/lit/ - Literature

>>4123496
We usually have an award prize each issue, where we send the author of our favorite submission about twenty-five united states dollars.

Now that we're quarterly, we're gonna increase the award amount, and likely offer multiple awards per issue (one for fiction, nonfiction, poetry, etc.).

i don't think you'd be able to win the award prize, tho

>>4123495
This.

Base the group around archetypes (you can make your own, if you want) and base the characters around this model.

>>4123425
>>4123432
>>4123452

Ok, that helps. But what's postmodernism as a literary movement? Modernism, as I understand (and read) it, was characterized by authors casting away literary "traditions" and norms.

In fact, pretty much all modernist art can be summarized with the above, and that speaks to its legitimacy as a cultural movement.

Whenever I visit Moscow, for example, I can clearly identify the modernist architectural elements of the city's subway stations. And when I read a story by Kafka or a play by Pirandello, I can clearly discern which elements of form were omitted/subverted in order to affect the work in a particular way.

But what did postmodernism do? (Postmodernism is dead, I think). What does a photograph of a man urinating on the cross do?

I feel so pleb asking this, but quite a few English faculty at my university claim that they absolutely love postmodern literature.

>>4123435
I used to create an outline, write up a draft using that outline, and then edit it. It worked but it wasn't very fun, and my writing felt kind of dull.

What I've started doing recently is making a general outline of the things I want to talk along with a brief thesis statement of some sort. Then I just start typing a paragraph about a random point. After that, I may move to the next point in the sequence, or start covering another random point in a separate paragraph.

Once I have all my points on the page (sans introductory paragraph), I rearrange and edit them according to the logos structure I want my essay to follow. At the very end, I create an introductory paragraph and give one last edit.

It's really disorganized, and almost feels like working backwards; however, it makes my writing feel engaging, allows me to get all my points across in a salient manner, and is overall quite a lot of fun.

It isn't any quicker and far from efficient, but I've noticed higher grades with this method as well.

>>4123411
Is that pic postmodernist?

What the fuck even is postmodernism? Anons slang that term around a bunch but I've never seen anyone give a concrete definition for it.

>>4123407
>next deadline

shiiieeeet! Our next release is on December 1st, man. (Going quarterly; gonna be an announcement over the week-end). So you got a while to send somethin' in and get feedback on it.

anime pussy

>>4122509
This. It deserves more acclaim than it's got compared to his other works.

>>4122490
All of his novels are quite different, so it's hard to describe the "genre" of Pynchon.

He is known for creating vast amounts of characters, each part of one in dozens of plot lines. There is no central context in his novels: they're set in one scene and then another; follow one character and then another; and flip between past, present, and future in paragraphs and sentences. His individual books aren't binded by one particular plot, but by the themes he wants to cover. Nothing you read will be particularly salient, but it's all interconnected and therefore indispensable.

Maximalism, basically.

On a structuralist level, his prose switches style so often that you'll find yourself absolutely loving some parts while hating others.

Reading Pynchon is kind of a chore, but that can be said for most post-modern authors. Most people suggest starting with Crying of Lot 49. After that, my suggestion would be to just pick up any novel and start reading. If you stick with it, you're bound to find chapters and sections you really enjoy.

>>4121477
>bourgeois leisure activities

Are you serious?
The Arts are for patricians only, friend.

>>4121438
Because Kojima is too into cinema. Although MGS2 did have some in-game ebooks.

I agree with you though. It's a shame considering other franchises like Hitman and Ass Creed got at least one novel. Starcraft, Diablo, and Halo have dozens.

At least I have my dot hack novels.

And Pynchon has pretty pleb taste in vidya

>>4121428
At least you're writing.

Too many people who have alot of free time neglect to even consider making literature, or any creative endeavor.

>>4121421
One Hundred Years of Solitude and An Old Man With Enormous Wings are among Marquez's most popular works. They're both very good reads.

With Borges: I recommend just jumping in. His stuff should be available for free in many places on the net.

And for more Lovecraft: his later stuff is much better than earlier stuff (he tried too hard to be Poe imo).

>>4121407
Have you read any Borges? How about Marquez?

I think you'll like those two. They're who I started reading after my "I just found out about Lovercraft yesterday" phase.

>>4121192
The field of economics -- where it bleeds into the humanities -- have branched beyond marxism. However, socialism is still a possibility (and, depending on who you talk to, an inevitability). My knowledge of Economics is amateur, but here's what I understand:

Keynes basically put a whole in the idea of a self-sustaining free market run by a cyclical "business model." He helped propogate the simple truth that Depression is not temporary by nature, and that it CAN potentially linger forever. He essentially killed the idealization of capitalism.

Soon after, another economist -- I believe it was Schumpeter -- realized that the next "stage" of capitalism was corporatism. Corporatism does not foster entrepreneurship, and so the whole business cycle becomes stagnant. Schumpeter's forecast is that nonpartisan intellectuals will elect to replace corporatism with socialism.

Today, we don't really have a nonpartisan elite. But if /pol/ is on the right track (and /pol/ is always right), we DO have a corporate, globalist elite (Bilderberg group), which does tend to spout rhetoric very similar to socialism.

To summarize: Capitalism becomes unsustainable, so it is in everyone's (or at least, the corporate elite's) self-interest to transition into socialism.

Not communism but close enough. If there are any Economist-anons on the board, don't hesitate to eviscerate my post.

All my literature professors love it. Like, they talk about how much they love it at the start of every class. A generation or two from now, english majors will read this book in class while going over how Metal Gear Solid relates to Pynchon's themes of post-globalization.

I think it's a fun read so far. Right now, everyone's eating it up like it's god's own golden jizz; but I think in a few months it's gonna get critically panned all across the board.

>>4121335
>(polite sage)
because im so fucking good at saging

>>4117897
>>4118286

Would you guys like a TAR epub alongside our usual pdf releases? We can start doing that.

(polite sage)

>>4109069
Discworld series.

>>4109072
>banter doesn't serve the plot or character in any way

Okay, on second thought it does... in its own way. But that CAN be hard to pull off, and there are very many ways to develop characters and expand plots BESIDES extensive dialogue.

Novels and stories don't have to have "genuine" chatter. In fact, it's better that they didn't, as banter doesn't serve the plot or character in any way.

I used to stress out about dialogue too, and have characters go through entire conversations. Like, they would talk about last night @ da bar or some shit before the significant parts came up. DON'T DO THAT -- it just acts as filler and pisses people off. Keep the non-plot-salient stuff sparse. Most stories do this, so don't think you're cutting the story short.

If you really can't write natural-sounding dialogue, then keep the dialogue to a minimum. The plot, conflict, or situation will be a satisfactory vehicle for character interactions and developments of relationships.

>>4108569

She is a pleb, who believes that just because a perspective comes from a marginalized or oppressed community, it is worth being exposed to. You're also a pleb, who believes that mediums with a middle man are inherently more valid than other perspectives simply because the middle man is there.

>publishers, editors, and the idea of a canon are a form of peer review

This is true, but one cannot trust all middle-men of rhetoric to have egalitarianism and philanthropy in mind, or be swayed by the doxa; neither can one possibly believe that all voices are worth consideration.

>muh repressed voices

Being part of an oppressed demographic only stifles one's ability to contextualize reality in meaningful empiricism. It's sad, but it's a fact: if a minority seeks to oppose oppression, it simply puts itself in the shackles of the oppressor's antithesis.

The two of you belong to the same problem: an inability to be exposed to the entire spectrum of demographics and use critical thinking to pin-point arts and arguments with value.

I'm surprised you broke up. The hate-fucking must have been fantastic.

>>4102231
I think he would be mortified at how both movements have become sweeping paradigms that coerce MULTIPLE minority groups to submit to SINGLE ideologies, and how these movements have become consumer products through pop culture and for-profit magazines (see: Gawker).

Fortunately, we are entering/have entered the age of post-globalism, where demographics all across the board have been beaten into the ground through massive economic disparity. And when everyone is united by weariness at the price of bread and rent, identity politics start tumbling down, tumbling down, tumbling down...

>>4106789
>blehafsnaskdfhbakl

fucking germans ruining my literary theory. this tops Gesamtkunstwerk.

Anyway, I've read some academic works on humor, some from schools of literary criticism, and some from schools of psychology. They're ALL obfuscated with endless terminology.

I think it speaks to the sublime that a good joke has: so much of it is obvious, yet also somehow intangible.