[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Settings Home
/lit/ - Literature

4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
05/08/16Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks. Make sure to check your spam box!
[Hide] [Show All]

[Catalog] [Archive]

File: lit.jpg (12 KB, 225x250)
12 KB
/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but ideally those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.

Check the wiki, the catalog, and the archive before asking for advice or recommendations, and please refrain from starting new threads for questions that can be answered by a search engine.

/lit/ is a slow board! Please take the time to read what others have written, and try to make thoughtful, well-written posts of your own. Bump replies are not necessary.

Looking for books online? Check here:
Guide to #bookz
Recommended Literature

File: IMG_7384.jpg (179 KB, 1242x714)
179 KB
179 KB JPG
What types of drugs does /lit/ do?
7 replies omitted. Click here to view.
i experimented with everything i could get my hands on in college and now i feel profound guilt about it. however i still drink pretty often.
It depends. I didn't mind them the first dozen or so times. But one time I ate 7 grams and it just took forever and it grossed me out. Just get some fucking doritos and mountain dew and have them together. Ur good to go. Fresh on pizza would be dope. I wonder if they would taste good.
I get high, no joking, from my gf's sweaty crotch. After she gets back from a run or something. I kiss her sweat from neck to hip line. Pull off her shorts to tease myself. Kiss her through her panties. And then slowly take them off with my eyes closed until I'm just enveloped with that scent. You should have seen her blush the first time I went dizzy.
peanut butter because it tastes so good. I don't even eat it with bread, just plop it right on a paper plate and scoop it up
I feel this put about sour cream

File: jordan-peterson.jpg (93 KB, 512x288)
93 KB
Dude be a hero, lmao.
13 replies and 5 images omitted. Click here to view.
what does he mean by sort yourself out
you'll have to sort that question yourself
>muh piaget
>muh jung
>muh nietzsche
>muh solzhenitsyn

he literally says the same shit over and over again every lecture/interview holy shit
About 90% of things he says is effectively gibberish. This the man is senile

File: John-Green.jpg (64 KB, 612x380)
64 KB
I know this board likes to pick on him a lot and I used to agree with your guys-es sentiments. Then I decided to pick up his novel "The Fault in Our Stars". Which you can purchase here -->https://books.google.com/books?id=UzqVUdEtLDwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+fault+in+our+stars&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj-8puOvOjSAhVM7GMKHZGnAUAQ6AEIGjAA#v=onepage&q=the%20fault%20in%20our%20stars&f=false

It suddenly occurred to me while reading it, that John Green is really bullied for want of a good reason here. When you actually read his book you realize how he really tried to push the medium of teenage romance novels by making them deeply philosophical and profound. That's better than most of you neets can say. Just take the title for instance. "The Fault in Our Stars" points to Shakespeare's master work Julius Caesar and the famous line "The fault dear Brutus is not in our stars, but in ourselves" and it rejects the simplistic nature of such a reactionary view. Instead it submits that it is indeed our stars fault. It is not our own choices to blame, but instead the socio-economic situation we were born in. I understood this sense he was a kid probably, when he had trouble getting girls. It wasn't his fault! It was because of the life he was given. I should note that I am practicing Christian by the way, but even I can see that the deep message that John puts into his work is noteworthy of admiration and perhaps emulation if you guys were wise enough to do so.

That is all.
127 replies and 22 images omitted. Click here to view.
If this thread dies before John Green's best fan posts the picture of the 23 copies I'll be mad at you guys
Bumping for John Green's biggest fan
John Green is a beta cuck numale. Only romantically ignorant teens get wet for John Green.
So do you have them yet?
Does anyone have the screenshot of the email email /lit/ sent Green years ago?

What is some literature that will make me want to kill myself?
10 replies and 1 image omitted. Click here to view.
No longer human by Osamu Dazai
t. weaboo
notes from underground aka your diary in russian
>He doesn't know that Jewt wordfiltered niggerspeak before he absconded
>Taking this blatant bait
I retract, for your comment I decided to read the book and I love it, thank you for recommending it

File: image.jpg (104 KB, 898x893)
104 KB
104 KB JPG
Is he the most important philosopher of the 21st century? I say yes.
11 replies and 4 images omitted. Click here to view.

The most important philosopher of the 21st century was Jonathan Bowden. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDGWr8kMBk8
Whatever Slavoj.
Philosophy hasn't been 'important' for at least 200 years now
File: bob-author-photo.jpg (18 KB, 300x400)
18 KB
>not reading tomes on inferentialism and critiques of sellars

the 21st century started in 2001, not 500 BCE...

File: 1490324965825.jpg (77 KB, 365x500)
77 KB
Redpill me on sci-fi, /lit/.
> Either wondrous with a sense of adventure.
> Boring and depressing.
> Has anyone found the middle ground?
Hahajajhajajja that's a fun y cove rhajahahah

File: IMG_0862.jpg (42 KB, 460x276)
42 KB
Books that got better as you got older?
Sort of related: over the last couple of years I have noticed that I am able to get a lot more out of books, music, movies, etc. Even stuff that isn't really difficult to comprehend, I find that I am picking up things I would never have noticed before.

I am not sure whether it is a result of reading more or just growing older in general
me too. feels good man :)

File: Tolstoy-List-Main.jpg (198 KB, 830x506)
198 KB
198 KB JPG
Is Tolstory overrated?
3 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Definitely not. Read his stuff.

He's better than Dostoevsky.
It's pronounced tolst-WAH.
one must clench one's fist with conviction to emphasize the second syllable.
Very very biased because he's my favourite writer of all time and to be honest has turned my life around from the brink a few times, but no he's definitely not.

Tolstoy, whatever he was like as a person ( I don't judge him as harshly as some, but people are troubled by the details of his life), truly understood the composition of people, not as isolated and atomised psychological units, as did Dostoevsky (just as great technically but nowhere near as important to me personally), but as entangled in complicated social networks, capable of the best and worst actions and feelings.

His writings on Natasha's affair in War and Peace for example perfectly encapsulates this incredible way he has of nestling into the mind of another, in a situation totally disimilar to his, the most uncomfortable perspective for anyone, that of a cheating romantic partner, which plays on the most essential insecurity we have, in such a way as to transcend it and understand their exact motivations.

It's this way of keeping the best aspects of the human soul in mind, even when laying out some of the worst actions we can perform, that makes Tolstoy so refreshing to read. The man was a true optimist, in a genuine and authentic way which will be opened up to any reader if they are receptive to his ideas.

Seriously, just read him, starting with a smaller work to get used to his style and diving into War and Peace, not paying attention to the technical aspects (which are spectacular in their own way, but hardly the point of the work), but instead being attentive to the characters, their nuances, their unfolding over time (often from childhood into adulthood), the slow breaking down and building up of people which occurs only in times of trauma, such as war, and which Tolstoy depicts so brilliantly.

P.s this sounds v. Profound to me but I'm drunk so have a good one and sorry if this doesn't make sense

File: heidegger-crop.jpg (356 KB, 1024x768)
356 KB
356 KB JPG
What's so special about this guy, /lit/? Is he a charlatan or a great philosopher? I haven't read Being and Time yet, but some of his other works, and I gained nothing, or few things.
55 replies and 6 images omitted. Click here to view.
But isn't this just transmuting self-realization into the realization of death? I mean, since death is "the only occurrence that guarantees out unique individuality," and this realization allows you to live "authentically," wouldn't the external appearance of this authentically-lived life be uniqueness or peculiarity itself? The more conscious you are of this impending, incomprehensible nothing (death), the more you "know nothing," the more creative you become. This seems very similar to Stirner's conception of uniqueness, "eigenheit," which literally means "ownness" but best translates as "peculiarity."
Uniqueness here is not important in the sense that it makes you stand out from others, but that it makes you aware of your possibilities for action in the world. Heidegger's concept of the "They-Self" [Das Man] is important here. Living an inauthentic life occurs when one is never aware of the possibilities one has for Being in the world, most often because one blindly follows the path of others without reflecting on these choices. In this case, you aren't connecting to the world, but rather are living through the expectations of others and letting the They-Self interpret the world for you. ("I'll go to college because that's what everybody does.") So when you realize your "uniqueness" it's not in the sense that you are different from everyone else, but that you realize that all your choices are up to YOU and you do not have to be part of the They-Self if you don't want to. "Unique" as in your choices are separate from those of everyone else. For Heidegger, you don't have to be "creative" to be "authentic" as you put it. One can be perfectly ordinary in their appearance and actions and still be authentic as long as they have weighed their options and this is what they consciously chose to give themselves the best life they could.
>m-muh m-morals

Morality is man-made. Morality is a spook. He being a Nazi is no big deal. Im sure that you are probably memeing though.
Gas the Jews.

If I can add onto this, Hubert Dreyfus argues for a "positive" and "negative conception of Das Man. If it weren't for the expectations, the references, and the rules that Daseins collectively contribute to Das Man, then the world and all of its actionable possibilities wouldn't be intelligible. But there remains a constant threat of temptation into taking these possibilities for granted, with Dasein becoming too absorbed into its everyday activities to the point where it no longer takes a unique stand on its own being, aka what it means to be that Dasein.

File: download (3).jpg (6 KB, 198x254)
6 KB
Is Dickens genuinely good, or are his stories plebian tales for the masses?
21 replies omitted. Click here to view.
Do any amerifags that have read a tale of two cities see the parallels between france and current usa? Do you guys think there would be a proletariat revolution where the heads of the 1% will roll in the streets?
They're equally good and tales for the masses.
Every sentence he writes.
some super self-conscious 'moneyed elites' here certainly do. it's in the news. read a nyorker article not too long ago myself about just this 'issue'-- but really, americans spend way too much time with their faces in their phones, getting fat, listening to bad music, etc. to do much of anything about most everything..
>plebian tales for the masses
When enough time passes, most plebian tales become high literature.

File: ALiteracy.png (1.19 MB, 957x526)
1.19 MB
1.19 MB PNG
How Aliterate are you?


Ah yes 2017 the year where everything is normal.
46 replies and 6 images omitted. Click here to view.
Big surprise, literature is meaningless without context. A book whose subject you don't care about is as illegible as a hieroglyphic tablet.
The only answer to this is complete destruction of democracy and the creation of a class of industrial serfs
>Canadian """academics"""
wow it's literally nothing
Some people here read the canon rather than random shit tho so yeah couldn't.

I could probably do a couple of books, but definitely not ten. Lit is a pretty canon oriented board, which is fine. It tends to collect people who are getting into literature and you should be reading canon at that point

File: giphy[1].gif (908 KB, 490x257)
908 KB
908 KB GIF
25 replies and 10 images omitted. Click here to view.
>Would you say thoughts are complimentary to experience?

>Thoughts are situated in a causal sense. The human experience is situated in a timeless place.
the human experience involves thoughts. wtf bro?
File: 1_BARTON_FINK1520[1].jpg (51 KB, 1520x945)
51 KB
>The base of your argument still lies in the fact that you view all reflective thought as a waste, thus allowing cinema to become the "ultimate medium,"

Not a waste, necessarily, but obfuscatory. It merely creates unneeded additional internal logic. It clouds instead of elucidates.

>I know what you are saying here, and I partially agree with it, but your rejection of all other mediums and of all reflective thought or meaning has thrown you over a cliff with ramifications that you have not considered.

I didn't reject literature (we're talking about the fictional and nonfictional narrative form, excluding things like philosophy and nonfictional nonnarrative stuff, to be clear); I just increasingly find it to be a waste of time when I can just spend a couple hours on more spiritual forms of media-catharsis.

>>claiming all directors discourage interpretation

It's not that I consider directors to discourage interpretation (of a certain kind, such as the kind found in literature where every elements has potential significance); it's that they frown upon looking at their works as something to be interpreted by a common viewer and thus brought down to an interpretative format of discourse., instead of merely taken in as is.

>>claiming all authors encourage interpretation

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>it's that they frown upon looking at their works as something to be interpreted by a common viewer and thus brought down to an interpretative format of discourse., instead of merely taken in as is.

In other words, interpretation is secondary to the work as a whole. But for a literary work, interpretation is all one has.

>the human experience involves thoughts. wtf bro?

But once one thinks, he is automatically taken out of the experience. You ever had someone tell you, "drifting off?" or "daydreaming?"

Similarly, "pay attention", or 'listen" in class? The human mind is not one for multitasking. If you're taking notes, you're not paying attention entirely to the lecture. Also, one shouldn't mistake the spontaneity of intuition while one is listening to a lecture for genuine "creative" and autonomous thought.

When one is in an autonomous mode of thought, he seemingly draws from a well of relational and seemingly chaotic knowledge constructs. That's entirely different from letting one's self go to the experience of SOMEONE ELSE'S production of sensation.

It kinda ties into the whole "discrete" vs "continuous" dichotomy.
>But once one thinks, he is automatically taken out of the experience.
no? he just enters into a slightly different realm of 'the experience.' you cannot disconnect thought from experience, they're inextricably linked.
File: street-chase-1l[1].jpg (75 KB, 978x547)
75 KB
>no? he just enters into a slightly different realm of 'the experience.' you cannot disconnect thought from experience, they're inextricably linked.

It's not something that can be quantified or rigidly delineated as one would like to think. Your problem (a problem that is indicative of all literature), is that you think in discrete terms, definitions, well-established (in your mind) conceptions of reality.

The delineation between thought and sense is something scientists are still trying to experimentally verify, and possibly never will be able to.

What is the relationship between the chaotic elements of reality, or sensations of reality, and our (we'd like to think as free will) thought?

You can attempt to argue that thought is the same as experience, but that would be--as Wittgenstein would say--just another language game.

For example, I'm using "experience" as a metaphor for something that is "thrust upon you", an intuition, a sensation. You may be using it as an overarching term for everything that happens to man, including the notion of decision making.

This is how Oxford defines experience, for example:

Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.

File: buddha.jpg (9 KB, 202x255)
9 KB
I am interested in Buddhism as a philosophy, not a religion*. I think that following many of its lessons one can certainly live a better life.

However, I have some questions, some uncertainties that are quite disturbing to me (and forgive me if they are stupid, but I am quite new to all of this):

>To eliminate desire one must desire to do so, so how is it possible to do it? Let me put in another way: to achieve enlightenment one has to eliminate desire (or craving), but you only follow the path to enlightenment by wanting to do so, with the desire to do so. In this view, you have to practice every day with a series of goals in mind, with the desire to achieve such goals - and that for quite a while - before you achieve enlightenment. So all the time you reach for the complete end of craving your are filled with the desire to end it. Isn’t that a paradox?

>I like to write and one of the main goals of my life is to become better as writer, little by little, day by day. I practice this art and I honestly want (I desire) to get better, to achieve more mastery. Can I achieve more profound states of wisdom (maybe even enlightenment after many years, who knows) and still keep striving each day to become a better writer? The process of writing, to me, is not always pleasurable, and many times I feel great discomfort while trying to polish up my drafts or when trying to imagine new things out of nothing. Is great-wisdom/enlightenment possible when one has this artistic-drive in ones life?

* I see Buddhism as Ethics, as one possible answer to the question "What is the best way for people to live?", and any supernatural rant piled up upon the oldest lessons are trash in my eyes. The older the texts, the simpler and down-to-earth they seem to be.
100 replies and 7 images omitted. Click here to view.
This doesn't seem right, there are tons and tons of wonderful buddhist art in all fields (I'm especially fond of thai sculpture). Are artist wrong for doing it or can art be beneficial to buddhist
Art for the sake of art is all that matters.
>Buddhism is a load of bullcrap

I love how people who have no idea what the fuck they are talking about think they can just make these assertions. Probably the most frustrating aspect of practicing Buddhism is people read some pamphlet and think they understand it. When in actuality it takes shit tons of patience and perseverance on and off the pillow to experience the truth behind something as simple as the five aggregates.

great post.

>long term diminishing returns
Would you care to cite this please?

t. Different anon

File: hollaback.jpg (39 KB, 324x499)
39 KB
So, I just got this for my b-day. What I'm I in for? It's my first Hollaback book.
Masturbation, sex, decadence, time jumps, alienation, and science
what's the best hoellebecq to start with? i'm interested in reading his worldview but Submission seems kind of meme tier and Atomised/Elementary Particles seems like it's shock value sex scenes

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.