I’ve been getting told to „embrace tradition” for like 10 years now, after all this time I’ve decided totake religion more seriously. So seriously in fact that I started looking into biblical scholarship. What Ifound out was surprising, I have no idea what I was expecting, but one of the interesting facts Ilearned is that the gospel of Mark was written first, both Matthew and Luke used it as a source.This has been proven, in my understanding, basically beyond a shadow of a doubt. It also hasprofound implications as to how to interpret the bible on the whole, since with the knowledge thatboth the authors of Matthew and Luke had Mark in front of them, we must now make sense of thechanges and differences between those and Mark, since this would make them editorial changes.This makes a lot of the bible make more sense and was very eye-opening as far as understanding thetext goes.I could talk about the implications of this single discovery further, but this isn’t the point of thethread. The point is: only after re-reading the bible in this light did I realise, the catholic church insiststhat Matthew was in fact first, going against pretty much all scholarship on the matter, I assume inorder to place the founding of the church by Saint Peter arbitrarily early.
I embrace tradition by studying different traditions but unfortunately the only tradition I have been initiated into is the French restaurant traditionTradition is mostly dead in the modern world
>>24738137Tradition is degenerate. You should go live on a farm and drink a gallon of raw milk every morning.
Buddy. If you have to ask, you ain’t traditional
>>24736107can you show me where you found this? im curious and would like to know more
BUMP
prev >>24733716
I had a dream that I was a serial killer, only I wasn't a serial killer. It was actually a living lifelike doll that looked like me who went out and killed people. I discovered it in an abandoned basement inside of a broken closet, it saw me and started to chase after me.
>>24738363It knows how to find you in your sleep now
I miss you.
Can I put some moldy bread from my fridge on the gash on my leg? I think that's penicillin or something.
>>24738378Well, I did manage to fight it off, but not kill it. If it comes back again I hope to be better prepared for it.
The hotel staff, I think, considers us useless freeloaders who have come to America – land of honest laborers with crewcuts – to eat them out of house and home. I know all about this. Everyone bitched about parasites in the USSR too, bullshitted about how you had to be useful to society. In Russia the people who bitched were the ones who worked least. I've been a writer for ten years now. It's not my fault that neither state needs my labor. I do my work – where's my money? Both states bullshit about the justice of their systems, but where's my money?
I am an actual nazbol tankie Russian and I hate Liminov because he had gay sex with blacks
>>24738395What part of FICTIONAL memoir don't you understand?
>>24738390Limonov actually embodies the very issue of the current Ukraine-Russia conflict, being born in Ukraine to a Russian AND Ukrainian. He could easily have gone to the Ukrainian side, but he didn't want to be on the side of losers, so he chose the winning side. Just like Gogol.
>>24738398the part where it veers into embarrassing non-fiction disguised as fiction.
>>24738385The Russian Nazbol party is basically a troll party. Underneath the edgy imagery it’s basically just a Russian nationalist, SocDem party. You could make an argument it’s socialist in some way, but EL was going on record bitching about the USSR constantly.
What did Oswald Spengler think of communism?Both personally and how did it factor into his theory of history?
Does the liberal use of adverbs make you a bad writer?
>>24735089I want Rowling to shit on my chest
I read her new book and it was ok. Bloated but not boring. The male and female lead charcters keep cucking each other its hilarious.
Jk rowling is an old insane cunt. Her books are trash and anyone who reads and likes them are npcs and should not be spoken with
>>24737666>Historical degeneration of the English language in one post.This might be more your speed:One…two…three…four, George stepped down each step, quiet per step, quietly tip-toe step upon step. The watch glint of silver and medallion (spelt; to my love, Georgie-boy, he who lies best lays best) upon filigree ornamentation swivelled upon a clockwise spin and were looked down upon by an almond shaped eye. Jowls of pork loin rogued within winter-like light in a pallid pale portly rotundness jiggled and heaved while George—sweet George; upon the lips of jam and mutton and eggs and ale he ate, swore and screamed to all who heard and fear’d: “Good heavens, I’m late again!”
>>24736635>not knowing word classes as a writer
What does "I know the 10 dollar words" mean?I get writers were paid per word back in the day, but surely not ten dollars worth per word
>>24737899Before inflation, $10 was worth like $300, so he's using $10 to mean 'rare' (because expensive things are rare).
He ate animals btw. Rot in hell freak.
>>24738211If heaven is a bunch of vegans, I'll take hell
>>24738244Do you honestly think torturing animals is ok?
>>24738257We were all made in God's image, and Him creating a universe full of lifeforms devouring each other for survival seems to fit your definition of "torturing animals". So, not only is our place as meat-eaters pleasant in the eyes of God, but your hatred for such things exposes you as living in the absence of God i.e. in sin and evil.
What the fuck this is well-written
>>24738401>“I was going to email you. I talked to the dean earlier today,” Adam told her, and she looked back at him.>He was gesturing to the chair in front of his desk. Olive pulled it back and took a seat.>“About you.”>“Oh.” Olive’s stomach dropped. She’d much rather the dean didn’t know about her existence. Then again, she’d also rather not be in this room with Adam Carlsen, have the semester begin in a handful of days, have climate change be a thing. And yet.>“Well, about us,” he amended. “And socialization regulations.”>“What did she say?”>“There’s nothing against you and me dating, since I’m not your adviser.”Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24738404>To that, he lowered his gaze to his desk, but not before Olive could see the corner of his mouth twitch. When he looked up again, his expression was serious. “So, have you decided?”>She pressed her lips together as he watched her calmly. She took a deep breath before saying, “Yes. Yes, I... I want to do it. It’s a good idea, actually.”>For so many reasons. It would get Anh and Jeremy off her back, but also... also everyone else. It was as if since the rumor had begun to spread, people had been too intimidated by Olive to give her the usual shit. The other TAs had quit trying to switch her nice 2:00 p.m. sections with their horrifying 8:00 a.m. ones, her lab mates had stopped cutting in front of her in the line for the microscope, and two different faculty members Olive had been trying to get ahold of for weeks had finally deigned to answer her emails. It felt a little unfair to exploit this huge misunderstanding, but academia was a lawless land and Olive’s life in it had been nothing but miserable for the past two years. She had learned to grab whatever she could get away with. And if some—okay, if most of the grads in the department looked at her suspiciously because she was dating Adam Carlsen, so be it. Her friends seemed to be largely fine with this, if a little bemused.>Except for Malcolm. He’d been shunning her like she had the pox for three solid days. But Malcolm was Malcolm—he’d come around.>“Very well, then.” He was completely expressionless—almost too expressionless. Like it was no big deal and he didn’t care either way; like if she’d said no, it wouldn’t have changed anything for him.”
>>24738408>“Though, I’ve been thinking about this a lot.”>He waited patiently for her to continue.>“And I think that it would be best if we laid down some ground rules. Before starting.”>“Ground rules?”>“Yes. You know. What we are allowed and not allowed to do. What we can expect from this arrangement. I think that’s pretty standard protocol, before embarking on a fake-dating relationship.”>He tilted his head. “Standard protocol?”>“Yup.”Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24738414>“Okay. Second rule. Actually, it could be interpreted as an extension of the first rule. But”—Olive bit into her lip, willing herself to bring it up—“no sex.”>For several moments he simply didn’t move. Not even a millimeter. Then his lips parted, but no sound came out, and that’s when Olive realized that she had just rendered Adam Carlsen speechless. Which would have been funny any other day, but the fact that he seemed dumbfounded by Olive not wanting to include sex in their fake-dating relationship made her stomach sink.>Had he assumed that they would? Was it something she’d said? Should she explain that she’d had very little sex in her life? That for years she’d wondered whether she was asexual and she had realized only recently that she might be able to experience sexual attraction, but only with people she trusted deeply? That if for some inexplicable reason Adam wanted to have sex with her, she wasn’t going to be able to go through with it?>“Listen”—she made to stand from the chair, panic rising in her throat—“I’m sorry, but if one of the reasons you offered to fake-date is that you thought that we would—”>“No.” The word half exploded out of him. He looked genuinely appalled. “I’m shocked that you’d even feel the need to bring it up.”>“Oh.” Olive’s cheeks heated at the indignation in his voice. Right. Of course he didn’t expect that. Or even want that, with her. Look at him—why would he? “I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to assume—”>“No, it makes sense to be up-front. I was just surprised.”Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24738416>“No sex,” she repeated. “Okay. Third. It’s not really a rule, but here goes: I won’t date anyone else. As in real dating. It would be messy and complicate everything and...” Olive hesitated. Should she tell him? Was it too much information? Did he need to know? Oh, well. Why not, at this point? It wasn’t like she hadn’t kissed the man, or brought up sex in his place of work. “I don’t date, anyway. Jeremy was an exception. I’ve never... I’ve never dated seriously before, and it’s probably for the best. Grad school is stressful enough, and I have my friends, and my project on pancreatic cancer, and honestly there’s better things to use my time for.” The last few words came out more defensively than she’d intended.>Adam just stared and said nothing.>“But you can date, of course,” she added hastily. “Though I’d appreciate it if you could avoid telling people in the department, just so I don’t look like an idiot and you don’t look like you’re cheating on me and rumors don’t balloon out of control. It would benefit you, too, since you’re trying to look like you’re in a committed relationship—”>“I won’t.”>“Okay. Great. Thanks. I know lying by omission can be a pain, but—”>“I mean, I won’t date someone else.”>There was a certainty, a finality in his tone that took her by surprise. She could only nod, even though she wanted to protest that he couldn’t possibly know, even though a million questions surfaced in her mind. Ninety-nine percent of them were inappropriate and not her business, so she shooed them away.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
I think it’s very sad to see the status which Clarice has gained among foreigners (Americans, that is) as the 'best Brazilian novelist' of the past century. She is not. No one in Brazil thinks so, and it's been only in recent years that foreigners have elevated her work to a status which it doesn't really deserve - they deny it to Os Sertões and Claro Enigma -, mainly because of political reasons and because it’s easy to turn her into a feminist icon. They couldn't do that with the old, Catholic Cecília, a great poet, and much less with Adélia Prado, so they had to choose Clarice instead. And it doesn’t stop with her: now Brazilians are doing the very same thing with that laughably untalented carioca junkie from the 80's whose name does not deserved to be mentioned. Very soon she's going to be translated and looked at as 'the best Brazilian poet of the second half of the 20th-century' (after Chico Buarque, of course). It's ridiculous. And they’ve been doing the same to Hilda Hilst too, although, like Clarice, she at least had some talent. What's next? Gregório Duvivier? Somebody kill me before it happens!
>>24735669Faye Dunaway?
>>24735669>Brazilian novelist>they deny it to Os SertõesThis is non-fiction; GREAT non-fiction, but still.>Claro EnigmaThis is poetry.>They couldn't do that with the old, Catholic CecíliaPost some of your favourites by her, anon.>now Brazilians are doing the very same thing with that laughably untalented carioca junkie from the 80's whose name does not deserved to be mentioned. Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24735860>Give me your top 3 20th century Brazilian novels.Seconding it.
>>24735867I wouldn't say she's a favourite. But she's a true prose stylist, and should be kept as a reference in this sense.Plus she isn't as easy as the quotes often misatributed to her make it seem.To finish, I will read only one more book by her (that one they say it's her best).
i don't read monkeyzilians of any type, but I consider Clarice a Slavic writer because she's from Ukraine
the fix is in
>>24738068>pages are letter-sizedYou're hurting me, Wallace. Shrink that down to 6x9in or 5.5x8.5in and you'll be okay; it's easier to read if you don't have too many characters on a line, and 50-70 will probably look good/right for a novel. And if you want another tip, remove the extra line between paragraphs. But...>uses Google DocsThere's no good way for you to get automatic hyphenation, which is more important when the lines are shorter since there are fewer spaces between words for the renderer to modulate to get each line to fit. Something like Microsoft Word supports it, and there are better pieces of software for rendering text.For examples of hyphenation or the lack of it:Look at the line that starts with "Hey!" here >>24738077, and see how "hammered" is split at the end.In the image here >>24733699 you see what happens if there are too few letters on a line and the spacing gets really wide; words like "Something" and "completely" would be split to fix this.Pic related shows an example too.
>>24738107This is very helpful. Thank you.
>>24738068if that link doesn't workhttps://litter.catbox.moe/0p9n8swsn00xw0zr.pdf
>>24738077>WingWing was always the greatest of 4chan authors. R.I.P.
>>24738107>Something like Microsoft Word supports it,why would that matter with an e-pub? doesn't it have to do its own formatting?
I feel so paralyzed, I know a version of me exists out thereSomeone who’s happier, freer, more successful, more confident, better looking. But I’m stuck here.Is it possible to reach him? I want to become a new person. To transform from a caterpillar to a butterflyEvery day is as mundane as the last. I’m still living in my own mind, a captive. With the same thoughts running over and over againEvery daydream is the sameThe same room, the same thoughts, the same unreachable desires.My body is decaying and my mental health is in rapid decline.The noise of isolation and loneliness is deafeningI know something more exists out there. Beyond the "border" they treat people as human beings. Maybe I could find kindness and safety when it vacated my native land.Maybe I could find opportunity when it was nowhere to be found in my birthplace.Maybe there, beyond the "border" I'll find a sophisticated life, I'll find ease, I'll have the chance to live my youth and act my age.Maybe I could attend a respectful college or school where I could learn and grow.Where I could meet people ever so diverse in thought and color.Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24738348>horrorfagPoint proven. I will no longer respond.
>>24738359I understand your frustration. While you take a break, you should try broadening your horizons. Maybe do some writing of your own and post it here. And when you do, I'll be there to praise it for its strengths, and someone else in the thread will complain about me liking elements of your work. Good luck, Anon!
>>24738188Thanks for the reply
>>24738253Thanks you for your input
>>24738382Thank you**
Perhaps we were too harsh on the Greeks…for years I sifted through the Symposium, offhand references to Ganymede, and even dialogue in Cicero, but then I saw this picture, and I understood the Greeks intuitively…
>>24736250Bas>>24736260Ed.
When I was 15 years old I went to a local arthouse cinema showing of this movie. The theatre was filled with grown men. I was the only underaged person in the theatre. Felt kinda weird. I think some guys were into me.
>>24737968>>24738002Stop posting gross old men.
>>24731840>They were to the Greeks>>To a Boy: Your condition is rather delicate, and it’s because, I am sure, your sandal pinches; new leather, you know, is quite likely to cut into flesh that is tender. That is why Asclepius readily heals wounds received in war and hunting and all such accidents, but neglects these others because of the voluntariness of the action—as due to indiscretion rather than to a god’s capricious malevolence. Why then don’t you walk barefoot? What grudge have you against the earth? Slippers and sandals and top-boots and shoes are for the wearing of invalids or the aged. Philoctetes, at any rate, is pictured in such protective garb—because he was lame and ill. But the philosopher from Sinope and the Theban Crates and Ajax and Achilles are pictured as wearing no shoes, and Jason as wearing but one. For the story goes that, when Jason was crossing the Anaurus River, one boot was caught by the mud and held fast under the stream, and so he had one bare foot—not that he deliberately chose to have, but that chance taught him what was best; and he went his way the victim of a salutary robbery. Let nothing come between the earth and your bare foot. Fear not, the dust will welcome your tread as it would welcome grass, and we shall all kiss your footprints. Ο perfect lines of feet most dearly loved! Ο flowers new and strange! Ο plants sprung from earth! Ο kiss left lying on the ground!>Philostratus, Letter 18brehgreeks were the original footfagswhat an interesting civilization
>>24738002Look at that bogged nose. Disgusting.
Is he right?
>>24738277My theory is there is a rising movement to minimize internet time. i think enough people are waking up from two decades of staring at pixels and want real experiences in their lives. And, for people raised on the screen, they want to live in a different world without chronic screen usage.Now, what would happen to the tech industry if there was a 20-30% reduction in internet usage. Lots of lost revenue and information harvesting. So, my theory is that interested parties are very interested in mocking any non-internet activity. Get a book from the library (for free) and engage in an activity that doesnt monetize attention and time? And helps develop deep thinking, focus, and concentration? No way!
>>24732663Joke's on her. Margaret Atwood really did sleep with you.
>>24738299Ties into the ongoing tech oligarchy so I'd believe it. Always follow the money, right? I swear, I've seen so much emphasis recently on trying to shame and prevent quoteunquote intellectualism, we gotta put books on the pedestal culturally speaking. Music specifically has had poisonous messages sown through it in the last few decades.
>>24738315Yah, like, i know it sounds silly but it makes sense. The more people use the internet, the more money people make. Things that threaten that are bad. Imagine what would happen to the tech companies if people went screen minimalist. Everyone has some spiritual awakening or something. Internet for banking? Great. Banking in person sucked. Google maps? Fantastic. Email? Wicked. But imagine if people stopped watching youtube and streaming services. Stopped using social media and, instead, made an effort to see people in person, or get along with the people around them. Imagine if peoples screen usage fell by 80-90%. What would happen to the tech companies? Probably their biggest fear. And I agree about putting books on the pedestal, but the way of shaming people for reading is unfortunately very effective. Shame, really. But there does need to be some movement away from screen and back to real life. But I would not be surprised if, whenever a non-tech non-revenue generating hobby becomes popular, there would be articles and online movements shaming it.
>>24738350Economy is a force of nature at this point, and when attention is drawn elsewhere then you have to suffer the death throes of the affluent, subtle as they may be etc. Shame is the best tactic of economic war yeah, people are still too tapped into the neoliberalist style intellectual/aesthetic policing which shitty articles like OP are able to exploit, and love being able to piggyback off a pre-established caricature of 'performative male' so they can tear down the people around them. I say fuck em, bring back literature. I'm personally seeing momentum with people stepping away from technology and the slow emergence of open mics and book-clubs again, I think we should try to cultivate it.
"High School Girlfriend" editionPrevious: >>24707466/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.Follow prompts made below and discuss written works 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.Violent shills, relentless shill-spammers, and grounds keeping prose, should be ignored and reported.(And maybe double-space your WIPs to allow edits if you want 'em.)Simple guides on writing:Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>24738296It happens because it is exactly as you said, Writers are just fucking retarded
What do you think of this screenplay?https://files.catbox.moe/aq09fd.txt
>>24738271Smut is smut
What makes a novel well written?
>>24736450Why post that only to your user account? There are a lot of fiction-oriented subs with actual readers. Check the (voluminous) rules on r/nosleep—your story might qualify to be there. And if not, consider one of the subs in this list: https://reddit.com/r/nosleep/wiki/similarsubreddits/
Schopenhauer in "ON THE SUFFERINGS OF THE WORLD" says this:>I know of no greater absurdity than that propounded by most systems of philosophy in declaring evil to be negative in its character. Evil is just what is positive; it makes its own existence felt. Leibnitz is particularly concerned to defend this absurdity; and he seeks to strengthen his position by using a palpable and paltry sophism. It is the good which is negative; in other words, happiness and satisfaction always imply some desire fulfilled, some state of pain brought to an end. The TL note says this:>Leibnitz argued that evil is a negative quality—i.e., the absence of good; and that its active and seemingly positive character is an incidental and not an essential part of its nature. Cold, he said, is only the absence of the power of heat, and the active power of expansion in freezing water is an incidental and not an essential part of the nature of cold. The fact is that the power of expansion in freezing water is really an increase of repulsion amongst its molecules; and Schopenhauer is quite right in calling the whole argument a sophism.What exactly is the argument here? Why is one of these ideas truer than the other? Why isn't Schopenhauer's conclusion that evil is the positive characteristic a sophistry as well? He just states it as if it's fact. Genuinely trying to grasp this. I can certainly see it being more true than the reverse, but as an absolute truth in regards to everything seems to be an excessive conclusion.
Finally, after months of arguing with you faggots, something we can agree on. I won't even suggest Schoppie is plagiarizing because I know that niggie didn't get past page 5 of the Logic."Nothing, it is said, is only the absence of being, darkness thus only the absence of light, cold only absence of heat, and so on. And darkness only has meaning in relation to the eye, in external comparison with the positive factor, light, and similarly cold is only something in our sensation; on the other hand, light and heat, like being, are objective, active realities on their own account, and are of quite another quality and dignity than this negative, than nothing. One can often find it put forward as a weighty reflection and an important piece of information that darkness is only the absence of light, cold only absence of heat. About this acute reflection in this field of empirical objects, it can be observed that darkness does in fact show itself active in light, determining it to colour and thereby imparting visibility to it, since, as was said above, just as little is seen in pure light as in pure darkness. Visibility, however, is effected in the eye, and the supposed negative has just as much a share in this as the light which is credited with being the real, positive factor; similarly, cold makes its presence known in water, in our sensations etc., and if we deny it so-called objective reality it is not a whit the worse for our doing so. But a further objection would be that here, too, as before, it is a negative with a determinate content that is spoken of, the argument is not confined to pure nothing, to which being, regarded as an empty abstraction, is neither inferior nor superior. But cold, darkness, and similar determinate negations are to be taken directly as they are by themselves and we shall then see what we have thereby effected in respect of their universal determination which has led them to be introduced here. They are supposed to be not just nothing but the nothing of light, heat, etc., of something determinate, of a content; thus they are a determinate, a contentful, nothing if one may so speak. But, as will subsequently appear, a determinateness is itself a negation, and so they are negative nothings; but a negative nothing is an affirmative something. The conversion of nothing through its determinateness (which previously appeared as a determinate being in a subject thinker, or in some other form) into an affirmative, appears to the consciousness which is fixed in the abstraction of the understanding as the acme of paradox; the insight that the negation of the negation is something positive, simple as it is, or rather because of its very simplicity, appears as a triviality to which haughty understanding need pay no heed..." - Hegel SoL 168 (cont'd)
>>24736599Why are you still reading Schopenhauer when you yourself admit that we have refuted him? Read Fichte.
>>24737762Fichte anon...is that you?
>>24737783Hello fren. We have to find a way to reach these Schloppie kids, they're going to ruin their life :(
>>24737762So Schopie and Hegel actually agree here?
