/lit/ - Literature

>>14385783
>technicalities of prose
I come to 4channel.org for fun and entertainment, not to write a doctoral thesis. I'd rather talk about Elizabeth Bennet being a cutie than Austen inventing free indirect discourse.

>>14385798
For some people it is necessary that there is a place outside of academia for such things. I was kicked out of an undergraduate for essentially making an argument in favour of holistic readings of texts which cohere with the history of literature or at least the original intentions of the author. Every set of literature fora are essentially filled with charlatans who will stab anyone with any level of intelligence in the back.

As far as I am concerned philosophy is just the exposition of teenage ideas through the veil of purple obfuscation. It is useless. My only interest is fiction and the way it works in its formulaic technicalities or lack thereof. Surely we could use this space for horribly overeducated unemployed suicidals?

>>14385815
>I was kicked out of an undergraduate for essentially making an argument in favour of holistic readings of texts which cohere with the history of literature or at least the original intentions of the author.
You were kicked out of your university while working on your undergraduate degree? Did you make the argument in favour of "holistic reading of texts" by calling people niggers or something?

>>14385831
It lead to arguments and I was de facto chucked. I never officially was but it was obvious they were going to bring it to the police or psychiatric Stasi so I just left. The air in every single one of my seminars was thick with awkwardness as well. I don't think you really understand how fucking bureaucratic these places are.

>>14385845
>I don't think you really understand how fucking bureaucratic these places are.
I'm in my 4th year of undergraduate. I think I understand the process well enough.
>it was obvious they were going to bring it to the police or psychiatric Stasi
You're definitely either super autistic and disruptive or some schizo.

>>14385861
The place was an indoctrination torture gulag old chap.

>>14385868
You either went to a really bad university or you're just a dumb freak. Seeing as how you're here I'm pretty sure it's the latter.

>>14385880
So I'm guessing from your response that we won't be discussing prose technicalities. Thank you for wasting my time.

>>14385815
>I was kicked out of an undergraduate for essentially making an argument in favour of holistic readings of texts which cohere with the history of literature or at least the original intentions of the author.
This is the most interesting part of literary analysis too. Decoding how an author conveys a central message through narrative, symbolism, prose is a very rewarding exercise. Just reading whatever the fuck you want into it is such a pointless activity.

>>14385880
>>14385861
if you dont go with the flow you have not really value.

>>14385783
I do nothing but analyze the formal patterns in prose fiction. I recommend Henry James. Turn of the Screw in particular. Ch. 13 is among the best things I've ever read. I never see any work on this question so I'm curious what you've found.

How can Murakami write something so mundane in WUBC and look better than the plot?
I couldn't care less about Kumiko cheating on him, I was more interested in Okada doing nothing, getting his clothes, walking around, talking with people and checking the abandoned house.

Captcha on nightmare mode.

>>14386042
Mainly Greek Proto-History.

>>14385815
>philosophy is just the exposition of teenage ideas through the veil of purple obfuscation
Sounds like you've never read actual philosophy.

>>14386365
Do you have a blog set up or have you published anything? I'm probably going to have a website set up in the near future, where I attempt to give a complete decomposition of a paragraph or chapter. My focus has been mainly on prose fiction. But I'm anxious to get a hold of any new patterns that might prove useful. And it honestly seems as if nobody writes about this kind of thing.

>>14386396
Philosophers are bad writers. We both know this. The rest I have already thought years ago. There is no philosopher who can present anything of value to me.

>>14386427
I have a blog but I have posted nothing. I will write something up and post it there soon though. I am thinking of actually composing myself as opposed to analysing based on forms in Herodotus and mabe Dodgson and Lewis.

>>14386433
Wrong. Philosophers are the most lucid prose writers in academia. It's literally their job to clarify complex topics in the foundations of mathematics, scientific methodology, ethics, law, etc.

>>14386441
I am as well. I strongly recommend The Turn of the Screw. He establishes a complex scene that is split into two parts (each devoted to an aspect of it) in the third paragraph (out of four), then he separates out the simple components or aspects of the complex, and devotes a small section to each of them in the second paragraph in order to prepare the mind to receive (and fully appreciate) the significance of the whole scene-complex.

It's obviously a little hard to talk on the topic without recourse to the actual work itself.

Anyway I'm looking to compose fiction myself. I'd be interested to see what you publish. Honestly can't find any academic treatments of the topic that aren't shallow or beside the point.

>>14386466
Being lucid doesn't mean anything. John Donne and Thomas Eliot weren't lucid. Mathematics is however an interesting field to bring in to this. We don't need more mathematicians though. We need mathematical novelists though.

>>14385815
>an argument in favour of holistic readings of texts which cohere with the history of literature or at least the original intentions of the author
Exemples?

>>14387147
Divina Commedia is not merely something silly like 'art'. It is a religious craft based in intense mazes of historical intertextuality.