/lit/ - Literature

>>11657719
>>11657733
I'm going to the library now, so keep the thread bumped and I'll answer you later. It's funny how this entire thread derived from upperbrow/lowerbrow to this. Happy it happened. See ya in a couple of hours.

>>7250616
>>7250665

Following on from that, actually, I also consider one a hack when they deliberately choose to be monumental faggots and sell their soul by writing clickbait, femidrama and "game journalism", but obviously have solid style and worthwhile talent.

Obviously my opinion is my own. I'd like to see what other definitions are bouncing around for people.

>>6901991
who is this sexual reproduction incantation?

Ok /lit/, all the paths converge to this exact point. Everything is set, characters, plot, lore, future and past, interactions, subtleties, allusions.
Everything is set in place, but one thing, which you may have guessed by this point:

>prose

How, for the life of me, do I objectively improve my prose, so that even if the rest of the "thing" I'm writing isn't alluring, it would be at least pleasant to read?
I'm reading a lot, and writing a lot, but it doesn't help when what I write is still sub-par. People seem to suggest reading and writing does just that, improve prose, but it doesn't seem to stick to me. Sure, I can mold the things I want to say around an already existing piece of literature, but is it really want I should be doing? Isn't free /good/ prose the way towards a good book?

I'm deciding to end this ramble with a tl;dr
>how to write good / decent prose so that if someone would critique my work and give it a low score, it wouldn't be because of my prose.

I have 2 credits left on audible. Third and sixth posts tell me what to chose.

ITT: We write down our literary interpretations of OP's image.

I'll start:

As she made her way through the body-ridden floor, the absurdity of it all put a smile on her face. It was then she realized that it was all an Infinite Jest.