/lit/ - Literature

Character: Frodo
Inciting incident: his uncle's birthday and a wizard and a ring
Plan: destroy ring

idk man

>>19198728
Lists are not enjoyable. It's not just about what but also about how.

Because literature, even so-called minimalist literature, as an aesthetic practice, is all surplus. The idea that storytelling is primarily about sharing information is a reduction that misses the mark so badly that it makes me wonder whether you're a human being or an automaton.

It's the difference between a photograph and a painting.

>>19198746
I didn't think people would interpret it as being a literal list with bullet points. I'm talking about a sequence of sentences, basically cutting the fluff, in a way.

>>19198756
>It's not just about what but also about how.
I don't understand what you mean.

>>19198770
>The idea that storytelling is primarily about sharing information...
It may not be for you, that doesn't mean that's the case for everyone. I read books to imagine, not to read by itself.

>>19198784
>cutting the fluff
>Muse, tell us about how Achilles killed many men.

Yeah nah

>>19198795
Well the problem is that imagining while reading is itself preconditioned by what the text draws your attention towards and how it describes any given object. It seems like you want to be given free reign to imagine things however you decide but you have to meet the text halfway. Even minimalist writers like Carver fixate on specific detalis and leave others out to create aesthetic experiences, even something like William Carlos Williams's "This is Just to Say" is ordered in such a way and with such precision as to imply a sense of guilt at the end. You can't escape that.

>>19198728
Literature works because of the ambiguities, it makes it easier to insert bits of your own life which gives the reader a new perspective on their life
and makes sympathy and empathy more likely which makes it more likely the reader will get caught up in the narrative. One of the things which separates great authors from the rest is the ability to effectively bake in this ambiguity in a way that feels concise while not losing the point/theme, the reader does not feel like they are self inserting, they just think they are identifying.
>Is there a class of writing which does not make use of prose?
Poetry.

>>19198728


A STORY IS A NARRATION; A LIST IS NOT A NARRATION, THEREFORE NOT A STORY.

THINK BEFORE POSTING.

>>19198905
Pinche Rei me maman tus tautologías

>>19198728
Because you can get drunk drinking 180 proof grain alcohol but having an ice cold Jack n' Coke with some BBQ ribs is a more enjoyable experience

>>19198905
>... tus tautologías[.]

ES UN SILOGISMO.


>Pinche Rei[,] me maman...

PERDÓNALAS, NO SABEN LO QUE HACEN.

>>19198958
pinche rei lo digo para que te encabrones goey; no sea tan denso compadre sale poes se la lava

>>19198966


DISCÚLPAME, QUE NO ENTIENDO MUY BIEN EL DIALECTO ÑERO.

>>19198980
asi es compa no se aguite que aqui no hay pedo entre usté y yo lo quiero mucho se me cuida

>>19198728
You have autism.

>>19198778
This

>>19198778
terrible take. photography is a complete art form.

>>19198728
Try to write an engaging story with your list of facts.

>>19198728
>it's objectively better - from an information sharing point of view - to just list facts?
I'll repurpose this example, which is wrong >>19198778
and say that it is actually the difference between a child's drawing, with a tree drawn a symbol of a tree, next to a symbol of a house, drawn as the typical box with a triangular roof, and an accurate painting of a tree next to a house, drawn in whatever architectural style. The green of the grass is the kid's drawing is just a crayon green, the green in the painting is the green of the English countryside during that specific season, as experienced through the eyes of the artist.

>>19198905
a simple list can narrate, if you understand abstraction.

>>19198728
Gee, probably because literature isn't just recitation of fact, and it's the actual craft that matters?

>>19199663
That is an even worst analogy, holy shit. You could maybe equate the difference to brushwork, but that's about it.

>>19199626
You can have an engaging story without words, how would this be a problem? Why do people think you somehow can't express ideas if you don't utilize prose?

I thought /lit/ was supposed to be the smartest board.

>>19199848
>You can have an engaging story without words

This is interesting. You mean like hula dancing? That's more efficient and factual for you? This is either world class bait or a bunch of anons speaking futilely into the void of a chink's emptiness.

>>19199848
I said try to write an engaging story with your list of facts. I never said or implied that nonverbal storytelling is impossible. I never even said writing an engaging story with a list of facts is impossible. But try to do it and you might begin to understand why it isn't done. Maybe /lit/ really is the smart board and you're the dim one.

>>19199848
prose is the obvious form of virtuosity in literature. exactly like fast and articulate playing is to music, in that it's a noble pursuit in of its own, but also in the fact that it's not entirely necessary if the intent is to create something poignant.
you could tell a story in purely clinical terms. some might even find it to their liking. the attempt at making that point would be, in of itself, artful. shit, there might be something performative about it, since you're essentially restricting yourself in a manner similar to those authors who write without ever using verbs or the letter E.
the only real problem with it is that most would find it alienating. you would not have an audience. given that it's almost certain your idea is not original, I think you'd be wasting your time.

>>19198728
Because some facts are more important than others and need to stand out, facts need to be organized to aid memory, and because they collaboratively achieve a higher goal. Also, there are different audiences, so different the grades of subtlety in prose can convey different information to each.

>>19199858
have you never watched a movie
turn that contempt back on yourself you autistic motherfucker

>>19199873
>I said try to write an engaging story with your list of facts.
Most people wouldn't like it because we're used to focusing on the writing itself, and not just on the information. You could write the most concisely written story but if you didn't use common literary patterns your writing would just be labeled as shit and many people wouldn't be able to look past that, because it would feel bland and souless because of previous biases. It's brushwork vs subject.
>Why would something like this be borderline unreadable?
The whole thread is about distiling that feeling.

>prose is the obvious form of virtuosity in literature. exactly like fast and articulate playing is to music
False equivalence once again. Music is music itself, while writing - in the context of this thread, which is pretty clear if you read the OP - is a tool for sharing information.

>>19199946
Meant for >>19199886
as well

>>19199946
>False equivalence once again. Music is music itself, while writing - in the context of this thread, which is pretty clear if you read the OP - is a tool for sharing information.
audio and written text are tools for sharing information. you are confusing the medium for the art form.
a recorded speech is not music and a scientific essay is not storytelling. at least not usually. it'd be stupid to discount the notion entirely.

>objectively better - from an information sharing view -
Sharing information is not the end goal of storytelling and if you cannot understand why you literally have autism. Not in a way that I'm trying to insult you with or something, I'm telling you in all seriousness that whatever part of your mind that is used to process emotions and subjectivity is severely warped or broken. It's not your fault that you don't get it but you still won't.

>>19198728
by the way, someone beat you to it
https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/32441344-the-forensic-certified-public-accountant-and-the-cremated-64-squares-fin

>>19199963
>audio and written text are tools for sharing information. you are confusing the medium for the art form.
Now you're just reducing this to an absurdity. The purpose of music is more often than not music itself first and foremost, and the kind of storytelling I'm talking about is about telling the story first and foremost (through writing).

Art doesn't actually mean anything, by the way. You can find art in several parts of a whole. If you make a movie, are the outfits art? What about the cameras used? If you make a song, are the lyrics art? What about the instruments you decided to use? What about the recording equipment you decide to use? If you write a book, is the story art? What about each individual character's personality? Is the way you bind the book art? To me all these can easily be a yes. Even if you tried to express a story through a matter-of-factly sequence of events, you'd still have much to decide when it comes to flow, characters, what to show / ommit, and so on. Even if you actually took the "list" thing seriously, you'd have to deal with all these.

>>19199984
What is this even supposed to mean? The emotion for me comes from the happenings, settings, characters, and everything else that I parse from the book as being the world being presented, not from the writing itself. Do you cry when you read the word "sad" or something? I legitimately don't understand your angle here.

>>19199946
the problem is that you are clearly also making an equivocation by confusing storytelling (the art form) with writing or language (the medium), the equivalent, following your bad example, of confusing music with noise.

>>19200026
I told you, you can't and won't understand it. You aren't physically capable.
Your attempt to disconnect "happenings, settings, characters, and everything else that I parse from the book" from "the writing itself" is mucb of the problem, they aren't separable. All of that exists only as far as the writing does, not in some Platonic realm that the writing relays you a message about.

>>19200038
>the problem is that you are clearly also making an equivocation by confusing storytelling (the art form) with writing or language (the medium)
Except I clearly didn't make that equivocation because the OP clearly states the thread is about sharing information and not the medium. Not to mention the medium is not even what's being discussed here, because both prose and non-prose use the same medium.

>following your bad example, of confusing music with noise.
Except this didn't happen.

>>19198728
If this were true, all stories would be written using sentential logic or some shit.

>>19200026
It's okay, dude. You probably also get puzzled upon hearing the phrase "the medium is the message". It's quite clear that there's something about the way you process things that doesn't allow you to "get" a text for its constructedness or formal characteristics.

>>19200049
>Your attempt to disconnect "happenings, settings, characters, and everything else that I parse from the book" from "the writing itself" is mucb of the problem, they aren't separable.
Of course they are, you can tell the same story in two different languages. And yes, there will be discrepancies stemming from the way you express different ideas, but these would unlikely be called "a whole new story". That's like saying each edition of a book is a new story because it isn't exactly the same words.

>>19199613
Photography is so much more plentiful and therefore less valuable than created artwork.

>>19200012
>The purpose of music is more often than not music itself first and foremost, and the kind of storytelling I'm talking about is about telling the story first and foremost (through writing).
can you conceive of any music that does not consist in the performing of an original song?
what about covers? what about corpo bands who play old top 40 songs for boomer audiences? are those not music?
your assertions are easily defeated

>>19200038
despite the similitudes in writing, this is not me.
good observation though.

>>19200083
Do you think reading a wikipedia plot summary of a book is functionally the same as reading the book?

>>19199848
It is easier to spread ideas with a list, but reading and writing are forms of art, crafts that are enjoyable and which enhance ideas by utilising prose and skilled writing to convey feelings, themes and messages subtly. You can be an autistic, robotic redditor who only does the most effective thing possible if you want to, go ahead. I'll stick to doing actual enjoyable things.

>>19200091
No, because the wikipedia summary is exactly that, a summary. Do you think asking stupid questions online makes you smart?

>>19200090
>what about covers? what about corpo bands who play old top 40 songs for boomer audiences? are those not music?
When did I say these aren't music? When the people play the music, the end goal is the music itself more often than not. Yes, it may have a deeper message within, but for the most part, music is not seen as the medium, but instead as the end substance.

>>19200083
>You can tell the same story in two different languages
No, you can't. It's literally an entire debate among translators and the first thing you learn when you study it. It's clear to understand why when presented with an original text and its translation. If you knew more than one language you'd immediately understand that there is a degree of untranslatability between languages, that translation functions somewhat as the art of the least unbearable sacrifice, and that therefore no matter how much you try a translation won't ever achieve the same effect that the source text does, rendering "the same story" different and even sometimes alien to the source text.

>>19198728
>objectively better - from an information sharing point of view - to just list facts

I have given this some thought after learning of the work of a famous writer that I took a class with. Basically, the point that he tries to get across with his work is that it is impossible to give "just the facts". There's the issue of the medium and the observer, which brings us to the problem of "why even try to tell a story." The reason is that, through creative storytelling, you can create an experience that replicates the truth of the actual event.

>>19200106
>When the people play the music, the end goal is the music itself more often than not.
but when people record audio, the end goal is usually not music. as I've said, recorded speeches are not music. c-span is not music.
we're running in circles. you're confusing medium and art form. you need to get over your compulsion to win the argument and understand that.

>>19200106
>>19200083
I told you you weren't ever going to get it and you're only proving my point with every post.
I honestly don't know what you want to accomplish with this thread. Do you want somebody to say "yes, it's inefficient to tell stories with detail and pay attention to prose, art was a waste of time all along, everybody's dumb but you?"

>>19198728
Flaubert

>>19200125
>we're running in circles.
I agree, you're completely missing the point.

>>19200110
>If you knew more than one language
I know more than one language, I'm not north american. If you got your head out of your ass maybe you could've read the rest of what I wrote.
And if you want to keep it within the language your argument is even worst because then you could just express exactly the same ideas.
Furthermore, I don't know why you're looking at this from the perspective of "lets turn stories into this". You could just as easily make a story in the non-prose format and then you'd have the same assbackward argument to support that format as well.

>>19200126
>I honestly don't know what you want to accomplish with this thread.
It was a discussion about the topic of prose and how it bleeds into expressing stories, and why it is so hard to divorce the two, even though they aren't inherently linked. You made it a war about me wanting to turn everything into non-prose for some reason because you can't fathom that I'm just curious about this shit, and instead just want to sperg out online.

I'm the one who really doesn't understand your angle here, because you clearly have nothing worthwhile to add to the discussion, and I've stated from the getgo that I enjoy prose as much as everyone else. I have never read anything that doesn't have prose, and I've never wrote anything that doesn't have prose either, because it just feels wrong.
>Why do _we_ care so much about prose in storytelling
>Why would something like this be borderline unreadable?
Maybe that wasn't all that clear, though, I can understand that, and sorry if that's what threw you off.

So yeah, congrats on shitting all over the place.

>>19200175
why did you feel the need to say "north america"
the only monoligual country in "north america" is the USA

>I agree, you're completely missing the point.
I'm sure writing this was cathartic for you, but you've obviously forgotten the fact that I've acquiesced to your point earlier on.
by all means write your robotic story. I am legitimately interested in such a thing.
I am also absolutely certain you'll unconsciouesly employ natural language in attempting to do so and defeat the entire idea. I don't think you're capable of it currently.

>>19200175
Maybe if you'd stop being so dense you'd understand that I got what you wrote and that it's ultimately wrong because your argument about translation is ignorant in that the source text and its translation are ultimately two different texts. This is why we have multiple translations of the same text, each claiming being closer to the original than the other. This is why different translations of the Bible got people killed. It doesn't matter that they're equivalent. They're not just the same with slight "discrepancies". It doesn't matter that they follow or "tell" the same succession of events or what you ignorantly call "story"/ They operate under different systems and abide by different cultural codes. You can't say the same thing in a different language. This is what makes me doubt that you actually know more than one language.

>>19198728
Product of 20th Century Modernism

>>19198728
I want to have sex with Belle Delphine and her cute sister!

>>19199844
you understand nothing about painting

>>19199613
Nobody will deny that it is an art form, but it's difficult to make comparisons like these. OP is super autistic.

>>19198778
>It's the difference between a photograph and a painting.
That's a very inaccurate statement. You have to be a lot more specific. A better analogy would be a stock photo being compared to a Rembrandt.

It's hard to break everything down away from "prose". With the way our mind works, it just makes more sense having to explain everything, make analogies, and do comparative analysis. It just gets boring, and human curiosity will make us want to pour over every detail with scrupulous fervor. There's so many details we have to wrap our heads around, and stuff we always have to think about. We also like to know all the details to make a better psychic experience when we recreate it in our head. Would you rather hear someone list the crime statistics of New Jersey in the 70's, or hear Joey Diaz tell all his crazy stories? whether viewing it as an outsider, or identifying with the character, it's always much better this way, ESPECIALLY if you're interested in the subject/story. The closest form that is most stripped of this prose would be certain types of jokes, like some green text stories that you'll see here and on other chans. Jokes always have a logical exaggeration or an outside context involved.

>>19199663
>it is actually the difference between a child's drawing, with a tree drawn a symbol of a tree, next to a symbol of a house, drawn as the typical box with a triangular roof, and an accurate painting of a tree next to a house, drawn in whatever architectural style. The green of the grass is the kid's drawing is just a crayon green, the green in the painting is the green of the English countryside during that specific season, as experienced through the eyes of the artist.
That is retarded. A little kid with a green crayon is still an artist.
>Green crayon.
>Green text.
>Don't forget the pretext.

>>19199886
>prose is the obvious form of virtuosity in literature. exactly like fast and articulate playing is to music
just the performance part of music. It's a performance art. (usually)

because it's not reducible to listing facts, you retard

>>19201819
children's drawings literally all look the same

>>19198728
The closest you'll get to a book being just a list of facts is reading old Northern European books that were written during the Neue Sachlichkeit art movement, but even those still have quite a chunk of prose in them. They just use more sober language.

>>19202017
>literally

>>19198948

Your book is bad and your big mistake wa s releasing a portion of it for us to read in advance

Please tell me that's actually a girl.

>>19198784
It would certainly be much easier to write that way but it would be nowhere near as emotionally impactful. Could be a fun experiment but it could never replace prose.

>>19199848
>You can have an engaging story without words
sure, in other mediums like music or film or painting but this is /lit/ go to another board if you want to talk about other mediums

how about this

https://granta.com/final-fantasy-iii/

>>19203631
obviously there is prose, but this kind of thing is pretty close to being just a list of facts