/lit/ - Literature

You
Fpbs /thread

>>12327130
epic. how will I ever recover?

>>12327125
Holy shit, OP image could be used as a fucking endurance test

>>12327125

Lovecraft wasn't a pseud because he had shit to say and he knew how to write cool stories.

Pseuds have nothing of substance to say and use "elevated language" to mask that

/thread

>>12327125
visit r/iamverysmart

>>12327125
If you don’t use slang.

>>12327671
>/thread-ing your own reply
Prime example of pseud right here. But correct on the other hand.

>>12327125
Pretentious implies something being overvalued even when it isn't outright stated. That means what is pretentious will be subjective unless you are able to provide objectivity to prescription.

If someone is using antiquated writing because they like it, then they just like it. However they probably think that writing this way adds value to whatever they are writing, which is implicit in choosing a colloquial, formal, archaic, etc. language. So it isn't that they just like it, they choose this over that, they think its better.Them thinking they ought to write this way then makes it possible to call them pretentious for doing so because someone could think that they are wrong and are overvaluing it.

All that being said generally we think of someone trying to look like the upper class as being pretentious, attempting to look like the aristocracy being an obvious example. So as a stereotype, sure, you could call him pretentious. However when you get down to it calling something pretentious is usually misguided and rather than try to add something which isnt justified, instead you should just say roughly that you dont like it and they do.

>>12327677
how do i upvote this.

edit: nvm, i figured it out

edit2: thank you for the gold, kind stranger!

>>12327125
You need to be aware of your audience and medium. That guy's review is cringe because that's just not the kind of writing style that you want to find in that context. In fact, that guy not only got the style wrong, but the content too because he hasn't actually reviewed shit, he just wasted our time with a blog post about how much he hated high school.
Basically his post is bad because he's writing in a self-masturbatory style that no one wants in this context and he's self-indulging way too much in what is supposed to be a review of someone else's work.

bump

>>12328261
this

>>12327125
It’s obvious when looking at this image. Big words are great when they are accurate, when you read it and (maybe after googling the definition) say “damn that’s exactly how I have felt in similar situations”. “Criminally vulgar” shyness doesn’t make any sense unless he gave some sort of context where his shyness got him into some kind of criminal or vulgar situation.

>>12332086
the criminally vulgar sentence is a directly quoted Smiths lyric, which probably makes it even cringier

>>12327125
This guy's writing reminds me a lot of a particular RYM user

>>12327125
It's not the words that are the problem here but the smug self satisfied tone

>>12333159
The words are also a problem, pontificate I about that sassy sesquipedalian....

>>12327125
Being non-authentic is being a pseud. That's literally it. Being unauthentic is not cool, you learn that primary school.

>>12327125
Lovecraft deliberately used antiquated and "fluffy" language because that was the kind of prose he'd fallen in love with after reading really old books his whole childhood. He was trying to replicate the feeling of that era. He wasn't writing that way because it made him sound smart, which is the definition of pretentious to me. I think the second you're making conscious efforts to sound intelligent or sophisticated you're already being pretentious. Particularly if the language/style you're using is actively detrimental to the writing itself like in OP's pic. Fucktard went out of his way to feel like he'd written something intelligent and the result is a chore to even look at.

>>12330860
have my upvote

>>12327125
I doubt you can come up with a precise definition. The best I can come up with is someone who obfuscates something simple with too many obscure words and long sentences. That and a general feeling of self-importance.

>>12328261
That's in his bio, dork. The guy is a professional book reviewer.

>>12333398
Don't be jealous of OP's pic. Greater is his fortune on earth, exactly what you'd think where it counts.

>>12333217
Schooling is what adults impose on children to suppress authentic expression and make them more manageable. If you somehow keep your authenticity through school, you're one lucky guy.

>>12327125
Him drawing parallels between himself and joyce is the only thing criminally vulgar here. He read this passage of A Portrait and tried his hardest to one-up his idol.

Pseuds, though, are lazy people interested in the glory and appearance of being intellectual but don't really want to do anything to prove it. Maybe they write small passages like this on facebook or review sites after hours and hours of revision as they attempt to fill every sentence with their witticisms, but they would never attempt a novel, lengthy essay, or anything of real substance. The eternal chip on the shoulder is hallmark pseud, and if they would ever attempt something that required genuine intellectual capacity they would come to realize the limits of their actual capabilities and therefore no longer be a pseud. If they do attempt writing real shit and come out the same, they move past the point of being a pseud and are simply delusional. I think most of us here have been pseuds at one point or another, or maybe I'm just projecting.

>>12335004
I think most people have been pseuds at some point in their lives. I've certainly written like one for school.

An unaware an uppity pseud.

>>12327125
>goodreads scum

major kys my friend.

>>12327125

Pretentious is just an excuse people use when they object to terminology they’re not inclined to try and understand
As for as /lit/ goes it’s purely personal taste
I think DFW is pretentious per say, in the sense that only a niche group of people enjoy what he is trying to do but I still am a part of that group of people so what the fuck does it matter.
Being pretentious is being needlessly verbose for the sake of showing unfounded superiority of intelligence and that is not something that can be objectively said of any writer unless he explicitly declares such a statement.
So I see it as purely aesthetical

>>12335567
Lmao some of these sentences remind a lot of Arthur Rimbaud in how he just stuffs everything to the brim with nouns and adjectives but what strikes me as even stranger is how the prose-poetry form emerged from my brain in the first place. After all, I didn't get that from OP's post. Sometimes it's especially evidence with a sentence like "Gates of my heart flung open as I read this book fooled by randomness". Even more though it's that continuously throughout the review this pseud writes sentences that have only marginally similar meaning to the one that precedes it. Then you realize this isn't poetry once you start comprehending what he's trying to say under these phrases and the whole structure falls apart like dominoes and you can actually read what vacuous it says on each individual piece while Rimbaud suffers no such collapse under scrutiny.

I'm only being half ironic

>>12328241
You made me chuckle, here take a Gold.

>>12327671
I agree, Lovecraft wrote pulp horror, he didn't have pretence of being some literary genius.

>>12327125
Did he begin that sentence with "But"?

>>12327125
Read Shakespeare my dude.
>It is a tale
>Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
>Signifying nothing.