Thread 24616277

I have never derived any meaningful knowledge or insights from the /lit/ consensus hivemind. Almost all of the best books I’ve found have been books /lit/ basically never talks about or doesn’t know about, knows about and shits on out of ignorance and envy, have been recommended or read by people /lit/ shits on out of ignorance and envy, or the information is from individuals posting their ideas in other mediums that /lit/ also shits on out of ignorance and envy.

It saddens me that one of the only places to talk about literature and new ideas is a bottomless bit of envy for no gain for anyone since people would rather do anything else other than take responsibility to have real meaningful conversations that generate new ideas and solve real problems.

Be more like god, make things more like god, you have nothing better to do.

>>24616277 (OP)
I remember I was reading "american gods" by neil gaimon and it said in the introduction that it had a cult following. Some people love it more than anything else and some people hate it

>>24616277 (OP)
what books do you like? whats this position coming from? clearly your point is about personal taste

>>24616277 (OP)
envy drives most things, i guess

I've written a book with some 'novel' ideas but you probably won't read it, like every other pretender in this board who pretends they like originality.

I agreem

Im really sensitive to disgust
>Space echoes like an immense tomb
>yet the stars burn
>why does the sun take so long to die
This is way too edgy, and it insists on itself, it sounds like something you write and then cringe at a year later, it forsakes explicit intelligence with cheap and bare gimmicks, it sounds violent with nothing to backing it up, it oozes weakness, its out of line its disconnected to reality which makes it further sound pretentious, generally the hallmark of pretense in writing is if it looks bad at first glance and you have to think about it to enjoy it then its pretentious as an art piece, this kind of writing some people really enjoy and find fulfilling, the good things about these people is theyre not vapid, other people find it gross and overpowering, generally people with good taste are like that because theyre sensitive to disgust so youre not going to find too many fans, even though it could be enjoyable, its generally not advisable to read because it steers you away from good taste, it lacks subtlety and it demands lower personal standards to read. Only if a book like this was written by my son id read it, otherwise this writing is nauseating

>>24616343
>generally the hallmark of pretense in writing is if it looks bad at first glance and you have to think about it to enjoy it then its pretentious as an art piece
This sounds like metal lyrics, it would be good as a song because songs look good at first glance, its terrible as literature though

>>24616343
It continues to bad hard after you surrender yourself to the god of amphetamines.

>>24616440
It continues to be hard*
Sorry, hard typing high on amphetamines.

>>24616277 (OP)
just go to r/truelit. much better than this shithole.

>no replies
sage

>>24616485
If i shilled my book on reddit, would they read it? I don't even have an account there.

>>24616343
>This is way too edgy, and it insists on itself
>...the good things about these people is theyre not vapid, other people find it gross and overpowering, generally people with good taste are like that because theyre sensitive to disgust so youre not going to find too many fans...

It takes a lack of self-awareness, a special kind of blathering drone to attempt criticism while parroting all this tawdry filth. Do yourself and everyone else a favor and shut the fuck up. The main disgusting thing about this thread is >>>/you/, many congratulations on that area.

>>24616485
So what would be the upside of r/truelit? Candid question since I'm a bit of a beginner to both sites.

>>24616343
>it insists on itself
Stopped reading there

>. Almost all of the best books I’ve found have been books /lit/ basically never talks about or doesn’t know about, knows about and shits on out of ignorance and envy, have been recommended or read by people /lit/ shits on out of ignorance and envy, or the information is from individuals posting their ideas in other mediums that /lit/ also shits on out of ignorance and envy.

people who say this are usually reading genre fiction dreck so can be disregarded

>>24616277 (OP)
I've actually found a ton of books via /lit/ that I wouldn't have otherwise. I'm American and I went to public school so my exposure to great literature was basically pure dreck. I wouldn't know about Pessoa if not for /lit/, for example.

>>24616533
truelit at the very least is more willing to discuss literature, and because they're not anonymous entirely, they tend to develop friendships and there's this whole "community" thing going on. basically, when everyone isn't a hostile scumbag, you can have a few conversations that are meaningful.
this here spot is crabs in a bucket. there was a time when it was useful, and if you have a practised eye, you can still get some useful bits here and there. ultimately the toxicity of this particular space is what stymies any useful outcome. reddit has its own toxicity to be sure, but at least it attempts to mediate that with *some* positive influence. here's motto appears to be "annihilate the newcomer, and dismantle our contemporaries". the fruits are clear, a miserable, sour, bitter little inedible stone comes peeping out of the riveled husk.

>>24616533
What it is its pretentious, im a left winger I voted for obama, i dont know what angle of criticism youre going for, because apparently im guilty because parroting someone out of the room, is he in the thread with us right now?

>>24616585
this place is a bar after eleven pm. reddit is a hr ice breaker session. noone is being honest and all the smiles are fake.

>>24616648
you think people are honest here? people embellish their negative criticisms here constantly. anyway, yes there is falseness in all quarters, you're not going to find otherwise, as to be expected of the world. probably the best chance is a very gated small community that vets new entrants.

>>24616485
you're a nigger

>>24616786
qed

>>24616686
an imageboard that has invites like private trackers would be nice. users get a few invites to hand out but their invitees behavior can lead to a ban (you invite multiple shit stirrers, you're out) and the staff also hands out official invites either on other forums (where you have to have been in good standing for a while) or through open applications/interviews

>>24616277 (OP)
>read thirst for annihilation
>An aged philosopher is either a monster of stamina or a charlatan.

No disagreements.

>need something new
>Land appears to be a recycling bin for Nietzsche, Marx, and Baudrillard
>some irrelevant thinkers tossed in and his Descartian I has been switched to twattery

Nothing new will come of this.

>>24616860
i think the closest available thing is cash gated spaces with heavy moderation. like something you see surrounding various social media stars, or even subcelebrity guys just keeping the chat quality high

>>24616485
>r/truelit
kek, it is filled with bunch of smug litfic pseud faggots who take themselves too seriously. go back to plebbit

>>24617015
>they're smug because they read and enjoy literature and can talk about it like adults
lmbo

>Almost all of the best books I’ve found have been books /lit/ basically never talks about or doesn’t know about,
such as...

>>24616277 (OP)
Well retard, a car salesman would find "how to sell 100 cars" a more life changing book than anything by Plato. An advertiser would find "hey Whipple, squeeze this" the greatest book ever written.

Lit is subjective consumption. There will never be another book that changes everyone's life. If you don't like the general census on /lit/ then that isn't /lit/s fault, you just don't fit in here.

>>24617130
then why are you here? fuck off back to plebbit, you rat

>>24616277 (OP)
turn your sadness into rage and let it boil over. read, train, organize, win

nothing to lose but your chains

>>24617196
litfic pseud kek, the misreable freak is not even allowed to read anything else by his echochamber.

>>24617225
cope

>>24617239
litfic pseud cope.

don't come back crying if you got banned for the wrongthink.

lighten up there chief

>>24617250
you're just mad you can't delete the thread, modfag

>>24617373
this ain't plebbit fuck you

>>24616277 (OP)
>doesn't say what those works/authors are
I'm gonna have to presume the shitting was merited, then, or you'd have mentioned them to lend your post legitimacy. But yes, /lit/ sucks and doesn't read and the other places to discuss literature online are either much worse, only barely better (and declining) or so obscure as to not serve as public forums at all but more as reading circles between a few friends.

>>24616277 (OP)
Didn't he once state that philosophy untethered from academia breeds schizophrenia? He seems pretty on the mark with that but unlike him I don't see it as a bad thing. I mean one could say the proliferation of pop-Stoicism is late capitalism reifying itself but it could also be a good thing and produce the first works of post-academic philosophy by guys who live in their moms basement in Iowa and chug monster and poor dudes who live on sheep farms in Belgrade. I'm not doxxing myself but I'm similar (but not the same, albeit) to one of those archetypes and I've penned five works so far.

>>24616277 (OP)
I pop in every couple of years, it's the same bullshit all over. Cormack McArthy, Neil de grassie salivation, wtf is this shit.

>>24617718
Why would you expect anything different on 4chan?

The average iq of this place is 120--with huge mismatches (2 stds) btn verbal and spatial--how then can you expect midwits to parse originality when all they know, all they can teach other newcomers is 'good prose' and 'no plot'.

>>24617465
This is something I'm starting to pick up on, which reminds me of Baudrillard. Baudrillard did write some material that was taken seriously by academic thinkers, he also would frequently claim academia was worthless and take polemical positions just to get any given person to argue against him only for the other person just to make up their mind on something and he turns around takes another position. In one of his late works I also want to say he made a claim that the person with the most interesting position is the one who ends up on top. He also adopted an attitude you're describing in his pataphysics which also blurs the lines on whether it's serious or parody or both but also seemingly encourages the process regardless. Baudrillard also had a tendency to cause seethe amongst his critics who frequently accused him of lacking background in his preferred sources. He learned German, read multiple German thinkers and even translated some of them, on the other hand some of his later works would have odd citations. Some of his ideas on this remind me of a highly Nietzschean situationist style and Baudrillard likely read all the right German thinkers to realize it's a waste of time to care what critics think. The outcome is a thinker who can generate academic quality material but chooses not to for various reasons the likeliest of which being the oppressive and controlling nature of academia.

>>24617210
This appears to be a false citation unless it's from a radically different translation.
https://archive.org/details/stalindialecticalhistoricalmaterialism/