/lit/ - Literature

Why do you want to read? I mean it, sincerely.

Your body is telling you not to read, your mind is drifting, you have things that worry you, that distract you, your mind is full. Anxiety, depression, expectations, nostalgia, preoccupation... It is a myth that the depressed "don't do anything" just because they lie in bed all day. Because the mind is working 24/7 at a pace that it can't handle itself. You may not be distracted by "huge problems", but still you can't take a small ammount of information without spilling out and going on about other things which were already there.

Think on why you want to read in the first place. Even that can be turned into a "task", in something you have to accomplish, in something you ought to do. Relax, you don't have to read, you may not read. To be aware of this is to be free to read if you want to read. Don't make an effort, because this is not a matter of making an effort and you are already struggling with everything else.

If you still feel like reading, don't be frustrated when you can't. Accept your drifting, get back to it and read it again without being angry at yourself. Cut what you can cut: turn off the computer, sit in silence, don't multitask, reserve a time of your day just for it.

The rest is about making room for the book in your head, emptying yourself before pouring those words down. Or else, it's only natural for them not to sit.

>>3162016 here

Just playing with you OP. You said it in a very funny way. But saying you are in your third year is not even the most funny part, but the whole "REAL intellect" cracks me up.

I can see what you mean by all that and I'd say I agree. But there is this huge preoccupation with being smart, clever, intelligent, knowledgeable, wise, having REAL intellect that is... well, just rather desperate and silly, like arm wrestling with brains instead of putting that strenght to use, you know? It's very typical of teenagers or people who really worry about getting the highest grades and all that jazz.

But then we move on from the arm wrestling and we are left with our honesty towards ourselves. Still preoccupied in being on the intelligent side of the discussion, you know. And thus we keep going on over and over what it means to be intelligent. Is it more intelligent to be 100% logical? Is "REAL" intelligence in this or that area of knowledge? What are the most intelligent men on earth? And the answers change with time, you move from here to there thinking you are learning, but the questions remain and the necessity remains: you just want to be on the intelligent side.

There is no need to define how the intelligent man or the superior man are so you can emulate this image.

You have a good conclusion there. One that stomps on its own head. "The intelligent man feels good bout himself". Sound about right, but can you see how that frees you from the obsession around that?

No, no videogames can be considered literature. Why? Because they are not books, they are not written media like that. They have scripts, that means there is something of literature in them, but they are not literature. Just like they have film techniques in their making, but that doesn't make them films.

Learn to see things that way. Stop defining them as one thing or the other. They contain literature, much like they contain music or drawing to them.

Same with film. They contain literature, they are not literature.

This is not hard to get.

There was never anything to stagnate. There is no linear movement, no progressive notion. That's just an illusion.

Apparently, people ignore that their very functionalistic perspective is nothing but a "mood" permeating our time. That doing things is only valid if they go for a purpose, always a work for a goal, never playing with it or living it up without the ghost of the future frowning at our "progress". People expect to be enlightened someday, someday...

This is intellectual greed.

No wonder that which is based in ideas of "progress" such as science appears to be the only thing that progresses, whether art and philosophy, seems to be "stagnated". We have seen art's history like a logical step-by-step thing. This self-awareness gave the illusion of progress just as much as it cut this illusory logical line.

Another thing is to use the "we" there. We? Who? Me? Us? Is philosophy seen as "a whole field that continues moves forward"? That's very restrictive. Say, if philosophy can ease one's aches and calm one's curiosity, isn't that person's mind fullfilled? And wouldn't it be expected that each of us settle for different answers, just as much as we use different words to ask different questions? Can't we understand something without reason? Can't we know through intuition? Can't we talk without knowing? Aren't all those things part of this entire game?

Is a mild consensus considered the end line of thought? It's sad to hear people taking that as true so easily.

I wanted to learn more about names.

Not really name origins, but the power of names. That is, anything pertaining pseudonyms, signatures, word aesthetics for names, mystic ideas surrounding the subject, how different cultures deal with their own names, anything goes.

Any book, quote, school of thought, idea that you might remember about this?

Discuss whatever.

But be extremely concise.

Go.

Things don't need to have an immediate use. Books are not merely means to a goal, but a goal on themselves. It's not about settling down or anything like that, but about living life as it is, without the need to post-pone and dream about some gain coming from it. People will live life in a variety of ways.

A waste of time has nothing to do with activities themselves, but on how they diverge from what you really want to do, falling for vices, anxieties and bad habits. You think it's a waste of time, because it's not what you really want to do, but you are missing that others will have different needs, desires and interests, that need no justification to make sense, as they are part of the core of that person.

And as a secondary argument, self-improvement comes from fiction as well. It comes from anything, really, you are always changing, thinking, having insights. "Art is a lie that makes us realize the truth".

Self-improvement is only relative to who we are. If deep inside you see yourself as a martial artist, you might not want to "waste time" studying a chemistry textbook in depth, if you ought to become a doctor, you might not want to "waste time" training a kick for hours. Who are we to say what others are made of underneath their skin?

One thing fiction can teach you is to enter other contexts and frames of mind, so to understand them. This is one thing that is lacking in you, OP and that should make you a much more stronger person.