/lit/ - Literature

>>2156699
No, I meant that the novella is devoid of meaning, but not intrinsically but only to me, because I also believe that meaning is fundamentally a byproduct of perception. The lives of Lin's characters are codifyied in a way I cannot decypher (although I loathe the mathemagical implications of using abstract symbolics as the source domain for this metaphor), and subjecting myself to a large enough quantity of Shoplifting that I develop the necessary perceptive modes for palpating any kind of texture in it would be more of a hassle than doing the same for the accidental distribution of ink superimposed on a fraction of it. Also, visual to tactile synaesthesia is one of the more underrated kinds of synaesthesia.

>>2156695
By me, yes. I guess I could take a photograph of the page for you when I get home tonight.
>>2156696
Or maybe you are not high enough.

I borrowed a copy of Shoplifting from a friend and accidentally smudged black ink from a poorly crafted pseudo-Anarchist lifestyle-punk leaflet onto one of the pages. Developing a mode of pattern recognition which sees significance in the oily gashes on that page would probably be easier for me than doing the same for the earlier, intentional print in the book.

>>2151399
People like me frighten you? Or the people I described as 'academics'?

also, here is what appears to be the entire book for free: http://evolbiol.ru/large_files/miller_the_mating_mind.pdf

The Red Queen seems to me problematic because the question of why human sexuality exists is apparently addressed in a way that incorrectly assumes that there was a possibility at one point for asexual humans to evolve. Even with my very naive understanding of biology it is obvious that sexuality as the mode of reproduction had ceased to be an option and become the necessary basis for further development long before anything like a human was in sight. The question of why sexual reproduction developed instead of asexual reproduction thus should be asked about another kind of animal, not humans. Making the book about humans just sells it better because our culture is very self-centered and shallow, so the surface impression "ooh, this book is about me!" counts more than logical structure of thought.

Let me quote the second review on amazon for you:
"But is it correct? Miller tries to explain the mystery of human intellect and creativity. Why would a creature (us) who evolved under the most primitive of material conditions, who lacked even sedentary agriculture until 10,000 years ago, have evolved the mental capacity for beauty, wit, rhythm, and truth? His answer is: sexual (as opposed to survival) selection. In short we are smart and talented because women preferred to mate with smart and talented men.

There is a problem, however. There are two theories of sexual selection: runaway selection (associated with Darwin and Ronald Fisher), and the handicap principle (Zahavi). Most of Miller's arguments require the former (although he formally disavows this early in the book), while the latter is probably the only plausible model of sexual selection.

For instance, the idea that we have large brains because women prefer intelligent men, even if intelligence imposes a fitness cost on men, is plausible only if intelligence is a signal of a superior fitness in some other hidden area (e.g., a lower parasite load). But I cannot think of one such area, nor does Miller supply one. Intelligence may have direct fitness benefits for humans, but that is NOT sexual selection, but straightforward selection for survivability."

Read Chris Knight's Blood Relations instead.

>>2151367
It is satire to ridicule moralists, actually.

>>2150284
I love how you rant about others' mediocrity. You don't know the fundamental basics of Cartesian graphic notation yet insist on using it and when it turns out that your stuporous sketch makes no sense you act like you don't care. You are everything that is wrong with /lit/.

>>2150133
You don't have to know the term 'mise-en-scene' in order to be able to understand and appreciate a film. Mise-en-scene is an especially bad example of analytical tools one might supposedly need to be validated as a connaisseur in your eyes, because it is so broad and vague that it adds exactly no explanatory power to the discourse in which it is used - purely to identify the speaker as a supposed connaisseur, by the way.

>>2151327
Are you really using 'bona fide' instead of 'real'?

Academics love minorities, because it makes them feel less guilty for being white middleclass. It is a pretty obvious ploy for cultural capital, mostly. Feminists, queer, black, chicana, etc. 'thinkers' wave their self-certified marginalization around in an attempt to guilt-trip the majority of academic establishment (straight white middleclass men) into including them in all the 'Introduction to [Subfield of the Humanities]' and some carrierists hop onto the bandwagon - nevermind that some might actually trick themselves into believing they are saving the world by rescuing the literatures of the oppressed into the canon.

You can only define that which has no history (Nietzsche)

I

In April one seldom feels cheerful;
Dry stones, sun and dust make me fearful;
Clairvoyantes distress me,
Commuters depress me--
Met Stetson and gave him an earful.

II

She sat on a mighty fine chair,
Sparks flew as she tidied her hair;
She asks many questions,
I make few suggestions--
Bad as Albert and Lil--what a pair!

III

The Thames runs, bones rattle, rats creep;
Tiresias fancies a peep--
A typist is laid,
A record is played--
Wei la la. After this it gets deep.

IV

A Phoenician named Phlebas forgot
About birds and his business--the lot,
Which is no surprise,
Since he'd met his demise
And been left in the ocean to rot.

V

No water. Dry rocks and dry throats,
Then thunder, a shower of quotes
From the Sanskrit and Dante.
Da. Damyata. Shantih.
I hope you'll make sense of the notes.

-- Wendy Cope

>>2149471
I don't know who Veil is, I only started hanging out at /lit/ a few weeks back.

>>2149461
Sorry hate to burst you reveling bubble but Veil already did that a while ago. You aren't making deconstructing shit so go back to munching on tostinos rolls

I hope I am aware that I am deconstructing tripfaggotry by giving up private possession of identity and instead creating this mask to be worn by all those who engage in elsefaggotry for their various reasons. Just revel in how I pretend to deface my own identity.

>>2149457
Stinky mister butthole farting up the bathroom!! :P

You're kinda kawaii desu desu wanna date???

>>2149307
Are you aiming at post-Falangistst of the pending revolution and/or German national-bolsheviks?

btw black people suck

>>2149448
>my drift

Ewww you made a pitooty!! X( uck I think maybe stop sharing your drifts you icky pants!

>> ctrl+f "2083"... 0 hits
>> mfw

>>2149448
>my drift

Eases you make a pitooty!! X( uck I think maybe stop sharing your drifts you icky pants!

All those dicks
In my mouth
Licky lick
Heading south
For the bunghole
Where I poop
A nugget and
Get it chomped
On by my
Black boyfriend Roy