/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 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 #bookzhttps://www.geocities.ws/prissy_90/Media/Texts/BookzHelp19kb.htmRecommended Literaturehttps://lit.trainroll.xyz/wiki/Recommended_Reading
Are you incapable of making decisions without the guidance of anonymous internet strangers? Open this thread for some recommendations.
Space fear edition>Recommended reading charts (Look here before asking for vague recommendations):https://mega.nz/folder/kj5hWI6J#0cyw0-ZdvZKOJW3fPI6RfQ/folder/4rAmSZxb>Banned Authors:Joe AbercrombieA.A. AttanasioR. Scott BakkerC.J. CherryhGlen CookSteven EriksonR.A. LaffertyMark LawrenceGeorge R.R. MartinComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>25465074token white guy author
Pretty comfy, my hats off to the anon that was asking about it a few threads ago. Lots of lesbian stuff though.
something about the gnosis magic from bakker was so cool.the tekne as well.
Do you guys know any fantasy/sci-fi books with White male/Asian female pairings?
>>25465112The anon's thinly veiled self-insert fantasy fetish.
farmer's market editionASOIAF wiki: https://awoiaf.westeros.org/index.php/Main_PageBlog: https://georgerrmartin.com/notablog/Old blog: https://grrm.livejournal.com/So Spake Martin (interviews): https://westeros.org/citadel/ssm/Book search: https://asearchoficeandfire.com/SSM search: https://cse.google.com/cse?cx=006888510641072775866:vm4n1jrzsdyGeneral search: http://searcherr.work/TWOW samples: https://archive.org/details/411440566-the-winds-of-winter-released-chaptersold: >>25447261
>>25464683>danymarketWhere's the danygrasssquat version?
Is it true GURM is actually a mid fantasy writer, not talking about worldbuilding but prose
>>25464923there's no good sf/fantasy writers in terms of prosewant prose read litfic not genreslop
Man he's posting like a dying boomer now too
On 4chan:There are two aspects to merely clever argumentation that call for fur-ther notice and which are to be contrasted with conceptually comprehend-ing thinking.53 – On the one hand, merely clever argumentation conductsitself negatively towards the content apprehended; it knows how to refuteit and reduce it to nothing. It says, “This is not the way it is”; this insight isthe merely negative; it is final, and it does not itself go beyond itself to a newcontent. Rather, if it is again to have any content, something other fromsomewhere else has to be found. It is reflection into the empty I, the vanityof its own knowing. – What this vanity expresses is not only that this con-tent is vain but also that this insight itself is vain, for it is the negative whichcatches no glimpse of the positive within itself. Because this reflection doesnot gain its negativity itself for its content, it is not immersed in the sub-ject matter at all but is always above and beyond it, and thus it imaginesComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>25463570The dialectic
None of this will be solved until we build the Neo-Platonic Republic.
AIslop makes Heglel obsolete
>>25462953good post>>25463270humility precedes understanding
>>25464141Humility proceeds? Understanding
Sorry anon, we've decided to move forward and not publish your work.
>>25464732What government regulations would you remove that would incentivize publishers to publish more male authors?
>>25464669Anita Bath.
>>25464669Pussy Galore
>>25464706Is this not just straight-up gender discrimination? I call up the most Jewish lawyer I can find
>>25464706How can you get sued for simply using a penname that's female?
"A personal message to the previous OP" editionPrevious: >>25458094/wg/ AUTHORS & FLASH FICTION: https://pastebin.com/ruwQj7xQRESOURCES & RECOMMENDATIONS: https://pastebin.com/nFxdiQvCPlease limit excerpts to one post.Give advice as much as you receive it to the best of your ability.Discuss the written works below for practice; contribute, and you shall receive.If you have not performed a cursory proofread, do not expect to be treated kindly. Edit your work for spelling and grammar before posting.Expect critique, not praise.Shitposters should be ignored and reported.>Garbage gudie(s) on writing:Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>25464994>Seems erroneous to me.that's because you're retarded. it's perfectly correct, in grammatical terms, aside from being run-on.
>>25464909>>25464952>>25464969Thanks for the feedback. Yes, it's a low budget schlock concept, and I probably failed to elevate it. I'll probably finish my 3rd draft (action and dialogue punch up) and call it done for now rather than keep tweaking the story. Then I'll move on to my next idea.(and thanks, yes the logline is bad, I rewrote it in a rush but yeah it's missing a lot and poorly written)
>>25462887>queryingWhat’s that?
>>25464837I remember this. You posted the first 25 pages of it earlier. Nothing happened in it. Does anything happen in your revised version?
I'm on page 174 of my book and at 58k words and I still don't know what the fuck I'm writing. But regardless, I srll write regardless. I had a tentative goal of 300 pages before I finish it and submit to a publishing house after doing some editing, but idk what I'll do now. I'll drop it on Amazon Kindle unlimited if nobody wants it. If I succeed in finishing my novel , I'll write my next books more casually unless I get a major contract. One should not work like a mule for free.
One of the most influential essays on this concept is called "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" by a filmaker named Laura Mulvey (pic related, despite her great insight she never seems to have made a great film).In order to solve the elusive mystery of why men might like to look at beautiful women, she uses the science of psychoanalysis (instead of, for example, evolutionary theory). The essay is a stream of incomprehensible jargon...but the argument she makes is that the reason men like to look at women who are beautiful or curvaceous is because of the fact that the woman has a vagina and not a penis makes the man afraid that he will be castrated."But in psychoanalytic terms, the female figure poses a deeper problem.She also connotes something that the look continually circles around but disavows: her lack of a penis, implying a threat of castration and hence unpleasure. Ultimately, the meaning of woman is sexual difference, the absence of the penis as visually ascertainable, the material evidence on whichis based the castration complex essential for the organization of entrance tothe symbolic order and the law of the father. Thus the woman as icon, displayed for the gaze and enjoyment of men, the active controllers of thelook, always threatens to evoke the anxiety it originally signified...woman asrepresentation signifies castration, inducing voyeuristic or fetishistic mechanisms to circumvent her threat"No evidence is provided for this. Given that she is a woman, how does she know this? Why would a woman having large breasts or whatever reduce the fear of castration?Astoundingly, this baseless nonsense is considered an important work, and people use this term without knowing its origins.
>>25464883How is it meaningless? The camera often reflects the male director's sensibilities. The camera slides along a female body, lingers on her breasts, etc. I'm a straight guy and I once knew immediately that a director must be gay (i looked it up afterward and was right) because the way a shot just zeroed in on the male star's ass in a way that felt wrong and violating. Maybe women get the same feeling when watching movies full of tit shots. It's dumb just to reject an idea because a feminist came up with it.
>>25465020That is not really the argument of the essay but the colloquial usage of the term. That men find women attractive is not really a mystery or problem. If a director should shoot a film in a certain way or "cater" to a male audience then that is their perogative. Yet this is problematised and pathologised.
>>25465020>>25465042Cont.For instance...films catering to a homosexual male audience are never accused of "dehumanising" or "objectifying" men. I myself, though I am not gay, do not find such things offensive to the dignity or humanity of men.
>>25464883“Male gaze” is the mcdonalds of critique.
Ballsack fish ed.Old: >>25460315
>>25465089no I'm a burger
>>25465066You a Jabba-man?
She moves as rain, clear and bright, a laughing sort of hurt.In her lay some truth God forgot but expects you to know, the path to freedom or ruin. She sings like a cat, she dances like the truth. Cry or laugh or make some kind of motion to make sure she sees you, she can’t stay still long. Her’s is the world, and you yourself a visitor. If you’re lucky, she’ll show you around.
I jerk.I cum.I cry.I sleep.
>>25462991Please don't make a new thread until this falls off the first page.
Metamorphoseon editio>τὸ πρότερον νῆμα·>>25423360>Μέγα τὸ Ἑλληνιστί/Ῥωμαϊστί·https://mega dot nz/folder/FHdXFZ4A#mWgaKv4SeG-2Rx7iMZ6EKw>Mέγα τὸ ANE·https://mega dot nz/folder/YfsmFRxA#pz58Q6aTDkwn9Ot6G68NRg>Work in progress FAQhttps://rentry dot co/n8nrkoAll Classical languages are welcome.
>>25464193do me aleae maybe works
>>25464193On further reflection, since the source word is “rolling” with the word for dice being implied, we ought to dispense with explicitly saying sortem or alea at all and could just say “mitto”
>>25464788consentio
>>25464193Everyone knows the phrase "alea iacta est" (or "iacta alea est"), so "iacio" (note the "-io") seems the best choice. (That is, unless anyone can adduce quotations demonstrating otherwise.)
>>25465048That’s fair. While I have seen mitto used, that was again in a medieval text, and in classical idiom makes less sense.
The idea that a philosophy's validity, or how seriously it should be taken, depends on how well the philosopher lives up to their own advice or musings is one of the stupidest opinions I've seen repeated on this board. A philosophical viewpoint should be judged on its own merits and nothing else. A philosopher's biases are only worth raising if they affect how the idea should be interpreted, e.g. if a philosophical claim is presented as grounded in empirical fact, but research shows the author lies by leaving out evidence that contradicts it.
>>25464667because no one's perfect >>25464675>Bias is always relevant to how an assertion, or any communication, should be interpreted, nowhere moreso in philosophy, which is structured like an argument with a proof. You don't find "pure" un-alloyed facts in philosophy; there is always an a priori assumption, ergo bias is always relevant.Keyword there: "argument with proof." Any philosopher worth their salt will seek out counterarguments, along with the evidence and logical reasoning needed to debunk a claim. Bias is prevalent, but it should not be allowed to shape the conclusions, or the arguments used to reach them.If I randomly believed there were three moons and set out to prove it, that would be bias from the outset, yes, but if the proof I provided holds up to intense scrutiny, I don't see why the bias would at all be relevant. And the reverse is also true.>And who was doing this research and reporting it? Are they not biased? Did you see what they claim to have seen for yourself?Yes. Because that's also part of consuming a philosophy critically. The merits of a viewpoint don't suddenly become moot because the person saying them doesn't follow them, cause that's a criticism of their character, not of the argument.
>>25464667Because that he thinks them false does not by necessity make them so
>>25464716But this example of yours doesn't contradict me at all.In this case, when the person who has a probable bias of wanting three moons concludes there is one, this is relevant how you should evaluate his conclusion. It is more reliable because his conclusion contradicts his bias. This person was more likely to have double checked everything and only published if it was certain.We see this in rhetoric all the time. For example:"I used to be a communist, I used to worship mao, I wanted nothing more than for the great leap forward to succeed, until i saw for myself the horrors of the cultural revolution"In this passage the strong pro-mao bias is used to lend more credibility to the speaker's anti-mao conclusion.Now you would then say-- but this isn't logically sound, it's reasoning based on assumption.And the fact is, science also does this. If you read "science in action" by Bruno latour it discusses how a system is turned into a latourian black box and used to enable the construction of the next system-- human judgment still governs how assumptions are called into question and which ones are selected to revisit. Ergo, bias is always relevant. science doesn't proceed in a linear fashion, it serves specific purposes, always organized by a given hierarchy.
>>25464935*Provable not probable.
>>25464935>In this case, when the person who has a probable bias of wanting three moons concludes there is one, this is relevant to how you should evaluate his conclusion. It is more reliable because his conclusion contradicts his bias.1. No, it isn't, for much the same reason that anecdotes can't be relied upon once we're bringing "science" into the argument; they're too easy to lie about, and even under a charitable interpretation, they're vulnerable to flawed memory and selection bias.And 2. It shouldn't, because whether or not the person believed there were actually three moons shouldn't influence the strength of the conclusions or the evidence presented. In other words, his evidence doesn't become more or less trustworthy simply because he said he believed otherwise (assuming he stated this outright rather than presenting it as a scientific curiosity he wanted to investigate). The only thing that matters is whether his belief that there are three moons affected the evidence he gave or omitted; that is, whether it bears on the merits of the argument itself. So bias is completely irrelevant despite its presence.
>Jew who praised selfishness>Jew who praised selflessnessWho was right?
>>25465034>Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume and where thieves break in and steal, but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consumes and where thieves do not break in and steal.>The master commended the dishonest steward for his shrewdness; for the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light. And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous mammon, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal habitations.>He who is faithful in a very little is faithful also in much; and he who is dishonest in a very little is dishonest also in much. If then you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will entrust to you the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in that which is another’s, who will give you that which is your own?
>>25464666I am God, Satan. Service to others is service to self, and service to self is service to others.
>>25465058Augustine says other people are just a means to reach God. Your religion is rooted in selfishness
>>25465062Not really interested in your midwitted musings.
>>25465096I'm not surprised a christkek doesn't know his own religion lol
Let's have a thread for poetry in the pastoral tradition. Do you read it? Do you write it?I've been meaning to pick up a volume again. I've got the Idylls of Theocritus lying around. I'm slowly learning Latin, too, so it'd be nice to be able to finally read Virgil's Eclogues in the original.
>>25464474We get it. You’re a cruel shitskin who gets off to white people dying
>>25463386Michael Oakeshott, Russell Kirk, Frederick Hayek, Robert Nozick, Carl Schmitt, to name a few
>25464891>victimhood is le good when le honks do it
Thank you for reminding me why I have no sympathy for Ukraine
>>25462003>>25462078Pic related - the “intellectual” of the Azov guys or at least he is the one who wrote their manifesto Homo EthnicusHe and Dugin are both equally retarded goose stepping morons. Dugin has more negative press in the west because he’s built up to be Putin’s personal Ivan Ilyin (lmao) but he’s just as much of a nobody loser as the Azovites
What's the best literature-related find you've got at a thrift store/charity shop?
>>25461788Musil's Man Without Qualities 1-2 for 15 euros.
>>25462558>>25462906Most of my closet box paperbacks are from estate sales, although thrift stores still come out well once in a while. I've been doing the thrift stores and estate sales every week for more than 15 years now
>>25464324i don't know how to find estate sales. yard sales/garage sales always end up a total waste of time for me, even for other stuff.
>>254624991/500 copies...mine's not signed though.How sure are you that it is legit?
>>25465085I figure it's legit. Maybe he was drunk and had his wife sign them or whatever, but it's a fancy limited edition chapbook so at least purporting to be legit
Post an album, get a literature recommendation.Poetry, novels, essays–anything goes. Don't be lazy, give recs whenever you can.
How about NO? You performative fucking F A G G O T.
>>25465061Alright, I'll go first>>25465067Shut up faggot, go post your own thread
Every piece of music I've ever seen posted on /lit/ is the most annoying, discordant ear-raping headache-inducing avante garde experimental bullshit I've ever heard in my entire life. You fucks are notoriously tone deaf.
>>25465082Would you prefer listening to audiobooks? Hmmm?
>>25465087No, dipshit
