Why does referencing other things make a work "better?"

>>9502703
relatability. also makes your cock huge. in many different ways.

Woody Allen is a fine director, despite his annoying namedroping, not because of it.

Who said that? The answer is nobody. You, and everyone like you, create the idea in your head when something intimidates you with references you dont know. Its a defense mechanism. You project the implication that someone like an artist or an author who does that is trying to make the statement that the reference is inherent to the quality of the work. But they're really, really not. Because they're not saying anything. They're just making art. It's a delusion, perpetuated only by insecure fuckboys who, instead of broadening themselves when confronted with something intimidating, instead try to call into question the entirety of the system that made them uncomfortable.

Just stop it. If you don't get a reference, go fucking figure it out, or put the book down. Either answer is correct. What is incorrect is to, instead of interacting with what is front of you, to intellectually retreat into your turtle shell and desperately try to explain away everything above your head. This is such pseud mentality, and its everywhere. Shake it off, homeboy. Do a fucking google search. Quit hating yourself.

>>9502703
Well, it simply adds layers. It can allow you to tell a mini-story or make a subtle comment with a single word. It can also show that you have already considered certain arguments made by others.

We only really call it namedropping when it's done badly.

>>9502744
First off I never said I have a problem with this. Secondly, when people talk about Ulysses, they often start by talking about how you need to know the "meta" of English literature. People always comment on how creative rappers are when they reference random shit. Don't be such a faggot

>>9502703
References are like words. A previous author conveyed something in a previous work. Instead of going through the whole work you reference it or the author and that "something" is succesfully conveyed.

File: 1489699822351.jpg (477KB, 960x904px) Image search: [Google]

477KB, 960x904px

>>9502703
definition, citation, value and reference are the fundamental building blocks of information.

>>9502786
>when people talk about Ulysses, they often start by talking about how you need to know the "meta" of English literature. People always comment on how creative rappers are when they reference random shit.
Yes, and these people are just as misguided as you are.

see>>
>You, and everyone like you, create the idea in your head...
These people would fall under the category of "everyone like you." These are the very "insecure fuckboys" to whom I was referring in my previous post, which you evidently did not read.

>>9502703
First of all, the kind of references Ulysses, Woody Allen and rap (???) are completely different. Second, it doesn't make anything better by itself, but applying it well is difficult and should be valued, but the same can be said to any technique.

>>9502792
No one says that, people usually say it's good to know Joyce's previous works, Hamlet and the Odyssey, but if you actually read it you'll understand this is good advice and not an attempt to keep you away from the book. But it's obvious you will take more from a work if you're aware of the tradition and development of the medium, tradition or movement they are a part of.

>>9502703
Because it provides depth of knowledge and context. It allows the reader, if they are curious enough, to perhaps see if they reach the same conclusions the author did after they interpret the references pieces on their own. In a way, it's a jump off point for both the author and the reader to either agree or clash.

>>9502744
Harsh but essentially true.

epic trol

>>9502703
>thinking Ulysses is comparable to Woody Allen and Rap