This post gets kind of bloggy at times, but it's justt to clarify some things. If you don't likeit, don't read it.
It's been a while since I read Grendel, but being a somewhat edgy teen I've noticed some of it's principles apply immensely to modern sci-fi and writing. Grendel is pretty dark and excessively adolescent in it's "edginess," but this is entirely on purpose. People seem obsessed with violence these days, and I'm unfortunately part of this addiction to bloodshed. I interpreted Grendel as being a commentary on violence in general, and what really stuck with me was that the thing (or one of the things) that was holding Grendel back from progressing as a being was that all he really cared about was violence and gratification. After reading a certain thread (link here 7743113), it was pointed out to me that modern sci-fi echoes this in how it's largely focused on escapism, violence, and gratification for the reader rather than becoming something beautiful, insightful, and that advances humanity.
I just want to have a chat with a more cultured person than myself about what makes a book "great" or "timeless" and more than a bestseller of the week.
if i remember highschool correctly it has to have no mass
OP here. I just want to have a conversation dude. I don't know why being young means I'm automatically not worth talking to.
>>7746564
no literally in highschool they taught me that if something has no mass it moves at the speed of light and therefore doesn/t experience time, ie. is timeless
>>7746577
Please. Troll somebody else.
A work is timeless if after enduring the test of time it's themes are still relatable and it's significance is still understood. I don't think you can really judge whether or not something is timeless when it's first published, though I have a hard time believing things like compilations of tweets or stories told through text messaging will endure that test of time.
>>7746577
Kek
>>7746549
timeless means it could've been captured 100 years ago or today that it'd be hard to place a finger on which for sure.
great will depend on who you talk to. for me, great means it explores what it means to be human in a thoughtful way. usually using words to take us beyond words into meaning that is generally hard to communicate. it is these hard-to-articulate-understandings that are generally the most interesting. the more common the unspoken but understood thought is, the better and more accessible the work will generally be. and I say generally a lot because someone's great could just be a really entertaining book and there is nothing wrong with that either. but for a book to be "literature"...a work of fine art I expect it to be thoughtful and not just entertaining (not that thoughtful books can't be amazingly entertaining.
so you're saying genre fiction is the metal of literature?
>>7746694
>>7746614
Thanks for giving an actual response. I do like how you define "unspoken but understood." I notice that one thing that really distinguishes good writing from mediocre writing is the amount of exposition and hand-holding. Good books don't spell out the meaning for you. Having to exercise your brain to interpret a meaning is much more enjoyable and beneficial to the mind that just having things spelled out for you.
I do wonder though as to what causes a piece of writing (specifically a novel or essay) to be influential. I've read complete garbage that influenced me more than something that was meticulously written. Maybe that's just my underage showing.
>>7746549
No memes.
>>7746737
I'm trying.
>>7746722
>Having to exercise your brain to interpret a meaning is much more enjoyable and beneficial to the mind that just having things spelled out for you.
Exactly, you have to cultivate a particular awareness or method of understanding. Exercise is definitely the right way to put it, you could even make the comparison to real exercise, it's like you're developing your body, cutting away at the extraneous bits. And I think that's really the key, is that you have to have less mass, maybe even no mass at all.
>>7746549
When it's a precise concretization of a philosophical truth. When you present a "fictional" example of a real principle that is so congruent with reality that it serves as a textbook and prophecy for the operations of actual persons and events.
>>7746761
OK you got me at the end there.
But in all seriousness, there are plenty of times when I doubt the importance of learning at all. I brought up Grendel because his predicament is that he knows there is a supposedly "higher" form of existence in the mind, but he doesn't see the value in it. So many people interpret Grendel as pessimistic because the legitimacy of the idea of "higher existence" is such a "timeless" human predicament. Seeing reading as exercising is useful because it lends a real motivation, a real purpose to reading. Exeercising isn't necessarily going to give you a divine reason for existing, but you'll enjoy your existence a lot more. Grendel doesn't exercise anything, he just indulges his desire to kill. That's why he's so miserable. He doesn't work for anything, and is surprised when he receives nothing.
>>7746843
That sounds valid, but what kind of higher existence are you referring to? Is it just any effort put into a pursuit?
>>7746903
Kind of. Effort itself can be seen as a higher existence. I suppose I just mean "belief" when I say higher existence. A higher existence for a Catholic would be god or heaven, for a Buddhist it would be Nirvana, for an Atheist it might be just be the act of marveling and furthering your understanding of the universe. I think all of these fit under one notion: the notion of peace of mind.
Peace of mind is just when you have the confidence to say that you're satisfied with your existence. Which isn't just not having problems, but being able to deal with your problems and reconcile with them. I'm just thinking in text here, but I sometimes I think the real purpose of life is not to be "happy," but to strive to attain this inner peace, through whatever method works for you.
