/lit/ - Literature

>>22439611
I never said I wasn't retarded

>>21964376
Hey shithead, post your last great idea. I dare you.

Writing is fucking EASY AS FUCK. I could churn out a book a month EASILY if I actually could make money from it. I'm banned from all social media, so I don't even bother working on writing. Wouldn't be very hard at all to put out a 100,000 word novel in a month if I thought I could actually sell it.

Truth is, you should only bother writing as a straight white male if you already have an audience, otherwise, you will NEVER succeed. The only other alternative path is to become a chameleon where you research what types of novels people are already into and just write fantasy shlop that fits a certain genre, but then you're just like a McDonald's worker making burgers... you're not a chef, you're just following a formula. That's not really being a writer, that's just copywriting.

I am a writer / want to be a writer and I've been trying to give myself a broad overview of the history of the modern novel by reading through some of the more well-known ones from Don Quixote onward; the problem I'm running into is that I just cannot bring myself to appreciate writers like Fielding, Swift, Defoe, Sterne, Balzac, Richardson, Stendhal, or Austen. I am grinding my way through these writers genuinely trying to appreciate their work for what it is but I just can't fucking do it. I don't have an issue with Dickens, Melville, Flaubert, Hawthorne, Poe, or really any of the novelists post 1850. Is this just me being a retarded zoomer? At first I thought it was because their novels were more "primitive" but I loved Don Quixote and had no problem getting through it. I know this is a psued question but how much am I missing out on if I skip these guys?

>>15655791
Is this a new joke on /lit/ or are you actually asking?