/lit/ - Literature

>>16630507
>We have writers from six continents
American Exceptionalism is real

>>16630532
Despite the variety, UK and US contributors still make up 10/26 contributors.

>>16630538
>>16630532

>>16630507
Nobody cares about your shitshow fuck off go back to twitter

>>16630507
You don't promote lit you don't promote writing gtfoh

>>16630656
How do you figure that I don't promote literature?

>>16630737
By rejecting good works for your ego and you certainly don't promote lit. You're only interested in works you like not works that push literature itself

>>16630824
Can you elaborate on what that means? If I consider certain submissions to not be literary, to be poorly-written or lacking in substance, and to therefore reject them, does that represent, in your opinion, a rejection of literature as a whole?

>>16630824
what the fuck
imagine for a minute you create a fucking literature magazine and you mostly publish works you don't like
imagine being that retarded
who the fuck are you
most personal projects further individual taste, what the fuck do you think patrons do?
furthering individual taste has its role in the market and in the scene, you god damn half ass idealist
go write something or publish something, there are a million options, do it all for free or you're not doing it for the sake of pure lit, then kill yourself to keep you works in amber, maybe a 13 year old will find some value in your mindset in 50 years after your bones are dust.

>>16630651
>>16630656
Distasteful. This sort of attitude is why /lit/ has never sustained a long running publication.

If I submitted something at the very end of July and have not got an acceptance, is it safe to assume I was rejected?

>>16630883
No. Submissions received between 1st of June and 30th of September are being read right now. The editors and their volunteer readers have so far read about 25% of the submissions. We hope to have decisions made by end of November, but no guarantees.

>>16630899
Is there a place I could pay to read online if I'm not into physical editions? Might be useful for me and cumanon.

>>16630842
It represents your inability to adhere to literature if you're wrong. You using yourself as a basis for good literature is about as nazi as it gets considering you have no power.

>>16630849
>he doesn't know
Start w the greeks newfag

>>16630914
yes, we're about to launch sales on our site in the next few days. $5 for digital copies.

>>16630923
And what if I'm right?
And who should judge literature without falling into the same "Nazi" authoritarianism?

>>16630864
And I'm right and I put all my reputation on it.

>>16630899
Because you're a little cunt.

>>16630914
Lol we've been over this. No one did his patreon newfag. He's not lit

>>16630928
Well I can tell you you're wrong by producing a better structure which doesn't fall off of literature because you have biases.

>>16630928
Idk see 1+1=2. It's weird cause every culture knows this, maybe uses different semiotics but it's just right. Why tf are you on lit and you dk this. Gtf back to twitter you don't hang out here

>>16630899
And will there be rejection emails, I've been hearing yes and no from different threads

>>16630928
That's like reddit tier response. Wtf r u doing here, I haven't heard that shit in awhile here

>>16630945
Nope, you have to follow up and it's a shit response. I got a full page saying "it's not invalid but you're doing too much". That and the writing was good didn't say shit about it. Just look up what he likes then copy it and you'll get your little publish

>>16630938
What?
>>16630943
keep seething retard
>>16630945
for 4th edition, no. For fifth edition, most likely. If you submitted between 1st of February and 31st of May and HAVE NOT heard from us, please email litquarterly@gmail.com for feedback.
>>16630953
keep fucking rambling with no coherent criticism

>>16630969
What are you referring to? A rejection email you received? Care to post it if you're not full of shit?

>>16630971
Lmfao seee? Easy break what a pussy cunt. Your project is losing money and will never gain money cause it's your vanity project

>>16630971
I'm july guy, so hopefully (well, y'know hopefully not cos I'd prefer to be accepted, but an explicit rejection is better than silence)

>>16630979
I deleted it i forgot but I can post my submission

>>16630985
Damn you're too needy for some recognition if you're doing this. Why don't you just learn how to write better and submit to a real journal

>>16630982
You don't say!
>>16630985
I'll do my best, it's just hard to reply to 400+ submissions.
>>16630993
Please do.

>>16630971
This is the editor. Keep that in mind. I can push his buttons easy cause he knows I'm right

>>16631000
Where've you been printed?

>>16631002
http://sjruruchunchun.com/blog/on-economics-or-on-opportunity

And my poems are on there

>>16631000
I actually just got blocked by a woman I was dating yesterday for being too needy, thanks for unironically hurting my feelings with this post

>>16631011
I've won writing contests. You can't critique this without being wrong show your ass>>16631017

>>16631017
That's a good piece. Any new non-fiction you're interested in contributing?

>>16630923
imagine continuing to allow 2800 year old nee cavemen continue to have the final say over you taste because you're fixated on arbitrary notions of high idealism

>he doesn't know
read the french newfag

>>16631020
Damn you're too needy now you know two instances, don't fuck w this shrimp dick unless you want this guy praising you >>16630971

Is there a non-fiction/ essays section in the lit quarterly?

Some of the more interesting effortposts on this board make me think anons it could be a good idea if not

>>16631025
No I got a shit response. I have another paper I was going to write but that was a terrible response I got in email

>>16631026
That's bait

>>16631030
Many more than two frend...

Just want some recognition/ appreciation y'know

>>16631033
Yeah we would except we don't get in it. I wonder how many he gets from lit. Idk why he posts here, only newfags comment on his threads

>>16631033
Yes, indeed. We received 43 non-fiction submissions this time round.
>>16631038
Well, I hope you keep writing.

>>16631040
I get you, just analyze it. It's an opportunity to develop your metaphysics

>>16631044
That hasn't been my experience at all. The project came about from crit threads which showed a lot of promise, and that's what's allowed the project to continue for the last 15-18 months.

>>16631030

>>16631046
None from lit I'll keep doing my thing which is lit, you go back to twitter. You can't deny that paper was good writing and exposition of idea and you contradicted yourself in the email when you sent it

>>16631051
Yeah as a springboard, I've seen great stuff here which I never seen on your shit

>>16631056
I'm right and I rest on my paper

>>16631044
Is the mag even advertised anywhere else?

>>16631069
Yes on Twitter I just said it stupid. God you're a newfag you dk this shit?

>>16631038
it's all the response "read the greeks" deserves

>>16631058
y u so mad acting like there are strong boundaries on the internet there aren't

>>16631079
Yeah but a /lit/ based twitter account will only be seen by other /lit/izens

I mean some other established site where he can find writers who don't have the /lit/ mindset/ aesthetic, I'm considering buying the next copy but I'm looking for a 4chan/ /lit/ based literature mag specifically not just a generic small time lit mag

>>16631083
You aren't lit gtfoh, you can't write shit, you can't debate and you can't shitpost gtfo
That's perfect response cause that concludes what I just said

>>16631088
He said he got most of his submissions from Twitter itself not lit. Why don't you ask these questions or look on warosu he literally says it

>>16631083
Fucking shills out today is this km

>>16631058
Here's the deal, man. We received a lot of submissions and can only print so many per quarter. If a piece isn't accepted, that doesn't mean it isn't good, or that it's bad...it just means it doesn't fit into our publication. You can't take that personally, or as a rejection of your writing or writing ability as a whole.
You're petulant response, however, makes me glad that we aren't working together and that some unconscious instinct of mine caused me to decline your submission, if this is how you respond.

>>16631068
Well, send them my way!

>>16631108
lmfao
He was saying he wasn't a nazi now he's saying his subconscious made him know not to post it

You're not lit gtfoh just some nazi you don't promote literature you promote your self conscious. You outted yourself. I volunteered was your only patreon contribution you're just a nazi

>>16631119
Keep lashing out, keep whining. What do you think my response would've been if a petulant child like you HAD been accepted in the quarterly?

>>16631108
Apparently his subconscious doesn't like contributions or volunteering. I've got all my other emails. You're a liar and you're a nazi. Your shit isn't themed and it fit in there. Idk why you even lied here cause said it was shit writing before

>>16631128
Lmfao that's the nazi shit. It's not about your writing. This is a baby boy nazi w a failing paper that he loses money on because he doesn't accept good writing

>>16631128
Show your ass more, I've got facts and I don't need to submit to your feelings in order to have good writing. Your paper is not about good writing

>>16631089
lit is a fashion statement and when i wrap it round my words as a fur i've stolen i become lit, everyone knows it, and when i denigrate the poor sop without the trappings i maintain my place

not knowing that poor sop wore my coat once long ago and left it where i'd find it, having no longer any need of it

>>16631132
When did I say it was shit writing? Post screenshot, please.

>>16631128
This is what nazis said to jews before they holocaust them
"Idc if you're good or not, my subconscious says you're petulant"
That's a nazi without any power

Ok, I'm looking through the sample writings on the site, some of the stuff is exactly what I hope from this thing, the poem "Digitification" is particularly good (for a w*man especially), but there's also a lot of generic navel gazing stuff that isn't particularly /lit/ or 4chan in theme or aesthetic

Am yet to dive in to any of the stories

>>16631153
HAHAHAAAAAHAHHHHAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>>16631151
Post the email. You literally said it was bad style cause I tried to do too much and nothing about it being invalid

What is the price? Do you ship to europe?

>>16631158
I can push his buttons so easy because I'm right. He was in a good mood too. It doesn't matter cause he knows he's wrong

>>16631168
Cope his mag is dying

>>16630924
Thank you, that's very reasonable. Sorry that you have a disgruntled reject in this thread but it sounds like he deserved it. Probably thinks you're "censoring" him because he suffers from delusions of grandeur. If he really believed in his writing he'd post it in this thread for us all to see and evaluate for ourselves.

This thread is mostly one sicko losing his mind because he got rejected lel

>>16631180
It sounds like your bitch ass can't refute me. He can't and he's tripping now >>16631017

He says it's a good piece too. You're some no-ball no-talent bitch. You're not getting published gtfoh w ur bitch writing

>>16631183
I got accepted stupid. He said I was right. I said he's shit.
This is the power complex. That's why he's a nazi. No you can't read stupid he said I'm right

>>16631017
>Brown text on black
Sorry, I have to actually strain to read this

>>16631180
Damn you can't read boy. I'm standing up for what's right you aren't. He asked me to contribute a piece. I still said no. Read stupid what are you doing on this board >>16631025

>>16631200
Yeah I'm not at all surprised something limits you. It's great writing. I've gotten compliments from professors and this fucker. I'm saying his structure is based off whim and it's just twotter. These threads are only populated by newfags

>>16631161
What email? I've just searched through my inbox and don't recall formally rejecting your piece, though we have been in touch regarding volunteer reading positions. If you have possession of some email in which I called your writing shit, please post it now. If you don't, I'll know you're full of shit.

>>16631168
We pay accepted writers anywhere from $50-$125CAD. The books themselves are $12CAD plus shipping.

>>16631190
A little rule of thumb: you may have written one of the best essays of all time, but your behaviour in this thread will certainly cast a shadow over how people view it. Your immaturity will sour whatever words you've put on paper. Well done.

>>16631194
>>16631200
>>16631211
Holy shit, shut the fuck up. You're not that smart if you think you're helping your case by spamming this thread.

>>16631221
Lol and you're lying now. So you took two seconds then you knew it and you immediately responded if I'll submit another one. You wrote a full gd page and if you think we only talked about volunteering you deleted shit cause I have all the other emails

You seem to forget I'm not here to get published. You asked me to submit again cause u said I'm good. I'm telling you that you are a bad editor and you mostly publish Twitter ppl.
Idc how bad someone is in any way. If you are about writing then you judge writing. You outted yourself multiple times. That's all I came to tell everyone and you confirmed it

>>16631243
POST THE FUCKING EMAILS, LIAR.

>>16631230
Cope bitch I'm right and he admitted. There isn't one thing I haven't got done here. Compliments, ask for a submission and all my points were confirmed. There's one bit he's lying about the email but that's a small issue and is easily confirmed. Your writing isn't good that's why you're upset

>>16631253
you're actually keeping this thread alive which is funny because this is a form of advertising good job you ape retard

>>16631247
But it's just volunteering. I have the rest too. I deleted your email which was shit but apparently I kept more than you

>>16631256
No idc if some newfags who don't write and don't read spend time here defending a self-admitted nazi by my definition. His paper is shit, it gets more attention on Twitter. I'm not on twitter

>Almost all published names seem to be real and not pseudonyms by anons
This is no longer a /lit/ quarterly

>>16631259
Christ, just send it to the Daily Stormer if you're desperate for accolades, I'm sure they'd take your oh so clever poetry decrying urban basedboys.

>>16631259
lol, yes. I have that email too.

I send an email to all submissions acknowledging receipt of their writing. Post the email where you allege I called your writing shit, you liar.

>>16631259
how trite

>>16631278
>>16631259
Lucky you, I found my response to your essay. Pic related.

>>16631269
A lot of the names read like they could be pseudonyms, but yeah generally speaking I'm feeling similar

It's a shame, an actual /lit/ journal which completely brought with it the aesthetic of this site and board in particular could be something special.
I'm thinking essays on MTW and new sincerity and meme development, experimental and offensive poetry which incorporates greentexting or site specific slang and formatting, stories which capture the schizophrenic tone of a late night shitposting session
etc etc etc

>>16631296
That's exactly what I said and now you can't call me a liar

>>16631301
Then go make that. Go on, do it.

>>16631309
I'm a poorfag student, I barely have time to write as a hobby already

>>16631308
When did I call your writing shit?

>>16631296
I don't even see subconscious claim you made either

>>16631318
You said it was too complex and >>16630969

>>16631315
You've got infinite time to cry tho.

>>16631331
aayyyyyyyy AAAYYYYYYYY

>>16631309
>>16631331
You've got infinite time to be wrong privileged ass bitch

>>16631321
What are you talking about? I said after the fact that your behaviour in this thread makes me think some unconscious instinct allowed me to reject your piece just to avoid the drama you're trying to stoke up now. Whatever force caused me to reject your piece, whether it was literary taste or unconscious defense mechanisms, I am grateful for.
>>16630969
Yes, none of this is calling your writing shit. it's calling it unfocused and too broad and incohesive in its messaging.

>>16631296
I thought I was submitting an essay not a science paper. That's why I wrote it as an essay. I don't see footnotes in your essay

>>16631360
What essay?

>>16631354
Damn bro you think unfocused writing is good or neutral?

>>16631331
Very hostile response for a relatively innocuous comment

>>16631365
Idr the edition before the one I submitted for. That's not the point anyways. That whole response was bs

>>16630651
>>16630656
>>16630824
>>16630923
lmao someone is mad their poorly written incel autobiography got rejected

>>16631369
No, I said it's too unfocused to be accepted; tried to encapsulate the entire economy by critiquing certain aspects of capitalism.

>>16631378
You mean "The Joy of Personal Criticism," which has 12 anecdotal footnotes? Still don't know what that has to do with my criticism of your essay, and your childish response to my criticism.

>>16631385
It wasn't an autobiography I posted it, Ihave nothing to hide and you can'tcall me a liar >>16631017

>>16631017
holy shit improve your blog and its coloring i'm not going to read this shit

>>16631391
It's not a science paper. It's an essay and it's not unfocused because professors understood and told me it's good

>>16631370
Shit or get off the pot, anon. We have a paying publication here and you seem to want to do is drive it away. I remember writing for TAR for chrissakes, this is a real step up.

>>16631400
waaa the market carries different responses than my undergraduate daddies wwaaaaaa

>>16631399
Idc you're going to let your "subconscious" and colors get in the way of you being right. You're a nobody

>>16631301
I never expected or wanted the lit quarterly to filled with references to greentexts or gay shit like that but it was definitely a lot more interesting when 90% of the submissions were sourced by anons and not the reverse. Tbh it almost feels like an advertising thread that should be banned. What relevance does the publication have to us now? Why should we care? Kyle's admitted he gets way more submissions from outside /lit/ now that the website is up and everyone is free to submit. Now it's just another dime-a-dozen publication with a bunch of women's names on the front, we've been gentrified out of our own neighborhood.

>>16631403
Go to Twitter you don't post here except for money

>>16631405
That's incoherent idk wtf you're talking about

>>16631400
Then tell your professors to publish it for you, faggot.

>>16631415
As long as you admit your paper's failings idrc

>>16631409
Because no one on /lit/ actually writes. They just bitch.

>>16631405
>implying this guy is actually in school
Smash the bigbluex.jpg to doubt.
>>16631409
Submit under a female pen name if you're so desperate, I'm sure that will boost you.

>>16631425
I think it's better if I'm not in school and professors agree w me and not you.

>>16631403
Well I am active, despite studying I write and submit my writing to places (waiting to see if you accept heh), but I'm hardly in a position to start a fucking magazine

Clearly I'm not the only one who doesn't like the direction things seem to be going in, it's definitely not too late to change what you select for but it's your magazine man

>>16631424
Gtfoh newfag go to twitter

>>16631432
Here's a summary of what happened:
>you wrote essay
>you submitted essay to independent, non-profit journal
>editor of said journal declined your essay for stated reasons
>you invade his thread about the publication bitching about not being accepting
>you make an absolute ass out of yourself
>you double down when people call you an ass
>you make an even bigger ass out of yourself
and here we are. Grow the fuck up.

>>16631424
Well that's demonstrably incorrect because the first two editions were 90% Anons

>>16631397
I'm fairly certain every single post is you besides a select few. You're larping as people praising your blog. You're larping as multiple criticisers of the lit quarterly guy, and you're also LARPing that your piece got accepted. You need help.

>>16631442
It's not your thread stupid, have you ever been on litmus you lied and you helped me prove it multiple times. You don't want to admit you're wrong

>>16631443
Yeah, and despite the publication growing, a smaller and smaller proportion of submissions came from anons. Not proportion of ACCEPTED writings, but smaller proportion of SUBMITTED writings. What does that tell you?

>>16631439
Not the magazine owner lmao. I'm just in this thread to shit on >>16631432 at this point because it's too fucking easy.

>>16631445
I mean if you think I'm arguing w myself then that would at least be valid without more proof but you can follow the links in posts. It's coherent

>>16631453
I never called your writing shit, which you claimed multiple times and never proved.
I even offered to have you read and review submissions for the next edition, but you never replied because you're a petulant baby.
I offered you honest critique of your essay and you make an ass out of yourself in this thread.

WELL DONE!

>>16631454
yeah to be fair I have to concede on this point
/lit/ failed to step up to the plate...
*sighs*
what could have been

>>16631464
>he posts Trump
Wtf are you doing here

>>16631454
>Not proportion of ACCEPTED writings, but smaller proportion of SUBMITTED writings.
I have absolutely no recollection of Kyle saying this, unless I missed a thread somewhere. I do however have distinct memories of Kyle saying he was receiving far more submissions from randoms than anons and that was reflected in what was being published.

>>16631454
Tells me the school season started and the kiddies are busy while Twitter gives you way more impressions. Everyone should cool it.

>>16631472
Indeed. And as executive editor, I am capable of letting shit fly, but if we get one anon submission for every ten twitter/blog/indie journal submission, what chance is there that the aesthetic and tone can be maintained?

>>16631470
You lied, I got proof in this thread. You said my writing was good but your unconscious let you know it was bad then posted the email saying my writing is incoherent. You can only lie to yourself

>>16630507
ignore the venom in this thread.

it's super hard to organize something like this (not to mention on an anonymous forum). thanks for giving us a platform.

>>16631496
It's not for you stupid

>>16631476
I just despise the weak, anon. Step up or be crushed beneath the Twitter kids that actually submit articulate work rather than ramblings about how they think the world should operate.

>>16631504
You're not lit dude gtfo go back to pol. It's about literature on this board this guy just posts to get more money and he's proud of it

>>16631485
Well, more consistent threads, perhaps a /general/ even if it could be maintained would help get more anons aware

I've lurked this board for years but only found out about the magazine during early summer
Maybe a discord server is a good idea, if you have anyone who could run that/ keep it in order

>>16631486
you're actually trying to gaslight him and failing pathetically

you've completely warped your view of reality to justify whatever shit comes out of your head

which, fine. but we don't believe you.

>>16631484
Probably true.
>>16631486
I said that AFTER you started acting like a fucking baby. And I stand by it. Here, I'll repost it myself:
You:
>>16630932
You:
>>16630923
You:
>>16630938
You:
>>16630943
Me:
>>16630979
Me:
>>16631025
You:
>>16631038
Me:
>>16631108
Me:
>>16631296

>>16631485
Not Kyle

>>16631513
You're same person and you've been here. Nobody cares about his mascot lying neither

>>16631516
So you denied my essay from the future? You said it was good but unconscious made you reject it then you posted the email

>>16631508
Only one of us has been published in a /lit/ based publication here anon, and it's not you.

>>16631516
You just want to look good buddy. You're a liar and a pos. I don't even want to know how much you lied about in this thread

>>16631518
Yes, it's me.

>>16631533
It's not lit based stupid and he asked me to publish more. Has he asked you? He lied about it too probably just shame I'm sure

>>16631516
Your writing is shit and my essay blew yours out the water. Idgaf what you stand by liar, you don't care about literature

>>16631529
It was a fine essay but way to incoherent and broad. If you were unable to comprehend my initial criticism, here it is again in pic related. I provided it before knowing what a childish baby your were in real life. After I realized that, I thanked the unconscious forces which allowed me to reject printing your work. Do you understand?

>>16631516
What do you stand by btw? You said it was good then you said it was incoherent (which means bad in anyone's definition of writing). Idk wtf you stand by

>>16631567
Oh he's got unconscious forces that let him know from the future.
It's not incoherent you're just uneducated. And you can't call good writing incoherent. That's not how it works. You're a liar

>>16631567
Why don't you post them both on your Twitter put a poll? Your essay is lukewarm diluted garbage

>>16631574
It was not acceptable for publication because it attempted to encapsulate too many broad, complex phenomena in such a small, generalized thesis. That's why it wasn't acceptable to the quarterly.
>>16631582
I'm obviously being facetious you simple-minded twat.

>>16630651
>>16630656
>>16630824
>>16630923
>>16630932
>>16630938
>>16630943
>>16630953
>>16630969
>>16630982
>>16630993
>>16631009
>>16631017
>>16631022
>>16631025
>>16631030
>>16631038
>>16631040
>>16631044
>>16631058
>>16631068
>>16631079
>>16631089
>>16631105
>>16631119
>>16631132
>>16631135
>>16631143
>>16631144
>>16631153
>>16631161
>>16631170
>>16631177
>>16631190
>>16631194
>>16631202
>>16631211
>>16631230
>>16631243
>>16631247
>>16631253
>>16631259
>>16631267
>>16631296
>>16631308
>>16631330
>>16631360
>>16631369
>>16631378
>>16631397
>>16631399
>>16631400
>>16631406
>>16631414
>>16631423
>>16631424
>>16631432
>>16631441
>>16631453
>>16631454
>>16631467
>>16631486
You have 3 minutes from the time this is posted to upload a screenshot proving the majority of these replies aren't you. If you can't, you're a schizo LARPer and an embittered loser who can't handle criticism of his writing.

>>16631594
Oh he's facetious now. Keep lying what's the next development?
So it was too complex that has nothing to do w incoherent. So you stand by your email or this >>16631025

>>16631600
Most of those are me not all tho, idek wtf that has to do w my point

>>16631600

error: no text entered

>>16631582
Are you ok man? Maybe you should just step away from the computer and calm down for a few minutes

Mom really found the quarterlies now, innit?

>>16631600
Why would those not be one person? You're crazy. I called him out and I was proven right. He's changed his position so much and I follow it up

>>16631623
The embittered loser who replies to his own posts praising his writing while pretending to be a different poster. Congratulations. You're a sad sack of shit.

>>16631633
it remove?

>>16631623
Nigga do you know the meaning of most

>>16631634
It has nothing to do w me, he lied and changed his story. He's wrong and it doesn't even matter if I'm wrong but he is wrong and he proved me right. It's not lit it's just for money

>>16631613
Your piece didn't fit in our quarterly. You tried, in a relatively short essay, to explain something as complex as a global economy. You don't understand that writing that is superficially good isn't necessarily fit for print. You don't understand how someone can be polite and encouraging about someone's writing can't also find it unsuitable for print. You understand none of these things, have made an ass out of yourself, and are still doubling down on your obnoxious behaviour. Grow the fuck up.

>>16631640
Dude just close your eyes right now and calm down. It will be fine after

>>16631643
Why would 5 other ppl be using first person to argue for my essay?

>>16631648
Yo read back that post you just made. Then put your head between your knees and do some breathing. This will calm you!

>>16631641
You can follow it buddy. It's first person. You lost the ethics point and the literature point so you fall to this

>>16631654
Lol he changed this much, do something else. I like the cope. You said it was good stupid and asked me to resubmit. Truth don't lie

>>16631663
Huh, bro you gotta wake up man. 12 years is long enough

>>16631669
>>16631659
I like how far y'all fell. Even the dude you're defending fell far. He's now lying to cover lies to cover lies. Y'all can't critique my writing or my points. You're just mad I did so much in this thread

Classic /lit/.

>>16631676
Damn you're crazy. Well I was just saying it's not lit it's not literature and the editor is just money hungry

>>16631673
I asked you to submit an OTHER piece. I told you it was a good essay. I stand by that. But your good essay is too incohesive and broad to be fit for print in my publication.

Do you understand?

Your piece is not fit for print in this publication. Do you understand?

>>16631688
Have a good one I made my point. This isn't your audience just go to Twitter or Reddit. Everything is specifically different here

>>16631686
HAHA, the editor who spent thousands of dollars to put up-and-coming writers in print.

>>16631693
You have crowned yourself the biggest douche on the board right now. Well done, mate.

>>16631409
Underrated desu
No animus towards the Lit Quarterly but at this point it needs to justify its relevance to /lit/ or simply move past it (probably for the best)

Came into this thread to see if there was a link to read other anon's finished work, but could only find schizo autism. Classic.

>180 replies
>13 posters
Nuke this

>>16631704
I hear you. These are legitimate criticisms. I thought paying for writing would be motivation enough for /lit/ anons to contribute and fine-tune their writing, but it's not. There has to be some other push, some other drive. Not sure where that might come from.

It's like typical 4chan autism and anger except intellectual.

imagine being atomically assblasted over the fact that you didn't get your super smart big boy essay into a magazine for bhutanese surfboard enthusiasts

https://smallpdf.com/shared#st=a25e472b-85eb-478b-be0f-6c374f2ea8be&fn=Fall+2019+-+PDF+FINAL.pdf&ct=1603387119486&tl=share-document&rf=link

https://smallpdf.com/shared#st=9190bae9-824a-4979-bf9d-f89ac8d515a1&fn=Winter+2020+-+PDF.pdf&ct=1603387228336&tl=share-document&rf=link

>>16631684
>tao lin irl
Killed me
>>16631725
Why? Because one crybaby shit his pants? Hopefully the free advertising boosts participation. We should be getting more printed than Twitterfags if we're really so good. I'll even submit a piece myself just for fun.

>>16631730
You're the man fronting the time and money, you don't owe /lit/ anything. I don't think there's a way to keep anon submissions up to pace with submissions from the rest of the world, and closing it off to anons only would keep you permanently in the red until you ran out of money. Probably better to divest

>>16631623

If nothing else, this thread was the only thing which succeeded in cheering me up during a really shitty day, thanks everyone :)

Will you be selling this on Amazon again?

>>16631943
Probably directly off the website, but first and third editions are still available on amazon

Thanks for doing this and I look forward to hearing if I made the cut for the 5th issue. Ignore the seething retard in this thread, your shits great

Good work anon, I think I'll get the first issue. Best of luck.

>>16631973
Yeah. I got all the other editions through Amazon

>>16631725
Make that 14

When will a lit audiobook come out

>>16631259
Kek, your poetry sucks

>>16631259
That's really bad poetry.

>>16632199
Oughta get ahold pf that vocaroo anon who comes around sometime.

Is the shithead still here? I wanna make fun of him and I forgot halfway through.

>>16630507
Do we buy it or something?

>>16632553
If you're looking for something to read, absolutely. The thread is just to update /lit/ on the progress of a project that originated here. And for the editor and contributors to fight.

>>16630507

Is it available to buy yet on the site? I only saw the first three editions and the new online edition. How frequently is the online edition going to be?

>>16632762
It's our first run at the online edition, so not sure. Hopefully quarterly as well. The latest version should be available through the site in the next couple days. Currently, you can email litquarterly@gmail.com directly.

>>16632777
Link?

>>16632795
litquarterly.ca, but stuff isn't updated yet so give it a couple days.

>>16631017
From this guy's blog:

Suggesting the unthinkable

For nothing to exist it must be naught
It can't be spun or made or taught
If you were religious with a capital a
Then you couldn't explain by the regions of your name;
That which is yours without the a
If I asked you to specialize your tool
So I may take away the a and give you a name
You may refer to foe's already slew
Like the labyrinth of science or ego's lion's mane
For that by this you cannot exist
What's not what's there cannot be without his stare
And even if you feign to subsist
I'd point to zero as the lacked consist
What Augustine lay to stay our boasting
Lay immaterial that which we call privatio boni


An Apologia for Sitting Out

There exists a race same as you and I
Clone to toe, to nail, to eye
With one peculiarity they're all one kind
The absence of clothes's what makes them fine
They toil their thoughts on the starked betokened
Gave us a name, which to them must be ours unspoken
They cite statistics given in a hurry
How real men can't tempt fire or blizzard fury
They show us quick their city of shacks
Expect us quick to account the facts
For truer words were never spoken
Men with clothes make unclothed broken
To deny the facts makes one most phobic
To affirm the deniers makes the epic heroic
Yet outside this village men hoisted poles
Ignorant of charge, may progress mend their souls


It's not good, breh. There's no discernible talent. Your prosody resembles that of a seventh-grader. Your ideation is somehow even more juvenile. Read more, lurk more

This whole magazine is just awful. /lit/ doesn't need a fucking publication. There's literally a few guys who shill their dumb magazine just so they can have a calling card. Notice how arrogant they are in this thread... how they assume you were rejected by them if you happen to criticize the absurd idea of creating a new literary magazine in 2020, and promoting it on 4chan. Take that shit to Reddit.

>>16633307
Your objection is noted.

>>16630507
look forward to reading it. Love the work you guys are doing.

>>16630507
LMAO is /lit/ still trying to push that bullshit? Fucking kek, based reddit

>>16633307
He was rejected though. And this was only assumed after seeing 8 or 10 of his extremely bitter posts.

>>16633307
The only meaningful post in this dumb shitparade

>>16633307
Seething

>>16633307
>>16633490
The guy was criticizing the editor for allegedly calling his writing shit, even though the editor merely declined his work and offered constructive criticism. That's literally the whole crux of the dispute here.

>>16633738
The point is that the whole thing is dumb and not even reddit does this shit in 2020

>>16633749
Does what shit? Declines people from a paying publication?

Guys, this is serious. My MOM found the fucking QUARTERLIES. I tried to cover it up, say it wasn't mine, I didn't know what that was. But the stupid fucking editor ACCEPTED MY GODDAMN POEM. Now she's waving around this goddamn QUARTERLY that has my goddamn NAME on it. I wish the editor would have just told me to fuck off. I can't believe this. She's not even mad anymore. SHE'S CRYING.

>>16633819
Retard

>>16630507
How many of the writers are from this board?

>>16633870

>>16633971
In current issue, only 3 confirmed. Plus a couple more in the digital-only edition.

>>16633990
OK thanks. I'd rather it was only people from lit but probably not enough of them would even submit something the right length or at all.

>>16633307
>>16633434
>>16633411
>>16633749
You are so fucking mad right now

>>16634013
Well, the first two issues were exclusively /lit/ posters (except for two people who knew lit anons). So I know this board is capable, but even if we didn't have a bunch of other people submitting works, I can see that the numbers have gone down (to the extent that I can discern if someone's from /lit/).

>>16633990
>In current issue, only 3 confirmed

KMD, my good man, I dare say this resentful and intractable anon is not worth your time.

Your deligence and effort, however, is greatly admired and appreciated. God bless you!

>>16631549
Was talking about TAR newfag

>>16631684

If this mentioned Infinite Jest it would be /lit/ exactly.

>>16634256
yeah, I bought the other three but I think I'm done now. If some other anon wants to set up an anon-only publication, I'd be more than willing to shell out.

>>16634256
what's the big fucking deal. just make everyone publish under pseudonyms

>>16634274
Hey buddy.

>>16635438
So what would have to occur differently for an anon-only publication to succeed or even last?

>>16635746
Would it even be desirable? The actual writing output of this board has always been anemic for fleshing out a journal. You get shitflingers too, like we saw in this thread. At best it would be an online only thing, a glorified newsletter. You're not the first or last to have romantic delusions about a /lit/ journal anon.

>>16635757
Oh, I know. My only hang-up is that there seems to be little interest in even being involved anymore. We get 300-400 submissions per quarter, a small percentage from anons. But you'd think some of the more talented anons here would be interested in seeing there work "published" with us because we will print stuff of any political view, as long as it's well-executed.

>>16635792
Clearly I've lost track of who is who here.

Anyway, you really think there are talented anons here? I mean, there might be two or three but the board is pretty run down these days. Trust me, I've had plenty of time to lurk it lately, at least 80% of the literary output is just brave new experiments in how to say "nigger". 6 years ago it was only marginally better and TAR just sort of "got by" before it went dead. The best minds still around are all avoidant loner types who are way too anxious to mix themselves up in something wild and crazy like sending an email.

Maybe you should have a junior publication for /lit/ and model it on TAR. Pay less (or nothing, so they can't cry about you being in it for the money) and the best can "graduate" to the quarterly? I feel like there being literally no stakes might make the schizoids feel comfier.

>>16635746
Instead of accepting submissions by e-mail, have them post a google doc right here. We can all critique it and if it's good enough, it'll make it in. I also believe instead of posting a new one every quarter, just wait until you have enough for a nice 150 page book before publishing, allowing longer stories to be put in. The quality of it would probably go down but I think it would be fun, even if just for a laugh. I'm not suggesting you switch Lit Quarterly to this model, this is just what I'd like to see.

>>16635792
Disinterested outsider opinion- around 2nd edition there were tons of threads on /lit/ right before and after its publication. You seem to also have completely missed your deadlines? Not making threads on /lit/ is effectively going radio silent and will obviously diminish the number of anon submissions. I mean the novelty factor has probably worn off so less interest is to be expected but when there's one thread a month regarding the quarterly it's unlikely to remain at the forefront of anons minds.

>>16635891
>for a nice 150 page book before publishing
Yeah I really wish this was a thing. There need to be more avenues for longer stories.

>>16630938
Here's the bias fag from the other thread

>>16635792
Going to second that other post. When you advertise on Twitter, you get a mass of people with polished pieces they are looking to push out to wherever they can. The nature of this community is that many here normally do not think of publishing things openly like that. That's why we post anonymously. You need to promote people writing and polishing for submissions with reasonable timelines. I feel like every time I see a thread on the Quarterly it's either
a) "Okay, so the deadline just passed and I'm working on printing the current edition."
or b) "Reminder to submit to the quarterly. The deadline is TOMORROW! Better rev up those keyboards."

Did the Fall and Winter editions get stuck together because of all the cum?

This thread is pure aspergers, I don't understand the hate for this publication, it seems to be a decent magazine with readable content, like any other lit mag.

>>16630824
Make your own

>>16631762
Thank you anon, I've gotten curious.

>>16635905
>>16635982
good posts

>>16635905
Good point, you're right. The deadlines in spring and summer fell through for reasons I won't get into. By the third one, after I had a thread or two go nowhere (or someone else made a thread about it which I didn't see in time), it seemed there were only a few people who even gave a shit about it, and seemed like the only way to maintain interest would be to almost constantly have a thread going, but I thought that would border on spamming.

>>16635982
That was accurate for the last one, certainly. But we accept submissions all the time. If you don't make deadline for this one, your submission goes in the folder for the next one. At the same time, same as my point above, I felt like I had to post obnoxiously often to maintain even a mild participation from the board. This, then, evolved into me being inundated with emails from the outside world, which made it even less plausible to keep the board informed about deadlines and such.

I appreciate the criticism.

>>16631973
Shooting yourself in the foot dude. Put it digital on amazon if you want to actually sell it.

>>16630507
>0 submissions accepted from /lit and now just posted here for advertising purposes!
Nice! Buy an ad next!

>>16636699
>By the third one, after I had a thread or two go nowhere (or someone else made a thread about it which I didn't see in time), it seemed there were only a few people who even gave a shit about it, and seemed like the only way to maintain interest would be to almost constantly have a thread going, but I thought that would border on spamming.
>spamming
Have you seen the catalog? Don't worry about spamming this is the most /lit/ relevant thread on here. Sometimes threads don't go anywhere and sometimes the same thread will blow up. Its alright to be persistent especially with a topic like this. The people who write and would like to get published dont shitpost here for hours each day. They may stroll through here a few times a week and miss this thread. Also, contrary to what some anons are saying, there is talent on here. The problem is that the talent is mixed in with ten tons of shit.
Finally, I know you got a quarterly to fill out and need to get quality submissions, but please avoid the Twitter crowd. On here, you will get new voices and differing ideas. Twitter will eventually make your quarterly conform to every other shit rag publication out there.

>>16630507
Hi OP,

I am thinking about submitting but I wanted to know if this is politically oriented in any way, because in that case I'd avoid it like the plague.
Also, is there any way I can pirate this? I want to read it but I don't want to pay for it.

Best wishes,
anon

>>16637199
Now OP but it's not politically oriented and you can email KMD for a pdf of past quarterlies

Final thoughts after re-reading this thread:
This is probably the most ludicrous thing I've ever said sincerely but leaving a minimum number of "slots" in each edition for anons (akin to affirmative action) would probably restore some good faith
That, along with more frequent threads (maybe posting a previous submission in the OP each time?) would help generate "local" interest
Some might get assblasted about "spam" but we've all seen the absolute garbage that makes up half our threads at any given time, they really have no right to complain

When do I find out if I made it into the 5th edition?

>>16637783
>We are the niggers

>>16637842
I don't have one of those gay twitter memes saved on my computer but
Yes.

>>16635891
>>16635906
>>16631301
Remember how we got together and wrote Coronameron?
Is doing more books in this manner a viable idea? I feel like it would be a fun pastime.

>>16637783
This needs to be advertised in the print publication itself along the lines of, "30% of print space in each edition is reserved to record the voices of adults with special needs."

>>16637783
Ahh yes the autism affirmative action approach

>>16637932
Always Sunny title screen
"Lit classifies themselves as retarded for affirmative action in their own publication"

>>16637122
>0 submission accepted from /lit/
There are three confirmed /lit/ anons in the most recent edition.

>>16637140
It already slowly is evolving. I've got all editors/readers judging the works blind now as a result--just title and type of work, no author info or anything. Best I can do.

>>16637199
We don't shy away from political writing, but we will print GOOD writing of any political affiliation.

>>16637839
Just started reading the 400 submissions two weeks ago. Hope to have all works decided by end of November to mid-December, but of course, no promises.

I definitely think a weekly thread would be fine, hardly spam, honestly even bi-weekly, so what if some of them stall at 10 or 20 replies, the interest is there as several also reach bump limit

>>16637932
I would like to see more works like Coronameron in the future but Lit Quarterly was supposed to show off the talents of individual anons, which I'd like to see as well.

>>16631409
this normalfag just used us to get his faggy pseud zine off the ground. he played us.

>>16638870
Why do you guys need threads that often? It's a magazine. Do you need to be constantly reminded that it exists for some reason?

>>16638870
these have literally become shill threads though. he doesn't even put anons in the nagazine anymore. we're just his paypigs

>>16639965
>>16639997
Not everyone who posts on /lit/ is here every day, in fact those who actually write are probably more likely to be here less often, if we want the magazine to actually have stuff from anons then we need as many anons as possible to know about it

Also seeing threads frequently does encourage people yes, I ignored the threads for like a month before deciding to have a look and then submit something

>>16638870
They should probably just make a general

>>16640025
Maybe a general with competing publications? Then the whiners could publish themselves.

>>16640012
the point is that he doesn't even want anons to submit, he wants us to pay him money for his product.

>>16640036
So you don't think a publication should be paid? Fuck off commie.

>>16640036
Seems like he'd prefer anons to submit, but he is happy to go elsewhere as well

>>16640025
>>16640032
Maybe combine with another /critique/ general thread, I know anons have tried to start something like it a few times already but if there's both discussion of the quarterly (or any other /lit/ projects) and individual anons submitting and critiquing stuff, it might just last this time

>>16640012
Well I have a full developed brain so I actually write and submit stuff without someone on 4chan telling me to do so. So I already have finished stuff that's I'm already submitting. If it doesn't get picked up by another publisher I'll send it to /lit/ Quarterly as a last resort.

The real benefit of posting here is finding readers, not submissions. No literary magazine is hurting for submissions.

>>16640045
no you fucking retard, learn to read.

>>16640072
exactly, he's just shilling at this point

>>16640072
That's great man I'm really happy for you

>>16640072
>>16640083
>editor of a quarterly directly interacts with readers and writers that submit to the magazine
>HURRR DUURR SHILL

>>16640062
>Maybe combine with another /critique/ general thread, I know anons have tried to start something like it a few times already but if there's both discussion of the quarterly (or any other /lit/ projects) and individual anons submitting and critiquing stuff, it might just last this time
That seems reasonable except /crit/ is usually kind of a mess. And yes, this seems to be the most successful publication to come out of /lit/ so far in my decade of posting. Mostly because it pays and is paid for.

>>16640132
you're obviously a fucking newfag so fuck off because you don't even know the whole story behind the quarterly

>>16640166
Make me faggot

This stopped being interesting when you just let all the normies in like a sellout.

>>16640166
He's right, though. There is absolutely no reason for you faggots to whine about somebody actively making something with the board's involvement.
What aspect of the "whole story" is going to convince us that KMD is a shill? You think he's profiting off this shit?

>>16640247
I've seen enough critique threads on /lit/ to know a magazine consisting exclusively of /lit/ submissions would be awful.

>>16640271
he's a sellout

>>16640247
>the exclusive division between us and normies is that we browse 4chan and they don't
Hope ya don't have any social media accounts pal

>>16640247
Wait what happened?
>>16640285
But it's called "/lit/" Quarterly—where else would it come from?

>>16640292
I honestly bet he pays out more money for submissions than he makes from people buying copies. Nobody outside of this board has ever fucking heard of it.

What the fuck happened to these threads? A few months ago they weren't this cancerous. Did someone get rejected and is now buttblasting ITT?

>>16640309
Yes. See:
>>16631623

>>16640309
Yes, frankly it's funny because it's keeping this thread bumped to the top of the catalog for about two straight days.

Anons really do not take criticism well at all.

>>16640302
do you think all of the submissions for Paris Quarterly come from Texas?

>>16640314
It's really one guy, and he went yesterday, now we're all whining about how twitter normies ruined our thing

>>16640321
I am incredibly skeptical that any twitter normies are aware it exists outside the retarded "groyp" kids and tradcaths that saw it here first anyway

>>16640321
I would host an online zine for just /lit/ (maybe with comics/art drawn by the other boards?) but it would hard to keep palatable/curate without getting jumped by /pol/fags or simply conceding to them and letting it be their rag, especially in current year.

Would be curious if you have any ideas.

>>16640307
he has said that 90% of the published submissions aren't even from anons.

>>16640332
Well good quality control is important, I really think the idea of combining something like this with critique threads, as motivation for anons to put the effort it is a nice idea

Could start a wordpress maybe, idk

>>16640361
Would anons respect a wordpress? Or would they think I was just stealing their work? Would it be any more meaningful than simply posting your stuff into the void?

Not to mention the labor involved in reading all the nonsense when I could be doing something else. I'm not certain but I am a bit drunk...

>>16640387
no one would give a fuck about some shitty wordpress, you need a physical copy. its just human nature

>>16640431
Well, I'm not going to publish anyone physically for free so I guess y'all just have to cope.

>/lit/ whining that they can't compete with normie literature

You fags are depressing. The whole point is that you should be able to write literature that competes in the wider literature market, not that some guy on a singaporean sudoku forum said your poem about your oneitis showed promise

Grow some balls and compete if you want to get published, otherwise stop whining

>>16639861
I guarantee OP got a ton of dogshit from /lit/ that wasn't usable so he had to open it up, I very much doubt if this board could cobble together enough publication-quality material for a magazine every quarterly

Secondly, I presume the realised that having a 4chan-only publication is a good way to make sure it gets a bad reputation (I actually think having Lit in the name is a bad idea in itself), better to play it as a publication with no agenda (i.e. free speech, no woke censoring)

Thirdly, letting in a wider audience raises the quality of the publication, meaning that any of us who get a piece published benefit from having been in something good instead of a shitpost collection in print form

I get why people are sperging about it including non-/lit/ people but I think it's a sensible decision

>>16640358
How does he even know where they heard about it from? I was published in the first edition and gave him no information about myself at all other than the pseudonym and a city, which was also fake.

>>16640715
It's not about competition, and if what you say is true, that lit quarterly is now not about submissions from /lit/, the magazine itself loses its appeal. I want to know what the people who use this godforsaken place writes about, what insights and perspectives they offer. If I wanted non-/lit/ submissions I'd read other magazines

>>16640774
>I want to know what the people who use this godforsaken place writes about, what insights and perspectives they offer.
Literally why, 95% of this place makes it obvious what they offer. The rest is probably good enough that they've already gotten into this mag.

>>16640744
I have no ill-will towards Kyle and I wish him the best of luck with his publication. He put a lot of money in to help anons and I appreciate that. However, I don't want to read a magazine that is high-quality or has good prestige, I just want to see what other anons have to say. Coronameron, and other stuff like that, proves that /lit/ can do it. >>16640774 put it better than I could.

>>16640980
could you point me to the choice cuts of the "coronameron", because all i see is the usual fucking shitposting in-joke trash

>>16640980
I can understand the sentiment of wanting a collaborative /lit/ zine, Coronameron was fun

Really the best way to accomplish that is to just start one, though. From the sound of the LQ is going in a different direction, I think it suits my needs as a writer but for others it might not be what they were looking for

>>16630507
Can I subscribe for PDFs through patreon or something?

>>16638688
> Hope to have all works decided by end of November to mid-December, but of course, no promises.
I'll hold you to that promise

>>16641035
I found the moviebob essay to be quite a good read

>>16641035
My favorites are:
Moviebob, Lecture to the College of Virology, Becoming Phytoplankton, 1666 Lockedowne and Joint Letter of Convocation, Dreaming (multiple), Kinslayer (multiple), Levirusthan (p. 389), Samuel Pepys Rides Out.

>>16630507
I am one of the contributors for this issue of LQ, but I did not declare that I'm a lit anon. So make that 4 confirmed lit anons.

>>16641274
Through the website, you'll be able to get the PDFs for like $5 soon. My co-editor is setting up the computer stuff.