/lit/ - Literature

>>19492722
For me its God vs Reality

>>19492722
Man vs no God is always quite funny.
"How dare you not exist!"

>>19492722
Where does Jurassic Park fall on this chart? Post modern? Jurassic Park is my favorite book so whichever category it falls into is best in my mind.

>>19492730
Man vs. genre fiction

>>19492730
man vs nature/technology i guess

>>19492741
kek
I didn't even know it was a book. I always thought it was just a movie

>>19492722
Man vs. Man will always be my favorite. You can make them stand for other things, but it's inherently satisfying.

Post modern but too bad its actually written the worst of the three.

>>19492722
>moby dick
>iliad
>book of job
>les miserables
>the tartar steppe
>crime and punishment
>industrial society and its future
>?
>?

>>19492802
>moby dick
>man vs nature
ngmi

>>19492818
>whales are man made
>the ocean is man made
Take your meds

>>19492852
>the whale is the antagonist
>the ocean is the antagonist
go to website

>>19492722
man vs. self is the most primal, and consequently the most inherently captivating one

Man vs Self. Every single panel ultimately ends at man vs self

>>19492872
The whale literally kills them all

>>19492852
I've never read Moby Dick but isn't the point of the book Ahab vs Ahab? I always heard it was about how our obsessions can consume us.

>>19492722
Man vs self because that is what they all are when you get down to it.

>>19492889
Ahab did nothing wrong and you are a woman if you claim he did

>>19492802
>Crime and punishment
>Man vs. no God
ngmi

>>19492722
Man vs Self and Man vs Man are practically the same. Those themes aren't even exclusive in between themselves, how can one make a meaningful distinction?

>>19492802
i know we're all friends here on /lit/ but there is really a severe divide between people who read books and people who read about books

>>19492771
goku vs vegets

>>19493301
Post yr list then

Recommend me some
>man vs reality
>man vs author

a example of man vs reality is the crying of lot 49, gravitys rainbow, or maybe even sideways stories from wayside school

idk any man vs author books but they seem like they would be just awful

>>19493317
My diary desu

>>19492888
no he doesnt, and even if he did that doesnt make him the antagonist

>>19493317
>man vs reality
Pretty much any philip k dick. Ubik seems like a good start
>man vs author
The year of death of ricardo reies. Don Quixote if you stretch

>>19492802
>Man vs. no God
Thus Spoke Zarathustra
>Man Vs. Author
Mein Kampf

>>19493337
>idk any man vs author books but they seem like they would be just awful
Parts of the pale king do it well.

>>19492722
post postmodern conflicts like man vs irony or man vs postreality

>>19492722
Man vs no God but the book ends with the protagonist coming to the conclusion that God is real.

>>19492722
Frankenstein fits all of them.

>>19493667
Gee anon how reddit can you be

>>19493337
man vs author pretty much just means that the only sane antagonist to point your finger at is the author. So things like The Third Policeman, the MC hell is plainly the authors playground, you can't really work it to be the devil. The story which happens in the trashcan in Sombrero Fallout could be another example of man vs author. It tends to be the playground of surrealism/absurdism.

>>19493436
Nah. The only man vs author you could make the case for in TPK is regarding DFWs own standin, which would make it man vs self. He made a wonderful little meta mess with that.

>>19493672
I was hoping someone would set me up by saying "Man vs. Author" doesn't fit so I could make "a Percy wrote it" joke.

>>19493796
Oh my bad I thought you were going for a monster vs his creator thing
Your joke would have been mildly amusing, sorry about that

Death of an author

>>19493878
I wholeheartedly believe much of the vitriol surrounding RRC is tied to the fact that people call it "death of the author." Roland Barthes even calls it "removal of the author" up until the last line of his essay.

That and a lot people seem to believe that proponents of RRC consider it the only way to engage with a work and that no author will ever be allowed to give commentary on their own work if DotA becomes accepted.

>>19493314
>>19493301
Coward

>>19492748
It's Man vs. God. Humans attempt to play God and create life and get fucked in the ass.

>>19492722
Damn Don Quixote got 8/9

>>19495157
Whats the missing one? Tech?

>>19495249
Yeah, tech. Couldn’t think of a relevant chapter, but I might have overlooked something.

>>19493365
>book is about man seeking revenge on whale who maimed him
>whale kills everyone
>whale somehow not antagonist
Cetacean internet defense force out in full numbers I see

>>19492802
moby dick is man vs America
illiad is man vs gods
les miserables covers too many of the squares, The Red and the Black is the better choice.
I never read tartar steppe
its been over a decade since I read C&P, but my gut says its man vs self, not man vs no god.
Teddy K is cheating since its non-fiction

Man vs Reality is my diary desu
Six Characters in Search of An Author is man vs author

>>19492722
O. K.

>>19495249
>>19496392
doesn't he fight a windmill?

>>19496924
Fighting windmills doesn't make it man vs technology.

>>19492722
Man vs Author sounds like it could only be done comedically with unusual book structuring.

Rec me some good Man vs no God books?

>>19496937
I only know of one book that really goes all out on it, Norwegian book called Sophie's World, and it's clearly written as like an intro to philosophy for kids. Literally the whole plot of the book is author vs fictional character.

>>19492722
Only one book does them all
>Genesis
>Exodus
>Job
>1st Kings
>The Gospels
>Revelation
>Genesis
>Revelation
>The letters

>>19492729
kek

>>19496407
>Cetacean internet defense force out in furr numbers I see
nip detected

>>19492722
covert modern hidden inside of classical is the most kino don't >> me

>>19492889

The whale has become the embodiment of Ahabs decline in his advancing age. That's why he's obsessed. He's not just trying to kill the whale that bit off his leg. He's trying to kill his own mortality, his own inevitable decline and death.

>>19497845
I'd be pretty mad personally if a whale bit off my leg. You? Maybe not. Maybe you're a little bitch. "Oh hes just mad at his own old age". How about I bite your leg off and then if you get mad at me I start psychoanalyzing your motive and tell you you're actually mad at your repressed gay feelings. Are you Jewish?

>>19497867

> "Old age is always wakeful; as if, the longer linked with life, the less man has to do with aught that looks like death. Among sea-commanders, the old greybeards will oftenest leave their berths to visit the night-cloaked deck. It was so with Ahab; only that now, of late, he seemed so much to live in the open air, that truly speaking, his visits were more to the cabin, than from the cabin to the planks. “It feels like going down into one’s tomb,”—he would mutter to himself—“for an old captain like me to be descending this narrow scuttle, to go to my grave-dug berth.”"

> “look ye here—here—can ye smoothe out a seam like this, blacksmith,” sweeping one hand across his ribbed brow; “if thou could’st, blacksmith, glad enough would I lay my head upon thy anvil, and feel thy heaviest hammer between my eyes. Answer! Can’st thou smoothe this seam?” ... "thou only see’st it here in my flesh, it has worked down into the bone of my skull—that is all wrinkles!".

I think when an author writes things he does so deliberately; and I think Melville did not build Ahab up with lines like:

>"Ahab’s above the common; Ahab’s been in colleges, as well as ’mong the cannibals; been used to deeper wonders than the waves; fixed his fiery lance in mightier, stranger foes than whales. His lance! aye, the keenest and the surest that out of all our isle! Oh! he ain’t Captain Bildad; no, and he ain’t Captain Peleg; he’s Ahab, boy; and Ahab of old, thou knowest, was a crowned king!"

And

>In old Norse times, the thrones of the sea-loving Danish kings were fabricated, saith tradition, of the tusks of the narwhale. How could one look at Ahab then, seated on that tripod of bones, without bethinking him of the royalty it symbolized? For a Khan of the plank, and a king of the sea, and a great lord of Leviathans was Ahab.

Only to have him be a deranged obsessive who leads his crew to disaster. If the whale has come to represent Ahab's mortality then it's in some sense a noble effort. Killing death has more grandeur of spirit than seeking revenge on an animal.

Also: Being unable to comprehend anything beyond "hurt bad violence", are you a nigger?

>>19497910
Ahab is based so he decides to kill the whale who hurt him, but moby dick is too much for him, there is no contradiction here

>>19492722
I don't like this; it makes everything seem flat and shallow.

>>19492722
man vs no god

Reality vs Technology

>>19492722
Man Vs Technology should be modernism and Man Vs Society should be Post Modernism

>>19496937
man vs author and man vs god are the same thing

>>19496937
Breakfast of Champions is probably the most well known example, comedic but fairly standard in structure.

>>19492729
literally me

>>19492753
Is this bait

>>19492802
>moby dick (haven't read it)
Man vs nature and self
>iliad (haven't read it)
Man vs man, man vs god
>book of job
Man vs god
>les miserables (haven't read it)
Man vs society
>the tartar steppe (never heard of it)
>crime and punishment (have read it)
Man vs sefl
>industrial society and its future
Man vs society, man vs technology


How accurate is this?

>>19492802

>>19501361
Not one of those Classical choices are correct, and IJ is not about technology

>>19501745
Post your own choices then you faggot

>>19501745
stfu

>>19501208
Not him, but... Jurassic Park isn't a book, is it? If it is, why would you just expect people to know that?

>>19501772
Because we are on the internet and you can search it in 0.5 seconds

>>19501779
ok but you're acting like this guy is baiting you when he says he didn't know Jurassic park was a book. In what world is that supposed to be common knowledge?

>>19501745
>and IJ is not about technology
Nor is it postmodern.

>>19501799
I bet you didn't know the Godfather was a book either

>>19501837
There are a lot of articles and essays calling it postmodern and discussing its relation to postmodernism

>>19501864
So? That is the argument of someone who has no idea what they are talking about and we can find lots of articles and essays to "prove" just about anything. It has a relation to postmodernism, but more in that it is a rejection of postmodernism, or more accurately DFW growing up and realizing the errors of his postmodern youth. If you were to force it into an established movement then modernism would be the best fit, but only slightly more accurate than postmodernism.

>>19501951
Why do you think that?

>>19501766
>>19501748

see >>19496499

Paradise Lost is an ok choice, but its rapt up in Milton's politics of loving Cromwell and coming within inches of getting his own self beheaded. Lucifer punished for inducing freewill could be Milton conceding he lost or was wrong, or he could be trying to create sympathy for Lucifer and his actions. He wasn't going to alter the ending of a biblical story anyway. The Book of Job is entirely about Man VS God (concluding with God not really giving an answer) and is in the big book about God.

Infinite Jest is about technology being one of the new filters that distorts our own view of self, others and events. The book is just as much about that with language, geographic location, age, sex, wealth, physical appearance, and choice of enjoyment. Its about escaping guilt, material addiction, spiritual addiction, suicide, denying reality. Its about being a western lab rat. Its about too many things. Its jumbled and adlibed and in-sequential compared to the mix-max logical way technology would want to arrange things in a narrative, but its not just a book about man vs tech.

>>19501994
Because it is accurate. If you want more depth you will need to ask less vague questions that demonstrate your knowledge so I can formulate a sane answer instead of writing a 30 page essay to cover everything.

>>19502073
What do you think characterizes postmodernism in literature and why doesn't Infinite Jest fit into the category. You haven't actually given any explanation

>>19492722
Man vs author.

>>19502088
It being a rejection of postmodernism is a reason it does not fit into that category. I sort of like DFWs definition (not his unique definition but the one he subscribed too) of postmodern, the exploitation of the tools of criticism, it gives the author more of an active role in the narrative and blurs the lines between author and character which also greatly expands how the author can use things like metafiction, pastiche and intertextuality. Yeah, sort of a cheat to use DFWs own definition but it is not really his and it is a somewhat vague term. The only definition I have seen which IJ fits into is postmodernism as a historical era, which is nearly useless in this case and requires accepting modernism as done despite modernism still being dominant and active in literature and still developing. I am happy to work within the confines of any definition you would like

>>19502345
That's a good answer. What about the footnotes though, is that not a sort of postmodern technique since it's kind of a tool of criticism

>>19492722
God what a simplistic, dumb as shit way of interpreting literature.
You can find literature from any time period that has conflict that is listed as "modern" and "postmodern" in this dumb as fuck picture.
I guess I should expect nothing better from literature toddlers, ie english teachers and professors

>>19501361
>>19492802
>dostoyevsky
>no God
retards alert

>>19502406
It's incredible how much I didn't ask at all

>>19502458
They mean his characters struggle with thinking there is no god clearly

>>19502458
You are fucking stupid and illiterate

>>19502468
>come to message board
>see message
>”ummm, actually I don’t care”
Women don’t belong here.

>>19502397
The use of criticism in postmodern lit is more that they viewed it as a toolbox, they did not have to fall into realism or modernism or surrealism or anything, they could switch freely as needed, IJ does not do this. The footnotes are an extension of the fragmentation which is a mix of nonlinear story telling and epistolary novel, both a well traveled paths in modernism. The epistolary aspects of IJ are interesting since most of them a woven into the narrative, like Mario's puppet show, but some like Hal's essay and the filmography are more traditional. The footnotes are largely an extension of the epistolary, he just moved them to the end of the novel to get more control over the fragmentation. This is all more of a growth of modernist techniques than post modernist, he definitely was influenced by the postmodernist and we get odd little glimpses of that influence throughout his work but overall everything from IJ on has more in common with the modernists.

To give a more concrete example of the differences, look at how drug use is handled in GR and IJ. In GR the narrative switches to surrealism/absurdism when Slothrop gets injected, when Hal gets high the narrator just notes the changes in Hal's mental state. Even through the extreme example of Poor Tony's withdrawl we never really switch narrative styles, it just becomes more detailed and focused, the narration never tries to trick us into believing that his hallucinations are real.

>>19502542
I see what you're saying, although the very first part of IJ does sort of trick us, we think Hal is speaking but hes actually having some kind of psychotic fit.

>>19502501
So why are you here, then?

>>19502574
No, that is Hal's internal monologue, a few sections are possibly narrated from the first person, but he is tame on this even compared to modernists and it is questionable if narrator ever actually shifts. One of the most defining aspects of IJ's narrative style is a heavy use of free indirect speech, at times there is none and at others the narrator almost completely takes on the characters speech patterns but we constantly get reminded that it is the narrator speaking, not the characters internal monologue. Hal's internal monologue in the first part and the use of free indirect speech in general can be viewed from the thematic, the narrator is ceasing to speak just like Hal, he has jumped through the hoops of being a good narrator for so long that he loses himself, just like Hal, by this view the first chapter is actually the narrator and not Hal's internal monologue, they have both completely ceased speaking.

>>19501361
IJ is man vs. reality. People are overcome by pleasure via drugs, giga-Netflix, etc. and delude themselves into existing in an artificial world meant only to seek pleasure rather than live in the real world of events. Various addicts don't take part in the real world and remove themselves as far as possible from reality.

>>19502847
You are ignoring the why. Why do they give in to those things? The bulk of IJ is dedicated to the why, you are fixating on plot. IJ is a mix of man vs society and man vs self.

>>19502458
Who is Ivan Karamazov?

>>19501361
>Man vs. Author
my fucking sides

>>19502916
I don't get it

>>19492889
Moby Dick is God and Ahab is a rebellious Job.

>>19502578
>I know you are but what am I
You’re a chick lmao

>>19502872
>you are fixating on plot
Yes, that's what you do when you analyze conflicts. What you're saying is analogous to saying Crime and Punishment isn't about man vs. self because the bulk of the novel is dedicated to why he's in conflict with himself, so it would be man vs. god/no god depending on whose semantics you buy. The common thread within just about every character in IJ is a conflict with reality, whether that be through their internal or external struggles.

>>19503340
I would maybe accept that argument if it weren't for the fact that what you listed are plot elements, not the plot. You did a half assed analysis of theme through literal plot elements. Plot analysis of IJ beyond how it supports theme, which is its primary purpose, is idiotic.

>>19502946
>I don't get it
The irony of a young children's book being included in a serious literature comparison chart?

>>19503621
Would you say that Moby Dick couldn't be considered man vs. nature? It absolutely shouldn't be analyzed as such but at a baseline understanding of the novel that conflict is certainly present.

>>19492722
Man v Man, Man vs self, Man vs author.

>>19492722
Man vs Audience: My diary Desu

>>19492730
man vs nature
>Life, uh, finds a way

>>19503993
Superficial and meaningless beyond how it supports theme and the true conflict, which you admit by saying you absolutely should not do it but still persist. Stop being obtuse.

>>19504554
It is LITERALLY about fighting a whale. You don't understand this because your dick and balls are an affront to the platonic ideal of genitals

>>19503628
But the Monster at the End of this Book is peak /lit/, even equalling the Hungry Caterpillar

>>19504563
You literally are a moron.

>>19493006
main character is an atheist, book is anti atheist (no god). fits well, don't know what book you read.

>>19504631
Your argumentative skills match your penile glory you fatuous sneed nigger

>>19504707
based 18 year old newfag swinging for the fences on a literature form

>>19492726
Underrated post

>>19492748
The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human being to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in “advanced” countries. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can’t predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important.

>>19492722
Nature vs. Nature

>>19492722
Man vs Man is my favorite. There's nothing better than reading a story where two flawed protagonists come into contact, gain something from each other that they each were missing, and end up in conflict over their ideals despite being so similar by the end.

>>19504554
The first guy who replied to this wasn't me, the guy you responded to originally. I didn't mean it as a gotcha question; I just wanted to make sure you genuinely held that position. You can believe whatever you want, but for basic classification that's an insane position that almost no one would accept. For actual literary analysis it's also a myopic view. The author's outward presentation of conflict and plot elements is important because it sets the stage for more intricate and thematically relevant conflicts, which you acknowledge but don't take the logical step of saying that I was at least partially right originally even if the more important themes are relayed through other conflicts.