What's the most criminally neglected literary genre?
Erotica
poetry
>>7780568
Essays. Patrish af.
>>7780568
I'd love to read more about the darker side of the 80s.
80s renaissance when?
>>7780571
I just can't stand modern poetry desu.
If it's anything like what I read on /lit/ threads then sorry, I cringe too much to finish one.
Sci-fi comedy, all I can really think of is hitchhiker's guide and one or two obscure books.
>>7780626
Good point. Sci-fi's always serious.
I wonder if it's some sort of self-fulfilling prophecy whereby most people think it'll be somewhat dystopian; which therefore comes through in the writing of most authors.
Utopian Sci-fi, on the other hand, is just boring.
>>7780612
That explanation of the "difference" is pathetic.
>>7780650
Yeah, I know everyone says this but I'm working on a novel (technically two but I've left one for now cause it was turning out shit) and I'm specifically trying to have more fun with it, the characters actually enjoying their situation and the villain being the killjoy of all this fun tech and magic-y stuff in the universe.
Not strictly a comedy cause I have a hard time being funny, but at least having some fun.
>>7780650
Quentin's leading sentence, that
>Fitzgernal's writing shows a true mastery of writing, evoking beautiful imagery in our minds and sympathy for Gatsby and the narrator.
is a vague and purely subjective statement that neither explains in what way Fitz allegedly did those things or refers to parts of the text that could enlighten us. This is objectively bad criticism. He goes on to claim that GRRM's use of repetition of the word "shit" shows the man has a small vocabulary — does he really believe that GRRM doesn't know any other words for shit? That there are no other explanations for the use of word repetition when describing a repetitive action? Given that there are, that statement is myopic to the point of ignorance. The statement about penises and cunts is utterly meaningless, and the conclusion that those are the reasons Fitzgerald is seen as better than GRRM is completely facile.
Further points:
- By saying "Here's some good writing", "Here's some bad writing" Quentin has openly admitted to cherry-picking the good and bad from each writer. If we were to compare the best of GRRM with the worst of Fitzgerald, we might draw different conclusions.
- Besides openly cherry-picking his quotes, they're not even remotely the same length, nor are they similar passages in content. There is no meaningful comparison to be drawn here.
Now I've never read Fitzgerald or GRRM, I imagine the latter actually is worse, but that image and everything in it is retarded.
>>7780612
>that image
sick cherry picking brah
>>7780712
So you're defending GRRM's infantile use of profanity, then?
>>7780724
Shitting is shitting is shitting, it's used appropriately to the context and infantile to think of that as profane. Even the image doesn't complain about that, why would you bring it up now? Your reading comprehension sucks.
>>7780724
>profanity
>automatically considered infantile
Spoken like a true classy gent
>>7780734
>2016
>Favouring anything more than sparse use of profanity, at most, when it comes to literature
>>7780568
>criminally neglected
Lawbooks.
>smugpepe.jpg
>>7780749
I see you've run out of anything relevant to say. Here's your (You).
>>7780743
If I read profanity in high literature I prefer "d--m"
>>7780763
Don't worry, there are plenty of pleb literature to cater to your fetish for puerile profanity; GRRM included.
>>7780749
Well it's like anything else in writing, does it fit the story? Read well? Suit the characters? The setting? I'd expect a story set in Harlem to have a ton of swearing, whereas a book about the Victorian era would have little to none.
>>7780712
He's not arguing that one of the writers is better, he is trying (unsuccessfully) to demonstrate what makes writing good
>>7780568
Slave trade apologia,hilarious yet heart warming at the same time.
>>7780840
>It is for this reason that Fitzgeral is seen as a great writer and Martin a terrible one.
He tries to do both because he's shit at writing critique and gets all confused about it.
In my opinion it is the memoir. Though my opinion is largely a consequence of my relevant ambitions.
>>7780850
That's one of his assumptions yes but it is not the purpose of his image.
Religious.
Damn Marxists.
>>7780889
It's the conclusion of the text of the image. Regardless, he fails to argue for anything properly and we seem to agree on this.
