/lit/ - Literature

>>14986633
>frog
>smokes
looks like he is one LMFAO

>>14986633
Literally who
What has he written of value?

>>14986648
He's a bong, brainlet zoomer.

>>14986665
What does your ignorance have to do with anything?

>>14986633
I dont think memes are just cliches.

But if you post buzzword memes like cope, cringe, brainlet, midwit etc then you are an inherently unoriginal thinker.

>>14986633
>If you repeat and post memes often you are an inherently unoriginal thinker
why so?
even james joyce used very ordinary, common and cliched english language in his everyday communication, you don't have to reinvent shit when there's no need to whatsoever (such as communicating with faggots on a javanese pedophile forum)
on the other hand, a creative usage of memes might be a reflection of other sorts of creativity, including literary talent
>and you never will be a good writer
writers don't really have to be original thinkers anyway - they have to be good artists first and foremost

>>14986730
Internet memes are most certainly cliches. Heard and vacuous speech. Mass remix culture was the death of creativity.

>>14986749
>javanese pedophile forum
See, this the exact kind of zombie language that will prevent you doing anything great in your life. It's not funny, it's not creative, it's not anything. You just type it because you have seen it typed and think the smallest of variations will justify the cliche. The meme is the language of lemmings. Detox your mind of this filth.

>>14986633
"everything is a remix"

>>14986795
As I said, this is far from a place where I have to express myself in some spectacular ways. The phrase isn't meant to make you laugh but to underline the trivial, fruitless nature of posting on this site.
>Detox your mind of this filth
Why do you use terminology invented and memed by snake oil salesmen, then? "Detoxing" is wholly a made-up, cancerous concept, just like the memes on here.

A good writer will have a command of various styles, btw, including the most trivial ones.

>>14986752
The evolution of a meme, its manifold variations and permutations, certainly are creative; it takes creativity put a new spin on an old meme.

>>14986633
>just be different, bro..
yes, because we all know postmodern art is so good

>>14986825
The concept of detoxification was not invented by "snake oil salesmen," it's a well documented biological process.

A good writer does not have to rely on memes to make a point even in the most supposedly trivial of circumstances. Don't try to justify your own laziness and lack of creativity.
>>14986829
Yes, sticking glasses on a wojak is the height of creativity.

>>14986898
It may not be the height, but it is creative.

Agreed, OP. I have long chosen to acknowledge only jokes, not memes. Upon this interpretation, the vast majority of instantiated memes are just failed jokes.

>>14986912
So is wiping your shit-filled arse across a bare wall until the shape of the skid marks resemble a crudely drawn stick man. So what.

i deeply agree op, what is the solution for this?

>>14986898
>The concept of detoxification was not invented by "snake oil salesmen," it's a well documented biological process.
It was, either way, popularized by them. None of us here would know what it is this intuitively without this factor.
>A good writer does not have to rely on memes to make a point even in the most supposedly trivial of circumstances
A good writer does not rely on memes (and neither did I, if you'd prefer it I could've expressed myself entirely differently), but CAN use memes when he finds them fitting. Just look at the numerous pop-culture references in Pynchon's books, for example.

>>14986942
So I guess it is better to be unoriginal and to wipe your ass with toilet paper like everyone else?

>>14986817
>>14986950
the solution is to subvert/détourne the meme to create an even better meme

>>14986969

any book about creating memes/ideas and make them original and better?

>>14986795
You must have fallen pretty far in your life to conclude that internet memes are the reason you’ve never accomplished anything

>>14986633
>cliches are bad
Ugh, what a cliche.

>>14986969
>Bourriaud

>>14986633
I bet you are unable to do OC

>>14986985
any such book or theory itself would be prone to a future detournment, but watch the film "can dialectics break bricks" and read at least a little about it to get a feel of an idea

>>14986962
>None of us here would know what it is this intuitively without this factor.
You wouldn't understand the combined concepts of "de-" and "toxification" without prior knowledge of alternative medicine? Unless your English comprehension is really weak, I doubt that.
>and neither did I
Your entire point of the triviality of 4chan was expressed through a meme. A very haggard meme at that.
>but CAN use memes when he finds them fitting. Just look at the numerous pop-culture references in Pynchon's books, for example
Pop Culture references aren't memes.
>So I guess it is better to be unoriginal and to wipe your ass with toilet paper like everyone else?
This is a weak extension of the analogy. The custom of wiping your arse is not a creative decision but a practical one made to prevent smell and possible infection. Conformity in matters of health and hygiene is usually for the best.
>>14987017
I'm not sure why you're writing in the second person there. It's not the reason, just one out of many.

>>14986633
Bump

>>14986730
Cope

>>14986898
>detoxification
>a well documented biological process
Any source on that bullshit claim?

>being original
Huge midwit cope.

>>14986730
cringe

>>14988452
The source is your kidneys

>>14986838
>Bee yourself.

I can't imagine a worse advice. You shouldn't be your true self for everyone and everything. Why would I talk about Plato with people that are not interested in it? Why would i say in a interview that I like browsing a forum full of neonazis and loosers of another brands?

>Bee yourself doo what you like bro.
Fufk off. I'll do what gives me more money

>>14986795
There is nothing new under the sun. Originality is a meme, what matters is aesthetics.

>>14988477
>being
OH NO NO NO NO NO NO NO MO NO HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHahaha

>>14986633
Look I don't like clichés, that's very low iq, memes? Oh boy, I'm very au-delá de ça. My very fetish is to reinveint the wheel.

>Implying different is always better
Fuck off boomer.

>m-muh me i and myself
>muh originality
genius is reformulation not novelty

>>14988769
Cliche is unaesthetic. You seem incapable of being anything but.

>>14988842
Different isn't inherently better, nor is cliche inherently bad. It's contextual. Some audiences require different mannerisms from others.

>>14988830
No, genius is always novel.

>>14988848
Cliches are inherently bad. They're conceptual Big Macs, hot empty calories for the lazy and unsophisticated.

>>14988875
Yet McDonald's makes money. Sometimes the audience is lazy and unsophisticated. I've found it rare that I can discuss topics that interest me to the full extent that I want to discuss them. Most people prefer pre-processed thinking over something they had to process themselves.

>>14988883
So if it makes money it must be good? Just because your audience is lazy doesn't mean you have to be.

>>14988883
>Mc Donald's
I like mc. What if i like to read dense philosophy and actively exercise thinking, and after getting tired of it I want to read some cliche romance well-written? Literature have their niches. So the food industry.

>>14988900
I wasn't saying that, rather, I was saying that there is a demand for the Big Mac, even if you don't like it. I wouldn't refer to it as lazy. If you have a specific audience and cannot convey your message to them, then you have failed, no matter the originality of your method. Perhaps we're speaking from different perspectives. I am going into vocational ministry and have worked with people from many different walks of life. The concept that I can speak at my highest level to all individuals is laughable, and is one of the first things you learn when interacting with a broad swath of people. A migrant from Mexico isn't the same as someone who fled Communism in China, and neither are the same as a rural Midwestern American. Communication is contextual, and meaning is use. If you see communication as something that's entirely self contained and objective, rather than defined by metaelements such as culture or language, you're going to have no one understand you. Your internal understanding is fundamentally different from anyone else's, and the only way to functionally communicate is to recognize this fact and structure your communication in such a way as to convey the same message despite these elements. You can preserve your thoughts while making your language flexible.
>>14988908
There is no issue with that. I do that too. Sometimes I want a homecooked meal that was made with care for who I am, and sometimes I really want a quarter pounder with cheese.

>>14988923
This entire screed is predicated on the fallacy that one can only communicate clearly if one uses clichés. If you are incapable of speaking "at your highest level" (whatever that even means) without sacrificing all clarity, that says more about your own lack of ability than the merits of cliché. One can make a burger that isn't as poorly put together as a Big Mac.
>You can preserve your thoughts while making your language flexible.
Cliché is inherently inflexible and stagnant, that's the point.

>>14988993
When did I ever say "only communicate clearly if one uses clichés?" I never said sacrificing all clarity either, but rather that changing one's speech patterns is needed for maximizing clarity between different groups. One can make a burger better than a Big Mac, but not everyone will appreciate not be accustomed to it. It takes time to educate a person as to desire greater.
>Cliché is inherently inflexible and stagnant, that's the point.
You're still fixated on the cliché aspect, when I'm speaking to language as a whole. I never said exclusively use cliché, but rather that it can be used within the greater context of speech without being "wrong". Flexibility is in regards to occasionally using basic statements so that people remember it and repeat it. You're so wrapped up in your own head you don't understand people don't want to hear autistic rants all day. Sometimes people need to be spoon fed information.

>>14989025
>When did I ever say "only communicate clearly if one uses clichés?"
In the context of a conversation about cliché, that is how your response came across.
>You're still fixated on the cliché aspect,
I'm not sure why you're struggling to understand this but cliché is the topic at hand. Of course I'm going to be focusing on it.
>I never said sacrificing all clarity either, but rather that changing one's speech patterns is needed for maximizing clarity between different groups.
>Flexibility is in regards to occasionally using basic statements so that people remember it and repeat it.
And why does one have to resort to cliche (remember, if you've forgotten already, that's what we're talking about here) in order to communicate to these groups? One can be clear and original, they aren't mutually exclusive.
>It takes time to educate a person as to desire greater.
So you concede that cliché is a lower order of communication then. Where's the contention here?
>people don't want to hear autistic rants all day.
Again, your inability to envisage any form of discourse that doesn't hinge on the use of precooked truisms as anything other than an "autistic rant" simply betrays your own lack of linguistic imagination and skill.

>>14989269
I do agree that cliché is a lower form of communication, hence why I didn't refute your Big Mac example but rather added that there was still demand for fast food. My interpretation of your statements had been that it was entirely unusable in speech, when I believe lower form of communication is needed for those who cannot appreciate or understand higher forms of communication.

Reminder that if clichés make you uncomfortable you're low IQ. High IQ people love clichés and know how and when to use them.

yes.

>>14989375
Then we are broadly in agreement.
>added that there was still demand for fast food.
Naturally, but that has no bearing on its quality, which is what I am discussing
>entirely unusable in speech
Not unusable but inadvisable. Sometimes their use is impossible to avoid. My main issue is when they are used wantonly as they so often are in places like this.
>believe lower form of communication...
Communication may need to be simplified but that doesn't necessarily require clichés. Such pointless patronization does neither them or you any favours. But we're just going in circles now.

>>14989450
Sounds like a retarded argument to me and I'm high IQ

>>14986926
Memes are just mass produced in-jokes.

>>14986730
BASED

>>14986969
no, you guys already tried that and it didn't work

>>14990964
Christ, what an awful decline it has been.

>>14990964

>put a smug pepe on every /pol/ meme

i fucking hate reddit and boomers for this. absolute disgusting.

>>14991017
The turning point was when memes became a meme themselves, and people ironically made memes to make people laugh at meme-making.

>>14986730
Kys tripfag

>>14991592
I remember when I first heard someone say "I saw this really funny meme the other day" out loud in real life. I felt a wave of cold sweat rush over me. Little did I know how far things would fall.