/lit/ - Literature

>>10488936
>The thing is, people who read genre fiction seem to not mind a lack of originality. In fact you could even say that lack of originality is what makes genre fiction what it is. After all, what is a genre if not a semi-formalized set of cliches? Don't people in this very thread complain bitterly if you deviate too heavily from established norms in their favorite genres? The fact is these unoriginal novels that come out year after year manage to sell many, many copies. How do you explain Brandon Sanderson's success? Sure his "magic systems" and "world building" is original on the surface (in that nobody ever thought of that exact configuration of descriptions before), but the underlying structure is the same old epic fantasy song and dance we've seen for the last 40 years and people lap it up.

>And if you think it's an age thing, that it's just the older readers set in their ways and the youth crave new things, then you've forgotten what it's like to be young. The youth don't have taste and don't know what they like. The first series a young person reads is indelibly imprinted onto their psyche as a favorite, no matter how shitty it is. There are people in this thread who feel nostalgia for Eragon simply because it was one of if not the first fantasy book they ever read. There's no other way to explain that except young people simply have no taste and will read anything you put in front of them.

what about pic related?

>You haven’t lived until you’ve fisted a nun under the cheap light of a neon Jesus. With the material of her full-coverage habit shoved to her waist, back plastered to the gritty wall and vivid color streaking her sweaty, flushed face – goddamn, it’s an experience. Her filthy lips wrapped around words I think are forbidden in the usual Catholic vernacular.

well that's quite the opening paragraph.