[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.13179891 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13179891

>>13179776

board is famous for not being able to criticize prose, and here's another living proof.

>The man had been taken outside a small holdfast in the hills. Robb thought he was a wildling, his sword sworn to Mance Rayder, the King-beyond-the-Wall. It made Bran's skin prickle to think of it. He remembered the hearth tales Old Nan told them. The wildlings were cruel men, she said, slavers and slayers and thieves. They consorted with giants and ghouls, stole girl children in the dead of night, and drank blood from polished horns. And their women lay with the Others in the Long Night to sire terrible half-human children.

Random paragraph: all written in paratactic style. Almost no metaphor. Every single sentence starts with subject-verb (the most elementary structure you can think). Almost no subordinate clauses of any kind. Almost no figures of speech. No detectable rhythm of any kind to match the subject matter (a kind thinking about tales would think in this sentece-rhythm and order? how does a kind thought sound like?). I could go on - it's literally just what happens, which is the definition of poor prose.

>> No.12516948 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, 1523285064690.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12516948

No one here actually knows anything about literature OP. If you actually enjoy lit you should stop coming here for actual discussions and limit yourself to a few minutes of browsing a day while you wait for your coffee or whatever.

>> No.12192791 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, 1523285064690.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12192791

Reminder that this not a place you should trust to critique your work

>> No.11936605 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11936605

>>11929853

>McCarthy'st style is an imitation of Joyce

Where, if you may? Joyce style is not even fixed, especially in Ulysses what he shows is that he can manipulate style to convey different impressions an meaning, while this is something that never happens in McCarthy.

The lyricism in prose which you find in Blood Meridian and Suttree is not indebted to Joyce as much as it is to Melville and Faulkner. If McCarthy is imitating someone, it's them, not Joyce - as, again, Joyce was a language manipulator as you said and does not maintain the same style.

On the other hand, the only shifts you see in McCarthy style are between the novels who sound lyrical like Blood Meridian and Suttree and those who sound like thrillers, with short paratactic sentences, like No Country for Old Men and, partly, the Road. Even when his style shifts in that direction, I'm not seeing any Joyce there.

Would you tell me in what, precisely, he would be imitating him? Because again 1. I don't think you could really define the style of a language and prose experimenter whose own purpose was to show how you can convey different meanings with different styles 2. I don't think McCarthy's lyricism is indebted to Joyce in any way since his most lyrical parts sound rather like Melville and Faulkner than like Joyce.

>> No.11434227 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11434227

>>11434113

He does not have a great style and you don't know how to judge it anyway.
I dare you to give an insightful description of his style.

>> No.11345209 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11345209

>>11344438
>>11344564
>>11344444

God fucking dammit, it's the prose thread all over again... This board always gives its best when it's time to discuss prose, doesn't it? Most of you guys are just a bunch of pseuds, you couldn't discuss the technical aspects of literature if your life depended on it.
Begone.

>> No.11248383 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11248383

>>11248273

You, sir, are right about absolutely everything, please keep coming here and make this place better.
Also, pic related is the thread you are referring about.

>> No.11232502 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11232502

>> No.11038431 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11038431

>>11036971

>assuming people on /lit/ are capable of judging the quality of any literary work

yeah, good luck with that

>> No.11010053 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, 1523285064690.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11010053

>>11008185
>>11008212
>>11008240
>>11009264

>> No.10998126 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, 1523285064690.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10998126

>>10998089
There's already another thread on him >>10974446

>tfw all but a trap were pseuds

>> No.10998113 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, 1523285064690.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10998113

How is this /lit/? No one is even discussing the book in OP, which I'm surprised is even on here. I never see any feminist book, let alone second wave misandrist feminism. Must be the excuse to shit on trannies. Usually these get purged.

Anyway, the state of this board - it's rather clear from some of the other threads that a lot of you plebs don't even read, and even less of you can even critique what you do read. Pic related.

>> No.10976791 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10976791

>>10974601

>being on lit
>liking prose

>> No.10976715 [View]
File: 655 KB, 1280x800, lit prose discussion.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10976715

screencapped to remind you of the absolute state of this board. You're welcome

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]