I don't get this board, but I've only been here for a few minutes total. How can people just casually dismiss authors works or anything they've ever done with a couple casually selected buzzwords stringed together?
Does everyone here just share the same opinions overall, so it's forgiven?
>>8137631
which of your pleb idols was dismissed, anon?
>>8137638
Do you really think I'd venture an opinion? And I came here looking for recommendations.
It's 4chan, I'm not sure what you expect. Every now and then there are some really good discussions, but yeah, most of it is filler where we throw around our memes mindlessly.
>Does everyone here just share the same opinions
pretty much. post something that goes against the general board culture without backing it up with thoughtful insight and the thread will be shit. Theres a difference between a thread that says "Why do you virgins dismiss female authors" and one that brings up an interesting point about say, Virginia Woolf's work. Sure some of these specific threads will die off, but every once in a while they strike gold.
>>8137631
Good authors are praised, if you post george rr martin or the martian prepare to be le down voted my friend : )
i wish you'd state who's so shit on anyway, most classical authors or authors of any repute are respected, once you get into modern authors it's different naturally.
>>8137631
Who? Who are you defending?
>>8137646
>Do you really think I'd venture an opinion?
Would it harm your ego that much?
>And I came here looking for recommendations.
Then check out the sticky first like you would do on any other imageboard, forum, or message board. I would also recommend lurking for more than 'a few minutes' before contributing to the shitposting.
looks like we've got a corncobber boys
>>8137631
>Does everyone here just share the same opinions overall
no, there are major disagreements between the posters on /lit/
for example, some people think it's unpleasant to have a load of beaten up paperbacks on your bookcase, whereas others think that having books without cracked spines makes it look like you haven't read the book
I don't get why you're surprised?
It doesn't take much energy to complain about something and it's an anonymous image board. And I mean the age of people here is early 20's. It would be extremely surprising if it wouldn't happen.
>>8137901
I'm with the latter. I want to use books and they should look used.
Since people write better than on most boards, the disagreements have more content than on other boads in general. The disagreements are more enjoyable.
I like /lit/ posters fighting over philosophical content of non-philosophy books.
And how some think Stirner posters are memeing while other see how he destroyed everything that came after him.
>>8137901
The Tolstoy/Hackskoyevsky threads are always fun too
>>8137671
The sticky is garbage, though.
>>8137631
You've been memed. Look at the website you are on. It is really that simple, that people don't get this really is strange.
holy shit someone fell for the memes and actually read books? LMAO
>>8139288
>So I told him to read a book and he actually did it, the absolute madman!
>>8137631
>How can people just casually dismiss authors works or anything they've ever done with a couple casually selected buzzwords stringed together?
It precludes thinking. It's buffoonery, tribalism.
>>8137631
>Does everyone here just share the same opinions overall, so it's forgiven?
What? No, half of the threads that don't die out at <30 posts turn into shitstorms. Honestly, I prefer getting insulted and demeaned then the suffocating conformity of le reddit. Only 0.0001% of extant literature is ever discussed on /lit/. Nobody is ever going to tell me that "Marginal Voices" sucked and we'll never have a fight about it because there will never be a thread about it. If all you read and care about are "meme books" then you're going to get into some arguments and there are probably going to varying levels of sincerity and shitposting in those arguments.
>>8137631
You sound just about 100% gay 2bh
>>8139268
The sticky is fine, what are you talking about?
>>8139299
This. It's a way to try to look like you're smarter than the opponent, without actually being smarter or able to prove why you are.
>>8137631
I only dismiss things I have read, and only praise things I haven't read yet.
>>8137934
dostojewskii is a saint you french loving russian idolizing prick!
>>8137679
an hero or gtfo
