What does /lit/ think of To Kill A Mockingbird?
Why do they make high school kids read it?
SJW shit that led to cuckolding phenomonen
to give them a good dose of white guilt. part of the indoctrination plan.
teachers only read it to their studednts as an excuse to say the word nigger
its cultural marxism
I wrote an essay on it in 8th grade without reading it or even looking it up on SparkNotes. I ended it with something like "and that's when the hunter pulled the trigger and the mockingbird fell from the sky."
>>7850884
Our teacher actually refused to let us say nigger in any context at all.
>>7851381
I said nigger a couple of times in the context of discussing male and female language differences and the usage of taboo language.
She found it funny.
>>7851412
Blacks were maybe .5% of 1700 kids.
It was less about offending particular people but just making sure everyone stayed in the trance of the all-powerful magic word "nigger".
>>7851412
Can you define the big Other to someone just passing through /lit/?
>tfw I always said Nigger when reading out loud
>>7851462
"The big Other designates radical alterity, an other-ness which transcends the illusory otherness of the imaginary because it cannot be assimilated through identification. Lacan equates this radical alterity with language and the law, and hence the big Other is inscribed in the order of the symbolic. Indeed, the big Other is the symbolic insofar as it is particularized for each subject. The Other is thus both another subject, in his radical alterity and unassimilable uniqueness, and also the symbolic order which mediates the relationship with that other subject."
"here are, however, many features of the “big Other” which get lost in this simplified notion. For Lacan, the reality of human beings is constituted by three mutually entangled levels: the Symbolic, the Imaginary, and the Real. This triad can be nicely illustrated by the game of chess. The rules one has to follow in order to play it are its symbolic dimension: from the purely formal symbolic standpoint, “knight” is defined only by the moves this figure can make. This level is clearly different from the imaginary one, namely the way different pieces are shaped and characterized by their names (king, queen, knight), and it is easy to envision a game with the same rules, but with a different imaginary, in which this figure would be called “messenger” or “runner” or whatever. Finally, real is the entire complex set of contingent circumstances which affect the course of the game: the intelligence of the players, the unpredictable intrusions that may disconcert one of the players or directly cut the game short.
"The big Other operates at a symbolic level. What, then, is this symbolic order composed of? When we speak (or listen, for that matter), we never merely interact with others; our speech activity is grounded on our accepting of and relying on a complex network of rules and other kinds of presuppositions. First, there are the grammatical rules I have to master blindly and spontaneously: if I were to bear in mind all the time these rules, my speech would come to a halt. Then there is the background of participating in the same life-world which enables me and my partner in conversation to understand each other. The rules that I follow are marked by a deep split: there are rules (and meanings) that I follow blindly, out of custom, but of which, upon reflection, I can become at least partially aware (such as common grammatical rules), and there are rules that I follow, meanings that haunt me, unbeknownst to me (such as unconscious prohibitions). Then there are rules and meanings I am aware of, but have to act on the outside as if I am not aware of them – dirty or obscene innuendos which one passes over in silence in order to maintain the proper appearances."
>>7850865
this book literally turned me gay
>>7851486
What does that have to do with books though lol?
>>7851486
This made my brain hurt
I'm sorry I'm a pleb
