/lit/ - Literature

>>17619470
First of all, thank you for your post. I feel obligated to give you, in return for your literary toilet service provided to me, some feedback. In short: What you have discovered there through your own pondering is the wisdom of Writing for Dummies. This is not a reproach. It means that your train of thought, on the whole, with minor exceptions, whether justified or not, is not particularly original, perhaps not even intended to be. That a story comprises style, plot, characters and the mysterious false floor was known even in the bearded Babylon. The other classifications are just as old and hairy. How these categories are interrelated and interdependent is worked out coherently enough, as is everything else, by the way, but nothing particularly interesting or revealing comes of it. Your essay can be dismissed in the same way as the more famous and probably also more original, though equally unhelpful theories of the late honourable Hölderlin. Poetology is a thankless branch. It is nigh impossivle to say more than what is obvious, and there is basically nothing left but to give what has been known for ages a strange, exuberant new coat of paint. One person always profits from poetological experiments though: the poetologist.