/lit/ - Literature

We should encourage more writing competitions.

The problem is that nobody here actually discusses books.

There are recurring threads about Nietzsche, Marx, Kant, The Bible, and a bunch of other stuff but it is clear from those threads that nobody has actually read the texts. Example >>18524587

Likewise, tons of "Just bought x, what am I in for?" threads. It's like people do anything to avoid actually reading.

Basically the problem is off-topic and low-effort threads. That's all.

>>18524768
i hate:
> 'what am in for?' threads, especially ones about highly discussed books. Just read the book and then make a thread
>diary entry threads that don't even pretend to talk about lit
>namefags
>anons who are clearly not 'extremely online' and can't speak our cool internet slang
>anons who are less intelligent than me
>anons who are more intelligent than me

>>18524789
>>18524800
>what am I in for?
These threads and the fact that people reply to them makes /lit/ look ridiculous. Read the fucking book, asshole. Why are you asking about it before starting?

>>18524768
Ban anyone that posts in /pol/, simple as

delete images in the OP
this is the only way to improve lit

I spend too much time on /lit/ instead of reading. I'm the problem..

>>18524768
>>18524789
>>18524800
>>18524803
You guys make a good point. More people should start threads reviewing books they've just read and then let the conversation carry on. Instead, most threads are asking for books to read or for summaries. Basically, the people putting effort are the ones responding to the people putting no effort who make all the threads. My only worry is that review cultures eventually draw in really dumb reviewers so I can't tell if it's really going to end so well. Depends a lot on how /lit/ stays.

>>18524789
And nobody responds to threads that are really about the books. Especially anything outside of Nietzsche, DFW, Guenon, Pynchon, and a few other memes.

>>18524789
There needs to be separate boards for philosophy and philology. No one goes to /his/ for these topics, because it's just a bunch of 80 IQ /pol/tards arguing about race/ethnic relations. Instead they come here.

>>18524854
Shut up and go back.

>>18524862
Only if you lick the fromunda cheese from under my nuts

>>18524823
Especially Jezabel posters.

>>18524830
I've posted in-depth reviews and got 5 replies. Meanwhile "x ended philosophy" gets 300 from people who've never read a philosophy book in their life. If these threads were gone, the good threads wouldn't die.

ban christ cucks

>>18524789
>someone saved my shitpost from years ago

I don't understand why people keep on posting philosophy or religious threads when those threads aren't supposed to be on /lit/
Wasn't this a big deal when /his/ was created?
It's like everyone's forgotten

>>18524885
thats my post though

>>18524880
>fromunda cheese
I could have gone my whole life without knowing that word.

This isn't particularly a complaint but more a way the site could be better.
Part of the essence of the liberal arts is to appreciate shared ideas and motifs across different mediums. For example, my appreciation for Henry Purcell's opera, Dido and Aeneas, is heightened by the fact that I read the Aeneid. The same could be said of pic related. /lit/ feels like the closest place for discussing "high culture" in general on this site, but it's technically meant only for literature.
So I guess having a /libarts/ or /hiculture/ board is what I want, or for else for /lit/'s board culture to be friendlier to discussing works related to books instead of just books themselves.

There's 10 different boards for 10 different video gayme genres but one "humanities and history" board. Tell me how this makes sense??/?

>>18524887
Go back.

>>18524898
I've been posting here for 8 years friend

>>18524768
>Discuss: the main problems of /lit/
As far as I can gather, this is a containment board for "enlightened" faggots that get a dopamine rush whenever an author circle-jerks with the reader.
>this paragraph has some deep meaning!
>that book literally changed my life!
>my brain chemicals go into a frenzy whenever some literal-who share the same thoughts as me!
/lit/ is such a fucking joke at this point. I actually have to go to different boards to actually discuss and reads books. Any person who denies it at this point are just being delusional of the situation.

>>18524916
>vtumor
let me guess youre the retard who keeps spamming ur vtumor booktuber

>>18524897
>There's 10 different boards for 10 different video gayme genres but one "humanities and history" board. Tell me how this makes sense??/?
more people want to talk about video games

>>18524897
>Tell me how this makes sense??/?
>If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer.

>>18524935
Fuck no. What would I ever do that? The person I’m following actually discuss books and has read alongs. And more importantly, I had better discussions on her Sunday streams about the Bible than I have here on the hundred of threads created. because, as it turns out, there are actual Christians in that stream, and not "its aesthetics and based and trad" larpers like on /lit/.

It makes a lot more sense when you realise that the reasons people use /lit/ are more varied than you think and often does not include discussing books in any depth.

>>18524885
If you really were the one who wrote that, I remember it from the original thread and I saved it as well. It was really well done

Ban the Anglosphere apart from India, South Africa, Ireland, Nigeria, the Carribbean, etc. Basically, ban North America and the UK, Au, NZ.

>>18524768
Ban everyone but me.

>>18524887
Not this shit again.
There is literally zero possible discussion in this format around literature works, other than posting an analysis that most people here won't be bothered to read you can't really discuss anything else.
I just read the Illiad and it was fantastic, a timeless masterpiece.
There you have it, that's the only possible discussion around the book. Everything else is discussing around ideas present in the texts and that is done better around philosophy books or even concepts and later bringing the books into the discussion.
As shitty and autistic as they could get, the Buddhism/Vedanta threads had the most meaningful exchanges of ideas in this board, with anons who clearly had read the texts they were discussing and were passionate enough about them to post long diatribes about different understandings of a topic.
The only thing you can expect from this board on regards to literature are charts and ocasionally some good recs, that's it.

ban philoso-cucks

>>18524768
I managed to leave for about 20 days, I even tracked it with a get sober app, but alas, I'm back. It seems like the memes are correct. We really are here forever.

it's been more than a year since ive been back
is butterfag still posting? how's the state of the board

>>18525046
Well ok
Just include that you read a book and wanted to discuss it, I don't understand why people create philosophy/religious threads without any reference to any texts and then they get upset when their thread's get deleted
Again, it makes me wonder if anyone actually knows that philosophy/religion threads without any reference to literature aren't allowed here

>>18525074
>how's the state of the board
worse than ever

>>18525057
>I even tracked it with a get sober app
This is a great idea.
4chan seems harder to kick than alcohol and I was physically dependent on it, the alcohol.

>>18525079
hard to believe, its been shit for as long as i can remember

>>18525099
/lit/ died around 2016 like the rest of the website and it's been a slowly rotting corpse since then. i only come here out of decade or so long ingrained habit

>>18525099
>>18525079
nevermind, just looked at the catalogue
what are the fucking nigger jannies even doing

The board is mostly fine right now. Maybe it's slightly worse than before (I've been here since 2013) but not meaningfully so.

Honestly the worst aspect currently is the board's self-hatred: so much endless bitching about how no one reads, everyone is a pseud, how reading and philosophy are pointless. Those people should just shut up and post about literature imo.

>>18525114
yeah, /lit/ lasted a lot longer than other boards tho
/pol/ was kill in 2012, and /his/ was dead in the water, only lasted like a month
this board is a fucking joke, but there's no other place where i can argue with people and make valid points while calling them a nigger

>>18525131
its never going to happen, because this board isnt moderated in the least. i remember a straight up porn thread being up for multiple hours

>endless larping resulting from either actual indoctrination or contrarianism
>no one reads books, but no one reads long OP posts about books either, even if theyve read the book
>productive efforts like &amp get banned
>slow and even dead on certain hours while bait threads and the same controversial philosophy shit is always on top

The only good thread on lit was /alg/ but I can't find it anymore

>>18525161
More moderation would not help, besides in taking down porn, gore, or illegal content which is rare enough as is. Most asinine threads and posters are arguably or clearly on-topic. The issue is in board culture and attitude.

>>18525199
the first thread i see on the catalogue is why do woman love shit poetry with 81 fucking replies
clearly off topic anon

>>18524789
>Basically the problem is off-topic and low-effort threads. That's all.
Which is a symptom of 4chan's extremely minimal moderation, and chronic on most boards.

>>18525131
>no one reads,
This is true and no amount of denial will change that.

>everyone is a pseud,
Wouldn’t go as far and say everyone. But there are a bunch of anons here that take themselves way too seriously, especially when they’re just larpers, the stack threads should tell you this. People just want to flex how smart they are.

>how reading and philosophy are pointless.
Mixed feelings on that. But if you’re here for book discussion and/or discussion on philosophy, then yes, it is pointless.

Yeah, mostly true. Somebody actually gave me some great critiques of vollmann in my recent purchases thread, the sheer existence of frater asemlen, and sometimes butters' posts are pretty great as well.
I'd say like 10% of this board knows what they're talking about.

>>18524885
and you're still posting here lmao

>>18524803
>>18524800

What am I in for is just a thinly veiled bait at starting drama/a conversation. OP doesn’t read, and will never read the titular book in question.

I like the 5ch approach where it's just an endless amount of generals for each game as well as even heavier splintering of boards into smaller boards. Obviously you can't stop low effort shitposting but there should be a book/author generals board or something so attention and conversation gets funnelled properly

The mods and janitors are inept at keeping the board on-topic and have been since 2016. Also they're precious faggots who issue bans/warnings if you criticise Christianity or buddhism.

>>18525297
Isn’t the current mod a bit more purged happy?

>>18525214
It's about an audience for poetry and about poetry. I'm not saying that's a thread anyone should post or bump but it is covered by current board rules. To make that a deletable thread you need an infinitely regressing series of stricter rules or a mod team led by arbitrary opinion. Both of which are worse than the symptom and both of which will only lead to the exact same threads in more on-topic disguise.
>>18525224
>This is true and no amount of denial will change that.
Prove it. If you can't, it's just your arbitrary belief.

>>18525317
>It's about an audience for poetry and about poetry.
It’s literally a thinly-veiled female hate thread.

>>18524896
I think 4chan needs looser restrictions on topicality for sure. For instance on gamefaqs you can make threads about anything on a video game board so long as you label it with the "community" tag. It always feels overly restrictive to me, instead of asking why users continue to break the "off topic" rule let's give an actual solution.

>>18525338
>I think 4chan needs looser restrictions on topicality for sure
No, what we need is for the mods to remove all the shit posters. Especially the Wojack and frog posting.

>>18525353
kill wojack posters especially the soijack posters. green frog needs to stay.

>>18525337
Yes it is. But thinly or thickly veiled, it's on topic. Deal with it and don't post in it. Report it if you want, but why would you trust a mod or janny to make calls about ontopic vs off topic? The rules are there to take care of blatantly off topic threads and nothing more.

/lit/ would be the best board on all of 4chan if we had 50% women here. Girls are fab at discussing literature. Men behave well when ladies are around also.

All my best lit talks have been with girls only. Men only play football and sports , video games and spend the rest of time fapping. Girls read books. They form book clubs. They talk about themes and authors and it is so much fun.

This is the main reason /lit/ suffers.
Too few men read books and too many play vidya. We need girls.

>>18525371
/x/ is half women. they spend all their time in the divination thread asking relationship questions.

>>18525366
>Yes it is. But thinly or thickly veiled, it's on topic.
It’s literally not. It’s a woman hate thread all but in name.

>>18525366
>>18525361
>>18525353
>>18525338
>>18525337
If you start heavily moderating 4chan then it turns into reddit. The main reason people post here is that it's the last place on the internet where the content isn't shaped by a bunch of internet dorks pushing the popular narrative.
I agree that better moderation is needed but this should just involve removing spam. Remove low effort OPs with 200 character texts, for example. Don't remove stuff just because it is "thinly veiled" controversy.

>>18525371
It's a shame the only female poster I know about is one of the worst posters on the whole of 4chan.

>>18525393
>Don't remove stuff just because it is "thinly veiled" controversy.
If the thread is a thinly-veiled politics thread, remove it or move it to /pol/. God damn, even the sticky mentions this shit.

>>18525382
Thread says poetry. Sticky rules say poetry. Fucking deal with it. Since this seems to bother you so much that you want the jannies to come blow their whistle, I'll also note: ywnbaw.

>>18525393
Think you nailed it. Could automate moderation by replacing repetive text with something like (common idiom). Then a post like...I just bought name of book what am I in for... would become:
(common idiom) name of book (common idiom)

>>18524768
Anons should read works opposing and/or outside their preferred ideology.

>>18525371
You probably don't recognize how many groups you would have triggered if this thread had more varied readers. The best way to improve threads is attract people who have something interesting to say. The best way to do that is to say something interesting.

>>18525371
Yep. Video g*ymes are degenerate.

There's a vast gulf between the best and worst posts. You can find somebody giving you a 10 paragraph writeup on the value of inauthenticity in gaddis's recognitions, then get called a faggot and nigger by idiots who don't want to engage in the points.
What's new? Just post bout literature.

Meta threads are cancer

Jannies are randomly deleting/moving good threads. Why the fuck is platonism general being moved to /his/? It is one of the only places on the board which discusses books.

>>18525541
Are you retarded?
It's not random
Philosophy threads do not belong here

>>18525543
Nice bait.

>>18525543
There are literally 30 philosophy threads in the catalog right now, dumb faggot. Either delete all of them or none of them. This is just abritrary.

>>18524789
.....books for this feel?

>>18525551
Well other anons were saying this board wasn't moderated that much :)

>>18525575
It used to not be moderated much and it was a good thing. Now they leave twitter screecap threads but deleted my empiricism thread because... because they just wanted to, alright?!

>>18525607
Jannies are doing a shit job. I think some "go to /his/" faggot actually took a position and is now nuking religion and philosophy threads while doing absolutely nothing about the blogpost generals, explicitly off topic, and extreme low quality threads. It has actually made this bpard worse.

>>18525618
>Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer
It's like the jannies haven't read their own sticky. In what fucking world did platonism general not discuss specific works??? The majority of posts were about the writers in the OP list, Proclus, Plotinus, or Plato. Why the fuck are they moved to /his/???

>>18525607
Make a thread with a picture of Hume
Say that you read the Treatise of Human Nature recently, that you really liked the book and maybe bring up some key ideas that you wanted to discuss
Then ask how other authors compare with Hume's ideas with reference to specific books
>>18525634
Because it's all about the OP and what the OP contains and not the posts that follow the OP
That said I feel like a general is kind of pushing it though

>>18525641
And the OP listing 10 specific books didn't have specific works to refer to how exactly?

>>18525648
Well in the case of a general I think it's too much of a philosophy general vs book general

>>18524800
>>anons who are clearly not 'extremely online' and can't speak our cool internet slang
these are the only respectable posters on the site

>>18525651
So you just randomly invent rules to justify the atrocities jannies are committing? Are the mods aware?

>>18525656
>Are the mods aware?
They posted a meme image on the sticky. What do you think?

>>18524768
There are always threads for purchase stacks. I've seen one thread ever for stacks of books that were read. And I made it, as an end of year review. And no one else posted in it.

>>18525661
Didn't even notice. They picked the worst charts they could have and I don't even understand the meme. As prophesized, the great discord migration shall come.

>>18524768
I'm so fucking butthurt that the jannies won't allow discussion of literature in its original language. A lot of people here learn foreign languages too, so it could be a help to the community as well.

A thread (>>18521510) about "books that LOOK good on your shelf" is allowed to stay up while high quality threads get removed. FUCK THESE JANNIES

>>18525676
shhh, they banned me for complaining a few weeks ago
they are power-tripping so fucking hard

>>18525662
People only buy books just so they can make stack/shelve threads. Did you really think they read those books? All of them look like they haven’t been read once, save for the second-hand books bought by thrift stores.

>>18525656
Just make your generals in /his/ anon, they will never be touched
I genuinely think the board would be better without these rules but those are the rules
Also if you have any screencaps of /pg/ threads that were deleted I'd appreciate it

>>18525399
That faggot who posts with the three face should be perma-banned. At least Butterfly has literary opinions.

>>18525676
Yes it's because it's a thread on literature

>>18525682
It is not my general

>I genuinely think the board would be better without these rules but those are the rules
WHAT FUCKING RULES YOU MORON? THE RULES SAY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT THEY ARE DOING, YOU PIECE OF SHIT DISGUISED JANNY TRANNY.

>Also if you have any screencaps of /pg/ threads that were deleted I'd appreciate it
Learn to use the archives, faggot

>>18525689
>Learn to use the archives, faggot
Ah ok so my suspicion was right, it was too much of a general thread rather than a specific one
>>18518853
Here's your plato general on page 9

>>18525703
>Here's your plato general on page 9
Holy fuck, not only you are ignorant but you are proud of your ignorance. You haven't even seen platonism general, have you, newfag?

>>18524896

>>18525703
>/lit/ is for the discussion of literature, specifically books (fiction & non-fiction), short stories, poetry, creative writing, etc. If you want to discuss history, religion, or the humanities, go to /his/. If you want to discuss politics, go to /pol/. Philosophical discussion can go on either /lit/ or /his/, but those discussions of philosophy that take place on /lit/ should be based around specific philosophical works to which posters can refer
Yeah I was right
>>18525706
I joined the discord and posted a few times lmao
The thread I linked is what the idea plato thread should look like :)

>>18525687
It's specifically about how the books LOOK on a shelf and not about the books' CONTENT, and this is acceptable to you, you NIGGER?

>>18525713
>lust-inducing image
>irrelevant, time-wasting question which has been asked 2000 times before
Yup, its a thread a jannie-in-disguise like you would like, you fucking pedo pervert.

>>18524768
>What do you think about the state of /lit/?
butterflyposters should be permabanned, they destroyed /lit/

also pic related. "are you incapable of... ?" is the first thing people see when opening /lit/ and the passive-aggressive tone is annoying and unnecessary. delete it, janny. just say "here are some books you might enjoy:" or something how hard is it to not be autistic.

>>18525737
>neet
>complete failure in life
>the only thing which makes you important is moderating a vietnamese basket-weaving board
>I will fuck those platonists good...
>Fumes constantly rising from his ears
let him vent, brother

How many of you have posted a link to your effort threads?
How many post effort threads at all?
Or even respond to effortposts?

Guess how I know it is none.

>>18525371
>We need girls.
Why do you think we're here bud

>>18525737
>...should be permabanned, they destroyed /b/

Wrong board

>>18524768
>the main problems of /lit/,
Janitors deleting threads and posts seemingly because the threads or posts discuss topics they personally dislike and/or don't want to see discussed.

Lot of posts ITT
If only the whiners made threads about discussions of books they like instead of whining

I do not care about the state of /lit/. I am too busy reading books. And when I finish a book, I will post about it here asking to discuss it. Maybe if people were more like me, /lit/ wouldn't be a shithole but who really knows.

>>18525293
sounds like it would lead to gay circlejerks where there's no viable discussion to be had

>>18525864
I did and it was deleted

>>18524768
Gas all guenonfags

>>18525297
>Also they're precious faggots who issue bans/warnings if you criticise Christianity or buddhism.
Calling people christcucks is essentially shitposting.

>>18525872
pbuh

>>18524830
I try. Anytime I finish a book I make a thread about it. They never last long, even despite that this is a slower board. That being said of the handful of people that do reply, ive had some good chats with them :)

>>18525877
There are many effortposts that contain the word christcuck. You are just seething because people don't like your death cult.

>>18525761
several high quality posts here
>>/lit/thread/S18507111

>>18526024
>structuralism
>post-structuralism
>deconstruction
>post-modernism
>critical theory
>hermeneutics
>phenomenology
>marxism
I think I just vomited a little

>>18526029
you're the precise type of poster that makes this board shit
try formulating an argument instead of contributing to the spam

>>18526038
You know nothing about me as a poster, only this post.
Enough has been said about transgender identity politics and all the buzzwords used for it. Pure charlatanism used to justify tribalism. Just read up on the searle-derrida """debate""".

>>18525870
Which one? Just took a look at warosu and all the deletions seem reasonable

This thread was moved to >>>/qa/4584733