>author writes pages upon pages of pointless details and descriptions instead of progressing the plot
>>23361372t. consoomer
>>23361372I’m with you, OP. So is Charles.BIM BIM BIM. BIM BIM BIM.
>author writes a freaking novel
Has anyone read that shit and thought "wow this really adds a lot to the book"? There's only so many ways you can say a hill is green and the flowers are blooming, get to the real shit.
>>23361573t. filtered by cetalogy
>>23361372>MUH PLOT!Literally one of the lesser elements of literature. No wonder plebeians obsess over it.
OP is right.Also fuck you Zola.
>>23361372>villain demonstrates his wickedness dozens of times>hero finally overpowers him>doesn't kill him>OH NO>because . . .>DON'T SAY IT>if he did . . . >NOT ONE MORE WORD>he’dbejustlikehim>OFF TO THE TENTH CIRCLE OF HELL WITH YOU
>>23361904Does this happen in literature? I only remember that in cheesy 90s action films
>>23361573There's a Japanese author called Yasunari Kawabata who is good at describing the scene very beautifully yet also very succinctly.
>>23361397>>23361575>>23361666Why do midwits pretend not to care about plot
>>23361372How would you describe that cat?
>>23362392They legitimately don't. To them fiction is a way to experience the feelings of others.
>>23362392>>23362431top o' the bell curve, these two
>>23362431How else would you define art
>>23362081I want to call him a discount Hemingway, but Kawabata just outright sucks.
Do people who think like OP just avoid poetry altogether, then? Maybe they read epics, but I can't imagine them liking Whitman, Dugan, or Donne. Shakespeare's Sonnets would be out of the window, too, I guess.
>>23363720Filtered
>>23363725If you mean to say I was filtered by how bad his prose is, then count me filtered.
>>23363718An attempt to convey any idea, not only emotion, with extraneous information you wouldn't use in your best attempt to express the idea precisely and concisely. Anti-plotfags are allergic to technical and temporal information and focus purely on emotional sensation.
>>23361372From what I remember Dostoevsky did this a lot. It's a careful balance. Sometimes the details and descriptions can be funny like with Nabokov or just be beautifully put. Pynchon's V. has had quite a few of those moments where a certain turn of phrase really sticks out even though it's not progressing the plot. The fucking Stencil sections can drag like hell but sometimes suffer from too much description, on top of almost always being twice as long as the Profane chapters but I digress.
>>23363740why is this prose so easy to read? dang i imagined it would be full of kanji
>>23361372Philip Roth was a hack.
>>23363753>to convey any idea
>>23361397>NOOOO AUTHORS SHOULD WASTE THE READERS TIME
>>23362055Count of Monte Cristo
stick to manga. comes with premade drawings
