/lit/ - Literature

You don't. You're a boring upper middle class white kid who works hard and gets good grades, and the only "unexpected" thing you do is play football.

Get addicted to something, fuck a couple of guys, and memorize every episode of Harry and the Hendersons

>>2114683
>>2114680

i knew i could count on you guys

Don't go OP, I have some ideas, but they might take a minute...

find a crazy chic to dive you nuts.

find someone you think is deep and do whatever the fuck it is they do

gotta be in it to win it

Be careful what you pretend to be because you are what you pretend to be. - Kurt Vonnegut

Give up all your worldly goods, and find yourself?

Or stay the Tom Buchanan you were always meant to be.

>>2114704
I know where she is!
Look in the tunk!

get depressed to focus your thoughts. force yourself to do things you don't like. watch more movies and read more books.

Focus on learning something rather than pretending you already have. That would be unexpected.

>Playing football
>Unexpected

Start studying political theory.

OP, you reminded me of this Michael Chabon essay I read about how he did all this shit in college to try to imbue himself with inner torment and none of it worked. I don't really remember the point of it but I'm pretty sure it means that you will never become deep & edgy but you will definitely win a Pulitzer one day. Maybe when that happens you can visit /lit/ and see us bitching about how the Pulitzer doesn't mean shit anymore and on that day you will become a totally goth serious intellectual.

>>2114724
I have no idea why Chabon writes anything. Any ideas, anyone?

>>2114683
I'm with this anon.
In the 60s and 70s, you had to be black to be hip, and since most people can't/won't willingly turn themselves black, they settled for drugs instead.
Now, though, edgy teens have it easy! All you have to do is embrace an old-world sense of sexuality, and you're good to go!

See, the modern "hip" archetype is based heavily on the beatniks, and the lost generation before them, and the transcendentalists before them. What do these movements have in common? Lots and lots of cocksucking!
I know my tone seems mocking, but I'm actually as serious as I can possibly be about this subject. In all fairness, you probably don't have to do the cocksucking yourself, but if you don't, you definitely need to find at least a 2:1 ratio of cocksuckers in your group of intellectual colleagues (friends are for closeminded mouthbreathers). Furthermore, please note that when I say "cocksucking," I'm not talking about girls. You can have one or two girls, tops, in your group, I'd say. I'm just using "cocksucking" as a shorthand for a whole array of countercultural, homosexual activities. You can be bisexual if you really want, but be careful you (and your colleagues) don't sent the wrong message. Blowing a politician's kin (or a politician!) might help immensely, if you can. Or, perhaps in this postmodern world, exchanging nude photos online might suffice.

First I would say cultivate curiosity. Try to see how most subjects, looked at in the right way, are interesting. The next thing to do is read, widely. Read fiction, non fiction, genre fiction, straight lit. Read a couple trashy romance novels, read some indisputable classics. Don't let your learning be confined to books, watch some films, look at paintings and sculpture, listen to different kinds of music, and most importantly, go out into the world. See how closely fiction apes reality, and how much it is the other way around.

Collect different perspectives like most people collect stamps. You don't have to agree with them, just be able to understand where another person is coming from.

Don't forget to take a moment to ask yourself how you feel about what you're experiencing, and what you think (these things are different, and shouldn't be confused; I don't feel like going to the store right now, but I think if I don't I'll be out of milk for my morning cereal). Make comparisons between two works, or two types of media often, and this will help develop different ideas.

Don't let your thoughts, feelings or opinions solidify too quickly, and don't be afraid to turn all your notions about things on their head periodically. Talk to others about what you have considered, and listen to them if they start poking holes in things. It's okay to be wrong. Fight for ideas you think are right, but know when to admit another person has a superior argument. Be willing to change your mind.

Being deep is a muscle, you exercise it, and it will show, but it doesn't happen overnight. If that's too daunting a task, then just do what this guy says
>>2114683
and you'll be able to nail a few impressionable first year art school skanks, no problem.

I am serious about this. I am not trying to be ironic or snarky:

Learn to shoot. Get the self-defense basics down, then start shooting competitively.

While you're at it, start reading up on the politics of gun control.

An entire new world will open for you, only a tiny corner of which involves guns.

At the very least, casually mentioning to friends and family that you've bought a gun will definitely send the message that you are not doing the expected thing.

>>2114742
Sorry, I don't think he was asking for advice on how to become a republican.

I never again want to hear anyone complain that /lit/ doesn't help people with their homework

>>2114744
>Sorry, I don't think he was asking for advice on how to become a republican.

Hey OP, talk to this guy to learn lessons on how not to be a pretentious cunt.

>>2114744

this is not as clever a post as you think it is

>>2114742

I think you have "deep" and "ritualized paranoia" confused

we're all gonna feel like a bunch of clownshoes when some dude blows up the nyt nonfiction best seller list with a sort of occidental tao te ching centered around guns, cocksucking, and harry & the hendersons

>>2114676
I'm sure it's likely that you're already a "deep" person, anon.
Do you have fears? Opinions? A personality? Unless you're a cardboard cut-and-copy of someone else, you're already deep enough.

Unless you mean like, philosophically deep, or a person who thinks deeply. I guess in that case you'd just have to ponder everyday things until you being looking at the world differently.

>>2114752

Expand your mind. Eat mushrooms, smoke pot, drop acid. Get out in nature and find synergy.

>>2114676
pick a philosophy that is very single minded and live up to the philosophy, then start figuring out it's pro's and con's, example:
Taliban why the fuck would I want to be a Taliban? well shit find out why or Feminist bitches can vote and we have to pay for their shit on top of that maybe a real feminist is a man that preys on woman that still want to be treated like a princess also I'm drunk why am I drunk? because have you ever tried to fall asleep sober?! it's horrible! my spelling and grammar are still alright in my opinion.

>>2114999
best stream of consciousness piece I've read this week

>>2115002
I can't tell if you're insulting me or not but I'll take it!

>>2115004
you stumbled from studying personal philosophies to a self-examination of your current state flawlessly. :)

>>2115008
WOW
you sound really smart, if only I knew 1/2 of the words you knew I think you were praising me but still whatever I did I assure you it was an accident.

>chabon hate

why the fuck. and why the fuck eggers hate. i'm reading 'how we are hungry' at the moment and it's some of the best shit i've ever read. are you genuinely mad because he is trying different things? stupid double level hipster faggots

There is no such thing as a deep person, OP. It's just a trick used by hipsters to make others feel stupid.

If you want to learn something new, check out skadi forum.

>>2115150
You must not have read a whole lot.

>>2115150
>i'm reading 'how we are hungry' at the moment and it's some of the best shit i've ever read
what are your relevant qualifications to the evaluation of literary works and what have you read?

>>2115156

lol. I need qualifications to give opinions?

lol.

>>2115156
0/10

>>2115160
No, just to be taken seriously. If we don't know a) who you are, b) what you've read,how could your opinions be of value to us in the least?

Okay OP, I'll ask it since no-one else has, why do you want to become a 'deep' person? Evaluation of your motivations is a good start.

Funny.

The "deep" people just want to be normal.

The normal people just want to be "deep".

>>2115156

one relative 'degree' and i've read a fuckton of books.

i've always been intelligent enough to differentiate b/w good and bad prose though.

>>2115166
Oh, okay. That's virtually worthless to someone of my level of expertise but thanks for clearing that up for the rest us. I hope you've learned something about how to express your opinion from this. I.E. not totally uselessly

>The only "unexpected" thing i do is play football.

What position do you play?

>>2115169

Shower boy.

Kinda like towel boy, only I take care of the team's repressed homosexuality instead of their towels.

>>2115170

Shut up you tard. The position a person plays on the football field defines how deep they are.

D&E, for example, is one of life's wing-backs.

>>2115163

Anonymous website.

Asks for credentials. Supposedly not a troll.

>>2115168

>to someone of my level of expertise

>>2115168

>level of expertise

you're the one posting passive-aggressive poo on 4chan day in and day out. why would I need to know anything more than that you're mentally unstable? I'd never hire you or ask for your expertise, you're unreliable.

>>2115173
>Anonymous website.
This is an imageboard on which people post anonymously or choose to adopt tripcodes.

But you'll find that strict anonymity is worthless to people on this site who want to get better at anything because truly anonymous posts are totally uninformative. Anonymous posters always have to reveal something about their identity (taking sincerity for granted) in order for their posts to have any value to others. Example: I start a thread asking what should I read if I want learn philosophy and someone responds "read Plato", it tells me virtually nothing except that I should read Plato. I don't know whether that's useful or not in any way. If someone posts "I have a PhD in the History of Philosophy and based on this I think you should read Plato" that at least tells me the expertise of the person giving me suggestions, if I choose to believe what I'm being told. The only way the former suggestion would be helpful to me would be if my standards were hopelessly so broad that I took "being someone" and "posting in this thread" to be helpful to telling me how to get into philosophy, which of course are not helpful at all. So you can only really be anonymous in name if you want to contribute opinions that could be of even the slightest use to anyone.

>>2115187

what exactly is your level of expertise?

>>2115189
he's not a retard like almost everyone else on /lit/!!

>>2115187

>because truly anonymous posts are totally uninformative

What with the hyperbole?

If I ask "what are some books similar to book x in the manner y?" I don't need someone who has a PhD to answer me, a person with basic capabilities for evaluating what they've read can answer me just fine.

>>2115187
*that couldn't be of even the slightest use to anyone

>>2115187
you are like midas. except with shit instead of gold

>>2115187

>truly anonymous posts are totally uninformative

but that is a lie. thanks to anonymous users on this site I've been directed to plenty of great music, art and literature. I don't need to know the expertise of someone to recognize a beautiful painting

>>2115197
>If I ask "what are some books similar to book x in the manner y?" I don't need someone who has a PhD to answer me, a person with basic capabilities for evaluating what they've read can answer me just fine.
I never said any question ever asked on any board only a PhD scholar could answer. I take your point; the simpler the question the less stringent the criteria necessary for a sufficient answer. Even in this case, however, a post that relayed some (assumed genuine) information about the poster ("these books are similar x in the manner y, I know this because I have read these books or I know someone who has") would still be of more informative value than a blank (a totally anonymous) post simply stating a bunch of books.

>>2115200

Indeed. I pay more attention to anonymous posters on this bored than the idiots who try and force the whole "look at me!" philosophy, while pretending they don't. There's also a great deal of pretension in assuming that the general userbase is actually committing your namefag to memory, I find.

Stop being an angsty faggot and just live your life. Fuck.

>>2115200
>thanks to anonymous users on this site I've been directed to plenty of great music, art and literature
I never said that an anonymous post could not direct you to great or helpful works. It may be the case that I go on the advice of a totally anonymous post of "read plato" and plato turns out to be very helpful to my understanding of philosophy. That does not make the post itself informative, I would still have had no reason for going on its advice. You are retrospectively evaluating the post. This is a bit like saying lucky your pocket bible is a great bullet-proof shield because it happened to be in the right place to stop a bullet.

>I don't need to know the expertise of someone to recognize a beautiful painting
No, but I never said you did.

>>2115226
I mean it's a sort of post-hoc evaluative fallacy

>>2115192
e.g., you

>>2115234

Oh man, you just don't stop. Fucking tripfag fuckin up every thread.

> Look at meeeeeeeeeee.

I wish there was some kind of ignore button to ignore all tripfags.

>>2115226

then learn to evaluate what's posted here based on how it's formulated. it's the best method for this particular site. if you think anonymity is useless for effective communication why do you post here? there are plenty of places that requires full names. if you valued your time you'd go there

>No, but I never said you did.

I read the post, it seemed sensible (for an anonymous post on 4chan) and in the end I came out reasonably enlightened, good enough for me.

>>2115234
Making a lot of defensive posts there, chief.

>>2115226
Done anything else, yet, today, D&E?

>>2115247
>then learn to evaluate what's posted here based on how it's formulated
I do; when someone comments on a book that I'm not familiar with and whose comment doesn't sit with my level of expertise, I will ask them to clarify their position. This is a perfectly reasonable thing to do for anyone who values the time they spend reading books they're not familiar with.

>if you think anonymity is useless for effective communication why do you post here? there are plenty of places that requires full names. if you valued your time you'd go there
There are plenty of posters here who make their backgrounds known through a variety of manners, from capsguy to carachahaha just kidding, to people who make their knowledge clear through their posts. All of these people make valuable and informative posts.

>I read the post, it seemed sensible (for an anonymous post on 4chan) and in the end I came out reasonably enlightened, good enough for me.
Well then I guess we are clearly on different levels of expertise for you to find such criteria enlightening, and there's nothing more to be said about it.

All the "deep" people I know are just retards that took some acid or shrooms once and read a college level psychology book so they are all convinced they are Sun Tzu.

>>2115258

sounds like me. some of those trips, man...

>>2115255

>different levels of expertise
>only values the knowledge of tripfags on 4chan

yes, obviously :)

>>2115255

This still leaves open the question of why you, personally, wish to trip. I imagine there are a few anonymous posters you usually "recognize" by now: So what do you gain by tripping? There are people here with equal and greater expertise who don't, so, is it just you get off on the quasi–notoriety and internet hate?

>>I read the post, it seemed sensible (for an anonymous post on 4chan) and in the end I came out reasonably enlightened, good enough for me.
>Well then I guess we are clearly on different levels of expertise for you to find such criteria enlightening, and there's nothing more to be said about it.

Implying that only "qualified" people take the time to sculpt a personality by creating a name on an anonymous image board. I'm not claiming to be "qualified" by your standards, but does that mean my opinion as valid as your because I didn't type my name into the field, followed by the hash key?

If anything, this board let's you create a persona more than a standard forum, as your only validation is that said hash key. I don't mean to be too harsh with this, How can somebody as educated as you claim to be misunderstand the fundamental reason as to why this website is so popular? Creating a faux profile on a purposely anonymous website, and then trying to criticise the anonymous user base makes no sense to me. Do you think there would be a /lit, let a lone a 4chan, if there was no anonymous userbase?

>I'm a boring upper middle class white kid who works hard and gets good grades. The only "unexpected" thing i do is play football.

This makes it sound like what you're actually aiming for is being a more interesting of a person, not just "deep". Which is more admirable in my opinion.

What I suggest for you is travelling. Not seeing the sights but actually experiencing different cultures, preferably in the most unexpected ways.

>>2115255
The best part of you being a namefag is that I can critique your grammar successfully. How educated were you again? Because that's a pretty shocking use of a semicolon right there.

>>2115268
>Implying that only "qualified" people take the time to sculpt a personality by creating a name on an anonymous image board.
I didn't say anything about other people, I was only talking about myself and my expertise. This also has nothing essentially to do with with anything in the namefield. Everyone who has focused on the label of tripfagging has totally missed what I've been saying thus far.

Become a deep person by trying too hard and failing but living through it and not being a pussy about it.

>>2115283
>Everyone who has focused on the label of tripfagging has totally missed what I've been saying thus far.

Not difficult, considering it is essentially the only difference between us.

>>2115278
>that's a pretty shocking use of a semicolon

You know, that's the only thing that Microsoft Word does right in corrections? I'm terrible with comma splices and that mutha is a lifesaver.

>>2115283
Rule one in forming an argument: Can't define it very well? Use that as an advantage.

>>2114724
Inner torment = alcoholism and drugs. For some reason this shit makes authors deep and edgy.

Learn to understand what does people really think and feel like.

>>2115288
>Not difficult, considering it is essentially the only difference between us.

You're right, in fact there is essentially no difference between a tripfag and an anonymous poster. We are both posters, and neither of us are anonymous as far as we are historically situated people posting, by adopting personas or divesting them, on this board.

>>2115295
what are you talking about?

>>2115300
Give it a rest. If you truly believe that, drop the tripfag, or join a conventional message board. I'm starting to suspect a troll in your convoluted reasoning.

>>2115300

have you ever thought about how italians aren't white but they still have blue eyes and they're pretty light-skinned? or how we consider ants to be small but like, in that movie honey I shrunk the kids they're big. wow it's like the concepts are all floating around and stuff. maybe we're all anonymous, I mean, do we even know ourselves? really? food for thought right there

>>2115300
We're all humans. Let's all make our name "human" and be done with it.

>>2115303
"You can't understand my argument because my argument is too good." Fairly crass logic.

I had sex with a spastic on Saturday night. I think that makes me pretty deep.

>>2115300

Anonymity ≠ Psuedonymity

>>2115352
Sure, you could arrange to have my IP address traced (somehow) or monitor my posting habits and draw a conclusion, but to suggest that putting a name in the field and not is on the same level, well, you're stretching it. I could also figure out your tripcode, does that mean I'm a tripfag even though I don't use a tripcode?

>>2115358

Think you're replying to the wrong post, bro.

>>2115311
I'll do what I want and nothing else.
>>2115316
what does that have to do with anything i've said
>>2115322
nothing to do with what I've been saying
>>2115328
what are you talking about?
>>2115352
I never made that claim
>>2115358
I never suggested that, and your question has nothing to do with what I've been talking about

Read, dummy!

I was a boring nepotist but now that I read, I am a boring nepotist with opinions!

I am the 1%

>>2115367

> You're right, in fact there is essentially no difference between a tripfag and an anonymous poster.

Yes, you did.

>>2115373
You've greentexted something I've said but you haven't established how that's actually what the claim is rather than what you've made it out to be.

I mean for fucks sake dude, start doing some work.

>>2115375

there are many differences between a tripfag and an anonymous poster. one of these differences is that the tripfag has a name. another is that we can attribute previous posts and opinions to that name. this will likely affect the posting behavior of the tripfag. this whole 4chan culture would look radically different if we had all trips, wouldn't it?

nothing like clicking back through a 95-post thread with a "i took adderall and went on the internet instead of doing my homework, now let me answer 37 different comments line-by-line with the argumental equivalent of sea froth" d&e joint before the jump and clicking back to find that it has its origins in some dork saying that he likes dave eggers

Alright, stop.

Hold the fuck on.

Just... Just stop.

How serious are we being here?

I know a ton of you are outright saying you're 100% serious. Guys like >>2114740 and whatever. But I still have to believe you're not if I still want to preserve any faith in humanity.

If I say something like "There is no such thing as "being deep", you're merely a hipster douche in training", will you guys just look at me funny and go "duh"? That's what you'll do right? This entire thread is just supremely dry humor and I just didn't absorb it properly. Right... ?

>>2115381
>there are many differences between a tripfag and an anonymous poster.
I never said there weren't. Hence the 'essentially' part. There is essentially no difference in the capacity to attribute identity between an anonymous poster and a tripfag in that they are both historically situated individuals posting. An anonymous poster could just as easily adopt a name, it's possible to attribute post history through guesswork, educated or not (by no means an easy task). These are superficial differences. Hence, the label of 'tripfag' is ultimately not all that important in terms of identity, because people manifest identities in their posts whether they adopt a specific name or not.

>>2115388

I don't see why "deep" would be an adjective that can't be used to describe a person.

>>2115390

Get a fucking life, you faggot. Fapping would be more constructive than what you've been doing for the last god knows how many hours.

Sorry that your thread was ruined by tripfag cocksuckers, OP.
At least you seemed to get a fair amount of good stuff before they came along and ruined it.

>>2115390

but that 'essentially' is useless because this entire site and its culture would be completely different if we all had trips. how can you not see this?

This thread was good for a little bit, but then D&E fucked it all up. I feel like I was half-way through a delicious burger, I put the burger down, then somebody walks up and spews diarrhea all over the remaining half.

Thanks for ruining my morning 4chan sesh, cockwipe.

>>2115394
>'essentially' is useless because this entire site and its culture
No, it's not, because what I have been talking about has nothing to do with the functioning of the site and its culture, which if changed would look something like 420chan and be much less popular (no doubt because clueless assholes would no longer have anonymously-imposed carte blanche to proffer their worthless, uneducated opinions on others), and I do not doubt the change in either of these things, but I have been talking about the essential difference or non-difference between the individual as anonymous poster and as named poster, not the implications of everyone posting as one or the other. This would apply just as much if we were discussing a forum, or any other board.

>>2115395
>This thread was good for a little bit
>"How do I become a deep person?"

Get fucking real you 15 year old moron

>>2115391

Because there is absolutely nothing "deep" about the human condition. The human condition in relation to everything around it? Maybe. Kinda. Possibly. However, a single human being is nothing but a parasite with no more relevance than a common sock. Common wet sock. Attempting to somehow artificially amplify one's "depth" is nothing more than a cry for attention from others, just as equally irrelevant as you.

You want to be "deep" hotshot? You want to be more than you are? You want to be truly interesting? You want to transcend and break boundaries, to break away from the norm? To bid a resounding "Fuck you" to the entire Universe and natural order? Yeah? Well, go ahead and blow your brains out. I can't think of anything more radical in terms of self-improvement. I'm 100% serious when I tell you that I would personally be impressed if you actually did this.

... On the other hand, at the very least, become wealthy and support charity. What? Not deep enough for you? Well, open a tumblr dedicated to your efforts filled with faux-polaroids of you playing with emaciated African children. Also, remember to occasionally post Best New Music and pictures of triangles.

>>2115403

I'm not OP.

>Attempting to somehow artificially amplify one's "depth" is nothing more than a cry for attention from others

I agree, that still doesn't remove the fact that some people have more depth than others.

>You want to be "deep" hotshot?

No, I'm not a faggot like OP, I'm just contesting this idea of yours that there are no shallow people.

>>2114706

>>2115393

>>2115418

This guy can truly say he's literally deep. Or at least he was.

>>2115421

He's asian dude. I don't think it was particularly deep.

Carry spaghetti in your pockets OP

>>2115441

I feel like this is a reference to something I've read somewhere, but can't pinpoint it.

>>2115503
Really crappy greentext story meme.

>>2115399
D&E, once again, you've read yourself stupid.
This thread was great in a way that is probably completely alien to you (at least, in the "real world"). Didn't you read the parts about cocksucking and Harry and the Hendersons?

Have you studied Zen, D&E? Your posts have all been "Rotting log on a hillside, no warmth in winter," and you totally forgot about fucking the bitch!
If you know your parables, you know what happens next...

>>2115511
>This thread was great in a way that is probably completely alien to you (at least, in the "real world").
The real world being having seen all of these threads before, better done. Don't project your inferior level of enjoyment on me.

>>2115515
>Don't project your inferior level of enjoyment on me

>>2115515
Ah, now I understand. The conditions surrounding your genesis really are miraculous. You're a rare synthesis of normally exclusive extremes. So unlikely, in fact, that most moderately well read people are inclined to take for granted its impossibility. But you exist, you strange, beautiful blasphemy, you. Like a Creationist biologist or an extroverted engineer...
But, of course, at the core of your persona is a very modern irony. I wonder if you're aware of it? I'm sure you'd like to think you are, and please, never say that I didn't give you the benefit of the doubt, but maybe it's impossible for you to know yourself (I wouldn't know). You see, the philosophy by which you conduct yourself is so marginalized that philosophy itself seems to repel it (this is naturally impossible, but nevertheless, those who STUDY the discipline will surely reject you).
Not a definitive argument, but case in point:
>inferior level of enjoyment

Eagerly awaiting your butchered greentext reply, which addresses tangentially only one or two of the points in my post,
Anonymous

P.S., since you don't seem to know "what happens next," the common old woman who provided for you chases you away while beating you with a rod, and burns down your hermitage.

>>2115537

Is this guy for real?

Guy -- shot yourself in the mouth.

Holy fuck.

>>2115537
You're welcome.

>>2115543
I bet he is...

>>2115150
chabon rules but i live in fear of his next book, which promises to include much rhapsodizing over hip-hop from a middle-aged white man. i have no use for eggers as a writer but i think it's cool that he opened up a bunch of tutoring centers.

>He must be accustomed to living on mountain tops — and to looking upon the wretched gabble of politics and nationalism as beneath him. He must have become indifferent; he must never ask of the truth whether it brings profit to him or a fatality to him ... He must have an inclination, born of strength, for questions that no one has the courage for; the courage for the forbidden; predestination for the labyrinth. The experience of seven solitudes. New ears for new music. New eyes for what is most distant. A new conscience for truths that have hitherto remained unheard. And the will to economize in the grand manner — to hold together his strength, his enthusiasm ... Reverence for self; love of self; absolute freedom of self ....

>>2115537

>inferior level of enjoyment
yeah, like a blind person can't enjoy, i.e. is physically incapable of the same level of pleasure (pleasure here is taken as something more substantial than an airy soul substitute like 'qualia'), a mona lisa as much as a 20 year critic of classical art with 20/20 vision

>>2115150
People who hate on Eggers hate on DFW. It's this like mistrust of sincerity. It's bullshit. Eggers is doing the good work.

bamp

>>2115617

I bet that people that actually create stuff feel even more pleasure than critics.

>>2115656
of course they do, it goes without saying.

>>2115658

mozart found immense satisfaction in poop jokes. bet he had capacity for more pleasure doing those poop jokes than you have listening to his music

>>2115658
deep and edgy huh, wow you must be a huge emo faggot

>>2115672
>new to the board

>>2115674
indeed, but it hardly makes my statement less true

you got the faggot part right

>>2115680

Deep & Edgy is the greatest philosopher of our generation.

>How do I become a deep person?
Your day-to-day interaction with people is very limited and superficial so unless you look "deep" most people won't perceive you as such.
That said, saying "deep" things in an attempt to appear "deep" is done mostly through rhetoric (the art of expressing ideas with words); even if you are the most despairing, reflective person in the world nobody will know how "deep" you are unless you can communicate it with language. I guess you could also do it through body-language and eye contact but unless you are attractive many would just consider you to be strange. Being attractive will increase your chances of appearing deep by many fold.
You could literally just practice this persona like an actor would and a lot of people wouldn't see through your bullshit if you are convincing enough to convince yourself. Being "deep" comes from a lifetime of introspection, a habit that must have come naturally to you as a child else it will probably be lost to you. You also have to be quite level-headed and intelligent else you might come off as a depressed moron who thinks too much for his own good. The most effective way to seem deep may be to give the impression that you are "at peace" with everything in the world, rather than telling people you are devoted to some extreme cause. If you can give that impression without making people laugh you might convince some that you are "deep". To be honest, I would say that the people of my country would think that so-called "deep" people are delusional twats but if you're American then you have a shot of making it work because Americans are fucking wierd.

>>2115691
You're so deep.

>>2115691

So much truth.

Gotta make a habit of visiting this board more.

>>2114676
simple: u just have to go deep in urself. try to find out the reason for ur lack of "deepness".
(ofc writing ir is way easier than doing it)

Watch good movies. Read good books. Listen to meaningful music. It will make you more "cultured", and thus more "deep" as a result.

Have fun being a boring, deep, upper middle class white kid who works hard and gets good grades whose only "unexpected" thing he does is play football.

Also, do you happen to go to a private school in Massachusetts?

>>2115152
NO U. Skadi used to be an awesome source for Germanic language/culture discussion, but now it's just an irrational cesspool of barely-justifiable nationalism and delusions of cultural superiority.

ideal deep:edgy ratio?

Create a song.

Here I'm make one up right here on the spot. You may use this:
It's hard to say what it is I see in you
If I'll always be with you
Words can't say, I can't do
Enough to prove, it's all for you.


Your welcome.

Deep&Edgy is easily the most successful troll in the short history of /lit/. Stop getting reeled in, assholes.

>>2114676

Push beyond your experiences and engage with everything. Forced to watch Wife Swap? Think about the socioeconomic conditions of the people you're watching and how it influences their actions, as well as the manner in which two weeks of raw footage were edited into a 1-hr show. Waiting in line at the grocery store? Think about the visual language of magazine covers, the techniques of marketing, the different lives and experiences of the people around you. Try to enjoy every experience fully. And whenever you get the opportunity, step outside your experiences. Go places you've never been; try things you haven't tried. Never be afraid to form your own opinions about something, but always have a reason for those opinions, some way to back them up. If you're not knowledgeable about something, don't act like you are, and don't feel the need to immediately judge things, and don't be ashamed if you have to change your mind.

If you just want to appear deeper to other people, it's simpler but less rewarding. Take the valid opinions of people who seem to be deep to you, and then just wear them as clothing, making sure to have a few stock phrases to defend them in conversations. Watch some old interviews with Bob Dylan to get the rhythm of distracted deep-thinker down. But in the end, you won't really get much out of it beyond respect from some people, and disdain from the people who can see through it.