/lit/ could use a new sticky, so let's create one.
A good sticky is short; ideally only a few lines containing the basic ground rules for the board and a handful of helpful links to guides and other resources. An eye-catching image is essential, and ideally you'd want something that embodies the spirit & culture of the board.
I'll present a first draft in this thread as a starting point, then people can make suggestions and offer criticism. After a few hours I'll post a new draft incorporating some of the changes that posters have suggested, and let people have another opportunity to make suggestions. Once we have a final draft for the sticky, I'll post it as a separate thread and leave this thread open for a while just in case there are any typos/errors or any last minute suggestions.
Please try to be constructive, and try to keep arguments and off-topic posts to a minimum, please.
>>7624294
>An eye-catching image is essential
Have a dinosaur running across the page
>>7624294
All in favour of DFW photo say aye
Also can we put I footnote somewhere in the text for the sake of cheeky banter
Here's /his/'s sticky, just for reference purposes.
>This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages, etc. Please use /lit/ for discussions of literature. Threads should be about specific topics, and the creation of "general" threads is discouraged.
>For the purpose of determining what is history, please do not start threads about events taking place less than 25 years ago. Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences. Discussion of modern politics, current events, popular culture, or other non-historical topics should be posted elsewhere. General discussions about international culture should go on /int/.
>/his/ is not /pol/, and Global Rule #3 is in effect. Do not try to treat this board as /pol/ with dates. Blatant racism and trolling will not be tolerated, and a high level of discourse is expected. History can be examined from many different conflicting viewpoints; please treat other posters with respect and address the content of their post instead of attacking their character.
>When discussing history, please reference credible source material, and provide as much supporting information as possible in your posts.
Sidenote: This might be the best opportunity to really hash out how /lit/ handles humanities topics post-split.
>>7624294
>An eye-catching image is essential, and ideally you'd want something that embodies the spirit & culture of the board.
>An eye-catching image is essential, and ideally you'd want something that embodies the spirit & culture of the board.
>>7624294
Why haven't you, the mods, looked over the feedback submitted some 3-4 weeks ago to 4chan.org/feedback about incorporating /lit/'s irc channel into the sticky?
I guess updated ebook links and instructions for #bookz would be important.
>>An eye-catching image is essential, and ideally you'd want something that embodies the spirit & culture of the board.
It's not eye-catching but this illustration was drawn specifically for /lit/ by some guy who asked what to include in it first.
Bloomkid is a classic image and represents us quite well.
>>7624294
wassup reddit?
if a thread doesn't relate directly to a book/books it's not /lit/
implement that in some way shape or form and this board would be much better off
/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but ideally those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.
Check the wiki and check the catalog before asking for advice or recommendations, and please refrain from starting new threads for questions that can be answered by a search engine.
Looking for books online? Check here:
Guide to #bookz
http://www.ak3d.net/help.htm
Bookzz
http://bookzz.org/
Recommended Literature
http://4chanlit.wikia.com/wiki/Recommended_Reading
/lit/ starter kit
http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/4chanlit/images/e/e2/1365475090228.jpg
Starting with the Greeks
http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/4chanlit/images/3/3f/Start_with_the_greeks.jpg
I know you know this mod, but many posts ITT will be shitposts. Mostly people posting about DFW and trying to make the sticky meme-filled and /mu/-style (pleb-style) elitist.
Maybe we could have a collection of our charts in the sticky -- so new folk don't have to work their way through the outdated wiki.
Here's an image for the sticky. Represents the board quite well.
>>7624334
nice imgur filename you lost redditor
>>7624332
he has a point though we should re name the board /lit/erally r/books
'course, there's always Ignatius.
We probably don't need a second one. When I saw the second one had disappeared I thought "Good, they took down the advertisement for /pol/; let's not mention it and hope we can pull this off quietly without attracting more /pol/".
Now you make this thread, mod, I am disappoint. I would prefer we kept the one sticky we need; it served us well for years.
If there is a sticky: fuck making this board about /his/ now we've just stopped labelling it being about /pol/ in the negative sense. It's a board for literature, and saying any books should have moved somewhere else with the split is retarded for any literature board.
A better reference would be >>>/trv/'s sticky. It points out that they are a slow board, and that people will read the catalog several pages deep. A sticky ought to discourage shitposting by indicating good behaviour (lurking, proofing, not typing every retarded thing that comes into your head and instead making posts about literature), not by telling you what not to discuss (don't be /pol/, don't be /his/).
Lit should always handle literature. This includes not just all literature on humanities topics, but all fucking literature. Do something good by not doing anything, Mod-san; leave the sticky as it is or at least don't entangle us with /pol/ or /his/ again. We already have a sticky about books, what on earth more could we need?
Could we spare a line for mentioning that /lit/ has an IRC channel on Rizon.net?
It's #/lit/
This should be a direct link to it
https://qchat.rizon.net/?channels=#/lit/
>>7624332
please dont link the starter kit and the greeks pic in the sticky.
please make it clear that "literary lifestyle", "patrician/pleb girlfriend", philosophy/religion discussion with no books referenced, /pol/ bait, and college/school/academia threads about no-lit related things are NOT LITERATURE
>>7624310
>This board is dedicated to the discussion of David Foster Wallace and the other humans such as James Joyce, Thomas Pynchon, Nietzsche, DFW and the Greeks. Please use /lit/ for discussions loosely related to or not at all concerning literature. Threads should be about vague topics, and the creation of "meme author" threads is encouraged
TO ENTER THIS BOARD YOU MUST FIRT READ THE GREEKS(1)
1- henceforth if said individual displays no aptitude for Classical Greek literature and philosophy, said individual is subject to a life ban and the defamatory title of 'pleb'(a)
A- plebiscite, plebeian, turbopleb, pleble
>>7624352
to clarify, you should either link a place with a repository of a large number of charts or not link directly to any charts. just having the /lit/ starter kit and greeks will just lead to more homogenous hivemind memeposting of the same 20 books ad nauseum
>>7624294
Just get rid of all the stickies and only have the occasional one when a famous author dies.
>>7624332
That looks good to me. Nice OP pic as well.
>>7624358
Fuck off name fag, don't meme shit up.
>>7624352
I disagree, both the Starter Kit and Greeks are fine ways to get into literature. I agree with tackling shitposts however.
>>7624362
You're being paranoid. The Greeks have been a cornerstone of /lit/ for a while.
>>7624364
the greeks are a meme for spamming, to the point where people don't take it seriously as something that should be done. the start with the greeks meme is starting to have the opposite effect of, well, getting peopel to read the greeks
add this: Because philosophy is central to /lit/'s board culture, philosophy will be allowed to be discussed here.
this
I believe the tone of 'READ THE FUCKING STICKY' that they have @ /fit/? or some other cancer board is pretty decent, as in, it does the trick. So /lit/ could use something similar. Just as a first line ofcourse.
>>7624314
brilliant pic, but needs more actualy DFWs and not this actor fuccboi
>>7624332
Needs a list of example non-lit threads desu
>>7624369
He's already covered that.
>>7624367
Spanners will always find something to spam. We must change our attitude as a board.
>>7624352
I agree with the second sentence
>>7624373
yeah just seen that. huzzah!
>>7624352
Strongly agree
The starter kit and greeks memes are prevalent enough that they don't need a sticky reinforcing them beyond the pale.
It will warp general discussion aggravatingly towards the same tired ground.
someone says they are perfectly fine introductions to literature. Fine. But there are any other number of perfectly fine introductions to literature. Literature isn't notoriously difficult to get into, and the literature that is difficult (hegel, joyce, etc) is otherwise incomprehensible to the uninitiated, and so the uninitiated need no protection from it.
If you just link to the repositories of pdfs, ebooks and so on, that should be plenty.
Let people make their own way.
>>7624363
Hi pol
put a link to this half finished philosophy reading guide as well
>>7624384
This one?
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/pub
>>7624384
no.
>>7624381
Hegel's highly readable. Heidegger is closer to Joyce levels. You sound like someone insecure about their introduction to literature not being "patrician" and so who mimics other "patricians"The person who told you Hegel was difficult was a liar or a legal incompetent, not something to be admired or replicated.
My vote goes to using an illustration or painting from some classic book. There is a ton of great Greek related art
>>7624396
i have no idea what you're trying to say but including the starter pack is a surefire way to turn 4chan front page into r/books front page where the same set of 10 or so books are discussed repeatedly
>>7624332
>Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but ideally those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.
I have or had no problem with the philfags, but those nihilist teenagers that spammed 15+ threads really left a sour taste in my mouth.
>Check the wiki and check the catalog before asking for advice or recommendations, and please refrain from starting new threads for questions that can be answered by a search engine.
You should add in a piece talking about looking for threads that are already up. We fantasyfags keep it in one threads, it's disheartening to see 5 pages of "oxford word of the year" and "black harry potter" threads.
>>7624299
shoulda did starting greek strength
>>7624407
Those threads tend to be started by crossboarders. They tend to be more raidy in style than regular occurrences.
>An eye-catching image is essential, and ideally you'd want something that embodies the spirit & culture of the board.
>>7624411
A guide to philosophical literature doesn't belong on the literature board?
Please don't be a fool.
>>7624402
The starter pack is high school reading. It's fine to include in the wiki, just like the other charts which aren't in it are fine to add to the wiki as well. Your reddit boogieman is getting in the way of having people complete the high school education level.
What I'm saying is that I think your argument that people should find their own way in reeks of insecurity, because there are many other charts besides the starter kit in the wiki and you don't think any of them are going to skew anyone's entry.
Please go read the actual recommended reading listing in the sticky. It also contains not just the starter and greek chart, but also a recommendation to start with TLoTiaT. The change you are so afraid of is already here, and has been for a long time. You just don't read the fucking sticky you want to change. You also name drop Hegel like a biatch who's ashamed of the books they do read, if you read any.
>>7624414
I miss 2011. I used to pretend to be a 9gagger on /b/.
>>7624420
This. There's more shitposts about Reddit than actual Reddit posts.
>>7624420
that wasn't even me and i still have no idea what you're even arguing.
im saying either list all of the recommended readings or link none of it - don't arbitrarily choose two of them to emphasize above the others by having them front and center in the sticky.
>>7624421
agree. any posts that are a slew of unrelated ramblings with "any books on this?" tacked on should be banned, because they invariably turn into anything but literature discussions.
maybe en go as far as to ban recommendation threads and instead just have a general.
>>7624431
...the link to download all the other charts is immediately below the overwhelmed and new section which has the starter kit, the greeks, and TLoTiaT recommendation. Are you complaining newbs might get trolled into reading one shit chart above another? Shock, horror, we might even troll them into buying a memebook.
The wiki's set up is fine as it is; your complaint with it is so retarded I'm pretty sure you can understand a book at a thematic level.
>>7624448
*can't understand
fuck
>>7624448
>>7624454
wew lad
basically all i heard is "i want /lit/ to be nothing but discussions of bnw, american psycho, great gatsby, and lolita, etc. because those are the only books i've read"
that seems to be the most straightforward explanation on why you're so obsessed with enforcing starter kit to everyone
also just in case you ahve shitty reading comprehension (seems like it?) i have nothing against the wiki, i'm saying the set up in >>7624332 should omit the links to the starter kit and the greeks . i didn't say a word about the wiki so i don't know why you brought it up.
>>7624358
>greek
>using pleb
>not οἱ πολλοί
>>7624472
if you've no problem with those links being first in the wiki, what's the problem with them being in sticky? They come after the link to the wiki, so if someone clicks on those links rather than the wiki, what is lost?
You're really convinced that a common basis for the board was a downgrade, but the starter kit was created to keep out the people who hadn't read anything, or who had read only one book. It wasn't designed as an ending kit. Why would you think I want it to be more than a starter kit? Oh right, you're an idiot who never read the sticky in the first place to get outraged at the same thing being there for like fucking ever, and now you think it's a travesty. Go suck a cock or whatever you were doing here besides not reading the sticky at all for the past year.
>>7624499
>all this butthurt over a non-issue
what to have:
good intro to literature
good literature
a brief paragraph on writing
one or two subtle patrish memes
>>7624352
>philosophy/religion discussion with no books referenced
This sounds totally autistic. Whenever one discusses philosophy there is someone who thought about it before and published it.
It sounds like a stupid rule that will never be enforced anyway
>>7624332
Not memey , needs many more memes
>>7624499
i was reading books instead of reading the sticky of an anonymous mongolian throat singing message board
i guess you were too busy reading the sticky over and over again and memeing about american psycho to read any books
also
>the starter kit was created to keep out the people who hadn't read anything, or who had read only one book
is one of the most hilariously misguided things i've ever read on this board
>>7624510
Not him but stop being a pleb. Very sad!
>>7624519
>samefagging
>starts with "not him"
Suggesting this image
>>7624524
Well excuuse me princess
>>7624510
the sticky overall is a great collection to refer to for reading. it does exactly what it says on the tin. i don't see why you saw less of it but managed to hop on the first mod thread to decry the same thing as the wiki has always said if you're so busy reading oh so much better books than i have been. i guess you'll have to thank your superior intellect for your reading of late, while i can just thank the sticky and obscure prize listings from the 1980s.
you can check the archive for when the chart was created, babby. then you can again cry about how you said something with an air of authority and all documented history disagreed with you.
>>7624499
There's a big difference between "This starter kit is user-endorsed on a separate wiki" and "This starter kit is mod- and board culture-endorsed on the sticky."
It's the difference between a group of senators backing something and the president backing something, ie, completely different orders of magnitude.
I'm not that guy you were talking with, but the board should never, ever "canonize" any "starter kit" because that homogenizes conversation and thought, and it contributes to a shit mindset based on holding one kind of book (the starter kit) above another (stuff outside the /lit/ "canon").
>>7624420
m8 you're fucking retarded. phenomenology of the spirit is famously annoying. I dropped it as a schelling point of an annoying book a beginner might be turned off by. Cool that you're bragging about having read him tho, nice 1 champ.
I'm fine with a bunch of charts being together in the wiki.
What I don't want is to cement discussion of infinite fucking jest into the foundation of /lit/ for eternity
I don't know how you can fucking imagine my saying people should find their own way is indicative of insecurity, that's stupidly absurd.
people who want charts can go to the chart place to find charts
there's no need to put two selected charts permanently at the top of the board, that's a bad idea.
>>7624309
Aye
>>7624332
What is the stance on political literature? I don't mean Trump etc. I mean works like Leviathian and The Republic. You can't honestly expect us to discuss that on /pol/, can you?
Other than that, I like it.
>>7624539
Why do you think we're going to get a sudden influx of new people, hell-bent on discussing the Starter Kit?
You're being ridiculous. Nobody is going to stop discussing literature because it's outside of the 'starter kit'.
>>7624547
Infinite Jest isn't even in the Starter Kit you dolt.
You two idiots are fearmongering and panicking over a fucking link in a sticky on a fucking literature board.
>>7624533
are you sure you're not the one with horrible reading comprehension? because the amount of leaps you're taking from what i said to whatever it is you think you're addressing is astonishing.
the chart was made cause we didn't want to type out high school reading lists over and over again. it was not meant to "keep people out"
by emphasizing it in the sticky, and elevating it above other charts , you're communicating to newcomers that this is -the- canon reading list that everyone should read, and discussion will invariably turn into an endless stream of threads on those 20 books.
also
>>7624532
>getting on mobile just to samefag so you can do this
embarrassing
>>7624539
>the board should never, ever "canonize" any "starter kit" because that homogenizes conversation and thought, and it contributes to a shit mindset based on holding one kind of book (the starter kit) above another (stuff outside the /lit/ "canon").
This 1000 times
>>7624554
Too stylized, lower the contrast, soften the pixels, and maybe even change the background color
>>7624558
i'm more convinced than ever that you want to canonize the starter kit because you haven't read anything outside of it and you're afraid of feeling left out :^)
>>7624372
>needs more actualy DFWs and not this actor fuccboi
There are never more than 4 pictures of the actual thing it wants you to select.
>>7624565
>>7624564
It's a fucking starter kit. We're not going to get 10000 new posters who think the books in the Starter Kit are the only ones in existence.
You're making an issue out of nothing, and taking a bloody chart way to seriously.
I mean really? You're afraid of the 'canonization' of an image? Are you being sincere?
>>7624568
Fuck off memer.
Just because an argument rustles your jimmies doesn't mean it's a troll. Take a deep breath and calm yourself down.
>>7624580
Hi there!
You seem to have made a bit of a mistake in your post. Luckily, the users of 4chan are always willing to help you clear this problem right up! You appear to have used a tripcode when posting, but your identity has nothing at all to do with the conversation! Whoops! You should always remember to stop using your tripcode when the thread it was used for is gone, unless another one is started! Posting with a tripcode when it isn't necessary is poor form. You should always try to post anonymously, unless your identity is absolutely vital to the post that you're making!
Now, there's no need to thank me - I'm just doing my bait to help you get used to the anonymous image-board culture!
>>7624578
no, but new posters come to the board all the time, and god knows we don't change/update the sticky often, so whatever we (or more accurately, ,the mod) decides on is gonna be cemented for a while. and a shitton of new users coming in will see, front and center on the sticky, a list of 20 books. pretty easy to see how discourse will shift overtime.
>>7624585
>bothering to post pasta to someone who doesn't return to threads
>>7624578
>You're making an issue out of nothing, and taking a bloody chart way to seriously
If it's such a non issue then why are you so butthurt about it? just let what we want to do happen.
>>7624539
wat?
The sticky we currently have endorses the wiki. It's the only thing besides the ED in the sticky. I don't know if you understand what we're talking about, because I really cannot see how endorsing the wiki is different to endorsing what the wiki already says.
>>7624547
Hegel has incredibly comfy prose. He mentions Swiss landscapes and shit in logic, and I really don't know what problem you could have with his prose. The worst you could fault him for is sometimes giving the impression of being a Bronte.
>>7624564
by keeping people out i mean keeping where do i start posters out. i'm sorry if that was unclear to you. it is already elevated above other charts. where the sticky is linked before it, and where clicking that link is going to bring you to the same recommendation as it always has, i cannot see the sudden problem with these charts being endorsed first in the wiki, or second in the sticky. if they were really going to skew discussion from people reading the sticky, that damage is already done. it will be done again by including the wiki link alone. the increase of supposed damage by including in the sticky i suspect will not be more catastrophic than the terrible age we've been living in that you did not notice until today when the mod asked.
>>7624309
>btw I'm an american xD
>>7624592
They'll know by the title that it is a 'Starter Kit'.
And the board discourse changes all the time anyway, but as long as we keep a good literary attitude and keep recommending good books, the board will be fine.
I just find it silly how scared people are over a chart.
>>7624599
I'm not angry at all lol, I'm just in the mood for debate and literary banter with some cheeky lads.
>>7624558
To me, it's about canonizing books. There are a lot of books out there, as you know, and if you elevate 20-30 over the other 50,000 classics based on /lit/'s often narrowminded, disaffected tastes, you're pushing out other people who may not relate to that. As great as most of the books on the starter kit are, they're basically the same redundant theme: "Boy or man tries to reconcile himself with society that doesn't understand him."
How I view it is it's a good /lit/ list, but it's not a good lit list. If we want a /lit/ list, then go with it, but the /lit/ starter kit as it is is completely unrepresentative of what literature as a whole has to offer.
>>7624600
>incredibly comfy prose
fuck off
Hegel for new face of /lit/
>>7624616
Maybe a change of name then for the chart: "Beginners Literature". Perhaps add a little paragraph saying that there's much more in the world of literature or something.
I can understand if your problem is with the books included (I think the selections are far too American highschool imo), but I don't get the fear of canonization. A few newcomers won't hold that much power over board discussion.
>>7624636
>A few newcomers won't hold that much power over board discussion.
you'd be surprised
>>7624631
We need Sartre breh.
>>7624636
you underestimate the impact of newcomers over time.
he specifically said his problem is not with the books included, as you stupidly imagine. His problem is with the books being in the wrong spot.
The charts go in the chart place.
the chart place is linked in the sticky
charts do not go in the sticky.
charts go in the chart place.
>>7624600
The wiki can be changed if we so choose. It's not permanent. It can evolve over time. The sticky is much less likely to do that.
I know it's subtle, but the difference is meaningful.
>There's a big difference between "This starter kit is user-endorsed on a separate wiki" and "This starter kit is mod- and board culture-endorsed on the sticky."
>>7624643
I've been there plenty of times during /lit/ migrant crises. A lot of fear and shitposting, not much change.
>>7624627
I've never read a word of Hegel before, but that is incredibly easy to understand.
>>7624652
easiest way to tell if someone is a newfag: they claim to be le ebin oldfag
>>7624650
If you read his post, he commented on how the books aren't representative of literature on the whole. I didn't even say that the books were what he was arguing against.
And his problem (I assume) is with canonization, not simply location.
There's no need to get angsty online mate.
>>7624627
Brah, go off yourself. You're an idiot.
>>7624656
on a word by word basis yeah. Assembling 600 pages of abstract concepts correctly, however, is no easy task.
plebs reveal themselves with the most innocent of statements
>>7624662
I never claimed to be an old fag. I just said I've seen plenty of times when /lit/ has panicked over Reddit, /pol/, etcetera without much actually changing.
>>7624651
The starter kit is unlikely to change over time, because it's set by high school reading. I'm not sure what disaster is supposed to happen that those books will suddenly become no longer representative of basic high school lit, but I think complaining to the mods about the sticky being wrong will be the least of our problems then.
>>7624338
This. I want the spirit of the board to represent strong discourse, not DFW meming
>>7624668
summarize the screenshot
PLEASE MAKE REFERENCE TO THIS ALBUM OF CHARTS
https://imgur.com/a/l2I86
>>7624689
>https://imgur.com/a/l2I86
no
>>7624679
>prove to me you're not as dumb as i am
fuck off loser
>>7624689
>inb4 whole thread goes from Starter Kit shitposting to imgur/reddit shitposting
"Welcome to /lit/.
When in doubt, read a book."
>>7624695
fucking poser
>>7624567
Decided to go with different style altogether.
Can't decide which of the two is better though
>>7624679
When one fully understands ethics the need for ethics disappearsNot that anon I'm just wondering if I got the just of it
>>7624721
>/lit/ sticky
>references a television program
plz no
>>7624721
pynchon needs his low end darks brought up a bit to match the other heads.
>>7624332
/lit/ is a big fucking place, kid. Imagine the biggest pile of dung you can take and then double-- no, triple that shit and you still haven’t come close to one octingentillionth of the /lit/ lifestyle. Hell, you probably don’t even know what real literature is, you goddamn fucking idiot kid. If you were paying attention, you would have gathered that it’s a strange fucking place, but one thing I bet you didn’t know about /lit/ is that it is filled with fucked up freaks. There are normal people too, but they just aren’t as interesting as the freaks. Are you a freak, kid? Some sort of fucking literary psycho? What the fuck are you even doing here?
>>7624736
Topsmile.
But seriously, we need something less memerrific.
How do you feel about this sticky as it's proposed right now? See >>7624332
http://strawpoll.me/6640864
Just trying to determine feels. Good? Bad?
>>7624724
I feel like that can't be right, but I'm not confident enough in my understanding of the passage to absolutely say either way. It seems to me that hegel relies strongly on constructing arguments out of concepts he's previously defined, and without those concept's definitions as context it's impossible to fully parse.
regardless it is clear that hegel is not an example of "incredibly easy to understand comfy prose"
it's well-agreed that hegel is difficult. motherfuckers are just being edgy posers.
>>7624349
>A better reference would be >>>/trv/'s sticky. It points out that they are a slow board, and that people will read the catalog several pages deep
This x1000000000000,
ALSO WE NEED ONGOING
-QUESTIONS THAT DON'T DESERVE THEIR OWN THREAD THREADS
AND MOST IMPORTANTLY OF ANYTHING
USE
THE
FUCKING
ARCHIVE
BECAUSE THAT TOPIC HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN EVERY SHADE IMAGINABLE, STOP POSTING REPEAT THREADS
>>7624314
seconding this as the pick
What's with the constant fucking mod intervention?
/lit/ was absolutely beautiful in its first 3 years when it never even had a sticky
>>7624782
>non stop GRRM and rothfuss posting, american high school english reading list
>absolutely beautiful
>>7624782
i think we got more vocal whiners and showed up on their radar again. fucking reportfags, they think they're editors.
>>7624332
Keep theology and philosophy here, lit is empty without it. Have a start with the Greeks as sticky as well as recommended novels for Russians, america, sf and fantasy, women authors, nigga authors and other often asked questions like guide to Dante, Biblical translations, Catholic and other denomination lit.
>>7624768
>just being edgy posers.
good prose doesn't have to comfy, it has to be good; straight to the point, succinct. Big words and jargon doesn't make prose bad.
Comfy is for fiction, not non--.
>>7624803
We have those charts already. We don't need a million guides in the sticky.
>>7624788
>funniest threads and posts on history of 4chan board-globally
>huge amounts of creativity, in both responses and thread starts
>tripfags that united the board, out of either love or spite
>shitposting very well crafted, thoughtful
>>7624807
you're not even addressing what I was talking about.
they claimed hegel was comfy (in order to appear intelligent/high-status)
we're not talking about what makes good prose
please pay attention.
>>7624822
rose tinted glasses faggot stop nostalgiaing
>>7624848
Yes
>>7624861
It's the story... Of a man named Tommy...
Who was bringing up three very lovely...
>>7624299
I fucking love that dinosaur.
>>7624529
Do we really want to present ourselves as "Not r/books"? We have an identity that goes beyond that... I think...
>>7624756
>>if you want to discuss books, read them first, you pretentious cunt
>>if you want to receive crit, give crit, you self righteous prick
this is all that is really needed desu senpai
>>7624823
>comfy
>in order to appear intelligent/high-status
just because people like books you don't like doesn't mean they're trying to outsmart you. hegel is comfy, his german is pleasant to read, and he's familiar and almost bucolic at times. he sounds like a fun camping buddy explaining how he see the world. you're really butthurt about smarts, but comfiness is not about smarts.
>>7624332
Can you just make it look non memey or else this board will be filled with shitposts.
>>7624903
sure bud
FYI jerking off feels better if you play with your dick rather than your ego
>>7624332
Can you filter the word "reddit" to "upvotes", in /lit/ only?
>>7624910
you might be happier in life if you had a comfy book.
>>7624294
Honestly I don't see what's wrong with our current sticky. I've gotten top tier recommendations from the wiki.
It could be interesting to make a philosophy starter kit, and maybe develop similar ones for different branches later on (aesthetics, politics, ethics, epistemology, etc.). The sticky should also make it clear that non-literature threads (is X patrician? What is the most literary X? Why can't X write?) are strictly forbidden. /lit/ should be a place for the discussion of authors, books, and the ideas in these books.
>>7624919
thx 4 your concern, fag
>>7624912
Change "Reddit" to "Corinth"
Change "4chan" to "Athens"
Change "/pol/" to "/ck/"
>>7624925
np lil bro
>>7624922
A philosophy chart would be shit. Nobody would agree on it and everyone would agree its shit.
>>7624932
You may be right but I was thinking more about a list of philosophical texts that can be approached without any previous knowledge on the matter.
For instance, off the top of my head: The Apology, The Discourse on the Method, Was ist Aufklärung?
>>7624932
some autist did a history of philosophy chart, but i think he was still prescholasticism when he vanished. any chart that does that is going to be too large, but we should still develop some new charts like the flow chart for wittgenstein. that's not really for this thread tho.
I'm gonna shill some possible pictures if that's okay boys
>>7624309
Aye
>>7624927
>Change "/pol/" to "/ck/"
Don't be mean to the cu/ck/s.
I was wondering, should we say that languages, linguistics, and philology are an appropriate subject for /lit/? These subjects are not discussed very often around here, true, but surely they would fall under our board's "jurisdiction" as they are an important part of literature. I know I have seen language threads on /his/ but as >>7624310 shows, their sticky technically only mentions ancient languages.
>>7624398
This
>>7624327
Hey I remember this from a couple years ago. This has my vote, really cool.
OP USE THIS
THIS IS THE BEST POSSIBLE PIC ANYONE COULD SUGGEST
>>7624398
>>7624958
No it's not.
>>7624952
I believe languages are technically /int/ territory
>>7624976
But they talk about international culture and politics, not languages. From the time I've been there, I've never seen anything about the subject.
/lit/ is (in theory) a place for scholarly discussion, whereas /int/ is not.
>>7624952
I enjoy language threads and I think they should be allowed (as they already are) but I don't think that we should actually put that in the sticky.
Also a question that pops up quite a lot is "how do I get into poetry" which the wiki/sticky barely cover if at all.
>>7624983
Fair enough. I would agree that the sticky should be straightforward and succinct.
>>7624398
i vote for Odysseus, just keeping it simple
>>7624973
>hegel
>>7624314
I like this one as well.
>>7624321
i like this
>>7624314
http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/intelligent-nihilistic-and-with-a-wicked-sense-of-humor
I think a disclaimer similar to the "The information posted here is the work of fiction or falsehood", or whatever /b/ had, I forget, would be of utmost importance.
Not only is it important that new posters realise that even here on /lit/ there are people posting what can only be considered completely false or /meme/ opinions, but that this is a board that above all else actually values freedom of thought, ideas and expression, however much it appears the contrary is true.
To come to /lit/ and fall victim to believing in the first half-thought-out ideology one comes in contact with is a travesty in itself, especially given the amount of meming that goes on here regarding several useless or largely unsound/disproved philosophies.
Of course there are those on /lit/ who would argue it is up to the browser to determine which philosophies are legitimate and which are simply parroted farce, and that that itself is a matter of level of intelligence upon entry to the board, but I believe some guidance or warning that /lit/ is not 100% serious may be in order.
No more /lit/-created books. We ruined that privilege with Hypersphere.
Also DFW-posting is a bannable offense.
>>7625062
>no fun allowed
We should make a definitive "start with the greeks" chart and use it as the sticky image.
I
>>7625092
greek lover here. no, it's a dumb idea, most anons who have read any greeks read them in translation and not much beyond plato and athenian tragedians. it's going to be shit and even if it were good, posers would read the same amount (4 books). /lit/ isn't into the greeks that much, it takes the amount of memeing we have now to get people to try 2/4
Make sure we include Bernhard in the integral German works section. Dude was the Beckett of Germany. Instinction might be one of the best novels ever written.
>>7625118
You expect people to learn to read in squigglies
>>7624332
I suggest using this or that Wordsworth cover of C&P.
Also, more Stirner.
>>7624309
Aye.
>>7624358
Bar bar bar bar haha you fucking loser.
>>7625130
no, i don't, i know my hobbies are weird. i don't even expect them to read 4+ books because that hobby's strange to lots of people too.
>>7624332
Can we have Woolf instead of Rand? Or at least Mary Shelly. Rand is just not that literary or qt.
Why do you want to discourage people from discussing anything that isnt strictly literature related. Sometimes mutual interest and general knowledge of literature will allow us to have different conversations about certain things like politics and philosophy and religion. These things are all tangential to literature and should not be discouraged on the sticky.
>>7624332
This wraps a lot up, but why is the link that youre supposed to start with sit at the bottom of the post ?
>>7624309
aye
I would be really careful with rules that are too strict. This board is small already. Removing DFW/bookshelf/lit life threads just makes it smaller.
>>7625269
I would be careful with that. Just because something generates traffic does not mean it is good.
/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but ideally those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.
Check the wiki, the catalog, and the archive before asking for advice or recommendations, and please refrain from starting new threads for questions that can be answered by a search engine.
/lit/ is a slow board! Please take the time to read what others have written, and try to make thoughtful, well-written posts of your own. Bump replies are not necessary.
Looking for books online? Check here:
Guide to #bookz
http://www.ak3d.net/help.htm
Bookzz
http://bookzz.org/
Recommended Literature
http://4chanlit.wikia.com/wiki/Recommended_Reading
>>7625289
My main criticism is to get rid of the meme image for something classier.
It's not as if anyone who is coming to this board is not going to become quickly familiar with our memes.
>>7624309
>>7625289
>Check the wiki, the catalog, and the archive before asking for advice or recommendations, and please refrain from starting new threads for questions that can be answered by a search engine.
>/lit/ is a slow board! Please take the time to read what others have written, and try to make thoughtful, well-written posts of your own. Bump replies are not necessary.
This is all you need and the bookz links. Stop defining us in terms of >>>/his/ and >>>/pol/. The >>>/pol/ sticky did nothing. It's not going to do anything this time even if you change the wording and add another board to fuck off to.
>>7625292
I like the meme image, it startles with shlock glaze and makes you enlarge it into, finally, relief. Rand is passé, though, and what's worse, with no relevant replacement.
And it's still a genre pic. You don't want the wrong people to get the impression that they should stray outside of their general.
Does anyone have the chart outlining the various absurd layers of irony?
It would be helpful for people new to the board.
>>7625289
Aww man don't put ayn rand on it. People hardly ever talk about her anymore. No even talks about her fiction anyway they just goad liberals with her edgy ideas.
>>7625057
>disproved philosophies
lmao @ this post
>>7625325
the anon that said woolf instead had the right idea.
>>7624299
/flit/izen here
That doesn't work we still have dyels and fat asses thinking they're special snowflakes and start threads asking questions that are covered in the sticky.
>>7624321
I too like this.
>>7625325
yeah, also we need Žižek in there
>>7625331
We need to create a "read the sticky" culture on /lit/
can the pic be our qt3.14 bf rambo?
>>7625297
This 1000x
>>7625297
This x999999999
Mod scrap your faggot shit and use this post verbatim or you have no idea what you're doing
>>7625289
How about you use one of the images people are suggesting instead of the one you made yourself?
>>7625297
Who's "us"?
>>7625392
/lit/tan is the most neutral of all suggested i think. no one meme or set of memes win.
>>7625334
No, we don't.
>>7625407
He has a trolley problem encircling him...
>>7625450
you're right, we should use one of the better trolley solutions
Any somewhat serious picture that looks good?
>>7625289
please put a painting, not a meme
>>7624294
pastebin.com/cBZknniE
include this pastebin pls
we get a million "how do i into poetry" threads a week
Perma b& on those who post the following threads.
>hey I thought about reading this book, should I read it?
>what is the lit equivelant of (name of anime)
>claim your lit waifu
> hyper sphere/ lit journal/ group project bullshit
>what's the best version of the quran?
>terrible dfw shitposting
>Anything Pepe
>>7625297
>The >>>/pol/ sticky did nothing.
It did plenty, when we said it was off topic the raids usually used the fact that we had "no rules" so they could do as they pleased.
Before we got quicker mod intervention on reported threads, I think the mods didn't know what to delete or to leave(what was lit or not) but the pol threads were deleted quickly.
it should mention 'start with the greeks'.
>>7625289
change image
remove /pol/ reference
otherwise it's looking pretty gut
>>7625522
Hi gas-kunt, I thought you leaving lit?
>>7624970
This one actually looks really nice. anyone else in vote for this one?
>>7625289
>/lit/ is a slow board
Eh, not really. But if saying that helps keep the redditors away, so be it.
>>7624294
Dumping images 1/?
Stop deleting all threads that don't put the pussy on the pedestal, you're embarrassing Nietzsche.
>can't even ask for recs on a topic becoz it offends all the white knights schooled in slave morality
make me sick
YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE.
use this pic right here
>>7625533
Lurking, fugnuts. Moving to market soon. Spent less time here and more time getting shit done. First book out in spring then a new book every 6 months for the next 5 years
A lot of people are talking about the starter kit and the Greeks chart but why not include the most recent top 100? It's a big enough list to not overly homogenize discussion while also giving good recommendations for newcomers.
>>7624332
This is alright. You should also post links to colleges which display their first year reading lists for courses in Classics. I know Yale open sourced theirs.
>>7624332
>>7624398
Thia
>>7624332
>No talk of religion.
What the HELL, MAN?? That is complete HORSE SHIT!.
>>7625593
Fucking righteous!
Now all christcucks can fuck off and I can actaully report them . hahahah bring tear to my eye
your god isnt lit bitches
its paranormal /pr/
>>7625596
Ha! Got him!
>>7624332
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptFhhz5Lrqk
Religious /lit/ is /lit/ though. If it's not shitposting and it is related to actual literature it should be allowed.
>>7625612
>Religious /lit/ is /lit/ though. If it's not shitposting and it is related to actual literature it should be allowed.
No. It's nothing but circle jerking anyway. Christian posting drags this board way down as it is.
Go to /christian/ on 8 ban. they actually want you
>>7625627
>i don't want to have to read these things so they're not books
kek, you're missing out on some of the finest faggot love poetry to not read the 4th century saints. a blanket ban on them makes no sense, except to someone who's rustled by authors with religious intentions.
>>7625612
>>7625627
A vote of no confidence for chancellor fedora!
>>7625633
I have no problem with the authors or the books. It's the posters they attract. They bring no discussion, they really just want someplace to have a place to have for their shitty religion; they want this place to become a giant circle jerk where everybody praises this or that TOGETHER. Posting in those threads from a literary standpoint generates no open minded discussion.
It's bad for the board, get rid of it.
>>>/his/
>>7625627
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dNegZrb9dE
Please fuck off to r/athiesm winterfag. A cultures religious literature is inexorably tied to its creative produce and banning discussion on religious lit would ruin things. Just because you read Zarathustra and can't into Aquinas doesn't mean this board should be a fedora'd hugbox. Now go spread your euphoria somewhere else.
>>7625648
>i get trolled easily and think everyone spent as long raging against this one guy trolling me last week
>the whole board is shit, at least the parts i read and replied to because of this minor phenomenon
sorry buddy, i haven't seen much great posting of late, but this christian invasion is happening even less than any university level post with correct citations. you know how rare those are. i'm going to have to rate you about a "girl with lots of unicorn statues"/10 on the crazy scale.
I'm normally not inclined to get more involved, one thing 4chan has taught me is both the excellence of using it as a resource, and the need to avoid contributing. In honor of a magnificent share thread earlier I will ignore that grater, later rule, and put in a modest effort.
>>7624510
>the starter kit was created to keep out the people who hadn't read anything, or who had read only one book
>is one of the most hilariously misguided things i've ever read on this board
While the dismissive approaching may be off-putting, this poster is absolutely right. I also think the poster has a better understanding of /lit/'s many failings to be a useful part of the remainder of 4chan.
Just a hunch, though.
Moving on, the board sticky should not contain a direct link to sharing resources. These things change. Ownership, hosting, policies, and popularity. All murky. Don't link directly, that is what the wiki is for.
What else? Hm ...
>>7625658
>Aquinas
>muh 5 circlular reasonings
fuck retard, go to church an d such your pastor sicks dick
u reaterd holding humanty back and are stipud stupid pants, take note religoun is dying
If you want to stay with a sinking ship that's your business, but don't try to take us good folk with you.
>>7625669
If you want to discuss your beliefs and try gain approval for your meaningless nihilistic existence go to >>>/his/ I'm just trying to put forward the point that posts discussing religious literature on a literature forum should not be disallowed. When was the last time you saw a vehement christfagging on this board? It's not a significant phenomenon. Now scamper back to where you came from senpai.
>>7625648
>no open minded discussion
Your euphoria is showing. Also:
>love the band, hate the fans
Pls
There is nothing more oxymoronic than "Christian Literature". It defies what it's all about. Reactionary as it comes. Go vote Trump and be away.
>>7625699
>implying 'religion' is limited to churches
Winterprole pls. Religious /lit/ is /lit/. /lit/ = literature.
>>7625699
>You don't see me going to church do you?
I heard Nietzsche laughing at you across the void of time when I read this, so, empirically, yes.
>>7625711
Making fun of Donald Trump is less funny than Trump is. Pls go. We don't take kindly to redditors round these parts.
