>download book from libgen>em dashes have been stripped from the text and misprinted i's replaced by l's>genre slop has been transformed into a postmodern masterpiece
>>23629857Some are worse than others. I read a sloppy OCR job of some book from the 1800s that went on and on about "God's Wifi"
>>23629857>reading pirated post-modernist novel>can't tell if transcription error or metafictional structural artifact>mfw post-post-modernistIf you haven't read pomo as an epub converted from a pdf made from a 1990s-ocr'd first edition have you really read it?
>>23629857authors hate this, turn a court of thorns and roses into finnegans wake with one quick trick
>>23629921>pirate recent a wes anderson movie>pasted with ads for a turkish casino>quality is so bad I can't tell if it's the actual film or a parody>wondering if it's all a dream I'm having, none of it makes sense and it keeps getting worse>not even sure if the part that is in black and white is supposed to be because the ads change with it>not even stoned, can't follow the plot>friend who isn't stoned at all has the same experience>there's a girl in the room watching bootleg indie shit and having a postmodern breakdown with me>it just keeps going and there is no next part>it's like a film made from stills by russians in someone's basement>start freaking out and go smoke a cigarette while boiling a pot of spaghetti>come back inside and make spaghetti>forget about the movie>never forget about the movie we watched togetherComment too long. Click here to view the full text.
>>23629921This is how I read JG Ballard's The Atrocity Exhibition
Probably Brat by Gabriel Smith or The Fermata by Nicholson Baker.
Embers Ad Infinitum by Cuttlefish That Loves Diving
Who's your favorite Patristic author and what's your favorite piece of theirs? Going through ὑπόμνημα εἰς τήν πρός Ἐφεσίους Ἐπιστολήν by John Chrysostom and then I'll go through Athanasius De Incarnatione. Would like some more reccs, and feel free to generally discuss anything about them.
was dh lawrence just a fucking asshole?
I find his style annoying. I like it and I can tell he may even be a capital G great writer but it also repulses me
>>23629266This is what Holden Caulfied would look like as a grown up person. Why are you repulsed by him? Sure he sounds like mother's son and a 'homosexual' , but I can't put the finger on a problem here. I think that inside every 'straight pride' man there dwells the 'gay man', the person that DHL addresses (as a reader) in his stories and novellas. Either DHL has to be shunned as a defective member of society not worthy to be read, or else if he's embraced then the whole hell would break loose. In other words, he's a dangerous man.
>>23629266>dunked on Freud>dunked on Russell>dunked on socialism>dunked on Mussolini>simultaneously seen as a crypto-fascist by lefties and a weird pervert by many chudsBased department? Hello?
A couple passages in The Rainbow gave me a stiffy.One was about flowers, the other was about a wheat field.
>>23631267Post them.
Who is the most fuckable author?
>>23628724They are both descended from Abraham.
>>23628749Anyone can write a book, that doesn't make you an author. Just a writer.
>>23630178>>23628724Why are people surprised that an ethno-religious group looks alike? People kept meming Jews as a religion and not an ethnicity in the 2000s and its like everyone forgot that they are like Hindus rather than like Muslims or Christians
>>23630185oh? and pray tell what distinguishes an author from a writer?
>>23628200>>>23628229
Transcendental idealism is a philosophical system founded by German philosopher Immanuel Kant in the 18th century. Kant's epistemological program is found throughout his Critique of Pure Reason (1781). By transcendental (a term that deserves special clarification) Kant means that his philosophical approach to knowledge transcends mere consideration of sensory evidence and requires an understanding of the mind's innate modes of processing that sensory evidence.
>Now in the first place, Kant understands by transcendental the recognition of the a priori and thus merely formal element in our knowledge as such, in other words, the insight that such knowledge is independent of experience, indeed prescribes for this even the unalterable rule whereby it must turn out. Such insight is bound up with the understanding why such knowledge is this and has this power, namely because it constitutes the form of our intellect, and thus in consequence of its subjective origin ... Transcendental is the philosophy that makes us aware of the fact that the first and essential laws of this world that are presented to us are rooted in our brain and are therefore known a priori. It is called transcendental because it goes beyond the whole given phantasmagoria to the origin thereof. Therefore, as I have said, only the Critique of Pure Reason and generally the critical (that is to say, Kantian) philosophy are transcendental.
For Kant, reason was only for us, and the categories only emerged within the subject. However, for Hegel, reason is fully immanent. Spirit emerges from nature in history and, in art, religion, and philosophy, knows itself in its truth.Hegel shows that the world is not other than self. With the realization that mind and world are, by logical necessity, meaningfully coherent, our access to the world is made secure, a security that was lost in Kant's proclamation that the thing-in-itself was ultimately inaccessible.
>>23631181yes and no
>The I think, I am, is, since Descartes, the basic mistake of all knowledge; thinking is not my thinking, and being is not my being, for everything is only of God or the totality
>>23631172He did it all without ever really leaving his house or resident city. He should be an inspiration to us all.
Should everything in a grand ol'epic tale be full and fraught of all kinds of themes and meaning that produce abyssal levels of insight; to be used as much as a cheap harlot that you find on sixth street?
Refined aesthetes will deride allegory as crude, but I don't see any point in telling a story if it doesn't have some allegorical depth that says something about how the world works. Pure aestheticism is just masturbation. The problem is when the allegory is dogmatic as opposed to exploratory. Going in with a prepared ontology or whatever and imposing it onto your work is crude, but it's a different thing to delve into the unconscious and see what you find. Genuine writing will always have allegorical and symbolic depth, whether intentionally or not, because our unconscious, the place where the best stories come from, is already saturated with those things.
>>23629936>I am no longer le jokey fun man>I am now le tough and deep man
>>23630628>Pure aestheticism is just masturbationThe opposite is true Anything but the pursuit of beauty is masturbation
>>23630945The good, the true, and the beautiful must be pursued equally. Too strong an emphasis on beauty alone leads to a hollow writer like Nabokov. Too strong an emphasis on truth: Dostoyevsky's ghastly rigmarole.
The man who destroyed /lit/
>>23631224This incoherent retard who can’t even get his own theology straight? Yeah man, really put me in my place
>Memoirs of Hadrian>The Last of the Wine>Confessions of a Mask>Poems of Sappho>Orlando
>The Picture of Dorian Greygay english dandy has a portrait that gets aids instead of him
In Youth Is PleasureThe Well of LonelinessNorth WindNicholas Crabbe
Naked LunchGiovanni’s RoomMaurice
>>23630464Hadrian was a pederast and a pedo. Mishima wasn't gay he was larping as a samurai, who were all pederasts. Homosexuals are just fetishists. The way some people like fat bitches for some unexplicable reason, they like grown up men. Like in most civilized societies, men are trained to get rid of their savage inborn impulse for pederastry but the homos are just guys with an adult male fetish. People like this never produce great lit. Only one I can think off is Giovanni's Room by Baldwin. 90% of the gay faggot books on the store shelf are slop written by women. The other classical stuff was written by proto-autists (Plato's Symposium) or pederasts (Saihara's encylopedia) and then ugg boot wearing white girls come around and try and convince us these men were actually gay as fuck when they were autists and borderline pedos. Also Ovid said it best in Ars Armatoria. Boys are less pleasurable to fuck so they aren't worth it. Correct. The coming of heteronormativity has been a good thing for humanity. Many boys anuses are now intact. LGBT wackos and feminists just don't understand this. You wanna go back to a world where the average male has been sodomized? Something the male ass isn't meant for? Just read Baldwin's book.
Are they just sloppy work from hacks who couldn't write any better? Do any of merit and depth equivalent to actual literature exist? Sing in me, /lit/.
Children's lit was good when white people wrote it, chiefly men. A few women are okay, like Madeline L'Engle and Frances Hodgson Burnett (The Secret Garden).
Hey lit rate my poem
>>23630793I'm a clerk in civil service, a bit dull job but i can earn a living and make verses. I'm not into it as a profession, I just enjoy writing poems.
bump?
>>23630794>Not samefagginThat's what a samefag would say
>>23630794>can you elaborate on the poem being ordinaryThere is nothing about the poem that makes it different from ordinary writing. It does not expound a profound thought, it does not capture a sublime emotion. It has no metaphor or simile that can be called genius, it has no deviation from ordinary grammar that can be called divine. There is no rhyme, there is no rhythm, there is no music in the sound of the words. There is nothing in poem that makes it worth the time to read it.>i want some tipsRead Palgrave's Golden Treasury.
>>23631116Ok, then. It was me same faggin, believe what you will.>>23631135Did you hear it being read? I posted a Vocaroo. Thanks for the recommendation.
In Don Quixote we witness the complete genome of the novel. Yes, every work of fiction exists within Don Quixote. Everything that has been written, is currently written, and will be written in the future, in the quill of Cervantes it has been traced. This is thus what inspired Borges to write the epitaph:>There is no new thing upon the earth. So that as Plato had an imagination, that all knowledge was but remembrance; so Solomon giveth his sentence, that all novelty is but oblivion.
>>23628345Falling for that proves brownies will never
G
Dn
>>23627842bet you felt really clever writing this shit tier baityou absolute retard
>>23628867For me it's Don Deadpool and his side kick Sancho Pool
is this worth buying to learn german?
Can you spell the wordRindfleischetikettierungsüberwachungsaufgabenübertragungsgesetz
>>23629662the plan is to just look up every "word"
>>23629489Why learn a minority language? If you want to talk to modern Germans you should learn Arabic and Turkish instead.
>>23629656alright ordered the hardcover
>>23629489no?
You weren’t filtered right? You did know the canon and were actually able to use that knowledge creatively right anon? Let us suppose so. I hope discussion can be enlightening for those of us on the cusp of understanding. In “Becoming Intense, Becoming Animal, Becoming Imperceptible” D&G elaborate on becoming, which they distinguish from scholastic and structural accounts of change yoked to identities. I recall in Aristotle’s physics how change is explained as motion in place, or motion about a very small circle. I may be misremembering, so please help on this point if you can. In this case movement (A to B) and identity are priveleged. What if we took speed instead, unmoored from movement and identity as the cause of change? I believe this would be becoming. We might imagine a motion ‘in place’ that is not about an identity. Becoming intense? In Darwinian biology we explain traits in terms of heredity. Genes from mommy and daddy are combined and baby gets them, which then produces their phenotype through protein synthesis, I.e. gene expression. . Of course this does not apply in all cases, with asexual reproduction of bacteria, parthenogenesis in animals, viruses, and lichens being troublesome. Can we really admit so many ‘exceptions’? Against heredity D&G assert contagion, the pack, multiplicity. The werewolf is a becoming of man. It is not that someone resembles the wolf while remaining a son or daughter, rather there is a change ‘in place’, a speed or slowness so that they alter their being in a manner that has nothing to do with heredity. The bite of the werewolf, or vampire transmits the contagion. The Koryos were to other men as wolves are to sheep, because they made their body emit a molecular wolf, a change ‘in place’ produced by an intense speed. These speeds take up ‘material’ and propagate. Consider how one might have two bodies of water separated by a wall. One side is agitated such that waves form, with a certain period and frequency. When the wall is lifted this will be transmitted across the now contiguous material of water. The wave is a becoming of water. The waving of water. Of course water waves are extensive, but extensive becomings do not preclude intensive ‘ones’. The matter of the werewolf is man. The wolfing of the ‘were’, as it were. I hope that criticism can help us understand more, or any comments on ATP are welcome.
>>23629875>sophist admits he doesn't know shitLol. Lmao even. Maybe read Plato's Sophist dialogue, bitchboi?
>>23630227Okay, please tell us what you think sophistry is, and how nomad thought and Deleuze's dialectic can be described as such. Are you sure that you are not the sophist who is dissolute and confused, unable to tell himself from the philosopher who can easily see the difference?
>>23630047A lot of pomo and post-structuralist stuff on difference and difference is just recapitulating stuff from ancient and scholastic phil, combining a few new interesting terms from semiotics and information theory, and then covering the whole thing in layer after layer of obscurantism and bad prose. The complexity is there so that you don't realize that the solid points were made better by others centuries or millennia ago and so that you can't pin down the weak points to refute them.
>>23630530Oh, and to make it complete, you have to use specialized terms from the sciences and mathematics in ways that belie a total misunderstanding of what they actually mean.
>>23629435>Do you have any particular part in mind that you could share?Its his phrasology like the way he uses words like machine and nomadic war machine other cyberpunk technobabble and references to science. I can understand why D&G are doing this but their constant attempt to write as if they are schizos in Guattari's clinic just get tiresome quickly. I prefer Deleuze's smaller and more sober work. ATP in particular is really creative and they are playing with all kinds of ideas but sometimes its just annoying. I think I'm more pissed at the fanboys pushing this book over all of Deleuze's other work, ignoring his influence from Spinoza and Duns Scotus, and acting like he's some genius who invented this stuff from scratch. Every reading group or thread online is filled with Deleuzefags who masturbate to this book and you can't have a straight critical conversation and they use their knowledge of Deleuzespeak to gatekeep. Like your not one of them if you don't see rhizomes the clouds and praise Deleuze like he's a god. I swear most of these people are ex commies or Foucault fanboys who've transferred their Marx Engels worship to another yaoi power couple.
>道可道非常道>名可名非常名you know he's right, right?
