/lit/ - Literature

>>21696440
>anon reads a couple of cherry picked newspaper clippings from pol and thinks he knows shit about shit and is better than anyone else
lewl

>>21692904
>Is Rowling a hack or am I missing something here?
Rowling is a complete hack. Harry Potter is a swiss cheese of plot holes. Pic related, these things are somehow completely undetected and some big surprise when they've been invisible and pulling the carriages to the school...because in all that time not a single student has ever bumped into the giant invisible horses.

>>21685037
>>What in god's name could this possibly consist of?
It's called bait anon, there's no such thing which is precisely why commie dicksuckers try to suggest it is real, their entire existence is based on delusions and mental sleight of hand.

It's just a way to try and siphon relevance from Nietzsche. In their tiny little brains it goes something like this

people like Nietzsche because he's cool

people hate leftism because it's gay

so if I say Nietzsche can be leftist too people will like it and stop calling me gay!

That's the level their minds work on. It's quite sad really.

>>20165111
>Would you consider him to be a good villain?
No, in fact I think he's very lazily written and full of plot conveniences. I'll just focus on one, since it has been years since I read the books and thought 'well that's convenient' but the sentiment stays with me.

Voldemort can literally read minds. He has numerous opportunities to do so against Harry in the 7th book. He never does. Even as Harry comes to him in the forest to die, he doesn't read his mind, or Narcissa Malfoys, and he instead is perfectly trusting that the boy is dead. This is completely fucking ridiculous and out of character. In fact the characterization of Voldemort was, before this convenient encounter, that it is functionally impossible to lie to him unless you're either Dumbledore or Snape.

I am sure this thread is full of retarded defenses of the many many plot holes and writer's conveniences throughout the story. The usual one I hear is 'Voldemort is arrogant and is confident in his superiority'. This does not excuse anything, particularly here. We are at a point in the story where Harry has destroyed 6 of his horcruxes. The fact he is not so superior couldn't be more explicit, couldn't be more fatal, and couldn't be more intimately known by him. I'll even add Dumbeldore's words on why he chose Harry over Neville, because he saw Harry as his equal, as 'like him' due to their half Wizard birth. Voldemort thinks he is special, sure, but he thinks Harry is special too.

The fact Voldemort knows he's a mutt and still larps about blood purity is still hilarious though, /pol/ incarnate.

>>18858677

>decide to re-read Harry Potter, haven't done so since I was in middle school
>startled by the crudity of the narration and the graceless of the transitions
>the crudity of it all gives the impression it was written by a novice
>I'm a better writer than the richest novelist to ever live
Nothing has alienated me from the ambition of being a writer quite like this.

>>15722419
someone post the god damn Harold Bloom pasta

never did understand why movie Luna and Hermione were made so bangable, I mean the male cast all look like realistic English goblins

Dumbeldore = bee

mind = blown

>>9180630
He doesn't express one drop of contempt. Wallace gives every perspective involved, he portrays the inside of the festival, the outsider's perspective, the PETA psychos, views of professional chefs, different cultural approaches, he even talks to the damn locals who have the most casual of opinions on that shit. He accurately represents the nature of the festivities, if your reaction was to look down on them, YOU'RE the elitist, not Wallace.

Which is reasonable, considering I myself wouldn't want to be among that throng of unwashed humanity, just the idea of being in such a crowded place with all its associated sounds and smells is really off putting to me. But to say Wallace passes judgement is retarded, all he does is describe it.

And you mention the first 40% but not the rest? He goes on to say he eats lobster, and meat, and whatever he feels about it he will continue to do so and really doesn't know what the answer is and that he welcomes all input. How is that even remotely elitist? He offers no solutions, only suggests it strikes him as something to think about, a poignant contradiction in his established values.

>>9182370
>t. brainlet

If you think that's hifalutin you're on the wrong board. We suck Joyce cock here.

>>9069228
Timelessness is a metric of sort. The fact that Beethoven survives centuries later is proof of greatness, of something fundamental and essential to the human spirit.

There is no way most contemporary artists will endure in the same way, when their music is largely produced by machines, written by others, and designed according to a simple consumerist formula, consider that there are countless reproductions and variations available that are essentially the same, and will be even more so in the future of these 'musics' which are so lacking in musical merit they are enjoyed instead as something like celebrity identity.