/lit/ - Literature

>>19989361
Damn, I was hoping this was a /lit/ & /tg/ crossover.

>>19989417
It can definitely serve as such. A number of authors got their start playing table top games. I, myself, prefer D&D 3.5 rule set. What about you?

>>19989432
Haven't played any rpg in the last 20 years, I use to be the designated storyteller for my WoD group tho. Otherwise lately it's more the Netrunner and Arkham lcg that's been holding my attention, as well as Battletech.

>>19989525
>WoD
I only played a few times, but each time was a shit ton of fun.
>Netrunner and Arkham lcg
Only card game I've been able to get in is MtG. Have any desire to do any serious writing before?

>>19989361
>the relationship between feminized society and emasculated men
>traditional masculinity/traditional femininity; war between man and the hominids (e.g., homo-erectus, etc. rather than orcs); genetic manipulation of the hominids; beauty and utility of Western culture/values; global cataclysm.
How will you avoid your book just being a masturbatory, "return to the old ways" kind of book? Wouldn't the "cause" be better served by creating beautiful art that stands on it's own legs rather than a veiled criticism of what you see as it's modern problems? I'm not saying what you describe can't be beautiful/great art, but western art wasn't built on bitching about the present moment and being afraid of it. Well, not all of it at least

>>19989543
>being a masturbatory, "return to the old ways" kind of book?
Yeah, no. I think you're way off base. These are just certain themes in the book, which will only be subtle undertones.
>cyclical nature of civilization
>war between hominids
>genetic manipulation
>cataclysm
>blood-sex ritual magick
What does any of this have to do with "modern problems? I think you just have a narrow, immature understanding of the world. These subjects do not much to do with modern politics beyond being discussed by political figures. These are the ideas and topics I find most interesting at the moment.
>on it's own legs rather than a veiled criticism of what you see as it's modern problems?
None of what I wrote are "veiled criticisms of modern politics." These are issues as old at the human race itself. Every work of art (especially literature) is infused with the author's historical, political, and moral interests. My book will be no different.
>by creating beautiful art that stands on it's own legs
Again, all literature carries undertones of the authors interests and viewpoints. It sounds like my interests and viewpoints disturb you for some reason. I think that's your problem, not mine. There is an incredibly large, untapped audience out there for the stories I want to write.

>>19989532
>I only played a few times, but each time was a shit ton of fun.
It's either a blast or you get the absolute worst group.
>MtG
Tried a long time ago, really wasnt my cup of tea.
>Have any desire to do any serious writing before?
Sure, I've been writing a Tractatus-styled phenomenology book for the last few months.

>>19989582
>I've been writing a Tractatus-styled phenomenology book for the last few months.
This sounds interesting. Can you give any more insight regarding what you're specifically writing about and where you're at in the process?

>>19989569
I didn't write politics anywhere but you defaulting to that is telling. You clearly can't see behind the surface and don't even realize that you are afraid of a changing world and changing people. Everything you mentioned stems from that. You won't get anywhere until you face yourself and your fears.
I don't mean this as a personal attack even if it sounds like it, just telling you don't actually understand what you are doing and you can't create something great or even good like that.

>>19989632
>I didn't write politics anywhere but you defaulting to that is telling.
It doesn't matter that you didn't use the word "politics". It's what you are referring to you disingenuous midwit.
>You clearly can't see behind the surface and don't even realize that you are afraid of a changing world and changing people.
astro-turfed change isn't actual change. The vast majority of the world (e.g., China, India, etc.) is traditional. Your "change" has been rejected. The people who support your "change" aren't having children and eventually your movement will die out like the other astro-turfed movements before it.
>Everything you mentioned stems from that.
No, you're demonstrably wrong.
>cyclical nature of civilization
>war between hominids
>genetic manipulation
>cataclysm
>blood-sex ritual magick
have little, or nothing to do, with modern events or politics. These ideas have influence art and literature for millennia and that won't change because it offends or challenges your world-view.
>You won't get anywhere until you face yourself and your fears.
What exactly am I fearing now? I'm "facing my fears" by offering art and culture that does not include "modern events and politics." Which is rather telling, when that's supposedly what you criticized me for doing. You're the one who is promoting establishment ideals and motifs. You're the one who can't create effective art because you're afraid. I know you midwits like to throw the world "projecting" around, as if it wins arguments. But you're really projecting here and it is "telling."

>>19989632
>just telling you don't actually understand what you are doing
What have you created? I can tell that it is you that doesn't actually understand literature or art.
>you can't create something great or even good like that.
What the hell are you even talking about. All of the greatest art and literature in history is based on the authors sensibilities, interests, politics, and morals. I can tell you've never actually studied literature. Why are you even on this board?

>>19989600
It's all manuscript for now, so I cant really share much (and I'm at work now). I have maybe 50 pages of notes, which translate to about 20 pages of "articles" a la Tractatus (on legal format paper).
I'm (trying) to do the inverse path that usual phenomenologist use, that is, produce a structured development from the point of view of a pure reduced consciousness, and build back up through all the different pheno-ontological stratas that are necessary to constitute our existence.
I'm confident that the successful joining of Husserl's and Witty's brands of turbo-autism should end all philosophy forever.

>>19989694
This is a major undertaking and I definitely would like to hear more substance behind the concept when you're able or in future /ccg/ threads. Thank you for participating.

>>19989656
>>19989665
So you are more interested in trying to prove to yourself that I am some idiot bogeyman than thinking about yourself and what you are actually doing for five minutes.
>astro-turfed change isn't actual change. The vast majority of the world (e.g., China, India, etc.) is traditional. Your "change" has been rejected. The people who support your "change" aren't having children and eventually your movement will die out like the other astro-turfed movements before it.
I have no movement and I have no change. It's clear you can't even imagine a person who is critical of your idea and isn't neck deep in what you hate. A dog has a more colorful worldview. And if you don't see a large part of society refusing to have children and the very fact that things like this can happen for the first time as "change" you clearly lost the plot long ago.
>cyclical nature of civilization
>war between hominids
>genetic manipulation
>cataclysm
>blood-sex ritual magick
All stem from your semi-conscious fears.
>What the hell are you even talking about. All of the greatest art and literature in history is based on the authors sensibilities, interests, politics, and morals. I can tell you've never actually studied literature. Why are you even on this board?
All great artists look inwards, which is exactly what you are refusing to do.

Your reaction to mild criticism, a few very simple questions and the lens being pointed at you momentarily proves that I right. Go write your book, but know that you are the furthest thing possible from a "culture creator". There's no point wasting another second on you.

>>19989722
>I have no movement and I have no change.
Again, you're disingenuous. The "change" was your words, not mine.
>It's clear you can't even imagine a person who is critical of your idea
Critical of my reverence for Western art? You have no criticisms.
>isn't neck deep in what you hate.
So having reverence for my ancestors and history is neck deep in hate? You infantile agenda is transparent to anyone reading this thread.
>All stem from your semi-conscious fears.
You're not at smart as you think you are and you're just projecting your insecurities.
>cyclical nature of civilization
I love myth, geology, anthropology, and archaeology. I don't see how that has anything to do with "hate" or my subconscious "fears." Your midwit is showing.
>war between hominids
See, you're unintentionally being the "racists" you fear by even bringing this up. Homosapiens sapiens co-existed with a number of hominid species. I think this is an excellent setting to place my story. You're projecting your subconscious racist superiority complex here.
>genetic manipulation
See Temple of Karnak and John Anthony West's work for context. Has nothing to do with fear, midwit.
>cataclysm
What does astrophysical cataclysm have anything to do with my "sub-consious" fears, other than the fact I think it's an existential, a-political threat and it's an interesting threat that seems to be part and parcel of our civilization.
>blood-sex ritual magick
You know, zoomie, that people have been fasctinated by magick for centuries and it has nothing to do with politics or "current events" or whatever bullshit you're trying to accuse me of doing. You're shitting up this board and this thread and embarrassing yourself.
>Your reaction to mild criticism
My reaction was to explain why you were wrong. And you are wrong. I don't think this is debatable.
>few very simple questions
You're questions were obviously loaded and politically-charged, you disingenous faggot. That's why my reaction is so strong.
>There's no point wasting another second on you.
Good, stop shitting up this board.