/lit/ - Literature

For me, John Deely and Charles Peirce. These fuckers really humbled me. Fuck it. I would wager any semiotician would make me feel stupid. I have read around 3 books and 5 papers on semiotics and I still don't know what a representamen, object, and interpretant are. I can recite the definitions but I just don't get them. I feel like Deely is to blame for this because of his extremely esoteric position on how an "object" is something presented or present in the mind. But does this mean, then, that "object" (or the "significant") is just the mental image of something (=/= res, aliquid, thing)? It is just so confusing.

>>20726379

>>9285418
>He's right, assuming a literal definition of "serve".

Horseshit, you're just setting up a no true scotsman cop out. Pic related is literally propaganda in the purest sense while simultniously art

Stop being a cultist and use your head dipshit

>>8385654

>Create posters to inspire the populace in the revolution
>Russian avant-garde puts out stuff like this.

I actually love constructivism, but I find it hilarious that posters like this were supposed to have some sort of mass propaganda appeal. While once you realize it's message it's fucking obvious as fuck, but if you didn't, you would just be like "Uhhh A triangle and a circle and black for some reason?"