If Aleister Crowley was such a great occulist then why he couldn't he save himself from going bald? Same with Austin Osman Spare, he was bald and miserable and died in poverty.
None of you know what magic is. You need to start listening to people like Alan Moore. It’s pure psychology. Art. That’s all it is. It’s the mind’s eye. It’s a way of looking at the world. Tolkien knew this. It’s why his elves don’t believe in magic. They don’t see themselves as magic. It’s just Art to them. Gandalf goes out of his way to cosplay as a wizard.
>>24688248Holy shit that was you?
In Natures infinite booke of Secrecie, a little Ican read.
>>24688278important corresponding film
>>24688346Humans want something more special in life, and they fall into a spell of desperate delusion. They put themselves in position to be ensorcelled by charlatans, and what is a sorcerer if not a charlatan who has a lot more presence? A true wizard, or the sage, won’t necessarily see themselves as such. They won’t necessarily go out of their way to weaponize ignorance, though they use it conveniently to enchant others the same way a stage magician enchants others.
funniest shit i've read in probably in the last 10 years
Just finished Gravity's Rainbow and I'm underwhelmed. The prose is needlessly convoluted and the philosophical insights are just warmed-over boomerisms. It feels like people only pretend to like him to seem smart. What am I missing?
>>24687980>perfect artThis is an empty statement. To say something is perfect is to say nothing about it. There is no information value conveyed.
>>24686458Okay but portrait of the artist was 100% about all of that Beckett I get though
>>24686280Haven't read GR yet but read V. and enjoyed it quite a bit. There is a sense of loneliness in it I enjoyed, and I don't think the driving themes of his work are so simple, at least in V.
>>24688042op is what is referred to as a "troll"
>>24687980> in general seem really amorphousThis isn't a hard science, so follow along if you can. The novel is a more superficial form, the only form where women are frequently greater than men (no offense to women intended), and Tolstoy is a fairly womanly as novelist (his female characters are most prized--which is pretty interesting since we know how much he hated women privately). We judge art by the depth of its conceptions--what problems it was chosen and overcome. Tolstoy's problems are not as deep as others, and his main value is negative in rebuking society, rebuking hypocrisy, depicting the brutality and mercilessness of the Will. It's not meaningless that he came to condemn all art, including his own, and it wasn't hyperbole when he did this, though he was among those artists who hated themselves. But the most sublime artworks are those of transcendental value which change reality and overcome evil, regardless if they are ever appreciated by any mortal (though of course they eventually are). Are Tolstoy's works of this kind? Perhaps, but less so than others. When I agree with fp and say he is overrated I mean that I don't view his accomplishment as superhuman, as I do with several others.
How does /lit/ cope with the fact that science has decisively debunked free will, God, mortality, the immortality of the soul, beauty, and consciousness?To be fair, Hume had 90% of this ages ago too.
>>24688217All these concerns only matter if you can escape this layer of reality, but as we're bound to these laws, there are no direct implications.
>>24688217
>>24688350OP isn't that though, you deluded ape.
>>24688217"Science" is so desperate to justify it self that a huge contingent of physicists insist there's an invisible undetectable type of matter just to explain their flawed models. Blindly trusting knowledge because it dresses up as science is probably the stupidest thing you can do especially when it directly contradicts obvious reality.
Rank them
right mogs I'm afraid. the sensitive white boy look of left just ain't it. and middle is an obvious earcel.
>>24688226Yeats doesn't really fit with the others, though.
>>24688226Yeats is passive and his mainstream appeal to modern liberals (despite being a fascist) is probably a bad sign. His belief in reincarnation as a sentimental affirmation of life is offensive on several levels. Lacks profundity.Eliot is only great in his early work, where he is a Dantescan voice.Pound viewed himself as a failure, though he was only partly. This kind of reflection speaks well to his profundity, but he wasn't as pure and natural a lyric poet as Yeats.The critical consensus putting Yeats at the top is probably correct but I prefer Pound as a personality and would choose to read only him for the rest of my life if made to choose between them
When you are old and grey and full of sleep,I had not thought death had undone so many.I have loved a stream and a shadow.And bending down beside the glowing bars,In vials of ivory and coloured glassO woman of my dreamsGilt turquoise and silver are in the place of thy rest
I give Yeats a slight edge over Pound although it‘s hard to compare someone who mastered traditional poetic forms against someone who blazed new trails. Eliot solidly behind both although The Waste Land is probably the best 400-odd lines from any of them.
>1200 pages of Schope >600 pages of HegelHow do you niggers manage to read through all this?
>>24688218Camus told me reading Hegel caused 19th century Russians to have a mental breakdown and cry tears of joy.
>>24688224Tbf it didn’t take much to make 19th century Russians do that.
>>24688165Reading secondhand material.
>>24688288All gave some, some gave all.
>they're called oliphauntsTolkien really halfarsed this
>>24687427Middle earth is third age Brazil
>You are the lord of the rings, FrodoTitle in the first page. Bravo
>>24687427Because Middle Earth is North America
>>24687573>tubers are potatoesWe all know this. All potatoes are tubers, but not all tubers wre potatoes.
>>24687427Don't forget tobacco (pipeweed)
>>24688335you could say he's a bit of a thanatropic guy
Who was the most gifted sister?
>>24686617Emily, obviously. Her single work overshadows both of her sisters' entire careers.
>>24686617idk man, but according to my mum Anne Bronte is the worst
>>24686617Who gives a shit about that. Which one was the best fuck? -- that's the real question.
>>24686617Why did they larp as writers?Weren't there enough men to pound them or shops and restaurants to shuffle about in 19th century yorkshire?
>>24688207I'm guessing the men of that time weren't particularly good lays, so the ardous process of writing seemed like a more rewarding activity to do with their time
Why do men find female authors so trite and boring? I've known well-read dudes who don't read women as a rule just because they feel like they're being subtly nagged or something.
>>24682623Yeah, I don't see a woman ever coming up with something like Donne's "A Valediction - Forbidding Mourning" or anything by D. H. Lawrence.
>>24687761Though if I wanted to be fair, I always felt like that in literature about love written by men, the woman in question almost never matters as a person but rather as an avatar of femininity, as if it was the thing that the woman embodied to them that these men truly loved and less that one woman specifically, who were quite indistinguishable and interchangeable when discussed at all. I suspect women love much the same way, however. Maybe there is truly only one Man and one Woman that we love regardless of whoever happens to be their representative at a certain time and place.
Mfw litfags shilling Shelley despite ~90% of it having been written by Percy
>>24687887That's a nice cope, but I don't think you're going to convince anyone. You can't even convince yourself.
>>24687887just like Woolf's work being heavily edited by her cuck husband
>“Everything is perverted by this civilization, the gentlemen in suits have fouled and besmirched everything. Lithographs and etchings by old dotards like Picasso, Miro, Dali, and others, which are sold in all the stores, have turned art into a huge unclean bazaar. The money they have is not enough, they want more and more. Paintings in oil, in tempera, are not enough; drawings, watercolors, and gouaches are not enough; to make even more money they do their hackwork on stone and put it on sale in hundreds and thousands of copies. They've devalued everything, the bastards. Many of them are burdened with wives and several families, with relatives and friends; they need lots of money. Money, money and the greed for money, guides these wretched old men. Once rebels, they have turned into dirty operators. The same fate awaits the young men of today. This is why I have ceased to love art.”
>>24688124>flag bruh they are edgelords>Curtis Yarvin, JD Vance, Elon Musk, Nick Land, Lex Friedman, also: Joe Rogan, MrBeasAh, yes. That's what I imagine when I think "Liminov" - government functionaries and billionaires. >I don't get why you need examplesBecause it illustrates the distorted, emotional quality of your perception. Everyone knows Limonov was a performer, not a revolutionary. People still appreciate him as a particularly original performer, akin to Harms or Pasternak. You seethe at him so hard you equate him to Hitler and Elon Musk at the same time. That's some borderline schizo shit.
Do you think Limonov's book warrants inclusion on this list
>>24688147>bruh they are edgelordsAh yes, reductio ad absurdum, "dude it's all just a prank! Heil Hitler, dude, lmao!"Have you ever been to Russia? Have you ever seen a nazbol? Have you ever heard what they say, see what they do? No? Then why the fuck this is the hill you're willing to die upon?>Ah, yes. That's what I imagine when I think "Liminov" - government functionaries and billionaires. That's because you're out of your depth here.One of the main seethings of Limonov was the woe that he's not a haute bourgeoisie (that he was destined to be).>Everyone knows Limonov was a performer, not a revolutionary. People still appreciate him as a particularly original performer, akin to Harms or Pasternak. You seethe at him so hard you equate him to Hitler and Elon Musk at the same time.I'm not seething. In fact, I understand why amerilard would love Limonov. America is inherently spectaclist; this is why Trump was re-elected. You said it yourself - performer. And yet, he had a nazi political party that exists till this day (it's called "The Other Russia of E. V. Limonov"). It's just vibes and "bruh" and "edge" and pranks and funny unserious gay talk for amerilards, before someone serious strips you of your basic civic rights. Also, I now realize why you won't get why Limonov was what I say he was. That's because you know nothing about modern russian opposition in exile. People like Ekaterina Shulman, for example, or Yulia Navalnaya. I've seen enough political frauds to know them.
>>24688250>Ah yes, reductio ad absurdumAbsurdity and shock value are the essence of their """""""platform""""""". >Have you ever been to Russia?Yes.>Have you ever seen a nazbol?Yes. I even talked to a good number of them. >Have you ever heard what they say, see what they do?Yes. They say infinitely more than they do.>One of the main seethings of Limonov was the woe that he's not a haute bourgeoisieSort of. And he wasn't. I question your Marxist cred if the actual class reality of an individual is irrelevant to you in the light of his rhetoric.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
You might want to read Marx's own analysis of what was going on in France before gracing us with your own thinking about the haute and the petty bourgeois.
Recommended reading charts. (Look here before asking for vague recs)https://mega.nz/folder/kj5hWI6J#0cyw0-ZdvZKOJW3fPI6RfQ/folder/4rAmSZxb>Archive:https://warosu.org/lit/?task=search2&search_subject=sffg>Goodreads:https://www.goodreads.com/group/show/1029811-sffg>Previous:>>24668507>Thread Question:Are there any worthwhile novel novel to comic adaptations or vice versa?
>>24688179There's a sequel series, the red queen war or something. I've not read it. Similar stuff could be first law or red rising. Both have a bit of grimdark edge about them.
>>24687915It seems like your issue is not the setting but the themes. Very broad strokes here, sci-fi is commentary on humanity, and fantasy is usually stories about humans. If you like the thems that sci-fi books play with you may not find that in a lot of fantasy books.
>>24687907You should try something good instead
>>24687915Ken Liu's Dandelion Dynasty series is silkpunk, moreso after the first book and may have some of that, though it isn't technologically advanced.
>>24686736I'd say no, fairly recent release+first novel of the author. Don't know if it sold well, never saw anyone talk about it m. Second book is expected around 2026 for a specific novel festival.
I didn't think LoTR was THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME but it is unique and really fun.I jumped into A Game of Thrones recently after The Hedge Knight and I have to say.. It's not that fun. Cliffhanging, exciting and all of that, but… maybe too modest? My imagination wasn't running or enjoying what was being said and described, and the way characters spoke and behaved was too close to our world.
So when a Greek god does x, am I supposed to read it as a poetical way of saying a character doing x?>Paris giving the golden apple to Venus over Minerva and Juno is his choosing Love over Wisdom and Power>Juno helping the Greeks is them restoring the marriage between Helen and Menelaus>Ulysses saved by Minerva is him being saved by his Wisdom>Venus telling Cupid to shoot Dido is Aeneas charming her>Juno telling the Furies to hunt Turnus is his rage for his nation to be usurped by Aeneas, who gets away with it with his Charm
>>24688112I had a similar thought the first time I read The Iliad, but it just seems awkward in places. When Diomedes wounds Ares, how should we interpret that? The passages where the gods interact with one another become even harder to understand the true meaning of. It should also be considered that it wasn't unusual for gods and man to interact in Greek myth
>>24688254>When Diomedes wounds AresWisdom (since Minerva helped) in battle, a good strategy, beats brute strength
>>24688112Odysseus used wisdom to run faster and make Ajax slip and fall face first into a pile of dung?
>>24688286The wise Odysseus avoids the dung while the dumb musclehead Ajax doesn't
>>24688112Depends the book,context, author, period...
Why women are more obsessed with literature than men does?Is literature inherent a feminine hobbit?
>>24686890are you being paid to be that stupid?
>>24684227Shipping
>>24686890This>>24687711Post tits
womenfolk have less outliers but they're more cleaver on average
Most men read WW2 and Nazi related "literature" while women read Harry Potter, YA and romance novels. It is rare to meet someone who reads classics