I have wanted to figure out how to make a writing which is nothing more than playing around with words, it's difficult for me to accept that with something as, say, a drawing, you can make something which has entirely no meaning, but when you're writing something there has to be some sort of objective with what you're writing. I wish that I could find a way to make, say, abstract writings, writings which have no clear purpose but instead just play around with words, in a rather beautiful way if possible.
>being this underage
>>8436250
have you tried glossolalia?
>>8436274
>glossolalia
by who?
>>8436291
Pentecostals, mostly.
>>8436429
Thanks for the hearty kek, anon.
>>8436250
Don't think that you are the first. There were the Dadaist pioneers, Andre Breton, et al, then Surrealists. The Beats playing with 'cut-ups,' also poetry concrete (Kostelanetz had some good texts on that but good luck finding them now), and the l.a.n.g.u.a.g.e. poets (e.g., Clark Coolidge's earlier work). Fun and games, mostly.
>>8436250
Gertrude Stein writes like that, or at least I, for one, haven't been able to discern any sense in her "prose poems".
Check out Finnegans Wake too although they're definitely layers upon layers of meaning to be sieved from that word ore.
>>8436250
Have you really never heard of Finnegans Wake ?
>>8436543
>>8436456
Yeah, I don't really like finnegans wake, because I at least like it when I can get a feeling from something, like when I say meaningless, I don't mean like ajsdhfghadsemrjgh, I mean like something which creates something that's just so abstract that you can't really put a true interpretation to it, except for maybe some feelings that it gives. That's one of my problems with finnegans wake, is that even if it does have some sort of "sense" to it, it's in like 40 different languages at once, so reading over it is just going to feel retarded. I want something that at least feels like it's doing something, but not really. I dunno how to explain it, I know that I am looking for some sort of writing that fits the description of what I'm looking for, but I'm not quite sure what I actually want.
>>8436559
But that's exactly what Finnegans Wake is. It does have sense to it, you're just too stupid to read it.
>>8436563
>you're just too stupid to read it.
hence why I don't FUCKING BOTHER. sorry for the caps, but I wanted to emphasize that part so you didn't miss it.
>>8436628
>literature should cater to people who don't want to put any effort into appreciating it but should still be creative