/lit/ - Literature

>>18961156
>than any objective truth

It does not claim to be an objective truth. Art is not about truth, but about different avenues of aesthetic exploration. There is no ''true route'' in art, only the ones which are more akin to your own interests.

>>18961166
>The novel is a medium for storytelling

Then go read the collected works of Simenon. There's nobody preventing you.

>You deliberately ruined so many great stories for yourself by reading lit crit and figuring out the basic "tropes

If you aren't lazy you'll be able to figure them out for yourself, eventually. I have read, I don't know, hundreds of traditional novels, and can't stand them anymore. It bores me to death.

>>18830786
1. Beckett, because he achieved his genius through the complete dissolution of literary norms. The ending of The Unnamable is the peak of 20th century literature, better than Molly's monologue
2. Joyce, because he achieved his genius through the complete absorption and satire of literary norms, 90% of contemporary authors who win Booker prizes and Pullitzers and whatever are retroactively mogged by Ulysses, XIII
3. Kafka, because he created the sort of environment which, among other things, made a lot of later literature, including Beckett himself, as well as Borges and others, possible, although he (Kafka) didn't go much further than that
4. Proust, because he wrote a 19th century novel which went so deep into its objects that it made it fortunately pointless for (intelligent, superior) writers to keep producing that kind of stuff ad infinitum like they thought they'd be able to get away with (some still do, but they write for the midwit)