/lit/ - Literature

start in small chunks. one sentence a day for the first week.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQjrcCau2XI&t=1s

>>15472671
based prog (esp Peter Gabriel era Genesis..)

>>15473215
cool guy hipster over here (na but I've always loved mr Richard D James)

>>15473468
mmm black metal

>>15475249
based super warm BoC

Ulver is probably my favorite band if you put a gun to my head (or the band Yes). One of those two. Ulver is /lit/ as fuck

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcvKDrDTcp0 (*ring ring* dark ambient kino on the menu)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_gGeVPla-A (synthy goth rock)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hB_1I0-NH3g (folky black metal when they were like fucking 16. what were you doing when you were 16? playing video games? shit..)

What do I read next?

The Dispossessed - Le Guin. I'm guessing this is comfy with some philosophical themes, it won the Hugo in the 70s.

The Diamond Age - Stephenson. I'm guessing it's going to take me 100 pages minimum to understand the world and memorize Stephenson's vocabulary. I'm guessing the ending will be utter shite, but the first half will be 9.5/10

Revelation Space - Reynolds (I read years ago but forgot most of it. Something about a dead frozen captain? I'm guessing I'll like it, I'm guess it's grimdark with characters I don't care about)

>>14727961
I third this. Will Durant's Story of Philosophy is good too if you want more text. I think Magee's has lots of pictures.

Ultimately I'd do it in historical order as others have said, as they all build off of each other and it's all one big conversation. Greeks (Plato + Aristotle, hell you can skip Aristotle really), medieval thought (if you must), modern (Descartes, Locke, Hume, Kant), and then you can go the autism/nihilistic/technical route and follow the ANAYLTICAL camp or go arthouse/gonzo/emancipatory/emotive route and go CONTINENTAL.

some folks would say continental has soul, some would say it's plain garbage and difficult to follow due to verbose language and obfuscation (I for example have NO fucking clue what the continental french philosophers are talking about. some would say the analytic side is the only way to move forward (in bite sized publishable papers that is!). some would say the divide I speak of silly. what do I know, I certainly do NOT have a degree in philosophy, if that's worth anything.

I really wish I had faith in something higher than myself and a more spiritual element to my life. Fuck science, honestly.

Lord I don't know, it's a bit toxic and I'm guessing the majority of you are still in college.

With that said, I can't go ANYWHERE else to find this much literature and philosophy discussion. There are definitely gems on this sub, and I'd like to think that deep down the majority of us here are looking for the same thing, capital-t Truth.

"Our lives are self-reflected in symbols."

What does this call to mind? Could it be worded better? Tell me your thoughts.

There was a quote about holocaust, by some writer(?), that every art created from genocide onwards should be concerning holocaust.

Anyone knows the quote?

Just fucking critique, okay, even if you don't want to. These threads have been shit lately.

-

Framed by what lacks,
an atom pops into
a gap within
spacetime's amnesia.
The atom is there,
but has gone. It is
everywhere, with
nothing to feel it,
and nowhere,
with all things
to see it.
Make a wish
in the nothing-well
and watch it
appear.

A lot of people here seem to be striving simply for extravagant writing. You can overuse rhetoric. Focus more on creating an image in the reader's head and having your writing flow.

Hello, fellow /lit/erates, I would like to share a story with you. Depending on how deep you move inside the actual literary scene of your city/closest "urban" literary and publishing focus, you will feel more or less related to what I am explaining; or maybe precisely that is the reason why you feel disconnected from it. If you are somebody who is only beginning to consider writing or actually being open about writing, maybe this will offer some insight. Maybe. All maybes. Whatever the case may (hurr) be, I'd like to hear your opinion on the subject.

This is the story of a girl I was involved with. This is not me, and I don't care whether you believe it or not, I am telling the truth. Who would do that. Come to the internet and tell lies. Green story ahead.

>So this girl (let's call her Sha) publishes a book in 2010, about 20 years old.
>First edition of roughly fifty books sold out.
>Publishing house asks for money in order to continue.
>She refuses
>The book is a collection of short stories, and she keeps referring to them as tales, the judgement for which is objective but mostly deals with what was going on in her life.

Five years later.
>Is getting into the poetry world
>A common friend introduces us.
>This common friend consistently gives lectures on writers as part of academic investigation circles, was published two years ago and has a new poetry book in the publishing gears.
>Now Sha (let's call the protagonist "Sha") is working as a corrector/editor in the publishing house that printed the other girl's work.
>Sha's Boss reads her poetry book and calls it juvenile and hardly literary.
>A couple months later she becomes short-listed for a literary award (cash+publishing) in one of the most prestigious publishing houses in the country.
>The simple fact of being in the list means that she is not the winner.
>Meanwhile she continues reading her poetry in recitals and other reunions of the underground literary scene. With underground it's meant the non-academic, not very demanding world of nights and open mics.
>A month or so later she writes to the publishing house. They decide to publish her as well, why the hell not.
>Her juvenile and non-literary work is done over/edited/corrected by two very prominent figures in the circle. One is the actual boss of the Publishing house, the other known for being a well established poet and sponsor/corrector of a third girl's award-winning poetry.

And that's the story. I honestly do not know if this is common practice in the publishing world. If one cannot really reach anywhere near the public if he does not let himself be tainted by the words of other people, specially in poetry this is virulent and detrimental to whatever artistic integrity the work might have had. At least this is my opinion, but I am confused as fuck.

Do I really want to lose part of my soul to be what I am to be remembered as: a writer