/lit/ - Literature

>>3367829
as bad as it is, it's still a decent literature forum-- it won't teach you, but it's a good place to build up a reading list.

>>3367895
???

do you even go outside of /lit/

it's like a hitler youth picnic

stay on /lit/ for a while
read a couple hundred books (most english majors read less but you want to outdo them)
yale and several other institutions have free courses online

happy autodidacting

to check the book's paper quality, the stitching and the font and size thereof.

>>3367731
>implying it isn't

lowest tier camus; too blunt, too boring.

read la chute instead.

ratatat or clams casino? some kind of painkiller?

idk im musically illiterate

>>3367448
> I'll either call
>implying money

>interact with them face to face
>implying proximity

>post-hip, post-ironic pharmaceutically mind-numbed hipster zombies
>implying you're any better

yawn

>>3367375
young people, the hipster demographic by and large, are more internet savvy than not, and gmail simply happens to be the best visible option.

if you're using hotmail you're either old or a luddite

acting without acting

i notice everything

houellebecq is pretty good. im making my way through les particles elementaires and it's very enjoyable.

/lit/ leans somewhat more to the left than the rest of the stormfaggery that is the rest of 4chan.

i like him because universal grammar is fascinating

yeah it's kinda slow, but just read a lot and you'll pick up speed.


thanks for the link though this looks interesting

there's worse ways to write

inducing hypergraphia [either via chemical means or by forcing it] is an old time-tested method

>>3367266
>The crusaders never really used boats as a main vehicule

nigger do you even know of the fourth crusade and venice

>>3366519
that wasn't bad at all.

>>3364656
that last yes should be capitalized

>>3364611
>Why do you think 'The elements of Style' is bad?

geoffrey pullum has a couple of critiques online if you're interested. mostly overcorrection and stylistic suggestion posing as grammatical injunctions.

>don't you think that some of the stuff you can learn in these books is good and can help a apsiring writer out?

nothing he couldn't figure out on his own by studying fiction himself.

if you don't have anything interesting, write the mundane but significant memories you have. like sitting in a restaurant and noticing everyone is sitting alone. small things. it'll build up.

honestly the best fix is to just write. sometimes fiction seems more real in retrospect than what "really" happened.

pretty useless. all you need is a decent manual of style (i.e not white and strunk mmkay) and you're set to go. reading about writing, like posting on 4chan about writing, is just procrastination.

never even got a hard-on

i usually don't read the blurb, i usually buy by author so it's not really a big concern.

>>3363899
>mfw

>>3363883
no problem anon! i'm glad to help. post a thread about it after you're done with it and we can talk about it.