/lit/ - Literature

>>23048943
A short premise that become the basis for a longer story. Some of them give me cancer and I can't tell if it is because I'm unimaginative, or of they are truly that bad.
>Write about a character who isn’t nostalgic about their past at all, and show readers why.
>Write a story about a grown-up sharing their favorite childhood video game with their child.
>Write a story about someone finally gaining access into their family’s very old computer.
>Write a time-travel story where a character from the present finds themselves in the 80s or 90s.
>Start your story with a character finding a retro piece of tech they don’t recognize.
>Write a story that includes someone saying, “You can’t run forever.”

>>23048954
Thanks for the prompt. I'll see if I can make anything worth reading with it.

>temporarily based subjective materialism

>>9965443
>Postmodernism is an ideology

Oh boi

>the guy with PhDs in Buddhism loses his cool at a random anon, then deletes his tirade.

Toppest of keks. Practice in secret next time, dope, like Jesus wants you to.

As if it didn't matter at all which word were in front of you at this moment, none of them provide any significance to you. And it's not as if arranging them in any other way would change the ultimate meaning much. All of it is unprovable drivel in the end. It's as if time itself doesn't exist and everything is everything at the same exact instant.

Am I becoming schizo?

>>8346842
>"my inner goddess"
>"holy cow"
>*bites lip*

that said i still read all the books and masturbated to them, no regrets

>>7523544
>>7523589
>>7523942
>>7523964
>>7523985
>>7526805
>>7526980

P L E B S
L
E
B
S

>>6843266

>>6785057

>classics

is there any higher form of pretentiousness?

>>6129039
>this kind of poster

zero argument, zero substance

>>6078893
>not accepting Immanuel Kant as your lord and savior

>>5874964

>>5366275
>Well, in fact, as Noam Chomsky's work on universal grammar established to the satisfaction of most (although the idea of a universal innate grammar goes all the back to Roger Bacon), language very much is a natural outgrowth of the human brain, which is hardwired for its acquisition and use
Noam Chomsky's work
Noam Chomsky's

>The trouble for the George Orwells of this world is that they don't like the ways in which our tongue is being shaped. In this respect they're indeed small "c" conservatives, who would rather peer at meaning by the guttering candlelight of a Standard English frozen in time, than have it brightly illumined by the high-wattage of the living, changing language

>Orwell and his supporters may say they're objecting to jargon and pretension, but underlying this are good old-fashioned prejudices against difference itself. Only homogenous groups of people all speak and write identically. People from different heritages, ethnicities, classes and regions speak the same language differently, duh!

>If you want to expose the Orwellian language police for the old-fashioned authoritarian elitists they really are, you simply ask them which variant of English is more grammatically complex - Standard English or the dialect linguists call African American Vernacular English. The answer is, of course, it's the latter that offers its speakers more ways of saying more things - you feel me?

Brits, how do these people manage to vomit on paper and be proud about it?
Sincerely, the Continent.

>>5206539
thanks for the bump friendo

>>5003242
The first reply to your post wasn't mine, but I'm back now, and this is my take on your question: I'm marking my name with L.R. just to separate myself from the anonymous name posts.

Any kind of character introduction can further a plot on its own, as well as an unfolding plot further a character. like a character who realizes he's in love with someone might motivate them to take a risk in being vulnerable by bearing their feelings, or it could darken the character by having them shy away, becoming more reclusive and less reactive to situations. I know it's obvious when I say this, but unless characters are frozen in time the entirety of the movie, the only progression you'll get is passing time. Now, if you focus on absolutely benign and unnecessary bullshit like showing the character cry over something stupid or have an overreaction to something that is hardly relative to the overall story, you can ruin both a movie and a character this way.

Now, by having the plot unfold without feeling like you're developing the character, progress always creates a reaction from the characters, which might corner the character to reveal something or make them do something drastic. Having a gun held to someone's head could force a character to reveal information by putting them into a tight spot, or you find out that they're careless and their true colors show in times of suspense/drama.

To sum it up, plot and character development come from progression, but to sum it up in a pic related way, micromanaging irrelevancy will create zero progress.

>tfw /pol/ is always right