/lit/ - Literature

>>7342073
hence >inb4

Also, I comment this on every Pynchon thread I see, but when he dies (which is an event we should really be preparing for), there won't be a photo to remember him by, and his funeral will almost certainly be private. Seems a shame. I would like to know the face of the person that gave me such happiness in my solitude.

>>7268534
Why do we "have" thoughts?

Do we own experience, knowledge, creativity and power too? And if so, how? For they are all abstractions of language; they are all judgements and comments that we give to pieces of art and wisdom. They are labels that we can give to the physical, and like a family tree, we can then lend to the person.

But to "have" a thought? Is that the same as to own a personality? Quite the contrary, it can't be connected to it at all. Whilst a personality can be shown in action, a thought cannot. A thought is the opposition of an action. It is inactivity entirely.

Thus: To have a thought? Nay. There is something that has to be changed in the verb.

Zizek just has that facial structure that makes him look like the bust of an Ancient Greek.

That's why I take him seriously tbh.

>>6947753
>>6947773

With photoshop, you should edit out the "under capitalism". It's unnecessary.

>>6939785
lol. This is one of the best posts of 4chan.

Ah, Babbie's first reading of the sonnets.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPlpphT7n9s

Yes, you must read them all in the OP to get the rhymes to work, but you WILL sound like an idiot doing it.

>>6926446
Not true.

In fact, I have recently begun afferently to ponder on how the emotional - what should I call it? The emotional... turmoil? Yes, turmoil. - turmoil of my daily, recurrent days can be so otiose within me, and yet to everyone else simply a matter of letters and words. Fascinating stuff.

>>6920991
Does abstract art inspire any kind of catharsis in a person? yes

Should it therefore be banned? See spoiler above

>>6887841
100% YES

>>6887777
Oooo, gets me going

>>6887258
Rawr. Wonder what this is about?

>>6885750
I bet he's a dream-boat

>>6885343
I. AM. SO. EXCITED.

>>6883302
That sounds disgusting. I wouldn't touch it.

>>6882833
#relatable. Hope it's under £10

>>6882864
Lucy would like that

>>6882233
Mum would like that, I'll get it for her

>>6881894
Not very interesting :/

>>6881510
Would buy... If I had my sunglasses on :O

>>6877381
Christ? Not real.

>>6876322
My eight year old brother would LOVE THIS!!!

>>6876240
Not even English, probably goes in the HISTORY section lol.

>>6875410
Aww

>>6875210
I didn't read that long bit, but lucky sounds like a great book about a dog :)

>>6872677
Truly a momentous work - the kind of art that would take Tolkein twice over to world build. Exquisite.

Let me tell you the truth. A, B and C are all tremendous idiots. As for who is the stupidest, it would have to be C. Whilst C does have the highest potential to be smart, by not taking the clear opportunity, C is the stupidest of all three.

You see, reading doesn't make you intelligent. Anyone can gloss their eyes over Shakespeare, Darwin or Joyce and claim to have read it in immaculate detail. The only proof of true reading and of learning is in writing. Only when a person writes is their intelligence truly shown.

Sorry to break up your petty arguments with the truth.

>>6844130
What motivates me is consumption of art. Paintings, prose, poetry, symphonies, nocturnes, pictures, nature, whatever. For me, the over-exposure of experience is what craves writing.

>>6813613

This is the opinion of someone who's never felt love.

In Our Time

This teacher, whoever she is, makes me fucking sick.

"I am sad that so many of my colleagues teach a canon that some white people decided upon so long ago and do it without question." There's no way that this is serious. "Some white people"? Does their skin colour take away from the fact that they are able to appreciate some of the most beautiful pieces of English prose ever written? And I want to affirm, in case any doubt is in you, that Shakespeare is the sole creator of that beautiful prose. There is no one in history that has had such an impact on literature than Shakespeare - and there is a reason for that.

This teacher, who somehow managed to get a degree in English (probably as a result of identity politics becoming so dominating in the field), argues that Shakespeare is outdated. This is, by every stretch of the imagination, a lie. In a BBC Radio 4 podcast about Shakespeare (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01h7cdr)) we hear that Marcel Reich-Ranicki at his quick marriage that saved him from death quoted to himself Shakespeare's, "Was ever woman in this humour woo'ed"; leaders of the African National Congress, whilst in Robben Island prison, smuggled in a copy of the works of Shakespeare and all signed next to their favourite lines - one signature came from Nelson Mandella, and was next to the passage by Julius Caesar,

"Cowards die many times before their deaths;
The valiant never taste of death but once.
Of all the wonders that I yet have heard.
It seems to me most strange that men should fear;
Seeing that death, a necessary end,
Will come when it will come."

Both of these examples link Shakespeare to the modern age, and both happen to relate to struggles that aren't to do with "white people" and their supposedly inferior literature.

I'd also like to hear of one piece of literature that will engage children. Some students can't take in Shakespeare because it's difficult to navigate. I understand that. But how is an inferior piece of writing from Latin America going to change that? Will they suddenly become infatuated with translations of these texts? No.

I remember when I was in school. To be a bit more culturally diverse, we studied Achebe's masterpiece, 'Things Fall Apart'. It is a beautiful book, but it went wholly unappreciated - even by the students that were from Nigeria. There was no innate connection by those students to the text; just because it was written in another country, it doesn't mean that people from that country will directly relate to it. Let's not forget that Things Fall Apart is set at the end of the 19th century.

Shakespeare is universal. Everyone can find something in those stories, even if it takes a while to get to grips with, it is utterly worthwhile.

Out of all the versions you could have read, you read the New American Bible?

>mfw

>Then if he thrive, and I be cast away,
>The worst was this: my love was my decay

damn...