i don't care about prose
ok
Put your clothes back on mr frog
>>24699650for me, whenever i've slogged through a book of flabby, unconsidered, purple, overwrought, cliched and generally limp prose, moving on to something vigorous and clear and vivid and well-constructed feels like finally seeing eye to eye with another conscious human after trying to converse with shoddy automata. but that's just me.
>>24699650If the prose is dull or monotonous I can't read it but if the prose is the main draw of the book it always ends up being shit
>>24699650Good prose is a must in non fiction expository books
>>24699650Some good prose is not actually good prose and sends me into a rage.
>>24699650WHAT??? BOIL HIM IN OIL!!!
>>24699937juicy frog legs with escargot
>>24699650Why not? What do you care about actually?
>>24699670A 4chan post with actually good prose? I'll take "that wasn't on my 2025 bingo card" for $2000, Alex.
Can anyone find me the best translated prose of Dostoyevsky? I keep trying to read crime and punishment or notes from the underground and it just insist upon itself. The characters come off as melodramatic, I don't care about some winging flamboyant tard and his helplessness. Feels like some theatre kid translated it and used their big girl thesaurus to fluff up the dialogue when it wasn't necessary and it comes off as clunky.Maybe I need a better translation. What do you suggest, because I find the prose tedious.
>>24699650You prefer poetry? Yuck
>>24700073There is hardly any dialogue in Notes from the Underground. It’s an incredibly easy read, you should have sped through it in an afternoon.As for melodramatic, yes that is the point. Dosto is not trying to depict entirely realistic human reactions, he’s using characters to embody philosophical trends that he saw as destructive. Not quite caricatures, more like characters in an opera: blended elements of plausible human behavior with overdramatic outbursts.His novels are more allegory than microcosm of reality: if you have no interest in his perspective, then you have no business reading it. You won’t get anything out of it.
>>24699650I'm starting to fell this way. What's required of prose is that it should be as clear as possible. I'd rather have my poetry in the form of verse. I've appreciated many prose poems / stylists but for me life isn't long enough for that kind of show-off Nabokovianism.
>>24700095I figure as such, I think I just have no interest in these self pitying creatures. I'm going to stick to Tolstoy.
>>24699650then watch a movie
That's gaytarded.
>>24699650You probably don't know what it means and are esl
You do care about pröse. But you know it by another name.
>>24699650found the #1 Brandon Sanderson fan
>>24700097Interestingly, I would argue that good prose has unclear or inexact meaning, such that the bare minimum number of signs are used to suggest an idea. One must also not be too economic, so as to prevent an infinity of truthful interpretations. In Book XII of his Confessions, for example, Augustine laments the amount of interpretation that a small sample of words in the Bible can elicit, and I find this the case for sparsely written novels; I find Hemingway intolerably exhausting to read because of his ambiguity. Purple prose occurs when authors lean towards overwhelming exactness, such that the image generated is rigid and unable to co-opt the varied sign-perception sets in each individuals mind.
>>24700095>using characters to embody philosophical trends that he saw as destructive.there are anons here who's idea of writing a great book is portraying zeitgeist conflicts with symbolic characters and i can't help but cringe at even the intent. is dostoevsky responsible for this?
>>24700384no, it's a time old trend
