>Now philosophical systems are wholly true for their founders only. >For all subsequent philosophers they usually represent one great mistake, for lesser minds a sum of errors and truths. >Taken as ultimate ends, in any event, they represent an error, hence are to be repudiated.Name the errors.Correct them.
>>25592229What is philosophy in itself? Is it 'a philosophy' or something else?I think the 1st fragment of Heraclitus answers this.
How good are the later Harry Potter books really? In terms of prose and worldbuilding.I know that the early books are comfy and whimsical children's books (or supposedly so, I have never read them) but what about the ones that are aimed at the older reader as they grew?
>>25592055They'd lose their minds if they knew 13yr old girls have been drawing and writing about genderbent HP characters, including Malfoy, since the mid 2000s. They're making all this noise over basic fandom slop.
>>25587583I loved the first four when I was a kid, they were imaginative and had this whimsy and a sense of wonder. Starting with book five, it turned into a teen YA series with more "mature" tone, I guess. I think the trick was that the series matured with its readers but I was binge reading them at ten years old, it was quite a tonal whiplash for me to go from a silly tale about wizards in a weird castle to whatever happened in later books.
>>25590037>(and her ghost writers)Yeah, you can tell 3 onward had ghost writers. 1 and 2 are mostly complete dogshit, so I'd say its fair to say she wrote them. 3 feels half written by her and 4-7 she wasn't even involved beyond being an ideas guy. I don't see many people talking about or acknowledging it though.
>>25587625Everywhere. The wizards world makes no sense, she didn't have enough creative capacity to come up with something otherworldly enough but still believable
I'm curious as to why don't wizards in HP live like literal godkings over the muggles. The secrecy thing is a joke.
All 5 literary scandals of 2026 involving the use of AI have been non-white writers
>>25584952Pangram has single-handedly given literature a stay of execution. It's a miracle it exists. The day a chatbot figures out how to outsmart pangram is the day ltierature dies.
>>25584952So the displacement of whites will continue at a faster rate?
>>25590438I don't get it. You can copy your AI-generated text into Pangram and then gradually edit it to the point where the detection rate gets low. Voilà, you have used Pangram to evade Pangram. It just takes a moderate amount of editing that could even be automated.
>>25590501In other words, no one knows how many published texts have already been to a significant degree generated with LLMs. Pangram might as well only show you the tip of the iceberg.
>>25590064>know your memesProblemExistsBetweenKeyboardAndChair
can VN be on the same level as Literature?, anything you recommend here? what to watch /lit/?
>>25589988c'est moi
In the next global war (which will be started by me) weebs will be one of the major groups of individuals targeted for extermination.
>>25591419>mad>insecure
>>25591102
>>25592472You will never do any of those things.
idgi
>>25592629>idgithere's a good reason for that
a favorite between the ages of 12 and 15, and thereafter
>>25591688Nabokov, Vladimir. Not fond of him. Mediocre prose stylist, vapid and vulgar. A shit critic, unimaginative professor and rampant pedophile. Some of his scenes are extraordinarily raunchy, and the rest are uninspired. Means nothing to me. Nobody takes his criticism seriously.
>>25591790What DID he think of himself?
>>25591819Probably something along the lines of "lmao I can't believe these american goyim are actually buying my bullshit, so long niggers, I'm retiring to Switzerland"
>>25591688i can't believe he hated dh lawrence.well, i can believe it because he hated everyone. but still.
>>25591819>>25591903He only really cared about lepidoptera. The only thing he really took seriously. Chess puzzles were his favourite "hobby". Writing was his line of work, just so happens he was really good at it. In a way he was a very simple (as in, elegantly and clearly structured) man.
What is the /lit/ consensus on Flannery O'Connor?
>>25592358If she comes at it from the right direction she'll see some meaning in it. And O'Connor would be capable of shepherding that nut into a massive tree.
>>25592594yeah i bet she’d have a great time i think the problem is i might be halfway too good for her. i’m thinking about her mum fixing her makeup before we meet. type shit
>>25592461Every writer is focused on making a good sentence 95% of the time. Critics think it's about authoring some intricate blueprint and then backfilling it with words until it exists away from the plans. That themes or an "idea" or some inescapable propulsion that comes from a muse is what the book really is. Writers are sometimes happy to let them think that. That's never what actually makes a book though, it's just one person putting down one musically sound sentence after another. The meaning is emergent and requires no special care or attention from the author to be present, to be apprehendable, or to be especially potent. Not making awful moment to moment sentences to be read is what takes work.
>>25592607Nah, you're not too good for her. She's fully qualified for any partner. One of the greatest artists of the English language can come with a few flaws.
>>25592620yeah yeah yeah chim chim chiree. the issue isn’t me being too tall and too goodlooking for a seven. it’s all wrapped up in feelings.
Which books published in the 21st century do you consider to be the best?
>>25591495
Do any philosophical anti-anime books exist that point out the inherent degenerate, morally bankrupt nature of the medium?
>>25590446>inherent degenerate, morally bankrupt nature of the medium?>inherenthow could that argument even work? do you want to criticize the culture around anime, the theme it protrays, the industry or the technique? all of that stuff can be changed and therefore aren't inherently anything really
>>25592497>Anime isn't inherently degenerate Thoroughly disingenuous post.
>>25592500>>Anime isn't inherently degeneratehow is anime inherently degenerate?
>>25592512You already know the answer and are just playing dumb right now.
>>25592522>no argumentreally makes you think
>author was only able to get published because his wife financially supported him throughout the writing process
>>25589636>>25589640You sound pretty dominated by resentment if we are keeping it one hundred.
>>25587817Look at a pride of lions, they're largely supported by female labor. The males are there to defend against other males and intimidate any other big animals from taking territory. Humans are the same. Your wife should be minding the fields while you write the next romantasy hit.
>>25587817Frank Herbert (Dune)
>>25587817It would make me consoder tolerating living with a woman, ofc music comes first though
>>25587818Not even remotely true, you tard. Lovecraft was only married for like a year.
I'm the American equivalent of a French pessimist.
>>25591069And I call it soccer, yes.
>>25591061So basically an orc that knows how to read.
>>25591414Better an orc who can read than a peasant with no AC.
>>25592434G O T T E M
>>25591061There is no difference.
What does /lit/ think about the Nouveau Roman? Was it simply a failed 20th century literary experiment that should be forgotten, or did authors like Robbe-Grillet, Butor and Simon manage to innovate the novel form beyond the stagnating conventions of plot and character?
imagine someone today having an opinion on some new way to write a novel like no one would give a shit
>>25586542>how much they relied on the negative space of the traditional novelCould you elaborate on this? I’m not entirely sure what you mean.>>25589195I think it was a lot more influential than most people realise, especially given that many of these books are out of print and hard to find. Hard disagree on Perec, I loved Life: A User’s Manual personally.>>25589203Anyone still interested in innovating the novel form today is basically just scrabbling around in the dilapidated ruins of modernism for an audience of maybe 3 people. That’s not to say there isn’t interesting art to be found though, I recently read a pretty good article on what the author terms “Necromodernism”:https://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/necromodernist-architectures-in-contemporary-writing/
>>25589195The bulk of Queneau's writing is not Oulipo, he move on fairly quickly.>>25589685>Could you elaborate on this? I’m not entirely sure what you mean.They write around the traditional narrative methods and often imply them, essentially writing what happened off the page and was implied in the traditional novel. >I think it was a lot more influential than most people realiseWhat would you say that influence was? I don't see any development of their techniques and ideas, lots of writers were definitely influenced by them but they don't seem to use that influence directly, it is just some literature they liked. Other than getting the occasional novel that is blatant about its nouveau roman influence and is essentially nouveau roman, I just don't see much influence. The primary influence I see is that to write a piece from the perspective of an inanimate object has become a staple in creative writing classes.
>>25586542>the negative space of the traditional novelThis is a neat way to look at it; defining what you're doing as, say, "not plot" is still defining things around plot, in effect around a plot-shaped hole, and for the reader that seems likely to mean understanding what you're doing from the perspective of plot (some sequential, logical connection between events). Talking out of my ass a bit since I'm the guy here who's only read some of Robbe-Grillet.Thinking about the Voyeur, this sort of happens (or he uses it) with respect to the "symbols" that are set up and repeated, which were in my reading of it empty signifiers. You see them repeat again and again, so you ask yourself what they mean, but they in themselves don't mean anything. That one is some kind of ring or whatever doesn't necessary have to do with it's role, which is rather to connect other elements within the novel. These all end up being a closed loop of relations within the novel itself. The reader goes looking for what connects the elements denoted by the symbols, and has to arrive at the conclusion that there is a connection, but the symbol itself was only there to indicate an arbitrary (not necessarily sequential, not necessarily logical) connection that the author constructed off the page. The author can construct his own logic this way, rather than relying solely on the reader's preconceived ideas.Maybe this kind of writing didn't have a lasting effect in the mechanics of how stories are written, but maybe the importance is more in how we read things now. Meaning (or structure, whatever) as arbitrary, meaning as derived from the author. I dunno.
>>25590893Maybe I’m exaggerating, but there’s certainly strains of modern and even contemporary fiction that inherit the kind of detached, observational approach from Robbe-Grillet and tend to avoid delving into a character’s inner world. Susan Sontag, BS Johnson, Ann Quin, and (more recently) Tom McCarthy all borrow from the nouveau roman in one way or another, though I will say that most authors directly inspired by it tend to be French (Luc Lang for example is also very good).It had a big influence on cinema as well from what I’ve heard, though I’m less well-versed in that.
Is the pebble edition really as badly translated as they say?
>>25591392Mary Karr?
>>25590946Yes.Personally I like Guy Davenport's translation.
>>25591366Making shit up out of thin air doesn't qualify as translating. What a tragically low standard you've set for your own understanding.
>>25591403tells you everything you need to know
>>25591366As a self-proclaimed poetry autist and philosophy autist, I think the philosophycels are onto something with this one. Heraclitus is notoriously difficult to interpret so people should be extra careful with translating him.
Is Bartley the Scrivener the greatest wagie story of all time?
The death of Ivan Ilyich by Leo Tolstoy
>>25592361I found Bartleby the Scrivener to be a farcical comedy making fun of the unreliable narrator who is far more concerned with the employee who says ‘no I don’t want to do that’ than he is with his traumatized mute employee, or his frenetic alcoholic employee who both turn in their work. Narrator doesn’t seem to care about anybody’s anything, so long as they’ll press the damn typewriter buttons, and all Bartleby has to do is act like a human and admit that he doesn’t wanna do any of this shit, and this guy has to write a whole periodical about it to cope with his own stress and anger. Very funny to me.
>>25592361I prefer not to elaborate.
Literally the greatest man the realm has ever seen
>>25592455>jobs to a warhammer
You cocksuckers have a containment thread for fantasy genre shit. Go there with this garbage.
