ITT: Post authors who secretly browse /lit/
im so sick of this fucking image
>>24112970It's erotic enough to elicit a mild, barely noticeable, irritating twinge of desire but nowhere near enough to pleasure the appetite.
>>24112975shes literally on all fours half in half out of a dog door like a bad porn scene. I would of course plow her from behind and impregnate her. Honor if you're reading this stop fucking around on 4chan and go write
me :)
>>24112968Honor is a mere scutcheon: and so ends my catechism.
tao lin ........ over a decade a go, although the new statesman bullshit might attract some lurkers
Me
>>24113025fuck lmao I cannot believe I forgot about tao lin. I started posting on /lit/ riiiiiiight when he quit showing up here. (have I really been here for a decade? christ)>>24113009I idly wonder sometimes how many "famous authors" are on /lit/. Like I know the actual answer is 0, but there have to be at least a few novelists out there who lurk here. I know one, put out a novel last year, but he's not on the board, just a visitor
>>24113033Probably more than you think. When I get published this year I'm going to come back here and lurk.
>>24113039less than I hope but more than I think is probably right, yeah. useless to put a number on it. probably better to ask if I've ever read something written by a /lit/ poster -- shit, maybe? I kinda-sorta keep up with literary magazines but not seriously, just whatever's on the online editions. maybe I've read a /lit/ story in Guernica or something lmaocongrats on publication! what genre/how long did it take you to write? spill the details I'm curious
it's me, honorwazzup /lit/?
>>24113065No, I'm Honor! Don't listen to this anon, guys :)
>>24113071post a pic of your copy of My First Book then. oh you don't own a copy? how strange...
>>24113017Shit interpretation of the part. People who post it know nothing of the real Falstaff.
>>24113075>>24113071>>24113065Hey connorWhats your book about?
>>24113075Holy based...the zoomer /lit/ trilogy...
>>24112968You just know
>>24112990I'm 80% sure you are her. You feel offended by not being an object of unbearable lust by that other anon.
>>24113118know what?
>>24113132If I was Honor Levy I would not write and I would just get fucked by big thick cock all day
^_*_^\_+_/ *meow*=<>=~ h0nør
>>24113075>levyoh nonono
>>24113174>Our /queen/ has entered the chatAhem, Mademoiselle...Allow me to introduce myself: A. Nahn Amos is my Hasidic name. Pleased to meet you. My mudder and my mutti's Jewish matchmaker presents to you this letter of introduction...I think you will find every thing in order. When, my soon-to-be Madame Amos, may we step on the proverbial wine glass?
>>24113195She’s a trad cath
>>24112968
>>24112970I want more of it
>>24113075Why did Gabriel disappear on us bros...is he on some kind of amphetamine bender since he went on vacation? I'm worried.
>>24112968>>24113150Are these the same person?
normies have truly ruined 4chan
>>24113580if there were real normies here it'd be 100x better.
Behold! I bring to your eyes the literary genius of Honor Levy!This is actually not a joke!
>>24113707i’ll give it this much: it’s brimming with energy. a world so inundated with ephemeral nonsense deserves a piece like this, a mirror held up to its chaos. i suppose i should be annoyed by it. but i’m almost impressed.
>>24113707This is probably the strongest story in the collection. The fact that you can't comprehend the mastery of style and the pathos that underlies this story proves your inability to be an arbiter of taste. Read the whole story. It's amazing. It really captures social media relationships accurately and through a creative style of storytelling. It's a social commentary on those individuals who are consumed by the internet and memes, dissecting how attention starved and isolated their social lifes are, and how these factors push them into extremes.
>>24113707 this is actually very good honor can I cum on your face
>>24113719She has mastered a style that is viscerally repulsive and has used it competently to synthesise something that ought to be classified as the shit-most shitpost of all time, but which is actually held (by the few who are over-soclialised and culture-concentrated enough to enjoy it) to be a stellar example of experimental literaty fiction, just as she intended. It wounds me that so many people humour her and take her writing seriously, rather than missapprehending it as a joke, as would be reasonable and sane.Basically, she writes ironically, or meta-ironically, or ironically non-ironically like an actual drooling phone-glued retard, and her shit's all fucked up and I don't like it.
>>24113793if she’s set out to blur the line between joke and art, and people are taking it seriously, doesn’t that mean she’s succeeded? irony, meta-irony, ironic non-irony - they’re all fair game these days, for better or worse. the modern reader (god help us) is trained to operate in these modes.
>>24113816Personally, I dislike most of all that people have such poor comprehension that they can't tell the difference.I suppose that I have less of a problem with her writing, and more of a problem with the fact that she's a symptom of the general retardation of internet-addicted people, and how increasingly common it is to cater to them as if they aren't repulsive.
>>24113834but here’s the thing: the inability to 'tell the difference' between irony, sincerity, and whatever this is, isn’t a flaw - it’s the point.
>>24112968You can just tell that she has a cute butthole
>>24113867You know she doesn't let cock anywhere near it though. Maybe an errant tongue once in a while
>>24113857I know
>>24113912seems like you don't if you're playing the classic 'it’s not the artist, it’s the audience' lament
>>24113933I dislike both artist and audience
>>24113940fascinating
>>24112968she lost her house in the fire :(
I know what you mean but "secretly browse" is dumb because everyone posts anonymously so unless they openly state so its always going to be secretly
>>24112990Didn't know her name was honor, thought you were saying you were honored if she read your comment kek
>secretlyShe's been calling people r-tarded g*y nwords all week and you didn't notice?
>>24113707Can see the influence of Longinus' 'On the Sublime' here.>Concerning the number of metaphors to be employed together Caecilius seems to give his vote with those critics who make a law that not more than two, or at the utmost three, should be combined in the same place.>The use, however, must be determined by the occasion. Those outbursts of passion which drive onwards like a winter torrent draw with them as an indispensable accessory *whole masses* of metaphor.https://www.gutenberg.org/files/17957/17957-h/17957-h.htm
>>24114068More like Pope's 'Peri Bathous'
>>24114087
>>24114155>>24114087>>24114052Obviously a falseflag
>>24113707>first sentence starts with 'He was giving'into the trash it goes
>>24115132Because?
>>24115143tiktok zoomer brainrot that is repulsive to read
>>24115143>>24115155and no, doing it 'ironically' is not an excuse when your prose is painful to read
>>24115155Can you actually explain what the issue is?
>>24115161Sure. It's a lazy attempt at writing something unique and trendy but is really a regurgitation of a bunch of shit she saw on twitter and tiktok. Spamming a bunch of buzzwords you read on social media is not the same as writing. Is that clearer?
>>24115163It speaks in the authentic voices of an internet brained pair. Buzzwards are not being spammed, a chain of authentic thoughts are being narrated.
>Is that clearer?Do you actually believe anyone can take anything away from your "explanation"? What is the actual reason why starting with "He was giving" is bad.
>>24115167If your "authentic thoughts" are anywhere close to using that kind of language then you're only proving my point about brainrot. >>24115169I don't know why it's so hard to understand. "He was giving" is an indicator that the author is going to be using annoying zoomer slang in their book, and it gets worse the further I read:>holy hikikomori virgin femcel holed up in her Serial Experiment Laincore bedroom. That's a pathetic attempt at trying to write something. You're relying singularly on the reader being "in" on the joke because they also saw these buzzwords and pop culture references on the internet before. It's the opposite of "authentic thoughts". It's a way of circumventing any possibility of authenticity or insight because all you need is the reader to think "I saw those words before too!!!!!" And on the surface level it makes the prose awkward to read. So for me, it fails in every way writing could. The fact that I'm getting so much pushback on this proves how far /lit/ has fallen.
>>24115179Yes, it's a story about two internet brain rotted people. That's what it's about. Expressing the actual world and the actual people in it as they actually are. Art exists to reveal truth, not to weave cant and deny the world.
>using annoying zoomer slang in their book"He was giving" is prove of the author using slang in their book? Am I mental or are you mental? All of your posts read like someone constantly screaming "WHY DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND!!" - yeah well, I don't. Had the author written "Paul gave knight errant" would it have been fine in your book?
>>24115182Don't worry, I get the point, but that doesn't mean it's enjoyable to read and it doesn't mean I come away from the piece with any thought other than "yep, the zoomers have brainrot". You are consistently ignoring my point that it's PAINFUL to read. Not fun. Not entertaining. Not enriching. Not insightful. There's no poetry or beauty. There's no pain or tragedy. There's nothing. It is a vapid piece of so-called "art"If this is you, Honor, you need to learn that not everybody is going to like your work, even if you do everything you can to appeal to the lowest common denominator of "booktok".>>24115187Are you retarded? Have YOU read further than "he was giving". The rest of the piece proves exactly what I'm saying, I can just tell from the first 3 words because only retards use "he was giving" in a book.>Had the author written "Paul gave knight errant" would it have been fine in your book?No? Because that's the exact same thing? Nobody says "gave" or "giving" in that way unless you're a teenage girl. >All of your posts read like someone constantly screaming "WHY DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND!!" - yeah well, I don't.Frankly, that's because you are an idiot. I cannot be clearer with my problems with the writing. That doesn't mean you can't like the writing. But all you're doing is asking the same question over and over and expecting a different answer. Why don't you ask a new question, and maybe I can give you a new answer.
>>24115192Light is more important than sweetness in literature. Illuminating aspects of man and the world is a higher calling than saccharine smothering. This was the point of Decadence's (Huysmans) rebellion against Naturalism (Zola). Not everything in the world is sweet. The overall aim of culture may be sweetness, but the first step is honest illumination.
>Have YOU read furtherYes but it's not important because your point is about a very specific, as of yet unexplained, issue pertaining to "He was giving" and you now talking about what comes after is basically false equivalence. Again, is there some secret meaning to one of the most straight forward and simple "phrases" i can think of, namely "He was giving" that I don't know of? Is this some internet meme I'm unaware of? "He was giving me the stink-eye""He was giving me a pained look""Paul was giving/gave a lecture on conversational problems and how some people on the internet always seem to believe everyone else simply must know what the other is also in on and or is talking about"
>>24115200Yes, you're talking about insight. I already said I don't think this kind of writing has it. In fact, I reject it's illuminating anything at all. It's probably really deep to middle-aged people who have never strayed from facebook or for teenage girls who have a pathologic need to feel 'seen', but like I said, it's saying nothing but "young people have brainrot". Which I already knew. The piece is revealing and illuminating nothing, and it hides behind the buzzwords to give it an air of originality while, ironically, being completely unoriginal. >>24115203Holy shit you might actually be a retard. At least the other anon seems to be trying to make a real point. Are you so illiterate that you think these two sentences are using 'giving' in the same way?>He was giving me the stink-eyeis completely different from>He was giving knight errantThe former is a real sentence. The second is zoomer slang. >Again, is there some secret meaning to one of the most straight forward and simple "phrases" i can think of, namely "He was giving" that I don't know of? Is this some internet meme I'm unaware of? Unironically, yes. It's a grammatically incorrect use of 'giving' that has become popular with brainrot zoomers, and only they use it that way. You're getting your panties in a twist over me calling out the first 3 words as if the rest of the piece doesn't prove exactly what I'm saying. You are just too stupid to see that for yourself so you fixate on your own misunderstanding to avoid admitting that YOU don't understand the difference.
>>24112968the book has some nice rambles in the first parts, with two major and very noticeable defects:>1: once you take away the internet lingo and boil the sentences down, their structure is extremely simple and repetitive.>2: the longer stories are extremely weak when it comes to all technical aspects - characters don't look nor sound like real people, progression/development of plot, theme and images is uneven or overall absent and obscured by wanting to reference things.We'll see what she does in the future but overall this book ends up sounding gimmicky more than anything else. There's nothing memorable about it besides having exposed me and other readers to the photo in the OP
>>24113719>This is probably the strongest story in the collectionSet it on fire and salt the fucking ashes.
>>24113707The word play is fun but this is exhausting to read.
>>24113707This girl is a Zionist
>>24113951fr fr?
>>24115284Im signaling out to all my jewish acquaintances and my jewish fiancé that im not in favor of Israel taking over the Gaza strip because I like jews but just because I hate muslims more. Fuck the jews
>>24115350Humans are humans. If you root for the massacre of women and children, you degrade and disgrace yourself.
baste bread
>>24115350botched jobhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GmYsHZjTPk>Burning Down Dhe House
>>24113707Do the rest of her short stories follow the same themes as this one?
>>24113951I hope the duck and everyone is ok
