Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 693. page
- Home
- Board: /lit/ - Literature
- Reading: Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 693. page
In 50 years, will writers celebrate the culture of the early internet?
Maybe a little. But desu most of the appeal of there internet is the novelty and newness, the feeling of being on it.
I doubt that will translated into lit well.
I'm sure eventually writers will be able to talk about phones and texts without it seeking forced though
Not really related to OP, but has anyone written a novel which takes place on the internet?
>>7878489
There was a /lit/izen who wrote one. I have an epub if you want it.
>a novel
>from the author of
>author's name is bigger than the title of the book
>translator's name is bigger than the name of the author
>cowritten
This story...holy shit.
Instead of a literally meaningless post why not tell us what you thought about it?
>>7878797
He just wants someone to ask him, anon! He wants to feel interesting, anon! Don't you understand?!
it's bs imho
college Americans lap it up
Since hedonism is the new meme, I'd like to ask you /lit/izen a question: what's so bad about it?
temporary fulfillment is not fulfillment
>>7878406
actually, ever since the BNW thread, I've been preparing an entire long post where I tackle at once all the reasons why hedonism is bad. Sorry that I can't find time to properly finish it -- I'm completely overwhelmed by the amount of new issues from my Brazzers subscription which I haven't yet *watched*
kek if you know what I mean
>>7878418
>fulfillment
Give me one solid reason to buy hardcover over paperback.There isn't one.
---
Also, how to acquire the perfect book shelf aesthetic? Dust jacket or not?
Hardcover/Leatherbound books are nice if you're really into that story. I see it like a collector's edition. It's nice if you have disposable income. I just buy used paperbacks.
I don't really like dust jackets, it makes it awkward when you can to take it off when reading and then putting it back on. And it looks so strange because a lot of the time the dust jacket paper/plastic and artwork is way too slick looking.
>>7878319
I agree with you basically anon: I never buy hardcovers if I can help it, they're too heavy and difficult to manipulate physically while reading.
There are some books that you ought to own hardcovers of though. I tried to read Infinite Jest as a paperback and couldn't do it. The thing came apart. Anything much bigger than about 750 pages and it's hardcover only for me.
I typically keep the dust jackets on until I finish reading the book. It protects the underneath part from getting damaged. Once I'm finished with it, though, I put the dust jacket away so that it will look nicer on my shelf.
I take the dust jackets off when I read because I don't want to deal with slippery fucking floppy bullshit when I'm reading.
I prefer paperbacks, but if a translation is only available in hardback then so be it. I have big hands so I don't find them uncomfortable.
Personally I find the chaotic nature of a disorganised bookshelf to have a pleasant aesthetic quality. I've seen shelves which are immaculately presented and it makes it look like you have never read a book in your life.
Where do I start with Camus?
At the beginning
it doesnt matter
I read The Stranger a few days ago and loved it. Now I'm reading The Myth of Sisyphus, which is my first attempt at philosophy, and it's really tough to get my head around. Any advice? I'm beginning to think I should have started with the Greeks.
I was going to post this on /pol/ but you guys are much more philosophically astute,
Does the fall of communism prove the argument that humans are inherently evil to be correct? What does this mean for socialism or "democratic socialism" as it's being repackaged as now?
No but it helps
No, how could you ever prove something so trite as "all humans are inherently evil."
You can't even define evil because it's a spook.
The soviet model just proved that bureaucratic centralism doesn't work in the long run. The soviet style planning system had a number of important achievements to its credit. It introduced mass production and greatly increased the output of a number of key industrial sectors, such as oil and steel. It produced the huge number of weapons necessary to emerge victorious from World War II. It provided full employment. It produced the world’s first earth satellite. It invested heavily in human capital. Its educational system was good by international standards, and produced large numbers of qualified people. During the 1950s the USSR enjoyed a golden age with growth rates much in excess of those in the USA or UK. However, soviet planning also had a number of problems. These included: shortages of consumer goods; inability to take full advantage of the world market for goods, capital and people; slow home-grown technical progress; and living standards that lagged behind those in capitalist countries. In addition, the high growth rates of the 1950s obviously gradually declined.
The soviet model was based on the method of material balances which was first developed in the 1930s during the USSR's rapid industrialization; superior input-output style planning was never actually adopted because the material balance system had become to entrenched in the Soviet bureaucratic system.
Should i read old testament if i am christian but not jew?
>>7878183
Yes?
No?
Maybe?
How can I be postmodern, /lit/?
>>7878162
you gotta modernize then go beyond that I mean the word is self-explanatory.
>>7878162
You gotta be contrarian that's all
>>7878162
Find something or someone that was going on before you and call it modern
I'm having a tough time deciding which book to start reading first. Can you help me out?
>George Orwell "1984"
>Adams "Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy"
no, since it doesn't matter, just read whichever you prefer
inb4 >>>reddit
>>7878153
1984. It's much shorter compared to Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy which is actually the first book in it's series. The others being:
The Resteraunt at the End of the Universe, Life, the Universe, and Everything
So Long and Thanks for all the Fish
Don't Panic.
All of them have upwards of twenty five chapters. With Don't Panic being the shortest at twenty five and the finality of the series and So Long and Thanks for all the Fish having 40 plus and epilogue chapter.
On a scale of 0 to 10, how good is this novel guys?
I don't know, it doesn't matter.
>>7878129
A solid 8. Always a good re-read. Ward's translation—
>translation
—is a good guiding light for modern prose style.
Just finished it. Very neat message about society. 8.5/10
Thoughts on him?
I'll get my hands on "The Name of the Rose" in a few days. Is that a good place to start?
>>7878071
Yeah it's fine. Then read Foucault's Pendulum or save it for last. It's his best work and very personal.
He's the Italian Dan Brown.
>>7878074
Dan Brown is italian him
I just watched Jodorowsky's Dune, the documentary about the Dune movie that was never made, and i'm interested to hear what others think of it.
I felt like he would have butchered it! It looked awful. His modifications seemed to me to completely miss the point of the book. Paul dies? His spirit goes into all other people and they speak with his voice? The planet dune itself becomes lush and green and then travels through the universe touching other planets and then disappears?
Furthermore, having Mick Jagger and salvadore dali would have hugely detracted from the film, especially hearing the absurd demands of Dali.
Thank god it never got made. It would have ruined Dune for those who hadn't read it, and would have been a commercial disaster and set back science fiction movies by a decade.
...at least, that's my opinion.
>>7878041
>film should be a direct adaptation of the original source!! I can't understand how you could make a movie based on the universe of a book and still make a good film.
Way to spot a pleb.
And btw, if you knew jodorowski, he doesnt really care about the plot, and you shouldn't too
>2016
>falls for the Jodorowsky's Dune meme
>>7878041
it would've been one of the greatest movies of all time. everything jodorowsky touches turns into gold, like he's some kind of freaky alchemist or something . . .
How do you deal with the concern that your writings will be misinterpreted?
>>7878021
I'm writing The Bible 2, so I really have no fear of how they might interpret it, because it should basically explain itself.
>>7878021
Writing my own commentaries under pseudonyms desu.
>>7878032
And what of understanding the commentaries?
It's endless
Do any of you philosophically-minded /lit/izens live your life according to a particular type of philosophy? If so, how is it working out for you?
existentialism, i'm still in college after 6 years so i think it's going great.
OP here. Up until the age of ~20, I was like most people in the west and lived a life of pretty carefree hedonism. I'd go out drinking/partying at least a couple of nights a week, and try to sleep with strangers. I'd say I was pretty much on autopilot, I wasn't really happy but I was a long way from being depressed.
Then I had a difficult breakup, the depression kicked in, and I started to live a much more stoic life. I stopped caring about the material things I used to go after, and tried to just cultivate the things that made me happy. I stopped drinking, gradually lost contact with my hedonist friends, started doing charity work, and began to pay more attention to mental and physical development. Three years later, and I haven't really got any pleasure out of this way of life either. I'm not religious and I can't bring myself to be, so I can't access any of the deeper spiritual happiness that this way of life should bring. The nicer and more compassionate I am to other people, the more they seem to take advantage of me. I'm unironically having an existential crisis because I can think of nothing important enough to give my life any sort of real purpose, so life just sort of passes me by and I'm completely indifferent to it. I want to re-connect with it and feel really alive again, but I don't know how. I'm considering becoming a hedonist again just to get these base pleasures if nothing else, but I'm not sure that's the right path.
Any wise philosophers got some advice for me?
>>7877933
How do you actually live a life according to existentialism? Isn't existentialism more a problem, and a particular branch of philosophy the solution?
