>/lit/ acts all pretentious and superior, looking down on

>>9562070
>posts image about people not trying
>criticizes people for trying to improve
captcha: STOP

>>9562078
The picture is unrelated.

>>9562070
YA novels and most genre fiction deserve to be shat on. They are virtually nothing more than vapid and disposable time-wasters.

>>9562310
Fiction novels deserves to be shat on. They are virtually nothing more than vapid and disposable time-wasters.

>>9562070

If the "you can't criticize other writers because you can't write" meme is true, doesn't that imply you also can't praise other writers because you can't write? Literally no one but writers can say anything about books then.

>>9562329
Is this supposed to be a counter-argument or are you making a genuine proposition?

>>9562345
Non-fiction books actually teach you something. Fiction books are just a waste of time.

>>9562378
>fiction doesn't teach you anything
That is objectively untrue, especially in terms of storytelling.

>>9562455
>YA novels and most genre fiction deserve to be shat on. They are virtually nothing more than vapid and disposable time-wasters.

Is objectively untrue. I'm trying to illustrate how stupid this sort of elitism is.

>>9562470
All you're doing is outing yourself as a retard.

>>9562500
Nice argument...really thoughtful.

>>9562519
>...
Back to plebbit

>>9562537
All you're doing is outing yourself as a retard.

>>9562329
>Music, Paintings, Literature, Cinematography and all other Arts deserve to be shat on. They are virtually nothing more than vapid and disposable time-wasters.

>>9562470
So prove the objective truth that YA and genre fiction, on the whole, are more than vapid and disposable time-wasters.

>>9562500
You're a goddamn idiot

Leave this board

>>9562470
>Is objectively untrue
It wasn't an objective stance to begin with. To imply that no fiction teaches you any doesn't even make sense. I believe that YA and many genre fiction works are ultimately vapid because it's made with the intention of appealing to a mass audience rather than for engaging in literacy.

If you think I'm wrong, then name several YA works that have any literary value.

>>9562564
You can't just simply revise my statement as a counter-argument. You have to actually present a point. None of those mediums are inhrently vapid.

>>9562565
>>9562470

The intellectual ghetto that genre books are in is a pretty new thing, and the distinction between genre and literature was in response to the popularity of paperbacks. Before that, both The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings were featured in the New York Times book review section, it didn't matter that they have elves or wizards, they were just fiction. But because of Tolkien's popularity, and the post-modernists, those who wrote "real fiction" sought to set themselves apart. Now we are in a state where if Charles Dickens wrote Oliver Twist or the Christmas Carol today, they would be dismissed as YA and fantasy tripe.

>>9562604
>Fiction novels deserves to be shat on. They are virtually nothing more than vapid and disposable time-wasters.
>You can't just simply revise my statement as a counter-argument. You have to actually present a point. None of those mediums are inhrently vapid.
You are the one who revise someone's argument and you are the who state the vapid of fiction even when you didn't explain why. Am I supposed to asume that fiction is worthless because of utility? Then why other Arts are not time-waisters if when you enjoy them you are escaping reality even for a second? What's your point, what's the point of Arts? Why are they different from narrative? Aren't they all disciplines of human expression? What are you trying to convey?

>>9562604

What is YA? Doesn't it just mean that the main characters are children? So is Lord of the Flies YA? It's a marketing ploy and you fell for it.

>>9562648
Sorry, I'm retarded. That wasn't even my post. I glanced at it and thought you replied to >>9562310.

>>9562070
>be bad writer
>put yourself out there for scrutiny
>attempt to get better before seeking publishing
This is good.

>be bad writer
>ignore this fact
>seek publishing immediately
This is bad.

/lit/ wants to be good, but isn't yet. Genre writers aren't good, and won't attempt to get better. This is where the difference lies.

I feel like the people on this board who post in the creative writing threads aren't the same people as those who read and discuss books (a decreasing minority)

Whom are thou quoting, fellow poster?