/lit/ - Literature

>>18512060
CIA plant.

>>18138813
hahaha no anon, you can tell us where you get all those expensive books from! You wouldn't be paying full, fair market price like a sucker now, would you?

post the address anon!

>>17701796

>>16983704
Perhaps it's just a personal philosophy, but I believe very firmly that the simple is more beautiful than the complex. A wise man once said, "An idiot marvels at complexity, a genius marvels at simplicity." The same man also had some good tips for dealing with CIA niggers of the glow-in-the-dark variety.
The idiot becomes overwhelmed by the complexity. He thinks to himself, "I can't possibly comprehend all of this, so it must be brilliant." Meanwhile, the genius understands how much more skill it takes to see the complicated, the confounding, and to whittle something simple out of it. Something concise, yet still bearing truth. Where the idiot's complexity runs skin-deep, the genius's simplicity breeds an endless complexity of it's own.
My point is that, when you taint the soul of your work by assuming anything but what lies at the center hold the greatest value, you are needlessly overcomplicating your work. You're pandering to the idiot. It is obviously true that making these transient changes will change people's perception of your work. But a thing is a thing, not what is said of that thing. The soul of your work will remain intact.
>p.s. if you're not the metaphysical type and object to the word "soul" on pure principal, you can instead see it as the story's molten core. It's center of gravity.

>>14721670
you're a big guy!