/lit/ - Literature

>Age
>Favorite alcohol
>Favorite book

33
Whiskey
The Sound and the Fury

>>14238275
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

FUCK YOU AND THIS IMAGE AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

AAAAAAAAA

How is it possible that commercial American entertainment basically cucks the whole world? Its reach is extreme: wherever you go people simulate the American experience in their movies, novels, arts, ads, restaurants, cities and just about any lifestyle choice. Everywhere you go is just a copy of a copy of a copy, whole interests and cultural differences are wiped and large swathes of the local population try to mimic an American lifestyle, to the point where in some places (the Netherlands come to mind) even the language gets replaced by American English. People's vernacular syntax is heavily affected: middle class kids sort of shoehorn English grammar into their sentence structure, and they start making literal translations of American dictums and expressions into their language, even if it makes no sense to someone who hasn't learned English. Even the Chinese, our supposed overlords from the future, are happy to get shitty Hollywood movies and gobble it up constantly: the country can lift its economy from the ground up but is still extremely cucked culture-wise. Is there no escape? Some places like Canada, Australia and New Zealand might as well give up now, but what about Europe/Latin America/Asia?

The ratio between writers and readers (consumers) is diminishing year by year. With consumers being lured away from literature into internet media, we can comfortably predict that in the future the ratio between readers and writers will be close to 1:1. I call this state 'peak literature', a state where everyone's main goal is to write and only read their contemporaries to build connections. When we reach peak literature, irony will overflow and insincerity will dominate the letters. Literature will become akin to the visual arts, in which a few select classics are either enjoyed by a general audience or this general audience will pretend to like these classics for intellectual credit. Anything new will be absorbed by an industry that relies on creative writing classes to both find a readership and generate income. After we reach peak literature, the fringes of society will inevitably turn to a kind of Folk Letters, away from the consumers market and become more community-oriented.

First of all, it's good that you recognize that you have a bad relationship with your phone. The second step is to actually break off from it. If you feel unable to turn it off, put it in a drawer and read, you might need to do something drastic about it. If you're on iPhone, use the restricted content functionality. I suggest making someone else put in the code for you. Include 4chan, reddit, porn websites or anything that may even remotely distract you from reading. Do the same with your computer (there are apps like ColdTurkey that help you do it). With that being said, turn the phone off and put it away. The second thing you'll want to do is to start with something easy. Pick up a short book (200 pages at the most) and try to power through it in one sitting. There is absolutely no shame in blocking yourself off like some kid. Remember, this is what Ulysses did to himself in order to resist the siren's call.

The philosophy degree I am applying to (don't care about your opinions wether I should do it or not) has a online test just to make sure the applying student is to some miniscule extent aware of the kind of material he/she will have to deal with, and they chose this Heidegger line as part of a question:
>Daß man für die Philosophie ein Interesse zeigt, bezeugt noch keine Bereitschaft zum Denken.
>That one portrays an interest for Philosophie does not account for a readiness to thinking.
W-what did they mean by this?

ITT: premises for short stories that will never see the light of day.

I'll just repost this here.

I've read The Catcher in the Rye 10+ times and the reason why I like the book is that I really enjoy Holden's banter. He is a whiny fag, but he's a pretty observant guy. I remember some of them very clearly, I'll give you an example. He talks about a poor boy, his roommate, who didn't have money to buy a really good suitcase. Holden would always hide his own suitcase (which happened to be a premium leather one) so his roommate wouldn't feel insecure about it. Turns out the boy would put the suitcase on Holden's bed and pretend he actually owned it. This is a pretty funny remark to make and a powerful one, too. Holden also talked about how he got 'blue as hell' when he saw two nuns begging for money with a wicker basket. He also got moved when the prostitute came up to his room and stuff.

People say Holden is obnoxious, but when I think of these examples I can't help but truly relate to this guy. Yes, he likes to call people phony, complain about minor stuff and act like a retard towards Sally Hayes. But he also cares about his little sister. He loves a girl and yet will refuse to hit her up, preferring to feel jealous as fuck for his friend and remember when they used to play checkers. I guess what I'm trying to say is: if you can somehow get past Holden's assholeness, you will enjoy the book a lot more for these touching moments.

Salinger's IQ was tested at like 110, Kerouac and most of the writers who achieve popular success during their lifetimes would probably test around there as well

>>10385170
>mfw Eco throws in a 4-page list of dates and places and people's names

London Frog, this is getting ridiculous. This shit isn't your personal diary, mang. Just get your act together somehow and stop badgering us with your incessant bawling. Jesus.

>>10273646
You can't perform a non-action (logical contradiction). For an ability (capacity) to be relevant, it has to relate to an act, which a contradiction is and cannot be. In other words, even by your definition, omnipotence (as "the ability to do literally anything") is inapplicable to logical contradictions, because "nothing" is not a thing, and this places it outside the realm of any conception of capability.

I want you to give me quick reads. I don't care if they're genre shit like horror or thrillers. I just want something that I can read in a couple of sittings and just turn off my brain, something like the Stranger Things or Friends of literature. Plot driven and fast paced, that's all I ask for.

>>10104525
A spook is just a fixed idea, as opposed to the normal kind that you eventually let "fall to ruins" (as Freud put it). Spooks are unpleasant because of the cognitive dissonance that arises from giving a false description (you cause the idea to become interminable instead of letting it dissolve back into virtuality).

In short, observing that the grass in green in spring is not spooky. Worshiping the spring's green grass (a fertility or harvest cult, etc.) would be spooky indeed.

Any good novels about conspiracy theories and creating secret societies?

Jesus Christ
I need to take a break from this board

Contemporary western literature that isn't strictly commercial or self-absorbed first world problem hogwash:
.
.
.

>>9363312
>things I said on /b/ when I was 14

>>9301096
Literally front page of the web-tier. Please get out of here.

>humanities degree
>anywhere

>justify your fear of different cultures because of the translation meme
>read nothing but american literature as a result of this thinking

Anglos are fucking awful.

Ernest Hemingway kicking a beer can