/lit/ - Literature

Is Dresden Files series any good?

This place is toxic. Full of supposed redpills that's just another pole of what's life. Being redpilled as well as being nihilistic is not the final truth you arrive at once you see things for what they are. It's just another twisted way to look at life, as much so as being happy all the time is. Life is neutral.

This place however finds pride and nobility in being doomer-like and thinks that that's how things are. Every philosophy boils down to personal experience in life which then dictate what kind of ideology you'll end up with.

To actually see things for what they are requires more than just jacking off in your own room all day and wondering why you have been cursed by the universe.
How can you come to a conclusion about life already if you haven't gotten that much experience in life - trying out new things that is.

>>16290081
You are saying way to little with way too much, especially for a children’s novel.
>which pranced along the trails with a tired strut.
Prancing and tired contradict each other. How about
>which slogged through the hills
>which dragged feet through the hills with its tongue leaving a path of drool marking their way

> looking along every hill and valley attentively, as though she had lost something within the plains
Don’t “as though”, be more direct and find better solutions than adverbs. Has she lost something? If so just say it. Or don’t.
>she had lost something in the plains, and kept a lookout for it.
>she was looking for something in the hills. She looked until her eyes went crossed and then still kept looking.

> The princess gave him a look as though he was a frog most likely because whenever he frowned, his eyes seemed to bulge out and his lips went wide around him.
Too long and awkward. Shorten your sentences like the other anon said. What look do you give someone when they’re a frog?!?
>the princess snorted. The knights eyes bulged, and the princess thought he looked sort of like a frog.

> “Isn’t it obvious? I’m looking for giants. They could be anywhere.” And with that, the old knight gave out a chuckle and couldn’t help but smile for the rest of the day, much to the frustration of our dear princess.
A nice little ender, but doesn’t pay off as well because how it’s written.
>”isn’t it obvious? I’m looking for giants! They could be anywhere”. The knight couldn’t help but laugh. The princess pouted. “What are you laughing at?”

Or something like that. This is just a. Few select parts, I only read the first paragraph. It needs a lot of work imo. Find more descriptive verbs. Simplify you’re sentence structure. Use sensory phrases to show instead of tell. Children’s novels needs a certain tone in voice and word choice. They tend to repeat a lot, because kids do not pick up on tropes and subtext fast a we do. Carry through and make very clear things like the knights fishy face, the princesses dissatisfaction with being treated like a kid, or a joke like the drool line of the perpetually exhausted horse following them everywhere they go.

>>15531172
It is mythic speech, anon. The question is not whether Plato believed in the gods, because he obviously did. He also believed in mystic knowledge, which is made obvious by him partaking in mystic speech in the first place, and in saying that poets speak the truth. What I am telling you is that mystic speech is distinct from philosophy, and lies at its border. When he partakes in mystic speech, Plato is no longer partaking in philosophy, but something other than it.
Seeing as you read him, I do not know why you are so unwilling to talk in a civil way.

>>15147397
You are not allowed to have fun.

>be Faust
>make deal with the devil for infinite knowledge
>go to heaven in the end anyway
Does this mean we’re all going to make it?