http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifes tyles/books/ct-publisher

why these people don't want to have a complex dialogue with what they read is baffling.

>>9121485
but I like offensive content in my books. hell I was more offended by Joseph DLacey's retarded environmentalism in The Black Dawn than by anything this "sensitivity readers" would find traditionally offensive. also there already are books and reading groups that put trigger warnings on books so special people can avoid them

>>9121485
Censorship is fundamentally conservative.

>>9121485
>publishing in the year AD 2017
If you want to make money, you should be writing YA, self-help or smut.
If you want to write something that will outlive you, you shouldn't be looking to publishers.

American conservatives are funny, as if your old 'PARENTAL WARNING: EXPLICIT CONTENT' stickers are any different from the 'new' trigger warnings

>>9121760
Yes, and just like every time in the past this too will be subverted by independent radical artists.

File: sir_gawain_discovers_hutdesert_by_alarie_tano.jpg (279KB, 1024x759px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 1024x759px

Offensive to whom?

>>9121485

>what's this Mr McCarthy? An instance of the n-word! We must ask that you reconsider this offensive language and make The Kid a genderqueer black trans Muslim

Maybe people will actually start reading self-published shit.

>>9121760
how so?

>>9121485
next step
>"a review committee... has determined that, so far, this history book is not making enough of an effort to include the contributions of women and minority groups. Unless some effort is undertaken to correct this situation, this book will not be approved for purchase by public school systems in absolutely vast quantities."

>>9121776
to the sensitivity reader

File: e-1719-0031.gif (28KB, 619x1070px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 619x1070px

>>9121780
Makes me think of when every book had a thank you to the lord who owned the printing press.

>>9121780
self-published shit is self-published for a reason. most works lack basic structure and are too busy pushing an agenda or are too self absorbed in the witters fetish (which can be anything from bdsm to eastern culture or physics)

>>9121776
Middle class high school and university students.

What the fuck happened to wanting to be challenged by literature and the viewpoints of others, why the fuck are these people so whiny and spineless

>>9121782
See american movies not allowing nudity because of muh conservative values

>>9121811
When they said that they meant YOU challenged by THEM. It was all a smokescreen, sucker.

>>9121792
Fuck, books used to have such clear statements of their unities. The shit I hate most is a completely incomprehensible or "witty" contents page.

>>9121760
In my understanding of the word a conservative tries to conserve traditional values. As societies change so does tradition and the things one might want to preserve. As people and institutes become more authoritarian and "voluntary" censorship is celebrated, speaking up against this becomes a conservative point of view (or depending on how far down the rabbit hole we go maybe even reactionary). That is of course only on that small time frame of a couple centuries, not millennia.

>>9121772
I'm not American. I think there is a fundamental difference between a warning sticker for parents who need to be aware what kind of media they have their children consume and allowing adult students to withdraw themselves from uncomfortable topics, removing these works altogether from the curriculum or silencing people based on how emotionally uncomfortable they make students.

>>9121815
church values don't equal conservative values. you don't see conservative values in south korea but they are into censorship. Germany is into it and so is France and many other countries. many don't allow nudity but many also don't allow violence,images of weapons,etc. censoring violence is still censorship and yet has nothing to do with conservative values

>>9121830
>removing these works altogether from the curriculum or silencing people based on how emotionally uncomfortable they make students.


But that's not in OP's link at all?
The only thing they're doing is to hire editors who's job it is to decide whether to put a sticker on the book. They're publishers, they're in the business of selling books, not withholding them.

>>9121840
I guess you didn't read the article or maybe I didn't. It describes how authors now pay members of "marginalized" groups to read their books to make sure that they didn't misinterpret or hurt the people the proofreader claim to represent (such as a transgender person making sure transgender people won't be offended or a black person making sure the black culture is represented as they feel is right and not hurtful to blacks). It also mentions one publisher demanding that books go through this process before being allowed to be published.

And yes, that is not in the OP. Neither is the trigger warnings the post I replied to mentioned hence I picked it up from the context I am most familiar with its influence, which is universities where this sort of thing I described is happening following the same principle (not to hurt marginalized people's feelings).

>>9121485

Let me say right off the bat that I think this is kind of a dumb idea that could easily get out of hand due to loose definitions of "label" and "offensive" (i.e. these books would probably be labeled as offensive of they contained racial slurs instead of graphic murders or rapes or something). However, everyone thinking this is the death of the West or whatever may want to consider a few points.

1. Putting a label on something is not *inherently* censorship. Do you object to movies having a rating system? Or alternatively, would you be okay walking into a film and having the first 30 minutes be snuff movies of beheadings? The rating system for movies doesn't make R-rated movies disappear, it warns people that they're suited for mature audiences. By no means is it a perfect system but it's also not censorship. No such system exists for books. You could just pick a book up off the shelf and have the whole thing be an treatise on how raping children pleases the gods or something. I'm not saying that that book shouldn't exist but if you're a 10yo kid that's probably going to mess you up. Is it censorship to put dietary information on a food product? (Keep in mind my introductory paragraph when you're refuting me here, I did say that this could get out of hand in literature quickly.)

2. "we need to hurry up with the conservative revolution". Conservatives and liberals both love to claim that they are the true proponents of free speech but really neither one has a monopoly on it. Historically they just differentiate which "free speech" they actually want to restrict based on different criteria. Liberals sometimes want to restrict (or, in this case, label) speech which is "offensive" or "hateful" while conservatives want to restrict speech which is "immoral" or "corrupting". I would love to see a video of a Republican defending porn or flag-burning. >inb4 but that's different! muh public morals!
That's fine, but you have to acknowledge that you are now thinking in the same way as the liberals who want to "protect people" by promoting the "public morals" of tolerance or non-hate or whatever.

So yeah, asking for a "conservative revolution" in literature is probably not going to make people think "more free speech" in a lot of cases. What a lot of people associate with big conservative movements in the literary world involve banning or even burning "subversive" or "immoral" books, which is kindaaaaaaaa like censorship if you ask me. > inb4 someone claims it was the liberals that banned books about sex, homosexuality, etc.

>>9121772
Yeah duuuuuuuuuude, you can totally draw parallels between parents not wanting their children watching some whore get railed on screen and delusional self-hating crossdressers attempting to silence anyone refusing to celebrate them.. I mean, are you actually braindead?

Canon literature is the new rock and roll.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d65BxvSNa2o

>>9121772
>'PARENTAL WARNING: EXPLICIT CONTENT' stickers
Except it was Al Gore's wife who did that shit. But it's cute of you to try to deflect from this, you faggot.

>>9121485
That's good for the self-publishing industry.

Who needs and wants those fucking greedy publishers anyway?

>>9121776
White Women ages 32 to 55
Educated african american women in the same age bracket
Homosexuals

ie, the bulk of the reading public

>>9121907
I'm into contemporary fiction, and I find that almost all the works that ever get on anyones radar are from publishers.

That said, there are good publishers out there, this one in particular publishes books awash with blood from all genres of the political spectrum, and seem t know how to pick and publish award winners.

https://oneworld-publications.com/

>>9121907

The modern writer writes out of a desire for esteem. Deep down, they know they're writing vain, soulless bullshit.

This is also the biggest reason why the novel has been in the garbage since 1990, and it's only going to get worse as the weblog/twitter generation really starts to take off.

I'm going to freely distribute my novel as a pdf. Either it's going to impress people enough to send me money and recommend it to others, or it isn't. The digital age has made publishers obsolete.

>>9121907
Self-publishing is a delusion, not an industry.

For literary fiction, at least.

>>9121492
Their simple ways of understanding things can't handle complexity

How do we end liberalism?

File: 1453513979345.jpg (204KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

204KB, 900x900px

>>9121786

>>9121485

Wait, so they are hiring readers to "flag" the content, but is that all for internal use? If so this is kind of a "nothing" of a story because it just means they're hiring people to do a specific job their editors would have done anyways. Publishers already look for offensive content either because it might hurt sales or might result in people denigrating their brand or whatever. Most publishers aren't going to publish neo-Nazi stuff, for example.

It seems to me that if the "flagging" is all for internal use this doesn't really change anything.

>>9121485
"""""""""""""""""""""""Liberal"""""""""""""""""""

When will conservatives learn that this is not the product of a liberal society, but an increasingly conservative and fearful society that hides under a liberal flag.

Let me break it to you, you know Victorian censorship? That was a product of traditionalism, where people do not want the youth "exposed" to such vile and dangerous content.

Liberal: comes from liberty, what do you mean liberty comes from? Censorship is the most anti-liberal thing you can do to art.

I do admit this is the left-wing doing, and it does come from a left-wing mindset, but not a liberal one: that is completely different. I believe we are in a strange age where, as queer as it seems, the conservative-left are becoming a thing; where people use censorship, to push and create certain values.

I am sick of people exploiting the existence of tumblr hipsters, to twist and strawman the liberal ideology with their own biased propaganda.

The left does not have to do the opposite of whatever the right does.

>>9121928
What schlock. The generalization of contemporary literature by those who do not read it is a meme that has to die.

>>9121795
That's still a lousy excuse for this kind of behavior on the part of the industry.

>>9121875

Please point me to a Republican group who opposes labels on rap music and/or restrictions on pornography. I'm sure it was all Democrats, all the time, that were cracking down on "corrupting the youth."

>>9121931
I don't think so. Currently, it might be chaotic because it's still new, but it will become more professional. There will develop ways how to find the treasures in the big trash mountain.
I feel like many publsihers lost their connections to writers and the audience.

>>9121962
There's certainly an element of truth to what you're saying
But I think you're acting like it's only tumblr hipsters who want to sensorship when it really is most self identified liberals

File: 51fUs%2BsW23L._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (36KB, 326x499px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 326x499px

>>9121971
Not the anon you are fighting with, but I just read Hitchen's takedown of the Clinton presidency (pic related) and was surprised to learn that the Clinton presidency pushed sexual purity in the military and abstinence based sexual education more than any prior Republican administration.

>>9121971

The entire libertarian wing.

>>9121786
>approved for purchase by public school systems in absolutely vast quantities

Thanks for reminding me that my tax dollars are funding my own ZOGification.

>>9121977
Yeah, traditional publishing hasn't done anything reputable on the literary front in decades but the current crop of readers are a huge part of that problem too so it runs deeper than just the industry stiffs.

The Rabid Puppies were right.

>>9121962
Conservative is not a synonym for authoritarian. This is not the "conservative-left" just because you use conservative to describe things opposed to your liberal values. Stalinism wasn't conservative-left because it featured strict a strong censorship of dissident beliefs and things that were considered vile and dangerous. Outside of the American political discourse liberal and conservative is not the all defining political axis. And none of their actions have anything to do with conserving values and institutions, they are pushing for a change of them.

>>9122003

Lefitists do this with everything. Whenever the Democrat party does something stupid it is always the fault of Republicans no matter what. An easy example is how they look at Obamacare. They manage to blame Republicans for it being so shitty despite passing the law without a single Republican vote.

Another example is how they always talk about this "party switch" where FDR was called a Democrat but he was really a Republican. But that was only when he rounded up the Japanese. You see, when FDR enacted the new deal, started social security, and helped us get out the Great Depression there was actually another party switch and he was really a Democrat. It's very confusing.

>>9121964

Name a good novel written in the past 40 years.

File: 51ZXOfx1FGL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (23KB, 226x346px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 226x346px

>>9122034
I can name 10 that were written in the last 5. But it is irrelevant, you will just call them all shit. Here is one that truly hit all my buttons for literary fiction.

Reminder that in your hallowed 19th century, Sir Walter Scott was the driving cultural force in literature and the modernist languished in the cafes, suffering as artists dismissed by the elite. Every epoch is of value, whether it is Scott influencing his contemporaries to Romantic Historicism or the new sincerity reverting to pure narrative and away from po-mo prose and structure.

>>9121977
>I feel like many publsihers lost their connections to writers and the audience.

You can't look at literature and publishing as an industry and honestly mean that.

Publishers are very well in touch with the audiance. Readers create a demand and publishers fulfill them. They want 50 shades? Ok, 25 copycats get published a year. ASOIAF? 10 copycats a year. Fake war-memoirs from ME veterans? Make that 10 also. They could publish works with literary value, but they don't sell anymore.

As for their connection to writers, it's irrelevant. There will always be a surplus of writers they can pick and choose from according to the demands of readers. The publishers don't need you, you are expendable, you are the most unimportant person in the process of selling books. Your work doesn't conform to the demands of the readers? Ok, there's another 25 blokes who do, and even if they don't, the publisher can "order" books that sell. Plenty of aspiring writers have no dignity whatsoever and they'd be glad to be published even if it means they'll have to work with a formula prescribed by a publisher.

Publishing is a business, as an industry it's centered around money. You can write a great book but if it's not in demand, you won't get published.

>>9122071
This, the reading group represented by /lit/ at best, pretentious smug hipster literati and book snobs, at worst, NEETs cannot sustain a tiny publishing house, they need housewives and female college students.

File: 1470965415238.png (380KB, 499x583px) Image search: [Google]

380KB, 499x583px

>>9122085

>>9122105
>the publishing industry is pro-profit
What a shocking conspiracy

>>9122119
was it pro-proft at the expense of quality 50 years ago though?

people want garbage like 50 shades, let's feed them that lol!

>>9122123
ulysses isnt selling anymore? better remove all the hard words and toxic white males and insert 12 feminist genderqueer islamic disabled bulldykes!

>>9122054

I'm a little lukewarm, but I'll check it out. I'm impressed that you didn't mention some shitty little meme book.

I think early-mid twentieth century is the best era for the novel. Contemporary life is too comfortable, and our culture too distorted and shallow, to produce anything of a similar level anymore.

>>9122085

It's not only housewives and female college students. Plenty of middle-aged men buying Tom Clancy and noname spy/"action" books, plenty of college-aged men buying trash fantasy. It's the ever shortening attention span of the people and the need to "switch off" in their freetime, avoiding anything mentally challenging. There's no specific part of the population to blame.

>the reading group represented by /lit/ at best, pretentious smug hipster literati and book snobs, at worst, NEETs

You don't have to be a pretentious hipster or a NEET to read the books usually referenced on /lit/. People don't read them because they're not hip. There's a preconception that "old-school" literature is boring and hard to understand, so readers avoid it. A female college student can understand Camus and a housewife can find Dostoyevski interesting and many do, they're just outnumbered by the fashion-readers and "wannabe literati".

>>9122123

Best Sellers in 1967
The Arrangement by Elia Kazan
The Confessions of Nat Turner by William Styron
The Chosen by Chaim Potok
Topaz by Leon Uris
Christy by Catherine Marshall
The Eighth Day by Thornton Wilder
Rosemary's Baby by Ira Levin
The Plot by Irving Wallace
The Gabriel Hounds by Mary Stewart
The Exhibitionist by Henry Sutton

I see shitty genre fiction, race fiction and mom books.

So yes

>>9122123

It was, but the demand was different.

>people want garbage like 50 shades, let's feed them that lol!

Well, it's not exactly force-feeding, the people eat it up all by themselves. McDonalds isn't feeding you unhealthy shit either, it's your decision to eat it.

Money > quality, since forever.

>>9122132
Not sure what argument you're trying to make
Ulysses was banned in the US for a while and there where publications that removed certain sections

File: infographic1.png (495KB, 610x4012px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 610x4012px

>>9122165
>Plenty of middle-aged men buying Tom Clancy

Agreed but women dominate dollars spent 65-35

>>9122183
>confessions of nat turner
>literally causing mass negro outrage because of its un-PC ness and non-left wing depictions of slave owners

none of that stuff on your list is anywhere near the degenerate slop that is shovelled out today

>>9122186
lol it's all relative dude xD

File: 1478708416111.jpg (84KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 960x960px

Looks like you guys need me now ;)

>>9122183
the only "mom book" on your list COULD be "the exhibitionist" but no mom in 1967 would buy that trash

File: 2465818.jpg (39KB, 266x452px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 266x452px

>>9122196
Aside from Rosemary's Baby, which is typical genre fiction, and Confessions, which is analogous to the racial fiction that wins awards every year (see the last man booker), all the rest of the books fall into the same old shit

Exhibitionist - Sexy book
Topaz - Spy Novel
The Arrangement - Horny wife
The Chosen - Jew coming of age
Christy - YOung woman has to choose between her faith and being a strong womyn

Not gonna continue, this is the same as its ever been.

>>9121835
"You don't see conservative values in South Korea"

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

>>9121859
10/10 post tbqh

My only problem is that while you see the danger, you underestimate it and don't really understand it. You're a useful idiot to them, saying "Somebody please think of the children!" when to them, it's about something entirely different.

The conservatives and their censorship attempts (like banning Harry Potter for witchcraft) get (rightfully) laughed at.
Yet we've accepted for decades that tax-funded grants go to those who identify as transethnic wolfkin, that movies aren't eligible for awards if they don't feature 50% black people, and so on.

If it was just about protecting children from reading snuff fantasies, everyone would agree. But let's be real, it's all about shaping how we think and talk, what's okay to say, and creating new positions for allies, just like obligatory "diversity managers" in companies.

>>9122210
in the arrangement, the man is the adulterer, not the wife

kill yourself you fucking retard

>>9122221
>Los Angeles, 1934. Mary Frances is young, restlessly married, and returning from her first sojourn in France. She is hungry, and not just for food: she wants Tim, her husband Al’s charming friend, who encourages her writing and seems to understand her better than anyone. After a night’s transgression, it’s only a matter of time before Mary Frances claims what she truly desires, plunging all three of them into a tangled triangle of affection that will have far-reaching effects on their families, their careers, and their lives.
>Set in California, France, and the Swiss Alps, The Arrangement is a sparkling, sensual novel that explores the complexities of a marriage and the many different ways in which we love. Writing at the top of her game, Ashley Warlick gives us a completely mesmerizing story about a woman well ahead of her time, who would go on to become the legendary food writer M. F. K. Fisher.

Kill yourself chum. Plebs have always consumed shit, and again, >>9121964

not reading the thread but
if anything this is the sort of thing that could potentially help writers ie not get them painted with racist/sexist/etc and dismissed entirely if they make a dumb mistake or misuse a term
you have to remember most writers are very stupid and sheltered
also aren't all the examples here for YA

File: 1478808570963.png (857KB, 996x760px) Image search: [Google]

857KB, 996x760px

>>9122231
you are literally referring to a different, modernized version of the 1967 bestseller

http://www.rusoffagency.com/authors/warlick_a/arrangement/the_arrangement.htm

fucking end your life you pathetic sniveling left wing parasite

you

LOST

>>9122234
I lost nothing. If you think plebs are reading high tier lit in 1967, or 1925, or 1909, you are arguing an incorrect point. There wasnt some glow.

>>9122216
"that movies aren't eligible for awards if they don't feature 50% black people"

Dude what? Movies featuring literally no black people frequently sweep awards shows.

File: 1478807322789.jpg (2MB, 2550x3300px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2550x3300px

>>9122239
>There wasnt some glow

MAKE

AMERICA

GREAT

AGAIN

>>9122165
/lit/ as usual forget that there're an extremely small subset of readers within the smaller subset of people who feel the need to talk about what they read online within the small subset of people who read more than like 5 books a year
women read more fiction across all genres than men, there's probably at least twice as many women who read what /lit/ sees as their male nerd niche than college men
also /lit/ ignores most of everything post 2000 and is at least half try hard high schoolers and college freshmen who can't even get through the stranger and think ij and dost are too hard

>>9121859
There are people who unironically believe rating systems have degraded film though
PG-13 movies get a lot more viewers than R movies and studios will almost always try to get a borderline movie edited down to PG-13

>>9122245
>they're
damn I blow

>>9122240
http://www.slate.com/blogs/browbeat/2016/12/19/the_bafta_awards_will_exclude_films_that_are_not_diverse_starting_in_2019.html

Just as an example. Obviously I was exaggerating since it's not all awards and it's not as simple as "50% Blacks" but you get the point about the direction we're in.

>conservative
>revolution

>>9122054

Me again, on further research, this book seems to be exactly what I'm railing against. The fuck is some dipshit storyteller going to tell us about the nature of time? That's physics, not fiction. Or God? That's theology, not storytelling.

This is exactly why smart people prefer to read non-fiction. They're already assured of their own intelligence. They don't need some pseudo-intellectual book to read so they can talk about how "time's really like a spiral... it's hard to explain (because it's bullshit), you really have to do a lot of reading (novels) to understand".

File: 4441.jpg (264KB, 620x412px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 620x412px

>>9122261

>>9122262
>The fuck is some dipshit storyteller going to tell us about the nature of time? That's physics, not fiction. Or God? That's theology, not storytelling.

autism 101

>>9122250
This is also a very valid point.

Authors will self-censor, already knowing that they cannot write too "edgy" if they want to to sell, etc.
It's the same with music or tv shows. Think hard whether you prefer Vevo to *bleep* every time fuck or drugs are mentioned and whether you don't enjoy the anarchic humour of MadTv, Archer, Arrested Development or whatever more than their politically correct versions. Hell, you're on 4chan instead of reddit.
Google etc. are already trying to kill everything politically incorrect by denying them ad money.

tl;dr By killing the market for challenging literature, you're killing challenging literature itself, even if you're just putting a sticker on it at the start

>>9121782
>Why should conservatives be conservative?
Just read William Prynne's "Histriomastix".
Allowing tings is a dangerous slippery slope.

Because that worked so well with rock lyrics and the Comics Code

>>9121859
In principle, I agree with just about everything you wrote.

>Putting a label on something is not *inherently* censorship. Do you object to movies having a rating system? Or alternatively, would you be okay walking into a film and having the first 30 minutes be snuff movies of beheadings? The rating system for movies doesn't make R-rated movies disappear, it warns people that they're suited for mature audiences. By no means is it a perfect system but it's also not censorship

I agree with this, but ratings are a step towards editing content because "Having a label will impact our sales. Can you take X, Y, and Z out, and then rewrite parts A, B, and C to address the sensitivity reader's concerns? We may have to not publish of you won't do this." I'd argue that crosses into a kind of market censorship, which actually does happen a lot with movies where parts are cut to get certain ratings.

>Conservatives and liberals both love to claim that they are the true proponents of free speech but really neither one has a monopoly on it. Historically they just differentiate which "free speech" they actually want to restrict based on different criteria.

In the 70s and 80s, liberals (in America at least) probably had the truest appreciation for no-restrictions free speech. Fighting against censorship by Reaganites on the right and feminists and radical left-wing groups on the left. That started going to shit in the 90s when political correctness became in vogue, campus speech codes proliferated, and hate speech laws were proposed and sometimes passed, only to be struck down by courts.

>>9122258
And last year's biggest Oscar winners included literally no black people - not just in acting nominations, but in the actual billed casts of the three movies that won the most awards (Spotlight, The Revenant, Mad Max). There are certainly those who feel that only diverse movies are deserving of awards, and the BAFTA rule change reflects a victory for them. But we've hardly "accepted it for decades," and certainly not in the extreme way that you spelled out.

I'm writing a novel now and actually caught myself changing some behavior of a character that might be perceived as misogynist because I was afraid people would think it reflects me as an author and not the character himself.

Now I'm not sure what to do with it.

>>9122071
I'm not criticizing stuff like 50shades. That's totally fine to publish if there's a demand. I'm saying publishers still live in the old times, don't risk anything, don't know how to keep up with trends.

Actually, 50shades is a good example. It started as self-publsihing and was then taken by a publisher. No company would have dared to come up with something like this in the first place.

>>9122306
Publish it in another country

>>9122309
I actually have a ladyboy friend in the philippines who told me it's very easy to get published there, especially if you're an american author.
i've been seriously considering becoming an expat and spending the rest of my life drunk, fucking trannies in Manila and maybe being happy for once.

>>9122304
and maybe the bafta thing will encourage the people who decide who gets to make movies to give black directors/writers a chance instead of doing wwii period piece number 5.778

and zoe kravitz was in mad max, but yeah- it's also a result of people thinking award winning=boring white people suffering

>>9122306
post an example

>>9122317
>niggers can write anything but WEWUZKANGZ AND DRUGDILLAZ AN SHEIT trash

maybe if you go back about 30 years the blacks were capable of something other than "muh dick muh munny muh slavery"; not today

>>9122317
I'm not interested in posting an example, but I can explain what I was referring to.

I had a female character who said she's going to stay behind while the men go out so she can do some cleaning up. My intention was to reflect the sort of natural order of things and to show what would really happen in that situation. But I realized quickly that people might think I was suggesting belong in the kitchen or that they can't come along on adventures, so I lampshaded it by having one of the men say something like "You know you're just as welcome as any of us!" and... I feel like an asshole for writing something so stupid. But I really feel like any woman between the ages of 16 and 29 will throw my book out the window, if they read about a female character choosing to do laundry while the men go out and do something more interesting.

>>9122304
Like I said, I was speaking in hyperbole. By "accepting" I mean that we are increasingly bowing to the groups who push for that rule change with #oscarssowhite, #canonsowhite and whatever else they have.

>>9122306
That's exactly what I meant and what Germans call "Schere im Kopf" and "vorauseilender Gehorsam" with their vast experience of totaliarism and stopping people before it's even necessary to officially censor them.

>>9121907
>the self-publishing industry
You might as well just not write at all, if you're going to self-publish.

>>9121485
This is censorship and I find it extremely alarming. Why are we reverting back to the 1950s?

If a book is overtly racist, sexist or anything like that it wouldn't get published anyway, but now it seems they're searching in between the lines for shit that isn't there, for things that could be interpreted as offensive.

This is really fucked up.

>>9122323
idk make her busy with work or something other than cleaning, but I don't think you need to stress about that in particular
>>9122320
when did I say any of that? and people write what there's a market for, but this conversation is boring when it always goes back to the same complaints

>>9122317
Just like there aren't many good, famous Black authors because the White man is just keeping them down and not giving them a chance, right? Damn all those inner city kids who never got to publish their scifi novels because old white men just won't let them.

>it's also a result of people thinking award winning=boring white people suffering
You could've just said "boring people suffering" and I would've agreed but you choose to make it about race instead of seeing the bigger picture. It's what has always been winning awards, even if it's about Black people like Moonlight.

File: 1403743577834.png (46KB, 532x557px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 532x557px

>>9122333
>the (((market)))

hmm just like how rap is currently braindead mumblecore ft. AutistiNig on a hard trap beat! I want literature to become the equivalent of that!

>>9122333
>and people write what there's a market for
No, BAD writers write for what there's a market for.
If you change the market so that challenging literature isn't published anymore, good writers will stop publishing, not kill their soul.

But go ahead and join the people who make Captain America a Black transgender whale and wonder what's going on when they've just changed so "little". (No, I don't read comics)

>>9121485
>conservative
>revolution
Pick one.

>2017
>not self-publishing
Plep today. Pleb now. Pleb forever.

File: laugh out fucking loud you cuck.jpg (29KB, 696x413px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 696x413px

>>9122364

>>9122350
challenging literature isn't published not bc of any race related reasons but because the market is middle class people who want to be titillated and entertained, but not actually challenged or questioned- which also extends to the people who can afford to work in publishing/have internships/major in English without having to worry that they'll starve if they don't go into a more lucrative field
having the dumbasses who write YA have someone look over their book to see if there's anything fucked up in it* that could hurt sales isn't the biggest threat to quality literature being written and published, the whole culture of publishing is

*also if you look at the statistics of the companies who are going to do this, how likely is it that 80% of their employees are white? idk, a lot of this is people who care more about seeming not personally racist than people who care about racism hurting people- but /lit/ isn't the place for any of these discussions

>>9122373
I agree but by "challenging" I don't just mean "high" literature, I also simply mean topics like death, self-harm, political dissent and so on.

For example, Camp of Saints is considered a more or less "normal" book in France while in Germany, the author is considered a full-blown Nazi and it wouldn't get published if it wasn't for a right-wing publishing house.
And regardless of whether it's high literature, it's simply challenging to certain mainstream views while at the same time making a lot of sense and not being actually right-wing.

File: ch.jpg (85KB, 600x425px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 600x425px

>>9121835
>you don't see conservative values in south korea but they are into censorship.
>censoring violence is still censorship and yet has nothing to do with conservative values
You just made my saturday evening, my deranged morian!

Time to hit the shower, buy some snacks and play Fallout 4 fuh real.

>2017
>not realizing that self-publishing isn't the best thing since the printing press

>>9121859
>snuff movie
Is not when someone dies in front of the camera. A snuff movie is when the death was planned by the film producers.

And disregarding your eXtReMe example. There's a good reason that you can't put out shit like Police Academy anymore. The internet. Back in the days, you had one weekend to make profit. And on monday, the word was out on the workplaces how bad it was.

File: 24991926.jpg (44KB, 316x475px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 316x475px

>>9122371
>implying that Trump and his ilk are conservatives
Nah, they are just radicals.

File: 1478808594922.png (277KB, 1793x1313px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1793x1313px

>>9122402

>>9122119
For stormcucks such as these it is:

>>9122105
>>9122123
>>9122340

And regarding quality. Ever heard about pareto distributions. It's basically 80% of the profits from 20% of the products. Or 80% of the quality from 20% of the titles. Or 80% of the stormcucking from 20% of the posters.

Now I suggest that you wipe your ass with your fingers and lick them clean. Because someone is making a profit on (((toilet paper))).

File: Genii2.jpg (17KB, 300x200px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 300x200px

>>9122406
>2017
>not knowing that nazis are radicals
Get out!

>>9122425
congrats

you made the most autistic post in the thread

>two-bit YA authors are having their brain-rotting pulp stunted by people who have had their brains rotted by ideology
Alas! It is the death of all culture!

Really though, this is no more meaningful and no less disgusting to me than watching one starving toad eat another.

>>9122267

It's a valid question. Why would I listen to a novelist over someone who has devoted their life to the subject? Why would I seek knowledge from an artist over an academic?

do you guys think common widespread hyper sensitivity will be a good or bad trait for the human species to have?

on the one hand it can lead to a certain degree of suppression but on the other it can also lead to increased awareness of our surroundings

File: hey stormcucks move to Venezuela - a country more in your taste.jpg (57KB, 990x500px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 990x500px

>>9122433
Stormcuck logic:

If there's never shortage of toilet paper. Then there isn't even a market. The stormcuck take it for granted that the shelves are constantly stocked with toilet paper.

But if the stormcuck sees somehting that he(il) doesn't like, then there's because of dat evil (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((market))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))). Simple as pie.

The similarity with Heidegger's hammer that only gets properties when it breaks is obvious and amusing!

P.S. And getting your undies in a bundle over bad rap music? Yeah, because you are all so sad that it isn't like Grandmaster Flash's old skool anymore. Yeah... Right... What's the next thing you stormcucks are going to be moralistic over? Heavy metal? Disco music?

File: 1478805275199.jpg (43KB, 1024x683px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 1024x683px

>>9122467
imagine being this upset that you just lost the culture war you'd been fomenting for over a century in a single year

to 4chan

top kek

>>9122467

Say storncuck again.

>>9122461
This has been discussed to death and is behind the Peterson hype.
If it was actual sensitivity, it could be argued about. But really it's just class warfare under the guise of kindness and compassion. It's all about creating in-groups and distributing resources. And how well that goes when it's done by "sensitivity readers" and "committees" instead of the market you can see in the USSR.

>>9122467

Excuse me sir do you have any idea how autistic you were going back there

"You must understand that our civilization is so vast that we can't have our minorities
upset and stirred. Ask yourself, What do we want in this country, above all? People
want to be happy, isn't that right? Haven't you heard it all your life? I want to be
happy, people say. Well, aren't they? Don't we keep them moving, don't we give
them fun? That's all we live for, isn't it? For pleasure, for titillation? And you must
admit our culture provides plenty of these."
"Yes."
Montag could lip-read what Mildred was saying in the doorway. He tried not to look
at her mouth, because then Beatty might turn and read what was there, too.
"Coloured people don't like Little Black Sambo. Burn it. White people don't feel good
about Uncle Tom's Cabin. Burn it. Someone's written a book on tobacco and cancer
of the lungs? The cigarette people are weeping? Bum the book. Serenity, Montag.
Peace, Montag. Take your fight outside. Better yet, into the incinerator. Funerals are
unhappy and pagan? Eliminate them, too. Five minutes after a person is dead he's
on his way to the Big Flue, the Incinerators serviced by helicopters all over the
country. Ten minutes after death a man's a speck of black dust. Let's not quibble
over individuals with memoriams. Forget them. Burn them all, burn everything. Fire is
bright and fire is clean."

File: La-Litterature-et-le-mal.jpg (26KB, 400x658px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 400x658px

>>9121485
When will these people learn that life isn't one big hugbox and visceral fiction/non-fiction is needed.

File: DSC00007.jpg (19KB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 320x240px

>>9122479
What culture war? I'm for a free market, faggot! Thing is that if you self-publish your epos, it will hardly make any profit. So as long as you can blame it on the publishers, then your crap is immaculate.

Pic related: Self published swedish stormcuck crap.

>>9122484
I'm not insulting you, I'm describing you.

>>9122526
your posts reek of desperation

you can feel your time is rapidly coming to an end

>>9122496
>still not getting that stormcucks are basically villains from Ayn Rand novels
Ever heard about in for a penny, in for a pound?

You can't just use the word "market" as some thought-canceling cliché just because there's books that you don't like.

>>9121485
ok. ok. wow. just... ok. so there are people who are hired and paid to be professional people-who-are-offended? what the fuck. seriously. are you fucking kidding me.

File: fatherland.jpg (34KB, 261x475px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 261x475px

If the publishing industry is so uniformly stringent on political correctness, then how do alt-history books where the Nazis won the Second World War get published?

File: lul.png (23KB, 487x407px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 487x407px

>>9122534
this is why you lost

File: toilet paper line.jpg (139KB, 1080x600px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 1080x600px

>>9122532
Yeah, I know that the free market is constantly under attack from stormcukcs, feminists, commies and other idle people.

But you will crawl back to it. You will crawl back to it when your fingers starts to smell like shit.

>>9122547
And that's why you shouldn't mix poison with food.

>>9122546
Probably because there are different publishers and some make children's books and some make mainstream friendly books about strong independent women and some make degenerate pornography and some make shitty alt history books. It's not quite Stalinist Russia alright.

And that was 1992, mate.

>>9122549
>8 years of leftist mental breakdowns and suicides

praise kek! praise his gentle and just soul!

I love it when YA authors get shit on by their own fans. if this is the way it has to be then so be it.

>>9122279
Do you think people won't self-censor and edit themselves to seem more appeasing to the market right now? And that every publisher will actually censor their books? I'm sure this is the sort of thing that will become standard practice in YA publishing and shit, but do you honestly think if a editor gets his hands in say, the next V., he will make the next Tommy P. cut all his degeneration of the book?

>>9121760
Censorship is fundamentally totalitarian. It has no political ideology.

>>9122592
I made a couple of other posts on that and feel like I'd repeat myself, maybe the one on Camp of Saints answers your questions.

>>9122479
Not who you're replying to, but what made the left what it is today was thinking they won the war.

Hubris is a hell of a thing.

File: fuuuuugg.png (287KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

287KB, 900x900px

>>9121786
In ten years time all history lessons in public school will be taught by means of educational rap music (such as Hamilton) and other forms of "edutainment". History books will be replaced by a curriculum of clickbait-style lists such as "18 times colonialism was called out on its shit" and "24 powerful images of African kings". Literature class will consist of reading famous authors' tweets.

>>9122691

I think there's light at the end of the tunnel if Betsy DeVos manages to implement a decent school voucher program because that would effectively break the government monopoly on education. That's the real problem with schools, they get funding no matter how poorly they do. If parents are given a real choice the schools no longer have a captive audience where they can forced this leftist bullshit on people.

>>9121931
Literary fiction is a delusion.

>>9122447

Because an artist devotes his life to aesthetics. He makes it a point to create something enjoyable. He also shows the reader how the nature of time or God affects people. He can intertwine a scientific concept with an interesting story. He can show you such a concept via fictional characters, etc. An artist's work is more accessible and more interesting.

Someone who devotes himself to science -generally speaking- can't make his work enjoyable for a wide audience. He focuses on the information he can pass on.

>>9121910
The bulk of the genreshit reading public, maybe.

>>9122317
man, you must be glad Martin Van Peebles got the go-ahead from the people who decide who gets to make movies. If it hadn't been for all those Oscars going to blaxploitation we would have lost a generation of black filmmakers.

>>9122546
Because they're all dystopias?

>>9121859
Liberals think any contrary opinions in literature 'decay public morals' too you dumbfuckcuntass.

IF YOU SAY THE N-WORD IN BOOKS KIDS WILL GROW UP THINKING THATS OKAY1!!!!111!

>>9122722
She can't even answer basic questions about the current education system, what makes you think she can build a better one?

>>9122447
CS Lewis was a theologian who wrote fiction books with obvious Christian allegories.

>>9122825

Because it wouldn't take a genius to do what she wants to do.

>>9122838
She failed at it in Michigan. Clearly it takes something that she doesn't have.

>>9122306

If a female writes scenes/concepts that could be perceived as muhsoggykneestic, can she get away with it? E.g. 50 shits was not exactly feminist.

>>9122864
>Clearly it takes something that she doesn't have.

Yeah, she wasn't the education secretary.

>>9122781

A valiant effort, but you're trying to make a connection between human themes and knowledge that just isn't there. What did we learn from the Renaissance painters? What did we learn from Shakespeare? What did we learn from any good artist ever?

Art as a learning tool is a fake concept sold by career academics, and it amazes me how strongly writers (and readers) buy into it. I see these novels about "the nature of time and space" and cringe out of my skin.

>>9122902
But she got what she wanted anyway, and it has failed.

>>9122243
And the retard proves who he was the whole time

>>9121485
I'm not gonna read that gay article, but I imagine this would mostly be for plebshit books that are just trying to sell a billion copies. Nothing of value will be lost, no?

>>9123047
>lefty cuck gets so btfo he leaves for starbucks and posts a few hours later

why do leftists argue like women

>>9123152
Same reason conservatives call liberals leftists: neither of them know what they're talking about and both have to resort to sad self reassurance to maintain their cognitive dissonance.

>>9121485
No you just need to stop dividing your points of view into "Isms" and learn how to contour your opinion to the specificities of reality.

File: antifa.jpg (147KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

147KB, 720x960px

>>9123363

File: 1486324224002.jpg (6KB, 241x209px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 241x209px

>>9122691

>>9123411
Exactly what I'm talking about. You need to convince yourself that whatever that thing is and leftists are the same so you can avoid engaging in a real discussion.

>>9123437
>leftists
>discussion

lol

>>9122691
As if that's worse than any other type of historical or contemporary institutional "education."

>>9123444
The irony of this speaks for itself.

>>9123504
>leftists
>understanding irony

lol

>>9122820

Perhaps if you had read the totality of the post you would have seen that its author acknowledges this and doesn't agree with it.

Reading comprehension, dude.

>>9122250

This definitely happens, but is it more the fault of the system crushing artists or the artists having little backbone? There is not a hard restriction on the number of people that can put out an R movie, they just self-censor because they want more money from the sweet, sweet wallets of 12 year-olds. If the filmmakers truly felt strongly about their product they would keep it as is rather than diluting it for commercial viability.

The rating system has created this dilemma for filmmakers but clearly few are willing to "suffer" lower profits by making a film they feel more strongly about. The option is there for these people but they just choose to sell out.

File: tropic-of-cancer.jpg (130KB, 285x465px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 285x465px

>>9121485
Submit Tropic of Cancer and watch the top of their heads blow off. Funny how censoriousness comes back around in a different disguise.

>>9124400
is that book actually good though? looking for recc's

>>9124404
It's by far the best Miller book that I've read. Too many of his other books are meandering and pointless, but this one comes together perfectly.

The parts that would cause a fuss these days aren't the sex scenes that got it banned when it was first published - instead it'd be the anti-Jewish stuff and routinely calling women 'cunts'.

>>9121485
Past censorship was about the text being inmoral or seditious. But now, the reader is an ill individual affected with an undefined PTSD-like syndrome who needs to be protected from the text for their own sake. Medicalization/Psychiatrization of power was going to happen anyways. It might take on vaguely 'leftwing' trappings now, but sooner or later right governments are gonna start doing it too. Naive do gooder liberals paved the way for this.

>>9121492
you're buying into a false dichotomy
neither of today's major political movements believe in humanity, there is no respect for responsibility or freedom

this is not coincidence. their left branch appeals to authority to crush the right, the right branch appeals to authority to crush the left. nobody is leaving room for the individual. it is the collective conspiracy, your choice is between two channels of identity authoritarianism.

>>9124451
I wrote that 15 hours ago but I'm back, so here's a response.
I don't know where you got the sense I was buying into any dichotomy, but I agree with you in general.

>>9124460
shit, i meant to quote op, sorry.
take this extra (You) in apology.

>>9122054
Good taste anon

If you liked that I'd suggest checking out The Man Who Spoke Snakish and Miruna

File: 1438365451165.gif (2MB, 400x225px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 400x225px

>>9121485
I never thought I'd live long enough to see Fahrenheit 451 realized.

>Fascists think there's something wrong with this.
It's called being sensitive to other's feelings, kys.

>>9122593
true

>>9122722
"18 Blackwater epic wins", 8 hours of coding/day. Math class sponsored by pepsi. gym class to be replaced with Palantir(TM) Biomedical Experimentation hour. All students need to submit to mandatory microchipping.

>>9121835

South Korea was literally a right wing dictatorship until the late 1980s. It's still quite authoritarian today.

>>9124885

Sounds rad. Am I going to be able to buy a wind-up girl soon?

>>9121485
Think about this from the perspective of a publisher;

You publish somebody's book. It's full of disgreeable stuff, and now the twats on twitter are making hashtags and boycotting you. You could have avoided this.

And that's what they're doing.

>>9121492
they're emotional children who want never to be challenged, and think there's something impressive in their refusal to self-improve.

>>9122316
You and me both. Saving up my money and ready to publish, but fuck the politicizing of novels. Let's start a gentleman's writer club out there.

>>9122570
>implying that Trump will last more than 18 months

>>9124986
That has and doing

>>9121485

A nuclear holocaust would be too good for these people.

File: 87660829.gif (2MB, 275x154px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 275x154px

>>9121910
>Educated
>Afircan "american" women

File: 20170216_164425-1-1.jpg (605KB, 2549x379px) Image search: [Google]

605KB, 2549x379px

imagine all the great sentences that would've gone to shit if this was always the case

>>9121485
""So until publishing is equitable and people are still writing cross-culturally," Clayton points out, "sensitivity reading is going to be another layer of what's necessary in order to make sure that representation is good.""

>it's not censorship if it's voluntary.

>"Another layer."

Laid upon the already life-sucking MFA, which has made this recent development little more than a finger in the dike to stop the leak of writers who wisely avoided the MFA.

>yfw Howl gets censored twice, this time by the liberals/progressives over racial slurs

>>9126955
So sensitive.

http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/88/sphincter.html

>>9121971

Films don't need to be rated, you know. And labels on rap albums are just a basic "explicit content" label. No adult gives a shit. Some parents decide against buying it for their children. That's the total effect of it.

These companies hire sensitivity readers to tell them how to revise works to stop from triggering people.

Labeling shit isn't the same as actively trying to prohibit shit from being said and written.

>>9121962

You're making two mistakes. 1. You're using "liberal" in the "classical liberal" sense (who would be disgusted with today's welfare-loving, big-government, freedom-hating "liberals"), and 2. You think that conservatism (as being tied to traditionalism and presumably a monarch) in the European sense is the same as what Americans here mean by conservative (limited government).

>>9121753
>hell I was more offended by Joseph DLacey's retarded environmentalism in The Black Dawn than by anything this "sensitivity readers" would find traditionally offensive.

>*tips fedora*