/lit/ - Literature

Why didn't Hermione's parents fix her teeth?

What are some books, referred to by some as 'sigma lit,' or 'incel lit,' that provides practical advice to men who are alone and who want to remain alone? I've already read Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius, and I'm going to read the Hagakure. Is there anything else? I'd like a book that more directly tackles the life of an incel, provides advice on how to get on in this life, how to deal with normies and the workplace, and how to be unseen. Pic unrelated.

>I hold his enthusiasms, his fervors against him. He demolished so many idols only to replace them with others: a false iconoclast, with adolescent aspects and a certain virginity, a certain innocence inherent in his solitary's career. He observed men only from a distance. Had he come closer, he could have neither conceived nor promulgated the superman, that preposterous, laughable, even grotesque chimera, a crotchet which could occur only to a mind without time to age, to know the long serene disgust of detachment.

Kek, This is the best criticism against Nietzsche

What's the Old Money equivalent in literature?

Get the fuck in here faggots, it's autumn, it's Trakl time

What are some of your opinions which are verboten in literary history. Eg: Shakespeare sucks.

My personal is that Robert Graves and Peter Green are better translators of Homer than Fagles, Fitzgerald or Chapman.

How does he even answer the proposition that reality is as real, or more so than the world of forms?
Is his fear of playwrights just him and Socrates, after studying for years on end, get btfod by barely literate theather kids since the theater kids have strict limits on rationalizing, as the story needs to be engaging and immersive, ironically landing closer to reality because they study nature rather than merely thhinking about it.
It also seems to me that Hegelian dialectics are just the same platonic fantasies but more immersive by obfuscation and already engaging due to the fantasies not having to correspond to nature
I wonder what the modern aristotle to this would be desu

In my opinion, villians almost always make poor protagonists... they're just one dimensionally evil and have no morality or struggles. How can you make a protagonist exciting and interesting if they are just boring like villians?

Seeing as the time is nearing us and everyone either wants a change in the system or sees it as a bullshit time waste, the top 100 vote has to be overhauled this year.
Now, what are the main critiques:
>It's the same books every year, especially top 20-30s
>Not enough people participate for it to have validity
>It's overall dumb
Well, I can't argue with the last two as they're dependant ot the individual's emotional outlook on the vote and seeing how ineffective last year's system of "vote for whatever and however much you want", the lack of enthusiasm is to be expected. Therefore, here are my propositions on how it shall be conducted this time:
1. If we want one collected list, then it will be good to limit the votes and to give them each a point amount, e.g.: 3p, 2p, 1p. To address the problem of always having the same books on the list, here is a method for voting I believe will counteract that:
>3 points vote goes to your underrated, underdog, unacknowledged masterpiece. It doesn't have to be your favourite book, but it has to be one you believe is massively overlooked (or closest to it)
>2 points go to your favourite. IJ, GR, Ulysses, MD, The Bible, Karamazov all go to the top because they're agreeable, which is because they're fucking good, so there isn't really much to counter that, except implore people to not give them their top vote.
>1 point goes to your second favourite, or whatever you feel like has to get that little extra push.
But, there is a second problem. Whatever fiction book isn't in the top 100, it's place where it could have gone to is most probably taken up by a philosophy book. Also, the simplest way not to get the same books on top every year is just to forbid voting for them, so:
2. Splitting the lists into categories, while cumbersome for the voter and the list maker, is the most effective way to make them more colourful, e.g.:
>Fiction, in the three point system I suggested, no philosophical or theological texts and the such
>Non-fiction, again a three point system, so it's not just the greeks, the Bible and the manifestos there
>Underrated, voting for books in the top 30 (or even lower if you want) of the aggregate list will be forbidden and not accounted.

What do you think? I think the cynicism can be cured by work towards a change. And those that keep complaining should just not participate for their own and the others' good.

Anybody read this? Thoughts?

Why is god like this

What's the greatest piece of literature written by a woman, and how does it compare to the greatest piece of literature written by a man?

>studied literature in uni
>got a job at a publication reviewing novels
>the whole market is dominated by YA novels with girl protagonists
>my whole days are spent reading these mindless romantasy novels
>can feel my testosterone dropping and viewing myself more as the protagonists each new book i read

Am I being brainwashed by my job

Top 5 living philosophers

1. Jason Jorjani
2. Jesse Lee Peterson
3. Nick Land
4. Slavoj Zizek
5. Alexander Dugin (sadly)

Who are the Ancient Chinese equivalent of Livy and Tacitus?

Is Buddhism the most pessimistic of all the sacred traditions in existence?

>no explanation for 'samsara'/contingent existence to begin with, if you try to ponder or believe in a cosmogonic account you're insane and trapped in delusion
>this samsara is meaningless and our lives are always caught in suffering no matter what, dukkha is the sole enduring truth of this world
>transient existence caught between different modes of being, continuity between gods/devas, humans, animals, etc
>Mahayana tries to make Buddhas into the equivalent of deities/benevolent gods I guess
>you have absolute free will to escape samsara if you wish, but that may take many lifetimes. or you're born into a society without buddhist teaching, and if you can't find one elsewhere, you're screwed
>even beauty, goodness and the wonder inherent in existence is a trap. it makes you temporarily forget dukkha and then you expend your good karmic 'points' and go to hell on the rebound, like if you're reborn as a deva
>the Good is just one side of the duality, Nirvana is beyond both

Meanwhile, Neoplatonism or Tantric Shaivism or Advaita Vedanta have a similar totally transcendent dimension to their practice, but they revere the world and believe it to be inherently good and a ladder to be climbed via appreciation/love/gratitude and ultimately knowledge of the divine author (not separated from self) behind it. The world IS to be left behind but it isn't some Gnostic-tier nightmare trap or as dark as Buddhism says Samsara to be.

Am I in delusion as Buddhists would believe? I used to be quite hostile to Buddhism on account of dogmatic metaphysical principles but don't view it the same way anymore. The actual ascetic practice is heroic. But this particular attitude toward the cosmos is a significant hurdle

Have you studied Epictetus? What he says is pretty salient (pic related).

What are you ordering from the scholastic book catalog, bro? There's a new Captain Underpants!

What comfy books 25-35 year olds should read after doing hard work during the day? Books which not only should help them chill but also give them useful wisdom.

Write a short passage about this image.

>read 30 chapters
>still sucks balls
When does it get good?

Is it legit? Does it help in better reflecting on the things you read?

Who is the Dostoevsky of poetry? T.S. Eliot?

Why does the "anti-woke" crowd hate female smut books even when they have every problematic trope that the woke movement hates?

Do any of you wear headphones while reading? Do you listen to music or rain sounds or something? If so, do you match it to the book you're reading?

I have a pair of noise canceling earbuds that do a pretty good job of quietting the outside world. Sometimes I'll put on a little white noise too.

Are there any screen adaptations that you enjoyed more than the book?

I, Claudius the TV show captivated me from the start, but when I picked up the book years later I ended up dropping it before the halfway point

Is this shit actually good? I watched the movie and didn't like the humor, I tried playing the game back in the late 80s and didn't like the humor, I tried reading it in high school and didn't like the humor, am I just not getting it? It was everywhere at the time, was it just a product of its age and I was of too advanced intelligence for my era?

Severian did nothing wrong

What it says on the can.

If a publisher ever uses this painting as a cover for one of their books, not only do I avoid buying the book the cover was put on, I also avoid the entirety of their publications altogether.

>Let me say here that although Chomsky remains a hugely influential figure, the military were not alone in concluding that no part of his theoretical system could ever be made to work. The celebrated concept of ‘deep structure’ had to be abandoned long ago, along with virtually every other concept of the early years. Many linguistics would agree that almost none of Chomsky’s detailed claims about the nature of language has survived the test of time, a point candidly conceded by Chomsky himself.[39]

>For anyone in my position as a lifelong activist, it feels risky to say things that can so easily be misunderstood. No part of my account can detract from Chomsky’s record as a tireless anti-militarist campaigner. Neither can it detract from his persistence in withstanding the institutional pressures that he must have endured at MIT. Had he resigned in disgust in 1967, when he was thinking of doing so, he might never have gained the platform he needed to signal his dissidence across the world. There are times when all of us have to make compromises, some more costly than others. My argument, as I explain in more detail in my book, is that it was Chomsky’s linguistics rather than his activism that bore the brunt of those damaging pressures and costs.

>https://libcom.org/article/when-chomsky-worked-weapons-systems-pentagon-chris-knight

>Universal Grammer was a leftist psyop on the military

Any other theories like this?

Who are the best Middle Eastern writers (north Africa counts as well)?

Since learning Spanish and Portuguese largely to read Spanish and Portuguese scholastic text to be up to date with the revival of baroque scholastic tradition. I've noticed that when it comes to language proficiency there is a clear sign between fluency and non fluency so much so that there are grading patterns I.e. a1-c3 that are very thorough and rigorous and even language learning is a multi faceted activity. So much so even people with large vocabs still don't feel fluent when it comes to conversation.

All this is to say that, how many people do we know or society deems to be intelligent but if we were able to translate their expertise in a science or humanities subject into a language they'd have more broken English than an Indian fresh off the boat or Chinese immigrant from some rural rice field. Language learning taught me that know and understanding are two complete different things and that it's easy to have the illusion of mastery until put into practise. But there isn't this same clear visual or audial fluency when it comes to other areas of knowledge where the masses can easily be fooled into thinking they're experts. Knowlwdge of key terms, jargon, ideas which if translated into a language it would be b1 tier at best and be equivalent of a guy learning random phrases in another language without deep knowledge of the grammar or syntax.

But besides the doomer mentality I've also wondered if there are ways to learn true knowledge acquisition that isn't mere fact gathering but also teach to think in the subject you are learning on an intuitive level. So far I think just practise is the best and writing novel research is the best but I'm not sure

Any of you guys got any ideas or good guides?

I assume that, to better understand greek literature, its historical background must be studied first. What is the list of major events that shaped ancient Greece in this context?

This kind of sucks, at least everything after the first part. Why is everyone so manic and melodramatic all the time? Why is it so needlessly long?

>What is /wng/ - Web Novel General?
A general for readers and authors involved or interested in the growing phenomenon of 'web novels', serialized English fiction posted to websites such as: Royal Road, Webnovel, Scribblehub, Wattpad, Archive of Our Own, Spacebattles, HFY, various personal author websites, and more

>Why read web novels?
Not for prose or tight editing or deep themes, frankly. As a whole, web novels are infamous for content sprawl and pacing issues. If you enjoy having millions of words to sink your teeth into to get to know the world and characters, though, you may be interested. Keeping up with other readers on a weekly basis to discuss the story's events unfolding is another perk, in the same way discussing an ongoing TV show might be.

>Why write web novels?
Ease of access & potential for Patreon earnings. Many successful authors gain an audience on their website of choice and funnel their readers into a Patreon. See graphtreon.com/top-patreon-creators/writing for an idea of what some are earning.
Also, once an author has earned a fanbase, transitioning into an Amazon self-publishing career is several orders of magnitude easier than starting 'dry'.

>/wng/ authors.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vSNZali-jIk2MASsAWVf8N7A8BlSyzPbAFV_BhsA5Ip3SWfMPWKxaXf8Pdb7f0TgFyWis31BzirtPeR/pubhtml


>Advice for Noobs!

##READ THE FOLLOWING BEFORE ASKING FOR HELP##

Running your story like the business it is:
www.royalroad.com/forums/thread/116847

On writing web serials:
alexanderwales.com/how-to-write-a-web-serial/

Sanderson's Writing Lectures 2025:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEUh_y1IFZY&list=PLSH_xM-KC3ZvzkfVo_Dls0B5GiE2oMcLY

Recommended web novels
rentry.co/d2yvczro

Anon's guide to success
rentry.co/RRBasicGuide

FAQ
rentry.co/pytefpxn

How is this?

. in her book “The Lost History of Liberalism,” the Swedish historian Helena Rosenblatt shows that in its oldest forms, liberalism was built on a virtue that we rarely talk about today. “To the ancient Romans,” Rosenblatt writes, “being free required more than a republican constitution; it also required citizens who practiced liberalitas, which referred to a noble and generous way of thinking and acting toward one’s fellow citizens.”
guess which ancient Roman she was talking about, I'll give you two guesses

What can we learn about the "Holden Caulfield Archetype" from recent revelations that Sam Altman raped his sister

Serious question: do you think the 21st century will be seen as a sort of dark age? From where I’m looking, market of art and ideas is too oversaturated for anything interesting to stick out. The notion of rebelling against the dominant culture no longer has any weight, because due to decades of waning attention spans and centuries of similar rebellion, we simply don’t have a culture coherent enough to rebel against. The avenues left open to contemporary writers seem to be

1) - mindless bestseller slop that we all know about (romance, YA novels, poetry books by bitter women and ethnic diaspora groups)

2) - /lit/-bro rehashing of the classics, attempting to live in a past which no longer exists and perhaps never existed

3) - hyper-obscure avant-garde literature, written by fairly intelligent academics but destined to be read by only three people.


The transformation is probably irreversible. There will never be a return to the older world of literature, and whatever comes after us will have to be completely original. I’m welcoming recommendations of anything written in the 21st century that you think is quite good.

where are all the contemporary conservative philosophers?

Atheist-sisters, our response? He has five of them!

Reading this weekend and he came up. Is this lad out of fashion because he was so dominant in his own time and has become boring, or because he was mid?

My politics are incredibly inflexible so there's no chance of me adopting his views, but is he worth reading out of historical curiosity?

he always sounds like he's about to cry, it's kind of depressing

Athitroons gunna be real quiet when the god voices of the bicameral mind are what brings AI into consciousness.

Made a similar thread on /tv/, so I'll it here as well.

As someone whose entire media consumption is anime, how much am I missing?
I have zero reason to not read book, I just... never started.

Nietzsche's hobbyhorsed this philosophy pussy with zeal of the mighty – his street name: hot wheels. His creed: to meme it big, bitch. B rushing, planting the seed – C4 under your unsuspecting ass, nigga. Which is the nature of the will to power: to art. To ART: to graft divine essence on the mortal plane, dominated by marketing and greed. Nietzsche is the Christ of philosophy, detonating the corrupt temple. Ravishing corrupt priesthood with the unabased horse rod. Overcoming his own death. His quantum immortality is proven in the Elder Scrolls. Don't be a fucking lazy, dig into the lore. 'Who's Nietzsche in the Talmood, nigga?', your asking in the heart of hearts.. Alright, bitch. It's time to truth it big.

Nietzsche is the devil of abrahamics. Nietzsche is a videogame called Nietzsche. (Your in it right now, bro.) Nietzsche is gnosis: 'Blessed is he who has crucified the world, and not allowed the world to crucify him.' Nietzsche put it in the pipe and smoked it (the crack). Nietzsche is the spirit of Christmas. Nietzsche is not receiving (you)'s, because you are too off the map to get scanned as worthy of attention. Nietzsche is screaming shit into the void like the last noble man. Nietzsche is Don Quixote transcended into the kingdom alone. Nietzsche is winning (in his own game). Nietzsche is Yeszsche, actually, on the reverse side of it all, like the cosmos parallel universe where only children and the insane are invited. Nietzsche is unrepentant shitposting. Nietzsche is friendship. Nieatzsche is love first and foremost. It is the living heart radiating care for wild animals, ecology, and freedom of the human spirit. Nietzsche is the last moment you feel just before the nuclear wave sends you into the next life. Nietzsche is when you are really hurt by a bitch but you overstep your resentment knowing that she is mindbeamed into low awareness blue light telephones and you really show how noble you really are and just sms her saying 'hey, whatcha doing?', knowing that underneath her psyop she's wanting to break free. That's Nietzsche, my nigga. Nietzsche is mind of the insects. In that sense, Nietzsche is pure drain.

A Christmas Carol - Dickens
The Chimes - Dickens
The Cricket on the Hearth - Dickens
The Battle of Life - Dickens
The Haunted Man and the Ghost’s Bargain - Dickens
The Nutcracker and the Mouse King - Hoffmann
The Nutcracker - Dumas
Christmas at Thompson Hall - Trollope
The Night Before Christmas - Gogol
Rock Crystal - Stifter

Anything else worth reading?