/lit/ - Literature

Homosexuality is so disgusting.

>>20983130
so true anon!

>>20983175
I'm glad you agree, anon. I love being based.

very nice

whats up with the bestof &amp thing?

will I get a reply by email if I'm accepted

>>20983313
you'll see your piece in the next issue/the issue after that if you were accepted

is OP editoranon?

>>20983363
nope. still waiting on him

>>20983774
any updates about &amp? idk what’s going on since the last thread died

>>20983792
The next issue is coming. What more is there to know?

>>20983792
editor said he'd publish after "the end of summer"

is the bestof cancelled? i still had some stories to recommend for it, should i email bestof anon? the google doc for it is read only

>>20983838
email anon or request perms on the google doc.

>>20983295
>>20983838
As an update on the best-of:
Moving onto V3 of the list, I've got the commenting permissions turned off and I'm going to re-sort the entries according to the recommendations currently given in the document. Pieces may lose stars or gain stars or get greyed or be pruned, etcetera.

I'll turn commenting back on once I'm through with reorganising, but I have a feeling that the momentum there has died down. That may mean that soon I'll take the top pieces for review away from prying eyes and start considering things like editing and typography (hopefully I won't be doing this solo). I'd still like to receive recommendations on the un-commented pieces.

If you have comments to give in the meanwhile, email me at unofficial.drivel@gmail.com, and the doc link will remain the same:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TMyRTrB6SEjbDFkFixaMqNpr0--Fb3T9Pdv1x2s7Z7g/edit
though, like I said before, it's read-only for now.

Sorry for being out of touch on things, but hopefully I'll have some real updates soon. Thanks to whoever started the new thread. Not sure if I want to tripfag, but maybe at some point so people stop confusing me with editor.

>>20983883
> That may mean that soon I'll take the top pieces for review away from prying eyes and start considering things like editing and typography (hopefully I won't be doing this solo).

thanks for the update, i emailed you. when you say away from prying eyes what do you mean? just that the final decisions are only going to be made by you? or will it be public/open for voting?

>>20983936
>away from prying eyes
I mean that ultimately I need to go through each of the pieces myself and vet them, though hopefully I'll have others to help with that. This will more or less be the job of text extraction/transcription, editing, and typography. That might include more decisions about which pieces are in or out, but I'd like for it not to.

The Google Doc is the public voting forum, and any decisions I make will be aligned to what you see there, but of course not all of the work can be done truly democratically (especially since it's only a select few contributing there so far).

will I get a reply by email if I'm accepted

>>20984013
you'll see your piece in the next issue/the issue after that if you were accepted

>>20984013
Not necessarily, and quit spamming, jackass.

i kinda want to get some help fixing up my submission before i send it in. has anyone posted in /wg/ lately and actually found it helpful? my posts there keep getting ignored. or can anyone rec other forums where i can get critiques?

>>20984156
atlaspherea@gmail.com has been offering help, but I'm pretty sure he's got a backlog of pieces to go through. You can email me at unofficial.drivel@gmail.com and I'll try to take a look, but no guarantees.

any poetrychads here who can explain to me what Mallarmé's "Un coup de dés jamais n'abolira le hasard" is all about? thanks

>>20983883
Are we set on the watchmen beehive look?

>>20984310
No, I just wanted something to make the reply stand out. Call it avatarfagging, I guess.

>>20983822
Thought it was BEFORE the end of summer. Fuck, man. Now I know it's not coming.

>>20984366
you're right, he did say before the end of summer. my bad

Anxiously awaiting issue 015 and the reception of my flash fiction. I already know people are gonna just say it's purple but I really just wanna know if anyone will understand it because it's borderline schizology.
I'm already working on more for issues to follow

Is there a word count limit for submissions?

>>20984991
I'm not the editor but I suggest you'd keep a submission at short story or chapter length, less than 7500 words. Otherwise you should plan on breaking the sections up. If you have a great novelette, you could possibly could get a feature but it might get split between two issues instead.
Maybe leave notes in your submission and give some guidance if the editor considers it should be broken up.

>>20985179
Thanks. Yeah I mean I wouldn't submit a novel obviously. Though it might be fun to publish one in installments, old-school style. Lots of old novels used to be published in magazines episodically.

I have a ~7000 word piece which I think belongs only on this mag. Nothing crazy long, but an editor has to make sometimes exclusive choices between the number, quality, and length of pieces that go into an edition.

>>20984619
i remember your post in the previous thread.
>Anxiously awaiting
me too
>already know
you never know!
>working on more
looking forward to it.

>>20985980
god almighty that thumbnail is ugly as hell

Anyone got any suggestions for how to pick the final pieces that'll make it in?

There are a few "good if there's not much better than it" recommendations in the list, but I'm not keen on trying to do a full ranking of the pieces (not all of them are comparable on the same scale anyway). I want to keep it fluid, but I don't want this to be a process that drags on infinitely.

>>20986110
there's no perfectly fair way to do this, so just get in touch with maybe two or three people and sort it out. people had the chance to comment on the google doc. if anyone has any complaints about the final line-up, they have only themselves to blame.

>>20984156
>>20984194
I’m atlaspherea@gmail.com— sorry, but I do have a bit of a backlog. I have a few anons who’ve sent me stuff to look over, but I haven’t had a chance yet. I’ll try to get through their pieces by this weekend. But if you want to email me your work anyway, I’ll get to it when I’ve got the time.

>>20986110
The top and bottom left covers look great— I love the colour choices. Superior to the yellow, imo.

On picking the final pieces, perhaps it might be a good idea to set some sort of guidelines surrounding the number of works that we’ll include in each category, more specifically by sub-categorizing by length. When we’re cutting down the list, the quality to quantity ratio is important— there are some long works on the list that are excellent, but some that are mediocre or were recommended with a lot of caveats. If something’s going to take up a lot of valuable page space, it should be worth the reader’s while. So maybe we should try to annotate the list to make note of each piece’s word count/page count, and then look at the longest pieces first and identify ones that have received criticism or don’t seem good enough to justify the space they’d take up. For prose, perhaps we can decide on a set number of longer works to include, and then cut down the list accordingly, being a bit more flexible with the number of shorter works/ vignettes. For poetry, I don’t think we need to really do much decision making, because there aren’t very many poems on the list, and a lot of the shorter poems can share a page layout with other ones anyway.

>>20986207
on account of the varying font sizes and formatting in &amp, i think word count would be a more accurate way to measure the length of a piece

>>20986225
Yeah, I agree. I should’ve send identifying word count to figure out how many pages each piece would take up in the best-of typesetting

>>20986110
ooh those are nice colors – all except the teal green (imo) would work well as a cover

>>20986439
What do you think of emerald green. (Not the editor btw, just a curious anon).

>>20986441
>emerald green
What?

>>20986704
NTA but i'm imagining a deep, saturated, cool green. which sounds pretty good. maybe this green should have been darker (>>20986110)

>>20986441
Not sure, I like the green in the image above, but for the cover I personally wouldn't want any green. I like the yellow, purple and plum/puce(?) because they give me decadent vibes (The Yellow Book, The Savoy, etc.)

>>20986439
Interesting, I like the teal one the best. But otherwise my vote goes to the purple, then the brick. Yellow might be functional but not nice

>>20986768
>The Yellow Book
don't jinx it, anon:
>Maugham also wrote critically about [The Yellow Book] in his semi-autobiographical work, The Summing Up (1938), commenting "If one takes the trouble to look through the volumes of The Yellow Book, which at that time seemed the last thing in sophisticated intelligence, it is startling to discover how thoroughly bad the majority of its contributors were. For all their parade these writers were no more than an eddy in a backwater and it is unlikely that the history of English literature will give them more than a passing glance."

>>20986110
the blue one's the best, imo.
&amp layout explorations:

>>20987174
7b

>>20987178
7c

>>20987181
and 7d.
but i think in the end i'd prefer something like the concepts best-of anon posted (>>20986110). very decadent, like >>20986768 said.

>>20987178
>>20987187
I like these two. Cool smoky effect to it.

best of &amp graphic design here:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qRXh4G2gpY1Pt1-i-Y1HteeN947FEmXp

look around and (please please please PLEASE) contribute!

An aside to all this: Cat in Abu Ghraib, &amp issue 005. To Lynndie England.

Any thoughts on this one? If it gets included I'm gonna make sure to include the tail and ears.

>>20986207
Yeah, I think the word count is going to decide a lot (bit of a mistake dropping the flash-fiction distinction, but maybe I'll make a jumpstart on transcription instead; page count is a little meaningless anyway for reasons already stated). In my head I sort of gave up on the idea of distinct chapters for categories and figured we should take a more granular, piece-by-piece approach to organisation: it's been expressed that some pieces would fit next to each other, but wouldn't stand on their own. That's a bit of a tougher endeavour, though I think it'd need to be done on some level regardless.

I still haven't given my personal vote for many of the pieces, so I might act as a sort of tie-breaker at some point. There are still a number of pieces--even on the starred list--that lack comments. Pic related, Cat in Abu Ghraib, is one that got multiple recommendations but no commentary. Maybe I'll go back again and revisit the threads/emails where these pieces were first put forward and gauge the enthusiasm there (those votes should count for as much as the commentary). Every starred piece technically has one more recommendation than it does stars, so that metric is a little misleading (takes two recs to get on that list, but only the second and later are noted).

There's also the challenge that good pieces might be polarising, but that depends on how the commentary is split. Anything dubious should probably be dropped.

Then my unfulfilled promise of screencapping starred pieces...would be good to get discussion going in-thread. Maybe I'll just do the contentious pieces or something. At first I blamed my not doing this on my work computer not having the same software I use at home, but the exact same tools are also online. Whoops.

>>20987476
i loved it.

>>20987476
One concern I forgot to raise: all the recommendations from in-thread are anonymous, so it makes counting those tough. The original list (which is more or less what we have today) is based on thread activity and emails, but I worry about having double-counted anons who may have been vocal in release threads and then re-recommended the piece to me. Ah well, not a big deal, but there are annoying caveats to the process.

>>20987508
And on this, how about you, >>20987483, eh? Trying to vote twice, huh? Trying to game the system? Trying to fuck with our (my) little democracy or sumthin? New rule: in-person votes only, and must provide name, address, and date of birth. Anyway, have you voted for this one before, or is my concern just needless waffling?

>>20987530
no; i didn't even know that this was on the list. i remember reading it a long time ago and i liked it very much, but i think it slipped my mind while discussing the best-of issue, so thanks for bringing it up, i suppose. sta

>>20987476
I like the poem, it has a nice rhythm to it, feels feline in a way I can't really describe, just has that kind of catlike sound. Can any anons tell me what the arabic means?

>>20987558
From what little I know of Arabic, it says "Be quiet, cat man."

>>20987174
the contrast is best on this one. the title should stand out. but also it shouldnt look like just a normal issue. thats why i like >>20986110. actually if there was a way of incorporating all those colors into one thatd be great. its going to be a diverse collection so the cover should ideally reflect that. im against doing a 4chan theme though, since it would not only rob some of atmosphere, but it would also make the already 4chanish pieces like the greentexts look that much more commonplace

>>20987476
worth it for the tail, ears and the arabic ! alone. and i really like the first two lines.

>>20987569
this post reminded me. the greentexts in the best-of are top-tier because they break certain greentext "conventions" so well. i'm very interested in /lit/ that breaks conventions.

>worth it for the tail, ears and the arabic ! alone.
this poem, too. i love works that are written in multiple languages. i don't know why. just very cool

>>20987567
Cool! makes sense, thanks very much.

>>20987476
> page count is a little meaningless anyway for reasons already stated

If we can decide on a general idea of the dimensions/typesetting that the best-of issue will use and create mock-up pages, then we can use word count to estimate the eventual page count of each work on the list.

> In my head I sort of gave up on the idea of distinct chapters for categories and figured we should take a more granular, piece-by-piece approach to organisation: it's been expressed that some pieces would fit next to each other, but wouldn't stand on their own.

When I said the number of works per category, I didn’t mean that we should have separate chapters for each category. I remember you suggested that we could organize more loosely and associatively, using shorter pieces as bumpers between longer ones, and I like that idea. I do think that the categories are still important for selection purposes though, because we should try to make the best-of a good representative sample of &amp and make sure to include a bit of everything: ie. a few long prose pieces, a few short prose pieces, a few carefully selected shitposts, some schizology pieces, a good number of poems, a few nonfiction works. And we should also judge works on the basis of uniqueness/distinctiveness, considering whether the list already contains anything in the same vein. There are some pieces that are decent on their own, but are very similar in style/theme to other works on the list that are significantly better—some of those lesser works should be cut. But conversely, sometimes there are works that compliment one another, and grouping them could create something greater than the sum of its parts.

>>20987589
Are they greentexts from previous issues or new ones? Which ones? Is there a name for the tense commonly used in greentext by the way? Is it present tense with a tendency to drop pronouns at the beginning of a line?

>>20987658
the greentexts were submissions. they were written for &amp. check the google doc in the OP!
>Is it present tense with a tendency to drop pronouns at the beginning of a line?
pretty much.

>>20987662
oh goddamn i'm stupid. check the google doc anyway!

>be me
>am anon
>realize my mistake
>question my own reliability
>god dam
>suggest anon read for himself
tfw

>>20987737
chuckled

>>20987569
> if there was a way of incorporating all those colors into one thatd be great. its going to be a diverse collection so the cover should ideally reflect that

To reflect the diversity you’ve mentioned, I thought it might be interesting to make a collage for the best-of, using visual elements taken from the covers of each of the past issues. Not necessarily to use as a cover—more likely as a two-page spread to include either at the beginning or end of the final product.

I’m a collage fiend—there’s a communal bookshelf in the laundry room of my apartment complex, and I like to steal all of the magazines and then surreptitiously return them with the cool visual elements cut out. I know, I know—I’m a terrible person, but my excuse is that I do it for my art.

Not sure if I’d make the collage by printing each cover page and then cutting stuff out by hand, or by doing it digitally in Photoshop or some equivalent. My printer is out of colour ink right now anyway, and the cartridges are insanely expensive, so I’ve been procrastinating on buying replacements. That poses a problem and makes me lean towards the latter. But I think something handmade would be cooler, so I suppose I could just print the covers at an office supply store or library.

>>20984310
> the watchmen beehive look
To add to the previous comparisons (road signs, power tools, caution tape), every day on my way home I walk by a fry truck that’s the exact same shade of yellow as that cover, with its tagline printed on the side in black text. So if we go with the yellow version, this project will forever live on in my mind as “Best of &amp: French-Frypunk Edition.”

>>20987662
>>20987669
Nobody linked the doc in the OP, so I'll repost it here. Comments off for now while I update it.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TMyRTrB6SEjbDFkFixaMqNpr0--Fb3T9Pdv1x2s7Z7g/edit?usp=sharing

>>20987784
Should submit some of those to &amp. Visual contributions are accepted even though (almost) nobody does it. I've been thinking of sending in album reviews to tie in with my radio show rather than just spamming the issues with posters.
>tfw some kid defaced my posters the other day
Means I'm part of the cultural zeitgeist, right?

>>20987787
oh boy. i've made a fool of myself twice in a row now. goddamn.

Today's Wednesday, that means writing for &amp, back to the American Psycho essay. I hope I preface it alright because the first half is mostly depicting how it reads almost just reading it back, a defining of my terms. The rest in how I thought it worked. Some of it was informed by our discuss weeks ago, but most is elaboration on what I had posted before.

Anyone writing PowerPunk still? I laughed way too hard at that conversation in the previous thread.

shouldnt the dimensions just be &amp dimensions?

>>20987784
>collage
could be nice. as a cover it would be too crowded but it could be used like youve said. an &amp cover made up of equal divisions of &amp covers.
>>20987658
thine is the kingdom and greente/x/t are really good, but i feel like there should be a third one in the collection just to satisfy the rule of three. also not a tense but, second person imperative?
>>20987617
>a few long prose pieces, a few short prose pieces
since prose is the majority, i think they should be represented proportionally. a solution to all of this in general would be to make it long enough. so many unique pieces that would be wrong to leave out.
>>20987476
>I still haven't given my personal vote for many of the pieces, so I might act as a sort of tie-breaker at some point.
handling all of this fully democratically will be useless since not everyone has read everything so imo feel free to curate intuitively

>>20987877
>second person imperative?
nah. it only *sounds* like that when the narration is in the first person, e.g.
>stand there staring at him
>shit all over the carpet
but when talking about someone else it goes
>stands there staring at me
>shits all over the carpet
which isn't imperative
although second person imperative is a great narrative mode

>>20987924
Reminded me that I need to ask my neighbor to not allow her "furbabies" to shit on my lawn. There is a damn entire field of mowed grass with no one living there, but they run over to my place, to shit on it. Please choke on ant poison.

>>20988013
lemon juice.
also throw the shit back into her yard

>>20987877
> an &amp cover made up of equal divisions of &amp covers

I wasn’t thinking equal divisions—one idea I had was to use a neutral background and have large collaged letters spelling out “The Best of &amp.” The phrase has 13 letters, and there are 12 written issues that we’ll be drawing from, so I’d use one cover for each letter, and pick a cover from one of the visual issues for the 13th.

Pic related is the closest I can find to what I’m envisioning, although it’s not exact. I think that this could work as a two-page opening spread? And then as an ending spread I might make another collage in a different style, using the larger visual elements from other photos/art within various issues. But, of course, this is only if other anons like the idea— feel free to tell me if you think it’d be lame. I’ll play around with this soon, but I should really try to respond to emails from the anons who wanted critique before I start anything design-focused.

> since prose is the majority, i think they should be represented proportionally…so many unique pieces that would be wrong to leave out.

I agree that prose should be the majority. I just mean that we can only include *so many* of the longest prose works without the final product being excessively lengthy and overwhelming to transcribe/edit. That’s why I think we should streamline the list of the longest prose pieces and choose some select favourites with a good quality-quantity ratio, which will leave us room to showcase a greater number of works overall.

>>20987806
I’m definitely open to contributing art/illustrations to future issues, as well as to the best-of. Album reviews sound like a cool idea as well— I’d read them.

oh shit :( how’d they deface your posters? post a pic if you have one so we can commiserate or laugh.

Vaguely related: an idea that I had was to submit curated “playlists” of poems to future issues—3-5 poems with shared themes that correspond to a specific mood or season, along with some short reviews/commentary on each one and maybe some associated visuals? I could draw from stuff in the public domain, and could probably get away with sharing excerpts from any that are under copyright as well, since the associated commentary would make it count as fair use, I think? I’d have to research it more to be sure.

My rationale is that I often find reading poetry anthologies and editions of a poets’ collected works overwhelming. Poems are best read a few at a time, so that you can really contemplate the themes and poetic devices. When just paging through a large poetry book, it’s easy to reach a point of saturation, where individual poems seem to blur together and you can’t fully appreciate each one. Hence, the playlist idea. I made a list last November of ones that suit a melancholy late-autumn mood, so maybe I’ll experiment with the idea if there’s a November issue this year.

>>20988118
i'm not sure what exactly you're envisioning, so if you're free could you do just one letter to illustrate your point?

>curated “playlists” of poems
sounds like a great idea. maybe with reviews, too? i was also thinking about this yesterday: maybe &amp could serve as a society not just for us to submit literature, but also for us to discuss and enjoy literature.
i'd love to see your november poem playlist.

>>20988143
>if you're free could you do just one letter to illustrate your point?

Gotta head to class soon, so I can’t right now, but maybe sometime tonight if I’ve got time. I’m not fond of the colours and messy/choppy textures used in pic related, so I can see why you might find it off-putting, but don’t rule out the idea until you see a mock-up— I promise that it’s cooler in my head. I couldn’t really find any images that fully captured what I’ve got in mind.

On the poem “playlist,” I’ll share it here later as well if you’re interested.

>>20988173
>but don’t rule out the idea until you see a mock-up
i'm not going to rule it out; i hate being hasty.
i'm looking forward to it, anon! take your time.

>On the poem “playlist,” I’ll share it here later as well if you’re interested.
yes, please. thanks!

>i've heard of your little magazine. i am here to change your lives.
>what?
>i've heard of your little magazine. i am here to change your lives.
>who?
>/u/Bengali_Hype_Beast94
>wherefrom?
>/fa/ and /biz/
>what?
>i am here to change your lives.
>why?
>to change your lives.
>when?
>now.
>how?
>merch.
>what?
>

>>20988272
Very impressive use of stichomythia, Anonymous.

>>20988272
I knew two guys in college that litetally would browse Supreme's website and by 100 shirts or hats on release and then flip them for double, triple the price after they sold out. People did this with TCGs, electronics, anything. I even saw them buy a lot in class. Crazy stuff.

>>20987877
> shouldnt the dimensions just be &amp dimensions?
Could be, but it could also be smaller, more akin to a book (I like that idea, like a small paperback – especially since, tho not exclusively, it is more text focused this time). Which also raises the question, How do anons envision the best-of: as a book or a magazine? It is an anthology, a collection of previous pieces; it makes sense that, qua medium, it also be set apart, and not be just another (though different, and 'unofficial') magazine issue of &amp….

>>20988496
what are &amp dimensions? 8.5 x 11?

bump

>>20987877
>>20988496
>&amp dimensions
In my head I see the best-of reaching a point between 'zine and book--more book-like in visual style, but with a zine-able format. I want the best-of to be visually distinct from mainline &amp and focus on a text-first typographic style. Without the usual embellishments, 8.5x11 is a lot of space to fill with text, and I think something like 5.5x8.5 (booklet dimensions) would be more appropriate--can get denser that way. Technically they should hold the same amount of writing, just rotated, considering the same font. We'll see.

If it's easy to do multiple formats I'll do more than one (I'm thinking also a simple-text epub I can upload to Libgen). Smaller 'zine format would be nice so anons can guerilla-print their own copies easily at home. Talked to a print shop and they said they can get up to ~84 pages (where each 8.5x11 sheet gives you four pages, so 21 sheets times 4 pages) in a booklet, but maybe I mis-heard.

>>20988118
I'll try to look at the longer pieces and nail down which those are and how long they go. Crossing my fingers that nothing has to be cut over length alone. And I'd like to see what you put together for the collage.

The posters just got flipped around with some shit scrawled on the back of one: some other station number/name, then "call this number for a good time: ###-###-###". I'll be calling the number at some point to lodge some vague threats. To be fair I have five posters (all different) up on the same board, and they missed one of them. I'm thinking I'll plaster up an extra twenty to make a point.

>>20988503
Yup.

>>20988529
I'm a fan of these, the right especially.

If someone made some &amp logo stickers I would definitely buy them, maybe we should get editor-kun to do it so he gets the revenue

a last concept

Literally produces garbage after garbage every issue. Stop advertising and spamming this schlock here

>>20989142
sounds like a cool idea.
i've been wanting to get into embroidery just so i can embroider cool shit onto a jacket. i might ask my mother to teach me.

GRDAY

>>20989156
gotta admit the graphic design's pretty fire though right

>>20987476
Nice poem. I had to look up to be reminded who lynndie is, gave the poem a bit of depth. The ending is a bit limp though.

Also maybe put an English translation of the Arabic at the bottom of the page.

All in all I get a "whatever I can get" feeling about the poetry that is published in this mag

>>20989156
The 21st century Borges has written for &amp. Fuck off

>>20989156
Tell me your least favourite pieces so I can make sure to exclude them from the best-of. Gotta trim the fat. And post your name and address so I can mail you a print copy.

>>20989174
>whatever I can get
That's the case for everything in &amp. In the last issue editor made explicit note that he was issuing fewer pages because there simply wasn't enough work submitted--let alone enough to be judicious. Everything that gets sent in gets published, more or less.

The free-for-all approach is part of what made me want to put together the best-of: take an opportunity to show off the higher quality pieces that would otherwise be forgotten in the milieu. The poetry in the best-of is likely to be sparse one way or the other.

Has everyone already submitted for 015/016? If not, what are you planning to submit?

>>20989369
Honestly I'd except 015 within the next week, we might already have all the submissions in we need for that one.
>016
I plan to submit a short story that's mostly about fried chicken biscuits call "Paying the Price" (pic related is the country-fried steak, the forgone combo) and also writing an essay with my thoughts about the novel American Psycho, which I want to write some more on tonight. Editing the former, still writing half of the latter.

>>20988950
a more book-like best-of could be cool

>>20989369
i haven’t submitted for 016 yet. i’m thinking of writing something more personal, sort of inspired by recent events. i am not handling loss well, and sometimes it’s nice to just write what’s on your mind, you know? or, as the saying goes, write what you know…

IA responding to Atlas on "For they are the ones who do the research" here

>And idk, man—throwing around words like “burger” and “chud” makes it hard for me to take you seriously.
didnt mean to sound dumb, just using 4chan shorthand (hell burger is especially appropriate while discussing an &amp piece) but i dont think it invalidates my point.
>but most people have to care about their careers to make money and survive
well he didnt apperantly, if he could have chosen to be a ski bum all along
>it’s objectively true that idpol has completely taken over the humanities and is now encroaching upon STEM disciplines
if it is such an undeniable and grave problem (again i wouldnt know) than the narrator suffers from an obvious and therefore uninteresting conflict.
>Art reflects the world we live in
yes, but it should never be its main goal to do so.
>Like it or not, political conventions are relevant to writers today. Your personal dislike of them doesn’t mean that they necessarily cheapen a story.
to me there is something inherently trashy about involving current day politics in your story. okay maybe not inherently. there were even pieces here that utilized politics very originally, like esoteric epstein (which i didnt get to comment on, but also didnt have much to add on). but the cultural prevalance of peoples problems with idpol is approaching that of idpol itself, so making it the main villain (which playing such a big role in his final decision makes it feel so) drags the piece into blatant political statement territory where its hard not to reflexsively roll your eyes.
>when they have real-world consequences
the emphasis made it feet like he was more hung up on the stickers and snacks than the diversity quota that actually affected him. presenting all of those as symptoms of the same issue is statement territory again.
>And he didn’t refuse the bait in order to take a noble path— he tried repeatedly to contact the professor, and gave up only after he realized his efforts were futile.
if he was not the barracuda (giving up after many attempts as youve said, unlike the barracuda) he at least learned from the barracudas integrity.
>I do agree, however, that the mention of the stickers and “left-wing slogans” was too overt and emphatic, which made the author seem overly politically invested.
glad you can at least kind of see. and im not arguing for the storys exclusion or anything, this was just my reaction to it.

>>20989698
Hey IA, sorry about that. I ended up deleting my response before the comments were frozen, because I felt like I was being a tool and I didn’t want to keep derailing the conversation. I think we both made some valid points though, so I guess we can just agree to disagree on this one. Anyway, I appreciate you responding.

As an aside, I find it funny that people keep calling me Atlas— it’s so pretentious-sounding. Atlaspherea is just a meaningless username that I created years ago because I liked the way it sounded. Then later on I googled it to see what would come up, and when the search results autocorrected I found out that there’s a dating/social networking website for Ayn Rand fans called the The Atlasphere. Imagining the kind of people who actually frequent that site sends my sides into orbit, but now I worry that people see my username and assume that I’m a Rand fanatic. But I suppose it’s too late to change it now, so c’est la vie, homie.

>>20989687
> sometimes it’s nice to just write what’s on your mind
There’s a thread for that, funnily enough. Interesting stuff— consider checking it out.

>>20988218
Not sure if I’ll have time to start any collage samples before the weekend, but I’ll post my poem “playlist” in a bit.

>>20989882
Thats fair. Didnt know you deleted. Sorry for derailing it further.
>dating site for ayn rand fans
LOL. Truly a case where parody and parodied are inditinguishable
>>20989687
>>20988950
The book size would be nice but would it have an effect on the length? If so is it worth pruning good pieces for size? Also the alternative to magcloud that im forgetting rn did a good job with the issues

>>20989882
>dating/social networking website for Ayn Rand fans
i looked it up; over twenty five thousand members? who are these people?

>Not sure if I’ll have time to start any collage samples before the weekend, but I’ll post my poem “playlist” in a bit.
take your time, anon. i'm looking forward to it. in the meantime, check this (>>20989144) — what do you think?

>>20987877
>greente/x/t
What made it so good to you? It was recommended once or twice, but it doesn't stand out to me. Sure, it's a good greentext, but that's it--doesn't feel especially original or anything. To compare, Thine is the Kingdom does much better.

>>20989981
>book size
Like I said, I don't think 8.5x11 or 5.5x8.5 are going to have much, if any, difference in text density--the latter is just the other flipped landscape-wise with a crease down the middle. Whatever font size works on one will work on the other, so pruning shouldn't depend on the format.

And Lulu was the other printing service. Some other /lit/ projects have used it, and Prussia offered to help set that up if need be.

>>20990445
>Prussia offered to help set that up if need be

Speaking of Prussia, did he ever get back to you about reaching past submitters? I think we discussed this over email briefly last week.

anyone have a PDF or link to the Hell Stream story? I’d like to show a colleague

>>20990485
Here’s a screencap.

>>20990472
Nah, I only had a brief exchange with him. I'll try to get in contact again, but I don't think I'd go through him to get info on past contributors unless he had personal contact with them--he was acting-editor for a few issues but only had the lamp.lit.magazine mail being forwarded to him, so I wouldn't want to skim that. Probably wouldn't want to go through anyone but editor himself for contributor info (apart from people who know others).

>>20990485
Pic related.

>>20990492
Sucker.

>>20989687
>i am not handling loss well
likewise.

>>20990445
>What made it so good to you?
its spooky. it doesnt break greentext convention or anything, im not even sure if its originally for the magazine or straight from the site but its a nice subtle creepypasta

>>20990496
Ah, okay, makes sense.

>>20988950
> I'll be calling the number at some point to lodge some vague threats…I'm thinking I'll plaster up an extra twenty to make a point.
Better yet: talk about the incident on-air, and read out the phone number so that your listeners can prank-call the culprit. Maybe it’d go against broadcast guidelines, but it’d be funny as hell.

>>20990496
>apart from people who know others
are there contributors who know other &amp contributors irl? or do you mean that they’re in contact from a distance and are friends virtually? the former seems implausible but not impossible i guess

>>20990628
I meant the latter. I know some contributors who talk or at least have contact with each other, but not any where that goes beyond a computer screen.

>>20990636
i see—virtual connections can be meaningful i suppose, even if you’re just part of each other’s lives at a distance. cool to think that some &amp writers keep in contact and collab with each other

playing around

>>20990141
As requested:

Poetry “Playlist:” (November 2021)
Theme: Melancholic Late Autumn/Early Winter

1. William Shakespeare—Sonnet 73: (That time of year thou mayst in me behold…)
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45099/sonnet-73-that-time-of-year-thou-mayst-in-me-behold

2. T.S. Eliot—Preludes
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44214/preludes-56d22338dc954

3. Wallace Stevens—The Plain Sense of Things
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/49420/the-plain-sense-of-things

4.William Carlos Williams—These
https://www.blueridgejournal.com/poems/wcw-these.htm

5. VI—an extract from a much longer poem by Thom Gunn, called “Misanthropos.” (not readily available online, but see pic related. Sorry for the shitty photo.)

I was going to post commentary on what I liked about each one, but it’s late and I need to go to bed, so it’ll have to wait. Instead, here’s an excerpt from a journal entry that I wrote around the time I assembled the list. The prose is shitty and I cut out any identifying info (hence the weird ellipses) but it sort of captures a taste of the mood I was going for.

November 15, 2021
The forecast had called for the first snow of the season last night, but it ended up being more like sleet. I stayed up late sitting at my desk, watching it fall in sheets outside my window, although it was too dark to see much of anything. When I tried to go to bed, sleep evaded me. I spent most of the night pacing around the empty living room in my sock feet, mulling things over.

…the sky was cloudy and flat and grey. Hail was falling in tiny white shards that pelted against my umbrella, scattering down onto the pavement. I took a shortcut through the park, where just a few weeks ago I had sat under the trees, reading in the warm, dappled sunlight. Now the grass is browning, buried beneath a layer of sodden yellow leaves.

…the light had already started to fade. It gets dark so early now—the days seem much shorter here than they did back home. The wind cut through my thin jacket, making me shiver. I walked down the street, looking up at the limestone buildings silhouetted against the early-evening sky…

I always feel so melancholic at the end of autumn. There’s something bleak and austere about the atmosphere—the lessening daylight and the decaying leaves, the forgotten jack o’ lanterns rotting on the doorsteps with their features gnawed away by hungry squirrels, the sharp smoky fragrance of the damp air. Everything around me is drawing to a close, but there’s this strange sense of expectancy. The dreary, barren world is waiting for winter’s arrival— to be made new again, blanketed under snow. It makes me feel as though I’m waiting too, for the arrival of something that I can’t quite name. This time of year, the loneliness is more acute than ever…

Sorry if that was lame and disappointing: it was put together pretty haphazardly. Also, I really like the cover idea that you shared.

>>20990936
good stuff. i'll go through this list later today. thom gunn seems especially interesting.

>The prose is shitty
the prose is pretty good, for what it's worth! only criticism is you should've gone for "sockfeet" instead of "sock feet." for that joycean compound word feel, you know what i mean?

>Sorry if that was lame and disappointing:
it wasn't! i liked the journal entry too-- i think i have an idea of the general feel these poems carry.
thanks for sharing, anon. i'm going to look deeper into thom gunn this week, hopefully.


my favourite part of the journal entry was when you said There’s something bleak and austere about the atmosphere—I feel as if it weighs upon me... Like upon Atlas himself... Maybe I shall call myself... Atlasphere.

bump

>>20991483
where is new issue getting released any is chapter of my hyperspace novel getting published?

>>20991505
i'm just a guy who puts coloured text over coloured backgrounds, man
keep an eye on this thread or lampbylit.com
good luck!

&amp made writan fun again for me. I didnt take it to heart much before but now I'd much prefer to write what's in my head and figure out what for than mull it over vaguely.

Any ideas for best-of illustrations?

One concern I have about making the best-of book-like is that it'll look too plain and whitewash some of that &amp Essence(TM). Apart from illustrations to go along with the titles/introductions of longer pieces, maybe we can use the bumper pages of short pieces/poems to inject some more art or typographic fun.

>>20991483
>>20991525
You're doing some real nice stuff. What's the software you're using for these? I've been using GIMP for my few mock-ups, and I'm thinking Scribus or LaTeX would be good for the proper typesetting. I've only got experience with LaTeX, but I think it'd be a bitch to do anything interesting with it, where as Scribus has templates but those might make things a little too cookie-cutter.

>>20992306
what’s this art meant to represent?

>>20992306
that's a great illustration. love the shape design on the torso and the calves.
>typographic fun
i brought up mallarme's "un coup de des" (>>20984219) for this exact reason (no replies, though). i'm very excited to see what we can do with just typography. only recently did i realize while doing these little layouts that JUST text and colour and texture can make a huge difference. i feel like we could honestly even completely eschew images and still have great, earth-shatteringly good graphic design!
BUT i'm really interested in the illustration you've done here, so i think including images would be really really cool. that sort of thing might amplify the "'zine-ness." much soul.
my critique is that it needs cleaning up, NOT in the sense that the lines are "untidy," but in the sense that the "silhouette" is a bit unclear; it takes a bit to understand what's going on, and even those few extra microseconds it takes to figure out what's going on can make the piece go from "cool!" to "eh." look at this pontormo drawing i have saved just to illustrate this concept to people. but it's good drawing nevertheless! very nice.

>Any ideas for best-of illustrations?
for the illustrations, i'm not exactly sure, but i'm a hundred percent in favour of a modernist, 20th-century-revolutionary-artist-core ATTITUDE (i hope you understand what i mean) to the illustrations. stuff like j.f. griswold. will post his work too.

as for subject matter, we're [you're (i am a bad draftsman)] only limited by our [your (i'm a mere connoisseur)] imagination. there's no limit.
i'll only say that if it's possible it would be best to ask the creators what they want (which might run the risk of turning a bit exploitative; it's like a free commission)? or we (you and any other illustrators who are willing to contribute) could spend a little more time discussing our (your) approach.

>You're doing some real nice stuff
thanks.
>What's the software you're using for these?
it's embarrassing, but i use photopea.com.

>>20992383
contemplation? whether in a funny way or a sincere way, i'm not sure.

>>20992404
griswold

The amount of distillation that is going into the best-of edition should ideally go into each new edition moving forward. Obviously, it's no fun for the reader base to read the pieces before they are published.

The people who find it fun to participate in the rankings ought to just create a discord server and act as impromptu, informal distributed editor team to help the guy behind &amp digest the submissions . This would probably lead to better end results and speed up how fast the editions come out.

I like &amp. The quality of writing is inconsistent, but it is a true document of the internet. Powered by anonymity and genuine passion, without the promise of financial gain, garish and fragmented but honest and authentic. It has more value than its origins might at first lead one to believe.

>>20992439
this sounds like a good idea in theory, but i can't help feeling like anons might somehow eventually begin to regard the "elite" discord editor staff with contempt. i also fear the thought that their contempt might be justified. otherwise, i think the idea is fair.

>>20992454
Well anons view everything with contempt. And the door should be left open to anyone who wants to participate, which might tamp down on the feeling that it's an exclusive elite . Since nobody has anything real to gain just by being on the server only those who contribute the most would earn any "status". The discord would be as open as every other process involved with &amp is.

It doesn't mean everyone who like &amp would just go to the server. Those who just want to read it don't want it spoiled. Those who just want to write for it just want to see their pieces show up. Not everyone wants to see how the sausage gets made.

>>20992454
But yeah I also see how this idea could fail miserably or lead to pointless internet drama or untold horrors. I think it's worthy of consideration as an experiment at least.

>>20992501
yeah. it's worth trying. i'm down.

>>20992404
also, nekojiru. and moomin.

>>20992518
Feel free to get to it . I'm too aspy to organize people. I'll just take credit for the idea.

>>20992603
i'm too beta to organize people, and i might kill myself if i make a server and post it in here only for no one to join.
b- best-of anon, please.............

>>20992383
Meant to be more expressive than representative. Just office doodles, so the thought is minimal. Discomfort? Malaise? Ennui? Who knows! I fill up a page with bodies when I get bored.

>>20992404
>>20992413
I'll take note, and I like the Griswold art. Is it out of copyright?

>>20992439
>>20992454
>>20992487
>>20992501
I'm skeptical of that idea, and it's been said a million times already, but &amp doesn't get enough submissions to curate the pieces and still churn out an issue every month. (That may be different for the next issue due to the hiatus and interim interest still being high, but that's not the usual circumstance.) In my eyes current &amp is best as a catch-all, and I think the best-of format could function as a quarterly/occasional thing. That way there's no spoiling pieces in &amp and the curation can be done after the fact in a way that's more transparent. Early &amp had ambitions of being curated, but that ideal was quickly forfeit to reality.

Really I'm not just skeptical of the idea, I think it's bad--antithetical to &amp as we know it. But I'm not editor, and things could change, I just don't see that as being what &amp is in its current form.

>>20992518
>>20992603
>>20992632
Please don't. Editor even made a point of shitting on an anon trying to advertise a Discord server in an old issue. It's only going to be gross.

>>20992679
>Is it out of copyright?
it was published 1913. not too sure. i'm not suggesting we use the art itself, though. just vaguely gesturing to it as inspiration, i suppose.
this drawing is great. which artists' works are you most fond of looking at?

>>20992679
>>20992691
my bad. you make some great points. you're absolutely right.

>>20992737
Anything older than a hundred years, or a hundred year's past the artist's death, should be out of copyright, I think. (Though photographs of art can be copyrighted.) I really like Egon Schiele (dead since 1918, but his art would be a little too much as illustration).

>>20992679
>copyright
I'm not a lawyer but I've had someone warn me that I might be able to use the image of a 200 year old painting if the image was from a specific print that is owned. I know there's plenty of images out there, but just mentioning because Ive seen plenty of times feuds start because someone wanted to just post a picture they liked and then an artist or museum has a melty.

>>20992794
>Schiele
i knew it!
i just checked. it's public domain.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rude_Descending_a_Staircase.jpg

>>20992834
>https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rude_Descending_a_Staircase.jpg
also, context for this cartoon is that griswold drew it as a parody of duhamp's "Nude Descending a Staircase."

>>20992794
> I really like Egon Schiele
what do you like about his work? isn’t he known for being a pervert/sex offender?

>>20993572
I like the expressiveness of the bodies he draws. There's something inhumane and irregular about them, yet they still present something intimate and personal. Sometimes kind of visceral and grotesque, and in some pieces obliquely libidinal.
>pervert/sex offender
I didn't know until you brought it up.

>>20993572
>>20994290
Forgot to add: his handle on anatomy is something I really enjoy. It takes a deep knowledge of something to distort it while still keeping it familiar or even attractive. Pic related is (to me) still sexually attractive and forwardly desirous in a way that seems at first contrary to the ugly coloration of the skin or the irregularity of the curves, but, on further thought, those "ugly" qualities seem to enhance the piece's attractiveness. I like the crude being presented in art, even going beyond what's realistic. I'll hazard to say I was attempting something similar with the Shit-Eater Triptych, although it wasn't an altogether very deliberate (or perhaps even successful) piece.

When I draw it's meant mostly as self-expression, and I mostly draw human forms. Maybe it's faggy to say, but I go by "feeling" or reflex (at least in the kind of drawings I posted earlier). I've still got a really limited understanding of anatomy and perspective, so I run into hard limitations there.

>>20994342
you should post more of your art

>>20992413
I like the grisworld idea. Not too dramatic

>I'm skeptical of that idea, and it's been said a million times already
Way to take the wind out of my sails bro. I wouldn't say it's antithetical to the mag either. Right now the mag is the pet project of one guy. If he gets hit by a bus or decides to call it quits the fun is over. And he doesn't know what to do with it. Eventually it will have to be assimilated into Anonymous. From which it sprang, so it must return.

>>20992691
Hmm idk, people seem to have been well meaning so far going off 4chan standards. Just look at the comments on that "best of" google doc. How many n-words can you count?

If it hasn't been tried, you can't claim to know what the results will be empirically.

All I'm saying is try it once.

>>20995003
Forgot to cite (You) >>20992679

Book Club, &amp issue 009.

>>20995003
Okay, explain to me: why bother? It's not going to promote contributions (unless you count the inevitable circlejerk pieces that'll arise from the cabal of editors), and while I think a distributed effort is okay (which it has been to some extent up until now), injecting off-site criticism into mainline &amp seems like a mistake to me--it stops being about /lit/ and instead becomes about the taste of a small group. If people want to discuss their own work with each other that's cool as a thing separate from &amp, but they shouldn't be put in charge of what makes it into the magazine.

If editor fucking croaks then someone else can become editor--we don't need a whole separate forum for that. Yes, it's a lot of work, but if nobody can muster that then let the project die.

In terms of the best-of, I feel uneasy about the development of personalities surrounding it. I think things so far have been impartial enough, but if this were a regular issue it could quickly become about people rather than their work. I want the picture I have of contributors to be formed by what they write, not their forum personality. I think things are treading a fine line--I want the names to fade back into the usual obscurity once this is done.

>try it once
Trying it would be a turning point for this whole endeavour, and I don't think it's something you can easily undo. Whatever real function you see in a Discord is already accomplished by a few emails, so why not leave it at that?

And, again, there's not enough material in the first place for there to be any filtering. You're putting the cart before the horse. And it's a stupid cart.

>>20995218
>In terms of the best-of, I feel uneasy about the development of personalities surrounding it.
There are clearly regular posters, or “personalities,” within these best-of threads, but that doesn’t have to be a bad thing. In some ways it makes things more interesting. I don’t think it has to devolve into a circlejerk— there have been pretty wide differences of opinion between commenters already.

>I think things so far have been impartial enough, but if this were a regular issue it could quickly become about people rather than their work.
Is that an inherently bad thing? After all, a lot of the work people submit to &amp is personal in nature. Is it really possible to fully separate the art from the artist? Isn’t any judgement or criticism of a work also, to at least some extent, judgement or criticism of the ideals and character of the person who created it? And, for that matter, is it possible to judge others’ work from an entirely objective, neutral standpoint?

>I want the picture I have of contributors to be formed by what they write, not their forum personality. I think things are treading a fine line--I want the names to fade back into the usual obscurity once this is done.
Why do you feel so strongly about this? Why do you see obscurity as such a vital quality? Something about this response seems unnecessarily angry and paranoid. Are you sure that you’re appraising the merits of this idea objectively and not focusing on your personal preferences?

>>20983126
why isn't it stylized as &mp?

>>20995218
Couple things wrong with your post.
This "cabal of editors" is not some one-party state politburo. It's whoever wants to contribute meaningfully.

Right now it's a dictatorship. What is the functional difference? We already have reached the point where the guy behind it doesn't publish whatever but is ranking them in terms of quality . This is a fairly recent development because it used to be whatever was sent in was published.

So why rely on the tastes of a single individual versus a group?

>ut they shouldn't be put in charge of what makes it into the magazine.
So only the one guy should be?

Another problem: the people involved wouldn't only be deciding what gets published. They'd be proofreaders, etc. Actual editors. The one chief editor (the guy behind it) gets ultimate say. All they do is give him some feedback and input.

>If editor fucking croaks then someone else can become editor--
From what I understand &amp is the brainchild of one single guy who does all the work. Including the graphic design and whatever else it takes. There is no infrastructure but him.

Obviously whoever this anon is gets final say. I'm just pointing out that this is a team operation and there's only one or maybe two people involved in it directly now which limits its scope.

>>20995325
not him but its a bad idea. it would render a best of useless if the normal issues had this curation. and if the best of was "the best of the best" it would leave out everyones personal favorites for the democratically agreed on best which might not be anyones favorites in particular, thus cheapening the value of a best of. of course the normal issues get very few submissions already. it is the pet project of the editor for now but his tastes dont make any real difference since he puts in everything, since he has to.
>Is it really possible to fully separate the art from the artist?
it is possible to seperate the works from the artists other works, and the anonymity is something i value in &amp. i think even editor made the mistake of giving people the chance to sign works. i like some works from k-anon and justice for example, but think badly of others, which ends up coloring my thoughts on the works i like. when it comes to the anonymity of the persons curating, i dont think its good that we werent anonymous in the best of doc file either. and the selection process of curators would be wierd. who'll select the selectors? if everyone is allowed, than it would not only make little difference-since every contributor would e a curator too-but it would also spoil the issue. there are also some pieces weve disagreed on that only i seem to like and it would be sad if i hadnt read those at all because they were exluded from the get go. reading &amp is a treasure hunt, and the pieces that you cant find anywhere else depend on its open flood gates.
>>20995553
>Right now it's a dictatorship. What is the functional difference? We already have reached the point where the guy behind it doesn't publish whatever but is ranking them in terms of quality
not for the issues. we're only able to do that for the best of because there was a lot to choose from.

>>20995325
>obscurity
We're on an anonymous forum and the forum itself is central to the ethos of the magazine. Anonymity is a form of obscurity.
>objective, neutral standpoint
No, but that doesn't mean we should be adding any unnecessary subjectivity to it.
>angry
I'm not angry about the best-of, and I'm fine with how it's going. I just don't think it should become the default mode for &amp.
>personal preference
Yes, it's my personal preference, and I laid out why I think that way.
>paranoid
Yes.

And now, again: why bother? What does it solve? What improves compared to a few chains of emails?

>>20995553
>doesn't publish whatever but is ranking them in terms of quality
Where the fuck are you hearing that? I don't know when that's ever been the case, and the last issue actually had only 80 pages compared to the usual 96 because not enough material was sent in. The guy isn't ranking or discarding pieces. Having a single guy who publishes everything is much more fair than a small group picking and choosing.
>whoever wants to contribute meaningfully
Which would be pointless and water down the magazine itself. Then it's just /crit/ or /wg/ except somebody does the pieces up all nice at the end of the month. What's the point if every fag gets to jump in and try to sway the end result? What's the point if we're all reading the material before it's ever actually a part of &amp?

>>20995575
I'll say I don't mind there being authorship listed since it implies a certain "weight" and ownership rather than people treating &amp as a way to piss into the void (I'll admit my bias since I attach a name for these reasons). There's also some tracking of personal growth that way. Also totally fine with anonymous stuff, though. I just don't want it to be personality that colours my interpretation of a piece (it's notable that editor always signed off anonymously on his pieces). I agree with you on all other points.

I do wish the best-of doc could be fully anonymous, though I think there being identifiers at least keeps the system a little more fair (I've mentioned my concerns about double-counting before).

>>20995575
>not for the issues. we're only able to do that for the best of because there was a lot to choose from.
Oh ok this seems to decide the question then. I don't have any data so I don't know what the parameters are. You say "we" which makes me think there are more people behind this already unless you are the guy behind it.
>Where the fuck are you hearing that? I don't know when that's ever been the case, and the last issue actually had only 80 pages compared to the usual 96 because not enough material was sent in. The guy isn't ranking or discarding pieces.
I deduced it from these threads. And I'm not saying that the decisions should be made by committee . It's this guy's project he should decide what to do. All I'm saying is that a bit more feedback might help inform or improve the end product.

I do think there is some discrimination going on about what gets published or arranged. If one person submits the N-word repeated 5000 times and another person submits a modern classic, the first choice will be rejected.

>>20995640
>deduced from these threads
Dude, it's been said repeatedly in these threads that &amp prints everything. And yes, I'm sure there's a caveat that editor is going to exclude a piece repeating nigger ad infinitum, but that's not the kind of curation we're talking about here. Editor's letter in 014 made it clear that he disliked a piece (the pedophile piece, "Grow Up") and found it distasteful but that he published it anyway.

Have you ever actually read or contributed to &amp? Seriously, take a skim through one of the issues and tell me whether you think editor is publishing pieces based on quality.

>we
Yes, there's more than one person helping with the best-of. That's never been a secret, and it's entirely separate from mainline &amp--I started organising the thing on a whim due to the present hiatus.

>>20995653
is it really necessary for you to use hateful racial slurs here? it doesn’t help to make any sort of point

>>20995653
>Have you ever actually read or contributed to &amp? Seriously, take a skim through one of the issues and tell me whether you think editor is publishing pieces based on quality.
Well the best-of marks a departure from the norm does it not. And it should be capitalized on.
>>20995653
>Have you ever actually read or contributed to &amp?
Bitch I am literally the best writer submitting to it. I submit to it under various @proton.mail accounts named after greek philosophers under various pseudonyms. The entire fate of &amp depends on me should I will it.

>>20995698
are you diogenesof4chan from last thread? the one who editor spoke with recently?

>>20995609
i do see your reasons but just for discussion sake ill ask since i dont use an alias, in case i sometimes should
>I'll say I don't mind there being authorship listed since it implies a certain "weight" and ownership rather than people treating &amp as a way to piss into the void
arent people who want to piss into the void still able to anonymously? are you saying it puts an auto filter on people who do use synonyms or names? wouldnt self control be enough, since no one would want what they themselves consider to be piss pulished, wether anonymously or not? is it in case they dont think its piss but people might? if so, isnt that filter a restriction? maybe if you wanted to go beyond writing "a solid piece" and really take risks? is it maybe motivation so that you feel like everything you write should be at least as good as your good stuff? is THAT not possible without authorship?
>There's also some tracking of personal growth that way.
interesting that in the two examples ive named ive seen the opposite of growth. "growth" in creative works can be hard to measure beyond basic technique

>>20995835
>pissing into the void
I meant that some people contribute without much thought for what they've written or as a sort of venting. That's okay, but I like to see it balanced. Of course you can also take an anonymous submission seriously, but to me attaching a name to multiple pieces feels like a little more has been put on the line. I mean this goes along with the anti-growth you mentioned: you're accepting the risk that you may not improve or that you'll make a misstep [I think risk is the important idea here]. Consider that if Justice or K hadn't put their names on their pieces you wouldn't be able to make any clear commentary on whether they've improved or not (bad pieces tend to be forgettable and aren't going to be mentioned unless they relate to something else, such as in the case of shared authorship). More meaningful for the author, but I think it can be symbolic to the reader as well (showing someone concerned with growth).

I also value the anonymous submissions in &amp, but I think they're characteristically different for being anonymous. Having them is part of the balance.

I've considered using a different name in the future, and I can't remember whether I decided to list authorship or if editor pulled a name from my email and I stuck with it (my first submission is anonymous; I think he asked what I'd like to do the second time around).

>>20994342
schiele's mark-making was remarkable too. incredible draftsman. his work makes me want to cry.
>I've still got a really limited understanding of anatomy and perspective, so I run into hard limitations there.
sometimes people who understand anatomy and linear perspective are limited by their understanding of anatomy and linear perspective.
but go through ernest watson's "Creative Perspective." even just the introductory chapters will change your life.

>>20995902
the name you assign to what you write doesn’t really matter. if you’re familiar with someone’s writing style, it’s very easy to identify their work wherever you see it. people have “tells” that are almost as unique and distinctive as a fingerprint, if you know what to look for. for that reason, complete anonymity on “anonymous” forums is impossible, especially when everything is archived.

>>20995902
good arguments, but maybe im still too shy for it.
>>20995940
i couldnt identify any that were anonymous

>>20995713
i wish i had that sort of ego.

>>20995698
>Bitch I am literally the best writer submitting to it.
did you write The Only Computer Crime?

>>20995940
Of course style is pretty identifiable, but I think you'd have to be paying attention to spot it in the dozens of entries that &amp has, or in the countless posts on a forum. It's easier if you go back and do it deliberately, but when we talk about tracking a writer's progress, for example, you'd have to first identify someone and then track down the pieces you suspect are from them, which is clearly a different process from how you'd track a named author in &amp.

how do i stop sucking at writing

>>20990995
Thanks, but the journal entry really wasn’t particularly good or interesting. I think it may’ve been lame of me to post it in the first place, and I kind of wish that I could un-post it. I appreciate you being nice enough to read it and reply. If you’re actually interested in the work of Thom Gunn then there’s more I can say about it, and some other poems of his that I can recommend. But I feel really bad if you’re just humouring me out of politeness, so no pressure to feign interest if you don’t care. I don’t want to monologue about the stuff that I like and treat you as a captive audience, or annoy others by derailing the thread.

>>20998226
>Thanks, but the journal entry really wasn’t particularly good or interesting.
i read anything that i find interesting. i found the journal entry interesting. i don't know what that says about me.
to me the entry seems like it was written by a sincere and very thoughtful person, but also maybe a person who is unconsciously aware of an "audience" to their life. which is very, very common, and it's okay.
>I think it may’ve been lame of me to post it in the first place,
it wasn't
>I appreciate you being nice enough to read it and reply.
you're being too hard on yourself!
>If you’re actually interested in the work of Thom Gunn then there’s more I can say about it, and some other poems of his that I can recommend.
please do. i was looking up some of his work on archive.org and found a collection of poems he wrote between 1950 and 1966.
>But I feel really bad if you’re just humouring me out of politeness,
i'm not!
>so no pressure to feign interest if you don’t care.
i do care
>derailing the thread.
&amp is more than just a magazine. it's a collection of artists. discussing the art they enjoy is important for artists. you're not derailing the thread, i don't think.

now let's talk thom gunn!
i found an .epub of misanthropos (which is a great title, by the way) and i was planning to read it today. actually, in about twenty minutes, so this is great timing.

>>20998328
part II is great

I submitted a creepshot along with a poem I wrote :)

i haven't been able to stop myself from rereading The Last Man over and over again

I really liked [008, p77] "Mademoiselle" btw.
It gives me tingles.

>>20998328
are you owner of lambylit submission email? DId you got my mail? Chapter of novel i am writign

>>20998756
no, but i'm sure you'll either get a response from the editor or you'll see if it's published in issue 15. let's wait until the end of september! good luck.

>tfw not gonna win the &c this time

>>20999686
the &c isn't the editor's stamp of approval; it's a symbol indicating a certain anon's work.

>>21000162
>tfw i will never win the &c

Bump

>>21000315
well, keep writing, anon.

could someone summarize &amp?

>>21001744
independent amateur literary magazine in the public domain organized by the literature board on 4chan.org

>>21000162
Okay. But the triforce fail is actually a bad one, right?

>>21001955
as far as i know, yeah. but i don't think the editor kept that going very long

>>21001759
thx

>>20997924
read books relevant to your writing, and write purposefully.

>>20990781
>>20991483
Could be more schitzo.
Any thoughts on adding that wall of text from the power tool cover, maybe as a block of text somewhere or column along rhe left hand side?

>>21002435
>Could be more schitzo.
i think it's best for the best-of covers to be much more simpler than the regular &amp covers. >>20989144 is my favourite so far. it seems the most coherent.
>that wall of text from the power tool cover,
this one? i think something like this is perhaps best inside the issue rather than on the cover.

>>21002463
>inside the issue
Maybe black and white if inside

>>21002435
Without speaking photoshop, how long are those transitions?
1/3 color, 1/3 gradient, 1/3 color
Or
45% color, 10% gradient, 45% color?

>>21002530
that's what i was thinking.
>>21002545
i'm actually very illiterate, so what i did was draw 4 ellipses (green, another green, red, purple) and slide up the gaussian blur all the way. i don't know how else to do something like that.
for the text, i duplicated the background, inverted it, and masked it onto the text layer. it was a pleasant surprise to get a kinda pearlescent gradient when i inverted it.
>>20991483 is an inverted version of >>20990781.

>>20983883
Cover reminds me of
I liked the 7s
>>20987174
>>20987178
>>20987181
>>20987187

>>20983126
>>20983126
How selective is this? If I want to get my piece in is it as simple as emailing you it or does it have to be good? I don’t want to go to the effort of writing a whole thing just to be rejected.

>>21002698
There aren't that many entries for &amp so you will probably get in, anon. Most of the discussion lately is for an unofficial "best of" edition, but yeah submit something to the editor's email, any of the entry types that's listed in the OP.

>>21002723
Chikflia burrito is better than biscuits

>>21002698
&amp takes everything. Entries aren't curated or anything--everything goes in, no rejection or acceptance. Unless, like >>21002723 said, there's a glut of material (but I don't think there ever has been).

>>21002776
Thanks I haven't tried it yet.

>>21002860
Fun, but looks more like general issue. 15 soon?

>>21002868
i'm just putting words on images at this point. i wonder when issue 15 is going to come out.

can we still chip in our opinions for the list? altough someone else should at this point. but there are still pieces on the mid tier that definitely deserve to be on, especially when there are some not so good ones in the starred tier.

>>20987174
what about text in the middle for prestige sake? maybe some small emblem like the moon here >>21002860 but positioned at the center and very small. or saturn? or a nebula. or just anything spacey, since it would be simple but still intriguing. just throwing stuff out there in case designer anons want to experiment

>>21003177
>opinions for the list
Please do. I'm being slow with updating the list, but I'll turn permissions on again soon, and in the mean time you can email me at unofficial.drivel@gmail.com with any and all suggestions. Haven't gone through and demoted any starred pieces yet--still working through the mids--but there will be changes.

>>21003197
forgot to mention this but I love how "drivel" and "piffle" sound almost the same, mean about the same thing but give off different vibes.
>unofficial piffle

>>21003177
your idea is great, but i'm not good enough to pull it off. i tried, i swear. maybe another anon can do it. i DID do this with the rings of saturn, but while i think the idea is cool, i don't think it's a good choice for the best-of edition.
>>21003239
there's a nice assonance with the /f/ sound there.

>>21003475
forgot the noise filter

Just a friendly criticism that it would be better to have an en-dash (–) than a hyphen-minus (-) in ‘001–014’.

>>21003508
I think you can call it official, or drop unofficial.

>>21003709
you're right. will keep that in mind.
>>21003727
it's part of the brand!

>>21003736
Unofficial
Unauthorized
Unreal
Unfortunately
Understood
Uneconomic

Could go on.

>>21003755
not sure i understand what you're saying. i'm sorry
>>21003177
i had another go with your idea, anon

something about the garamond font makes you want to say corny shit

which writers would submit to &amp if they knew about it?

>>21003887
I really like this one. The slight shadow on the font is really sweet, and the styling on the globe is sweet. That you, STA? or somebody else?

There's a Google Drive folder for the graphic design of the best-of, but I think it's just me and STA with editing privileges. Don't wanna fuck with the perms without STA being in on it, but I think he meant for it to be public editing.

>>21004687
yeah, it's me.
>Don't wanna fuck with the perms without STA being in on it, but I think he meant for it to be public editing.
i think i'll go ahead and enable editing for everyone. i'm just a very anxious person

please contribute if you can. anything related to the visual component of the best-of edition: typography, graphic design, layouts, illustrations.
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qRXh4G2gpY1Pt1-i-Y1HteeN947FEmXp
thanks!

>>21005324
Looks like the Google drive is still view-only? Or maybe I’m just dumb…

>>21002723
>>21002786
Awesome. Any deadlines?

>>21005655
are you signed in to google?

bump

>>21006735
>implying i would sign in

>>21007338
Ah shit, I hadn't realised you can only add to Google Drive folders if you have an account. On documents you can edit and comment anonymously without one.

>>21007338
i'm not

>>21007338
oh, but if you have anything you'd like to add, please post it in here and i/best-of anon will upload it!

should we upload the images to a google doc, then? would that be better for people who aren't comfortable signing in?

>>21007416
Not a bad idea, but you can't upload images to a doc without an account either. Google has that shit locked down.

>>21007238
oo I like this one

>>21007424
i see. that's a shame.
>>21007447
thanks. it's just filler, though, because i'm trying to avoid anything that's too expensive to print.

>>21007819
rip blessed papa norm

>>21007824
norm macdonald was one of the funniest comedians i've ever known. i wish i was even a thousandth as funny as him

Burgerpunk Delivers, &amp issue 009. Guerilla delivery, existential worry.

I'm going through V3 of the best-of list and I've got pic related in the mid section with no commentary but my own. Somebody else rec'd it, but I'd like to hear more from people in-thread while things are locked up there. I'll vouch for bumping it up, but I'm hesitant to just go off my own taste at this stage. From my comment in the document:
>Sometimes difficult to read with the vernacular as heavy as it is, but a good story. Interesting plot, good use of the language, maybe a little too long for its own good but still enjoyable.

PS
I've got a Google Drive folder with PDFs of some of the pieces from the list. Should be able to comment on them in there (and anonymously, without an account). I had another folder for screencaps, but those are a bitch to do sometimes.
Anyway, here's the link:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EwsOjMkqL1CaKdIqVPf6yDmpYh4G_BBf?usp=sharing
Use this as a quick-reference if you want to look at pieces from the list. I'll try to add more to it.

PPS
I love the CTAN lion.

>>21007363
>>21007387
>>21007416
>>21007483
>>21007819
Absolutely reeking of that delicious eau de &amp.

Burgerpunk Delivers, &amp issue 009. Guerilla delivery, existential worry.

I'm going through V3 of the best-of list and I've got pic related in the mid section with no commentary but my own. Somebody else rec'd it, but I'd like to hear more from people in-thread while things are locked up there. I'll vouch for bumping it up, but I'm hesitant to just go off my own taste at this stage. From my comment in the document:
>Sometimes difficult to read with the vernacular as heavy as it is, but a good story. Interesting plot, good use of the language, maybe a little too long for its own good but still enjoyable.

PS
I've got a Google Drive folder with PDFs of some of the pieces from the list. Should be able to comment on them in there (and anonymously, without an account). I had another folder for screencaps, but those are a bitch to do sometimes.
Anyway, here's the link:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EwsOjMkqL1CaKdIqVPf6yDmpYh4G_BBf?usp=sharing
Use this as a quick-reference if you want to look at pieces from the list. I'll try to add more to it.

>>21007363
>>21007387
>>21007416
>>21007483
>>21007819
Absolutely reeking of that delicious eau de &amp.

>>21007849
PPS
I'm an idiot but I love the CTAN lion.

>>21007849
See pic related for an example of an anonymous comment on a PDF in that Google Drive folder I linked. Save your identity and your dignity (if you so choose), folks!

Sorry for the egregious file sizes on some of the PDFs. Extracting pages can be slightly annoying.

>>21007819
Please use this

>>21008022
i'd have to find a public-domain image of norm. let me look for one

couldn't find one, and i'm not too educated on copyright law to say for sure whether we can use an image under a "cc 2.0" license (whatever the hell that is).
but speaking of norm, mark normand has really been killing it lately, i think

>>21008153
From my very little looking into the subject a while back, we'd just have to be careful about attribution when it comes to using Creative Commons material (a list of credits at the end of the doc would probably be sufficient). Can probably claim fair use on collage materials.

&amp in general is sort of dubious when it comes to the "public domain" claim. It hardly matters for something at this scale anyway, though there was talk in an old thread of tweaking the copyright claim (as in the little written bit editor has pasted at the start of most(?) issues). If I remember right, Public Domain in some jurisdictions is something that only happens after a certain amount of time after publication, and may not be a legally legitimate claim on a newly released work. It's a mess and varies internationally, from what little I understand. CC0 might be the closest thing you can actually release a work under to make it public domain. Anonymous releases can also have their own fuckery.

A notable caveat to the public domain (at least pulling from the CC0 definition at https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)) is that the work can be used for commercial reasons:
>You can copy, modify, distribute and perform the work, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
Although there is:
>When using or citing the work, you should not imply endorsement by the author or the affirmer.
and it seems like attribution is still required under CC0 (but not under "real" Public Domain). Of course this doesn't mean you can plagiarise public domain works, but it makes it a lot easier to. Watch out for &amp poetry in the next Nike commercial.

Another fun bit but from https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/public-domain/trouble-spots/:
>Modifications to a public domain work may be protected by copyright and cannot be used without permission. A famous example used in many copyright classes is the artist who paints an elaborate hat and mustache on the Mona Lisa. Even though anyone is free to copy the image of the Mona Lisa, the modified image (with mustache and hat) is protected under the artist’s copyright.

In the context of the best-of, all the old works being (ostensibly) public domain means we could technically fuck with them as we see fit, but that wouldn't really be in the spirit of &amp. There's going to be at least minor editing, and authorship will be kept in place. (I'd say those were both a given for this.) And re-releasing something under a "new" licence is invalid and never changes the original designation (so you can't force pieces into public domain or whatever against someone's will).

Murky waters, all in all.

>>21007837
Yup. I think Patrice O'Neal is up there too.
Lucky to have had them in our lifetimes. Wish they had been around for longer tho.

Is anyone familiar with the poetry magazine covers of the 1970’s? I really like the style that they use, and I think it’d be cool to do something similar for the best-of.

>>21008382
Pic related is a quick mock-up that I made in a similar style. I fucked up the background removal so it looks sort of amateur, and I'm not sure if the image positioning is weird... but it's just an idea.

>>21008393
>Egon Schiele
:)
And genuinely nice-looking, good selection for the photo. I like the "Poetry" style idea.

>>21008393
Schiele is kino.
I kinda wanna do pic rel but with a laptop on the desk and a hulking monster behind him instead of a woman.

>>21008393
If I have time then I'll go back later and resize/reposition the central image, and fix the visible edges so that it all looks smooth, because I wouldn't want to upload it to the google drive as-is.

>>21008393
that is awesome, anon

>>21008405
Pic related is probably more apt.

>>21008538
I like this a lot!!

if you guys are okay with it, upload your designs to the google drive (https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qRXh4G2gpY1Pt1-i-Y1HteeN947FEmXp)) (and please tag yourselves! thank you)

>>21008538
I felt it lacked something, how about adding some small detail like pic rel? Maybe I should've kept it in the contrasting style. hmmm

>>21008393
also, just to be sure, are you ari or someone else? because i tagged your layout with [poetryanon]

>>21008399
> Egon Schiele
I wasn’t really familiar with his work before it was brought up in this thread, but I found what was said about it earlier interesting.

>>21008405
That sounds like a cool idea.

>>21008459
Thanks— I noticed that it was already uploaded to the Google Drive. Are you sure that you don’t want me to do a fixed version first, like I said here? >>21008423

>>20998328
> maybe a person who is unconsciously aware of an "audience" to their life. which is very, very common, and it's okay
Yeah, I know what you mean. I took a non-fiction writing course a while back where I had to submit a collection of journal entries as a final project, and I really struggled to write about my life with the awareness that someone else was eventually going to read it. I think that experience taught me to write with an audience constantly in mind (basically self-censoring all of the time) and I’ve had a difficult time un-learning that. It’s hard to strike a balance—when I think too much about the possible reader, my work comes off as contrived and inauthentic.

> found a collection of poems he wrote between 1950 and 1966
His earlier stuff is my favourite— I really like the poems from his first book “Fighting Terms,” specifically “The Wound,” “Lerici,” “Tamer and Hawk,” and “Carnal Knowledge.”

> i found an .epub of misanthropos (which is a great title, by the way)
Cool, I hope you enjoy! I agree that the title is great, and I find the framing of the whole thing fascinating, with the idea of the speaker as the sole survivor of this apocalyptic war— it explores the idea of isolation in a way that really resonates with me.

>>20998344
>part II is great
That’s one of my favourites too— the technique of the back-and-forth conversation with the echo is so well-utilized. And part IV is another that I really love.

>>21008653
OH, it's you, atlas! hold up. going to update the tag

>>21008653
also, you can update the drive when you fix it later on. edit perms are on for everyone!
>(basically self-censoring all of the time)
i struggle with this, too. it's hard to write for a reader without coming off as insincere. but i've been unlearning that too by going into any piece with the intention that nobody is going to see it but me.
i read part ii aloud multiple times and it's so fun. it's so damn good

>>21008642
I think the moon is a good addition. The original style is a little difficult to bridge given the fact that shrinking the window erases the guy. Could also be improved by adding minor text elements such as seen in the original. Did that and jumped off your idea for pic related.

>>21008712
I don't wanna derail the thread with these but I also made one with a moon lol

god bless everyone who's contributing, by the way. all your hard work is appreciated

If you didn't already know; you can update file version by pressing manage versions. Makes the less cluttered and every file version easily updateable and obtainable.

Nearly done with V3 of the list, so I'll turn commenting perms back on soon. Tidying up now. Definitely some pieces that need attention (there are starred pieces without any comments), especially considering how long the prose list is becoming.

At this point the middle tier is likely going to be dropped altogether, so if there's a piece there that you want in the best-of it'll be imperative to make that known (with a good argument if need be).

>>21008778
Thanks, anon, that's a really good tip. I had no idea.

I wish I could make covers like mid-century sci-fi novels and magazines. pic related

>>21008835

>>21008840

Prayer of the Minimum Wage Burger, &amp issue 001.

Thoughts on this one? Another commentless entry from the list.

>>21008659
Here's the fixed version-- I'll upload it to the google drive in a bit.

>>21008896
Forgot to add the file cause I'm an idiot

Notes on a Devil's Threeway, &amp issue 007.

Strong recommendations given, but no commentary in the document. Same goes for the next one. Mostly concerned with criticisms or reasons why these shouldn't appear (but further recommendations welcome).

>>21008965
Vignette: A Chili April, &amp issue 010.

>>21008801
wait until tomorrow. ill opinionate then. but bog brother and testes dream should definitely be in.

>>21008835
honestly i might start drawing again just because of &amp

OKAY.
Comments are back on for the best-of list.

I think I've done as much as I can for V3 of the list based on what's in there now. Priority should go to uncommented or undiscussed starred pieces when it comes to review, and recommendations against a piece will be most valuable (though a good argument/reason is important one way or the other).

LIST LINK:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TMyRTrB6SEjbDFkFixaMqNpr0--Fb3T9Pdv1x2s7Z7g/edit?usp=sharing

PDFS OF ENTRANTS:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EwsOjMkqL1CaKdIqVPf6yDmpYh4G_BBf?usp=sharing

I've done away with the grey section, so consider "single recommendations" to now be the "at risk" zone.

&amp&amp&amp&am
p&amp&amp&amp&a
mp &amp&amp&amp&
amp&amp&amp&amp
&amp&amp&amp&am
p&amp&amp&amp&a
mp &amp&amp&amp&
amp&amp&amp&amp
&amp&amp&amp&am

>>21009013
Good to hear--both of those are up in the starred section now.

>>21008972
Now a third: Suburbpunk, &amp issue 006. Couldn't make a decent screencap, but there's a PDF of it in the best-of selections folder.

I couldn't help myself, made a cover for the october edition.

>>21008972
damn…i feel weirdly nostalgic for last spring, and reading this brings me right back to when i was working from home and going for walks alone bc there was nothing else to do

Summer is almost over. 015 soon?

Here are some more covers I found to draw ideas from. Center right features a sketch from Egon Schiele, so I guess his work fits their aesthetic.

>>21010055
honestly there's a lot of 20th-century illustrators we could be looking at right now. i'm super excited because i haven't been looking at or talking about art lately, but that might change

>>21009202
this one's really good!

>>21010165
Yeah, there’s lots to consider when thinking about cover design, and it’s cool to look at different artists that we could draw inspiration from. I might make some more mock-ups incorporating the art of Wyndham Lewis, or some inspired by Penguin/Pelican book covers from the 60s-70s.

heinrich kley, raoul dufy, francis marshall, john clement coll, and john richard flanagan come to mind right now. heinrich kley especially. he's a favourite of mine

i was wondering, though: wouldn't the BEST-case scenario here be that we use an illustration drawn by an &amper (is that the term we're using?) specifically for the best-of edition? those figure drawings ari did looked pretty damn sweet. i think ideally we'd be seeing an authentic &amp-artist illustration on the cover, but i have nothing against what we're doing right now!

>>21010238
I agree that it’d be ideal if we could use art made specifically for the cover. I considered using the drawings that were posted earlier in the “Poetry” inspired mock-up that I made, but the angles and sizing didn’t fit the cover layout that I was going for.

>>21010220
>>21010238

>>21010291
this one's really cool. i hadn't heard of wyndham lewis. seems like he was among the cubists.
i just did this one to see what it would look like. please look at the version(s) i posted in the drive, because this one's compressed

>>21010238
Thanks for the compliment. I'd be down to draw something, but I'm slow enough already with list business and I haven't properly finished a drawing in a long time; if there was some brainstorming about a suitable subject first that'd be good, but it'd still only be a "maybe". Not sure if my style is suitably emblematic for &amp.

There's also the topic of illustrations for specific pieces. If any of my pieces make the final cut I'd gladly do my own art for them; the sketches I posted earlier are essentially the Shit-tych in lineart form. For others I could try, but I don't have confidence that I'd be able to do them justice.

Another potential source for illustrations with lenient copyright is Radiopedia. It's all x-rays and CT scans, etc., from medical cases, and the work is released under a form of Creative Commons licence, so they're free to use and edit for non-commercial purposes so long as you provide attribution. I've dug through there for images to use for posters (pic related).

Semi-related to the Radiopedia stuff: if you're working with low-res source images you can use so-called "newsprint" filters to improve the visual quality; these filters break the image into a grid of dots or lines, called halftoning. Pic related was done this way and would be noticeably pixelated otherwise. This can be really helpful if you can't find a high-quality source image, though it's best for greyscale. And even GIMP has this stuff built in.

>>21010291
Very nice. I'll start digging for artists I'm into and see if I can find anything &amp-esque.

>>21010303
You're gonna make me blush.

>>21008719
>>21008712
I like these. Can they be redone in those flat earth colors of the 7s?

>>21010308
Pic related is the background image without any effects applied. 629x630, so pretty low-res. Takes a little extra to get the filter to look right (upscaling then blurring is what I do), but it's not hard.

>>21010310
If nobody beats me to it I'll give it a shot tomorrow.

>>21010303
This looks great—one of the best so far—but I think it’d look more visually balanced if you put the 001-014 in the bottom right corner.

Wyndham Lewis is known as the creator of a modernist art style known as Vorticism— it’s inspired by cubism in some ways. I might make a couple more mock-ups using his art.

>>21010328
A Lewis fan out in the wild? Tarr is wonderful and I'm not sure I understand it..

>>21010303
>seems like he was among the cubists.
no idea what i'm saying here what is wrong with me. seems like he was one of the cubists? seems like he was one among the cubists? god damn me. i'm so goddamn sleep-deprived i hate school so much my eyes they burn

>>21010308
>You're gonna make me blush.
it's all because your scan was so high-quality
>>21010328
>put the 001-014 in the bottom right corner.
yeah, i pretty much threw that one because i was in a hurry to rush to the bathroom due to a bout of coffee-induced diarrhoea.
>Vorticism
ah. sounds great. i'll look into it soon

>>21010310
>>21010327
good luck!

>>21010323
oh, i just recently discovered this cool halftone effect under the Filters tab on photopea.com, and i've been loving it. i think we should try to make use of it as much as we can for that sweet cheap-low-quality-printing look

actually, how about this (>>21010303) with these colours (>>20989144)?

>>21010360
>literally the same colours
fuck me

y'all niggas accept non-fiction essays?

>>21010413
Literally everything is accepted, read the OP. Or actually read &amp.
>non-fiction
>essay
As opposed to a fictional essay?

>>21010413
>&amp accepts all
>>prose
>>poetry
>>schizology
>>failed theses
>>essays
>>diatribes
>>creepshots
>>apocryphal accounts
>>hoaxes
>>bribes (in all denominations)

>>21010417
>As opposed to a fictional essay?
maybe the only piece he read was The Only Computer Crime

>>21010417
>>21010423
Sorry, I'm a member of a latin gang. That sentence was meant to read,

>Do you accept non-fiction, esse?

Excuse my mistake, but due to my disadvantaged background and low socio-economic status, I cannot read.

>>21010425
>implying he's ever read &amp

>>21010426
My apologies, hombre.

>>21010426
how did you misspell the only spanish word in your post
>>21010429
>implying he hasn't

>>21010434

>>21010434
eyyy, take it easy hommes

>>21010454
no worries

>>21010348
I'm familiar with his visual art, but I've never looked into any of his written stuff. Tarr sounds cool though, so I'll have to check it out.

>>21010351
>i'm so goddamn sleep-deprived i hate school so much my eyes they burn
>i was in a hurry to rush to the bathroom due to a bout of coffee-induced diarrhoea
:( oh shit (no pun intended). if it makes you feel any better, I'm insanely sleep-deprived as well

Anyway, here's another mock-up.

>>21009038
Thread's close to the bump limit-- do you want to make another, or should I? And I'll check out the updated list when I get the chance.

What if I wanna submit but I'm just not good enough? What then? What comes of all this? Will it be the submission panelists laughing at me, or will it be God doing the laughing?

>>21010524
this one's great. love the palette.
0/10 no noise filter
no, but seriously, pro-tip: the noise filter can help increase the "clarity." i thought i was the first to discover this, but apparently it's a real thing they do to increase the "acutance" of an image, which is the perceived sharpness of an image, which may help with the usually low-quality scans of the great artwork we're working with. i love this, though. feels like a taschen book cover! probably my favourite out of all the ones so far

>>21010536
>submission panelists
only one guy, and he generally accepts everything
>or will it be God doing the laughing?
i don't think He's that mean
>I'm just not good enough
keep writing!

>>21010524
>bump limit
I'll do up the new thread so I can add in all the links and shit for the best-of. Any suggestions for the OP image? I wanna use one of the cover mock-ups--probably what you just posted unless you've got a preference. Hopefully the new thread won't die overnight, though.

>>21010536
As our pal has already said, it's only one dude and he puts everything in. But if you want someone to laugh at your shit you can post it here and I'll give it a read.

>>21010562
i vote for best-of_cover_wyndham_lewis_02 as the OP image for next thread, FWIW

>>21010550
I’ll do a version with the Photopea noise filter, since Canva doesn’t have an equivalent. How do you use it (standard vs despeckle/dust&scratches), and what percentage do you apply it at?

>>21010562
I don’t have a preference for the OP image, so use any of the cover mock-ups that you like. I’ll probably be up pretty late, so I’ll make sure to post something to bump the new thread before I eventually go to bed.

>>21010629
i use the standard, and i usually just apply it intuitively. with the standard noise, there's an option for monochromatic too, which i also use sometimes if it fits.

Here's the new thread:
>>21010644

Gonna repost some of the un-reviewed pieces from earlier when I get the chance.

>>21010649
You should really make the threads once the bump limit is reached.

>>21011542
Sorry, pal. I didn't realise the limit was 310 and not 300.

TAKING THIS THREAD DOWN WITH NO SURVIVORS.

this one's
4U