Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 924. page
- Home
- Board: /lit/ - Literature
- Reading: Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 924. page
I want to be forever remembered as a meme-loving patrician. What should my yearbook quote be?
>>7736352
Fug :-DDD
>>7736367
I cant swear :^)
So I've just experienced true life-altering heart-ache for the first time in 27 years. My whole perspective is warped but the shining light is my creative output has absolutely exploded.
So /lit/ does one have to experience some sort of traumatic event to create a true work of art?
Also, Pepe me please, nothing feels real anymore.
>>7736321
Are you australian?
>>7736328
Nope, United States.
I feel like I'm being setup for a punchline.
>>7736334
How does it feel to be 27?
What Dream Cycle stories should I start with?
Also HP a QT with glasses
>captcha: select all mountains
The entire Dream Cycle is maybe 150 pages. Read it in publication order.
whatever happened to the /lit/ smallchat? it looks abandoned, is it kill? it was pretty comfy sometimes.
>inb4 fuck off back to /soc/
i'm bored and lonely sorry ;_;
We both know that we will die lonely, sad and with an unfulfilled life.
There's no point in pursuing delusional dreams.
I FUCKING LOVE READING
>>7736255
Leave while you can.
Reading is all about self-indulgence, so fuck you. Narcissistic piece of shit refusing be authentic.
>These books are so good, they're literary classics.
>Oh why?
>Because they tell such beautiful stories about the struggle of poor people and the misery of life!
>Wow, you're actually a condescending piece of shit.
>No, no you just don't get it. The language is so mesmerizing, and the characters feel so real and it's just so amazing, like the author is speaking directly to you.
>So you basically jerk off to it because you're too unoriginal to find pleasure in existing?
>It's bigger than me, it's contributing to the wealth of human knowledge and culture. It's true art and can be used to teach countless generations about beauty, love and honor.
>Oh you have to be taught those things? Because humans are just beasts right, you need the cultured white man to climb down from his tower and hand down the mana of wisdom to the unwashed and ignorant masses.
>I..b..but..
>Enjoy your fascism with a smile faggot, you bend your will to power and get rightly penetrated by it. No man can say what another can do. And let that one who tries fight for that right and rightly die in vain pursuit.
>>7736719
(You)
I have just picked up a collection of Korean short stories. Is there any interest in Korean literature on /lit/?
>>7736223
Any good contemporary Korean lit, like at all? Even pulp. Someone in that other thread recommended "A Lucky Day" and "Our Twisted Hero".
Do Korean writers use a lot of hanja? I've only read childrens' books in Korean and there isn't any. But it's all over the newspapers.
>>7736223
korea are literally the dfw of nations, no discernible talent and just suck the dick of papa japan and papa china.
Ok we can all agree the characters were kind of bland. And immersive world building doesn't necessarily make an OK-good plot line - "great"
But
Is it safe to say this trilogy has the best action scenes in fantasy?
>>7736189
we dont read that kind of shit here, you mong.
Ehhhh I bet I could do better. I bet a lot of writers can.
Didn't Sanderson only get published because he had connections?
>>7736189
They were written by a Mormon, dude. Also explains whyVin, Kelsier and Sazed end up becoming gods.
Was he being ironic?
>>7736181
Nope, he's just an idiot.
What I get from this is that fundamentally romance is a completely trash genre. Just the worst fucking dregs of literature. The proper response to his diatribe isn't to attack female romance writers LESS, it's to attack male romance writers MORE. All writers of romance should be ruthlessly hounded out of the writer community.
I wonder how much his own experience as a writer of popular trash novels informs his new found respect for other popular trash novels.
>people enjoy it so it can't be bad!
I'm not sure how lit this is in the traditional sense, but it has to do with written language so I thought /lit/ was the right place for it.
When reading the US Constitution or Declaration of Independence, it's amazing how plainly it's written and how understandable it is. Why is modern law not written like this? Legalese is almost impenetrable for a layman, and much more verbose. But it's not as if the concepts of most laws are above non-specialist understanding.
I get that the Constitution is notoriously open to interpretation (often carried too far, in my opinion, but that's another matter), but I doubt that the language gymnastics of modern law reduce ambiguity, and probably just obfuscates it even more.
The same can be said of scientific writing in general, I believe, though the need for technical language there is understandably more necessary.
>>7736174
Because americunts are dumb by nature.
>>>/pol/
>>>/rk9/
>>>/or just dont bring up this fruitless subject/
>>7736174
Hello, OP. I'm not a legal expert, but I have had multiple interactions with the law over the course of my life, and have occasionally looked up various laws and statutes as a result. FWIW I'm also (by general standards if not /lit/ standards) a fairly well-read college graduate, and fluent in English. I also recently re-read the US constitution, and according to wiki, it is among the shortest of extant, effective constitutions (in addition to having inspired many of those). I am also in the habit of actually reading and fully understanding my legally binding apartment leases, even though they do tend to be similar.
It has been my personal experience that plain legal language itself (in the USA) is not exceptionally difficult, even when it is being parsed into various subsections and paragraphs. The whole difficulty arises from the legal tradition as implemented in the United States, case precedents, and interpretation. This latter stuff is the stuff that I really don't know, and comprises a lawyer's training. But I do know how to parse several paragraphs of legalese and have a clear understanding of what that block of text, taken by itself, means. It's the relation of some language/jurisdictions to others that, if I needed a lawyer, I would ask their advice because they know the things I don
Why didn't this become the cult classic it should have been?
what is it/what's it about? sell me on it anon i'mw illing to be persuaded.
on /lit/ I don't name things i actually like because i fear a inflation of my social capital. Who wants to mostly be a chantard? TFW
i mostly don't bring up shit i like cuz peeps are too pleb to dig it and it just scroll away to nothing
>I think where I am not, therefore I am where I do not think. I am not whenever I am the plaything of my thought; I think of what I am where I do not think to think
what did he mean by this
lmao philosophy is gay as shit
>If a house takes fire, we must seek, above all things, to protect the right side of the house standing on the left, and, on the other hand, the left side of the house on the right; for if we, for example, should protect the left side of the house on the left, then the right side of the house lies to the right of the left, and consequently as the fire lies to the right of this side, and of the right side (for we have assumed that the house is situated to the left of the fire), therefore the right side is situated nearer to the fire than the left, and the right side of the house might catch fire if it was not protected before it came to the left, which is protected. Consequently, something might be burnt that is not protected, and that sooner than something else would be burnt, even if it was not protected; consequently we must let alone the latter and protect the former. In order to impress the thing on one's mind, we have only to note if the house is situated to the right of the fire, then it is the left side, and if the house is to the left it is the right side.
What did he mean by this?
he just wanted to make you think.
What are the two or three best words to put on this t shirt? Prove your linguistic superiority by being sarcastic
OP'S
A
FAGGOT
>>7736052
it;s a metaphor
cellar door
Why are all the characters so unlikable
Because it's a book about mood and setting and theme, not characters.
No, I didn't say the mood and setting and themes were good. Don't put words in my mouth, asshole.
>>7736006
Lol my baaaad
He borrowed that from Dostoyevsky.
Recommend me (your favorite) poetry, fit for a child.
Metamorphoses, its a family tradition for me. Just gloss over the rape parts.
>>7735987
Lewis Carroll
>>7736000
The Crocodile
by Lewis Carroll
How doth the little crocodile
Improve his shining tail,
And pour the waters of the Nile
On every golden scale!
How cheerfully he seems to grin!
How neatly spread his claws,
And welcomes little fishes in
With gently smiling jaws!
![Podkowiński-Szał_uniesień-MNK[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/R8AHVBU.jpg "Podkowiński-Szał uniesień-MNK[1]")
