Any other patrician postmodern fantasy authors?
>>7629936
Nah. The fantasy genre is in the public eye right now, so we're gonna get a bunch of Game of Thrones clones until it dies down
John Crowley
Hi /lit/
What is some good /mom/-core?
Books my mom has already enjoyed:
1. John Williams - Stoner
2. Kent Haruf - Our Souls at Night
3. William Inge - My Son is a Splendid Driver
4. Frank McCourt - Angela's Ashes
please respond
>>7629853
my mom liked A Fraction Of The Whole by Steve Toltz. other than that she just reads the russians and british foppery.
>>7629950
>my mom liked A Fraction Of The Whole
>Have you ever read Metaphorical Reflexives Allegorical Pretenses: Our Selves?
It may discuss fluid identity
>may
I can't have this goddamn ambiguity hanging over my head, guy. Does it or does it not? Will it, or will it not-- this willy-nilly business does not amuse me, my boy, and I don't know why you'd come in here and pussy foot around the business as if it could be about anything else! Do you think I want to be in my kitchen in two hours, preparing myself the fourth meal I've had since I became awake twenty-five hours ago, pondering this post as I reach for the milk in the fridge? Wondering if this book really /does/ discuss fluid identity, as I pour myself a bowl of oatmeal and pop it into my microwave? Do you? Huh? Too many variables, man, I just can't take it.
"Hey, duder."
"Gimme da soap, Job!"
and but so
Buncha phonies
>be literally the best writer of all time
>never get mentioned on a dweeb /lit/ imageboard
>>7629653
Turgenev is one of the few classic russian authors I haven't read. I really do hope he's as incredible as many people say. I'm really looking forward to it.
I just don't know what translator to read.
>>7629679
I'm reading the penguin classics one. I've been blown away by the prose so I assume its a good translation.
Is there literally any merit to third-person narration?
First-person narration means that the reader acquires the story from the narrator. It allows the reader to see how the narrator sees the world, and allows the narrator to go off on their own tangents and rants and observations that flesh out who they are as a character.
Third-person narration can't accomplish any of those things without very clunkily inserting long monologues, clumsy "he thought that" statements, etc. Furthermore, to be able to write multiple different great narrator characters is the sign of a talented writer. A writer that writes in the same exact narrative style in each (third-person) story can't be said to be as good.
Can you prove me wrong, /lit/? I'd like to know some excellent examples of third-person novels and arguments for their merit. What DOES a third-person narrative style do (that has value) that the first-person style doesn't? I know that third-person allows for a more "omnipresent" narrative which may be good for stories with lots of characters doing different things in different places, but other than that, I don't know.
>>7629638
This is is very remedial.
In a basic sense:
First person: intimate, limited access to characters/pov
Third person: less intimate, more access to characters/pov
>First-person narration means that the reader acquires the story from the narrator
the reader always acquires the story from the narrator, the narrator just isn't always a named character in the story.
>It allows the reader to see how the narrator sees the world
unreliable narrators will lie to the reader, so this is not necessarily true, and also why would you prefer the restrictions of subjective experience over the freedom of a more exhaustive, zoomed-out narrative.
>allows the narrator to go off on their own tangents
>implying you can't do that in 3rd-person also
>implying 3rd-person cannot do this to stronger effect, even, since any rants/observations can be stated not as mere opinion but as universal facts within the framework of the story
>Third-person narration can't accomplish any of those things without very clunkily inserting long monologues, clumsy "he thought that" statements, etc.
a good writer wouldn't write "he thought that..." to begin with, or at the very least he would do so sparingly (i.e., showing, not telling), and you are assuming that long monologues are necessarily clunky. you are also assuming that exposition does not exist.
the best POV depends on the type of novel. (if you were not pleb you would realize this.) 1st-person works best for some (e.g., in He Rapes His Sister, Phoebe, 1st-person narration is just about necessary because it is a novel about a flawed worldview, which Salinger wants to show you is wrong), and 3rd-person works best for others (to cite another meme book, GR, where the author's argument encompasses all history and human experience).
First person unreliable narrators are the best
What's your opinion of Emily Dickinson's works and poems?
Shit
>>7629582
Mediocre, not horrible but you could certainly do better
Whats it about? No Spoilers pls
THIS SHIT
IS BERNANOS
If you don't want to read a blogpost, please skip to the last paragraph.
I use to be really creative when I was younger and a somewhat talented author for my age who always enjoyed writing stories. I even won a fairly decent short story award and got to read my story to a bunch of commercially successful authors.
I stopped writing when I became a rebellious teenage, transferred my creative talents to doing graffiti and developed an addiction to marijuana at a fairly young age. By the time I was 18 I was close to suicide with many bridges burnt, no friends and slight brain damage and temporary psychosis from excessive drug use. I didn't do much at all for a few years but eventually got back into the world and regained a lot of my lost cognitive abilities. I am doing fairly well in most respects now but my creativity remains blocked. I can feel it is still there but I don't know how to get at it.
I want to start writing again but for some reason that is not as easy as it sounds. How do I get my creative juices flowing? How do I utilise my urge to start writing into something tangible? What am I missing?
Sometimes it is just the lacking of urgency.
>>7629522
write something, or take something you've already written, and rewrite it from the beginning. do it again and again and again until it's absolutely perfected. practice the act of writing, rather than the creation of ideas. if you have the tool of writing accurately honed, when an idea does finally come to you, you will be prepared, and not miss out when you're finally ready to write something on your mind.
>addiction to marijuana
Anyway, if you want to write just start writing. Daily, regardless of whether you feel like it or not. If you don't have any ideas for stories, just sketch a scene or write some random thoughts.
Practice is the key.
Has anyone read Dianetics? If so, would you recommend it?
yes.
and no.
hubbard was a sociopath. the most fun you can get out of his work is to go through "Battlefield Earth" and circle the parts that appear to have been written by a twelve-year-old. hubbard wrote those. the rest was written by a group of uncredited staff writers.
What does /lit/ think of this?no spoilers please, I'm just starting it
I think it's a book
>>7629339
I personally feel that Will Navidson dies in the basement of the house at the end.
read like 15 pages went to sleep and had horrific nightmares
never carried on after that
What's his other eye looking at?
>>7629317
Bitches.
One eye on some philosophical term
One eye on the bitches
Or something like that
the sticky
I know im gunna get told ">>>/pol/"
But they do not read over there and this is literature related.
Im looking for a good biography on this memer, both his personal life and his propaganda methods are of interest to me.
No political discussion please
Peter Longerich - Himmler
A 2000 page affair. I do not know if it Has been translated into English.
Gustave Lebon - The Crowd
Edwards Bernays - Propaganda
asdf
I write down some of my thoughts when I get high. Is anyone interested:
>I get people that go get exorcised. It’s religious people that turn to god for their mental problems.
>Is anyone interested
Speaking as someone who is high right now, no, absolutely not.
>>7629095
solar systems are like giant atoms, and galaxies are like giant molecules
>>7629111
That's the man in a man theorem, as I like to call it.
>But a person who seeks to know more than the common crowd ought to be ashamed of himself for looking for doubt in common ways of speaking
Is he dissing linguists here?
>>7629091
feminists BTFO
>>7629091
>Is he dissing linguists here?
he's dissing prescriptive grammarians, u fucking nitwit, swear to god lit gets dumber ever day
>>7629133
>linguist detected
