/lit/ - Literature

Please leave this board and never return if you agree with any of the following sentences:

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you do not at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon (muh african authors)
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

Stop making low-effort threads.

Please leave and never return if you agree with any of the following;

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you think fantasy, science fiction, detective fiction, young adult fiction or horror are literature
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you do not at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon (muh african authors)
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme are just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

This is a board about literature. You're not welcome here. Please take your plebeian garbage to /b/ or reddit, where you will find both a demographic and a general atmosphere more consistent with your tastes and your culture.

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you don't have at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

>>18049172
Wrong.

.

Leave this board and never return if any one of these apply to you:

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you don't have at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you don't have at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

Leave this board and never return if any of these apply to you:

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you don't have at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>you rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

>>15922259
Hymnen an die Nacht
Heinrich von Ofterdingen
Die Lehrlinge zu Sais
Geistliche Lieder

is there such a thing as a "romantic triad"? i'm currently reading novalis' hymns and came across the concept "romantic triad" while researching it on wikipedia:
>These works consist of three times two hymns. These three components are each structured in this way: the first hymn shows, with the help of the Romantic triad, the development from an assumed happy life on earth through a painful era of alienation to salvation in the eternal night; the following hymn tells of the awakening from this vision and the longing for a return to it. With each pair of hymns, a higher level of experience and knowledge is shown.
next line has a reference but it's not about this concept, i checked. couldn't find anything about it on my own. so, do any of you know what this is or if it's even a thing? an explanation would be most welcome if it is
also, is there any credible source to it being structured as such? (>These works consist of three times two hymns.) my copy doesn't come as divided in chapters or anything so i wonder whether it's inferred and what would be the argument for it
also, what's your go to english translation of it? i'm currently reading it in spanish but i'd like to compare
thanks in advance

This was the entrance exam for Harvard 150 years ago. Anybody who wanted to get in had to pass this.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/education/harvardexam.pdf
Would you pass it?

Leave this board if any of these apply to you:

>you barely know your classics
>you only speak a single language
>you read for the plot
>you read solely for entertainment
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>your literary analysis proceeds from ideology
>you rarely read for more than two hours straight
>you read fiction

Leave this board if any of these apply to you:

>you barely know your classics
>you only speak a single language
>you read for the plot
>you read solely for entertainment
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>your literary analysis proceeds from ideology
>you rarely read for more than two hours straight
>you read fiction

Leave this board if one of these apply to you:

>you barely know your classics
>you only speak a single language
>you read for the plot
>you read solely for entertainment
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>your literary analysis proceeds from ideology
>you rarely read for more than two hours straight
>you read fiction

Leave this board if any of these apply to you:

>you barely know your classics
>you only speak a single language
>you read for the plot
>you read solely for entertainment
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>your literary analysis proceeds from ideology
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight
>you read fiction

Leave this board if one of these apply to you:

>you read fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you only speak a single language
>you read for the plot

>you mostly read contemporary literature
>your literary analysis proceeds from ideology
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours

Leave this board if one of these apply to you:

>you barely know your classics
>you read any form of genre fiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you only speak a single language
>you rarely read for more than two hours straight
>your literary analysis proceeds from ideology
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it's justified on an artistic level
>you don't have at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you rely on the opinions of literary authorities and refuse to judge works for yourself

>>13284870

>>13040663
glad to see you're browsing /lit/ and making this thread

current read: Understanding World Societies, A Brief History McKay, Ebrey, Beck, Crowston, Wiesner-Hanks

Please leave this board and never return if you agree with any of the following sentences:

>you read any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you speak a single language
>you read contemporary versions of Shakespeare or Milton
>you read for the plot
>you read for entertainment
>you rarely read nonfiction
>you don't have a solid grounding in philosophy
>you do not at least have some understanding of the Three Tragedians and Homer
>you have little to no understanding of literature outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of literature within your own cultural horizon (muh african authors)
>you mostly read contemporary literature
>you believe 'the author is dead'
>you make your literary analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate prose is 'pretentious' and that the author 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely read poetry
>you think Rhythm and Rhyme is just useless rules and laws restricting creativity
>you have a hard time explaining why you like a given work
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant literary criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of literary authorities
>you rarely read for more than one or two hours straight

>>10997846
>>10999422
>>11000273
>>11000766

and never return...

Leave this board and never return.