/lit/ - Literature

>What does /v/ think of Halo 2? It's unlike any game I've played. I take it most of /v/ has played Halo 2? I'd recommend Marathon, Halo: CE and Halo 3 if you haven't played them.

Chuck is a bad writer. If you haven't read anything like him you're probably in high school.

Fight club and Choke were okay when I was 15. Not so sure if I'd even look at them now.

but if you enjoy him, power to ya.

>What does /tv/ think of Breaking Bad? It's unlike any show I've watched. I take it most of /tv/ has watched Breaking Bad? I'd recommend 24r, Prison Break and Walking Dead if you haven't watched them.

Let me guess, OP. You're like 17 or 18. Chuck is undeniably talented, and I'd recommend Fight Club to anyone. But that's really his only impressive work, IMO. He is unlike any author I've read too in that he has a pretty distinct voice, but as much as I hate term, he's straight up "entry level". When you start reading more you'll start to see how not-that-great he is, even Fight Club. I basically got into lit because of Palahniuk admittedly. When I was like 18 I thought he was the shit.

I know Chuck's unfashionable around here, but I won't apologise for liking Fight Club. It's a good book. Besides that I've only read Haunted and Choke, both of which were lukewarm at best and kind of put me off pursuing anything else by him.

>>What does /a/ think of Code Geass? It's unlike any show I've watched. I take it most of /a/ has watched Code Geass? I'd recommend Death Note, Madoka and Neon Genesis Evangelion if you haven't watched them.

>>2198724
>Death Note
Hmm. Are you recommending the films or the series?

I like him. Fight Club was glorious and some of his other work was highly entertaining. I mostly read him as an in between writer when I don't want to read actual philosophy or serious, heavy novels.

I do however understand all the 'lol you must be a teenager' comments on here. I discovered Fight Club when I was 15 and it changed my life. If I would come across it now I probably wouldn't give it such high praise, but since the novel really attributed to and challenged my thought at that age I'm still very fond of it.

>>2198730
Either anime or manga, but stay away from the live-action movies.

>>2198713

Agreed, like I said, I think Chuck's got a lot of talent and has a very distinct voice. He doesn't take a lot of risks as writer which is too bad. If he did I'm sure he'd have another Fight Club in him. Read what you want, OP. If Chuck's you're thing, go with it. Just because you're not creaming over Ulysses it doesn't make you any less of a "reader". Opinions are opinions.

>What does /co/ think of Transmetropolitan? It's unlike any comic I've read. I take it most of /lit/ has read Transmetropolitan? I'd recommend Kick-ass, The Walking Dead and The Killing Joke if you haven't read them.

>What does /lit/ think of Tao Lin? He's unlike any author I've read. I take it most of /lit/ has read Shoplifting from American Apparel? I'd recommend Eeeee Eee Eeee, Bed and Cognitive Behaviour if you haven't read them.

>>2198740

all of his books are "another fight club"

Props to anyone who was in charge of the screen play for Fight Club. Book was gay as hell AND retarded.

>>2198735
I actually thought the first one was quite reasonable, well until they killed off Light at the end. The third spin-off "L heals the world" or some shit was unbearable.

I hear they are in the processes of making an American version, i really can't wait to miss that.

What does reddit think of 4chan? It's unlike any site I've browser. I take it most of reddit has browsed 4chan? I'd recommend /b/, /hc/ and /soc/ if you haven't browsed them.

>>2198708
Good for you, psychology 101 boy.

Not OP, but that smug attitude of yours really tickled me off.

So you assume that just because he likes Fight Club he hasn't read anything else or doesn't have any experience with books?
I was (and am) an avid reader since my tender years. Instead of playing with legos, I read books. In my teen years I was already reading Descartes, Blake, Byron, Vonnegut, Bukowski and so on. And by "teen years" I mean 14-15.
I discovered Fight Club right after my 18th birthday and despite all the literature I devoured before, it was STILL a life changing experience.

So instead of generally assuming that you're a top dog just because you finished the latest Ayn Rand existentialist BS fest, be humble lad.

what does /lit/ wallstreet occupy pains me think paperwork NYPD

>>2198768
So, you read entry-level writers in your teen years, then you read an entry-level book you liked and we're supposed to find that impressive or something?

>>2198768
Jesus, sounds like you would actually be better off playing with lego then.

>>2198768
Oh look, an aggressive tough guy Palahniuk fanboy getting defensive on the internet. Surprise surprise. Go back to watching some more DVR'd UFC , kid.

>>2198777
Google might have close to a million servers. Yahoo has something like 13,000 staff. We have 400 servers and fewer than 100 staff worldwide.

Wikipedia is the #5 site on the web and serves 454 million different people every month – with billions of page views.

Commerce is fine. Advertising is not evil. But it doesn't belong here. Not in Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public park. It is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all go to think, to learn, to share our knowledge with others.

>>2198768
>Descartes, Blake, Byron, Vonnegut, Bukowski

lol, I like how the list steadily declines in quality until finally ending on Bukowski.

>>2198768
>tickled me off

>>2198800
Vonnegut ain't got shit on Bukowski. He's just a mediocre writer absorbed into nerdcore.

>>2198804
this is the worst opinion. even ignoring how dissimilar they are, could you have chosen a worse reason to criticize a writer? "got absorbed into nerdcore", jesus christ, try to have a thought that is in some way nuanced or interesting instead of just being as clumsy as possible in thinking about subcultural affiliation and genre marking. and the way social status factors into literary judgment. good lord, man

>Vonnegut ain't got shit on Bukowski
>mfw
I like Bukowski and think he deserves a hell of a lot more credit than he gets, but c'mon man. Vonnegut was a master of the craft.

>>2198808
>could you have chosen a worse reason to criticize a writer

His mediocrity isn't enough?

>>2198813
Just saying that he was mediocre wasn't your argument. The argument you used was that he was just a mediocre writer absorbed into "nerdcore." The thrust of your point was his acceptance into a genre/subculture.
Explain why he's mediocre if you want that to be your argument.

>>2198813
yeah maybe like say he's mediocre or explicate how he's been 'drawn into nerdcore' or talk about how nerdcore isn't a blatantly bullshit construction

post better and think better, is what i'm trying to say here. imo he's an okay writer but because he is fairly easy to understand because his writing appeals to alt teens, it's true that his fanbase is probably wider than his quality merits. but i don't know if i'd say mediocre - he has his qualities - mostly being quite imaginative and a certain wry, bitter, black resignation to the futility of life particularly as a reaction to the absurdity of the nuclear age. reacting to 50s/60s cold war america, basically.

but like explain how you're not just a dumbass, basically, explain that. also comparing vonnegut and bukowski is super weird because they're totally different authors in basically every wya.

>>2198824
Haha, okay we get it. You can't clarify because you have no idea what you're talking about. You're just some kid way over your head getting into arguments way beyond your comfort zone.

>>2198771
>>2198774
>>2198777
>>2198802
Samefagging just because you do not have it in you to process a compelling argument won't get you far. If you are seeking (so desperately) the approval of others, you must earn it boy.

Also, as you fail to actually refute my points, you felt threatened and the need to excessively use Ad Hominem and General Assumptions burst. Which is, in my honest opinion, pathetic.

Furthermore, if you consider those authors (and I quote) "entry-level", you understand nothing about literature son.
But it is alright, not everybody is supposed to be good at this matter, so I forgive your ignorance.

>>2198832
wait, what the fuck, i can't clarify? your entire argument is "He's mediocre". fufufuck you.

>>2198824
Thinking about it, they're quite similar and you already said why:
>a certain wry, bitter, black resignation to the futility of life particularly as a reaction to the absurdity of the nuclear age. reacting to 50s/60s cold war america, basically.
This is Bukowski's MO, when you get right down to it. Vonnegut addresses very different themes in how he goes about it, but he and Bukowski definitely share this trait. Bukowski went into the social constructs, especially success and prosperity as forces of a destructive nature with no truly attainable goal, but his humor was also very dry and sardonic, even at times in a similar way to Vonnegut's, despite Vonnegut's use of the fantastic as source of contrast.
I'd argue the link between the two would almost definitely be Celine, myself. Bloom noted the heavy influence in Slaughterhouse Five, and Bukowski's views on life are obviously a borrowing of Celine's use of the pathetic.

>>2198839
Quoted the wrong guy.

>>2198837
OMG he knows fallacy terms! So keut & adult.

>>2198848
Alles Klar, this is getting pathetic.
Gah, I am ashamed to be seen talking to such two-penny form of life.

>>2198844
Well there is a similarity there, true, and the Celine link is pretty astute, but I still think they're very different authors. Perhaps it's a question of scale, and also something of a difference in attitude: Vonnegut is characteristically more wry, and bitter, and resigned, and he seems to be responding to the nature of the world and the absurdity of life (and I think that large scale plays into his ability to use fantastic constructs to get at things he wants to deal with, because he's addressing them as general, large-scale, recurrently human things). In contrast, Bukowski always seems more angry to me and more depressed, and he always seems immersed in the small-scale, the concrete, and an almost vulgar physicality. They're both very dry, which I think is definitely a link between their basic attitude. But stylistically they go in very different directions with it.

>>2198848
okay we cool

>>2198852
Whoa! Dexter! Now there's a complex show dealing with morality. It's like, is killing like okay and stuff if you're killing bad guys and stuff??? ~:/ uh oh I confuze uggghh! Dexter so smart!!!! Blargh!

>>2198859
Loving the butthurt, by the way.

>>2198856
Yeah, I'd definitely agree the similarity begins and ends there, but I just thought it was an interesting thing that I'd never even considered before. I had the same reaction as you, at first, "How can you even compare?" But then I came to the same conclusion, that Vonnegut takes a much, much bigger view of things and his development of them throughout a story is much more complex. Bukowski tends to use his narrative as a vehicle going nowhere and that's part of his point, true, but it's where the clear-cut criticism of his work as narrow comes from in the first place. This, to me, makes Vonnegut the better author in a lot of ways. I think Bukowski's style is fantastic, the man definitely knew how to shape and present the words, but he just didn't do as much with them as Vonnegut did.

>>2198864
Haha he's tough as nails!! Eh, doesn't get offense and is pretty b-a guy

>>2198865

i was gonna say bukowski's language was vivider but then i remembered that thing in slaughterhouse-five where he compared the guy with the fucked up shoes' feet to blood pudding and shuddered

>>2198866

>>2198873

>>2198892

>>2198865
i agree with you, basically, but bukowski really is very much better as a stylist, it's not even close. i think vonnegut is more interesting as a writer though.

>>2198892
>>2198894
meta (dumb)

This thread illustrates better than any other why you tedious losers will never achieve anything, in literature or otherwise.

>>2198837
>Samefagging

No one is samefagging. It's actually telling that you think someone is.

>Also, as you fail to actually refute my points

You didn't have any points besides "but i read descartes when i was yung and I like palaniuhk!"

>you felt threatened

No, I'm pretty confident in the fact that you're a pleb.

>Ad Hominem and General Assumptions

Ad Hominem isn't a fancy way to say "BUT YOU INSULTED ME". My entire argument has to be based on the fact that you're a fucknut, no one said that you were a fucknut, therefore you were wrong, people just called you a fucknut. But it's nice that you read some wikipedia pages on common fallacies.

>Furthermore, if you consider those authors (and I quote) "entry-level", you understand nothing about literature son.

None of those authors are not particularly entry level. I hope you've read beyond those. Do you think that Descartes, that overly-simplifying, philosophy-101 reading material is the saving grace in your list? Or is it two of the most celebrated poets in the english language? Because-- surprise-- they're entry-level.

>Which is, in my honest opinion, pathetic.

You're honest opinion is pretty poor.

>>2198824

That's got to be the most awkward use of explicate, and grammar in general, that I've ever seen. You should consider AP english. Why vonnegut is mediocre is self-evident to anyone who has read him and has any modicum of respect for prose.

>>2198837
>Samefagging

No one is samefagging. It's actually telling that you think someone is.

>Also, as you fail to actually refute my points

You didn't have any points besides "but i read descartes when i was yung and I like palaniuhk!"

>you felt threatened

No, I'm pretty confident in the fact that you're a pleb.

>Ad Hominem and General Assumptions

Ad Hominem isn't a fancy way to say "BUT YOU INSULTED ME". My entire argument has to be based on the fact that you're a fucknut, no one said that you were a fucknut, therefore you were wrong, people just called you a fucknut. But it's nice that you read some wikipedia pages on common fallacies.

>Furthermore, if you consider those authors (and I quote) "entry-level", you understand nothing about literature son.

None of those authors are not particularly entry level. I hope you've read beyond those. Do you think that Descartes, that overly-simplifying, philosophy-101 reading material is the saving grace in your list? Or is it two of the most celebrated poets in the english language? Because-- surprise-- they're entry-level.

>Which is, in my honest opinion, pathetic.

Your honest opinion is pretty poor.

>>2198824

That's got to be the most awkward use of explicate, and grammar in general, that I've ever seen. You should consider AP english. Why vonnegut is mediocre is self-evident to anyone who has read him and has any modicum of respect for prose.

>>2198837
>>2198908

thanks guys i was just saying what /lit/ needs more of are boring supercilious walls of text

>>2198908
>That's got to be the most awkward use of explicate, and grammar in general, that I've ever seen

that's because i don't fucking give a shit about posting on illustrious internet message board 4chan dot org. seriously dude i'm tired and it's 4hcan who cares.

>Why vonnegut is mediocre is self-evident to anyone who has read him and has any modicum of respect for prose.

that's bullshit and a total failure to make an argument and you fucking know it, too. that is just plain bad analysis. i don't think he's mediocre and i said why, too. we had a nice little conversation about vonnegut.

and stop caring so much about entry-level, you are giving way too much significance to what is at bottom a pretty fucking dumb oversimplification of literature

>>2198911
its' especially awesome because they have nothing to do with books at all, it's bullshit infighting internet arguing (maybe this post is kind of guilty of this too, but at least i acknowledge it, or something, i don't know)

>>2198907
What to do when 90% of your post is nothing but direct insults to me and the remaining 10% proving me once again that you are nothing but a fool, hipster, edgy wannabe trying too hard.

This is truly laughable.

Oh, way to delete your post you fucking coward.

>>2198916
>that's because i don't fucking give a shit

Sure.

>that is just plain bad analysis

It's not analysis.

>and stop caring so much about entry-level

That wasn't directed at you.

>>2198937
i know it wasn't but it was still dumb and bad

>>2198931
>whines about being insulted
>you're nothing but a fool, hipster, edgy wannabe

I may be all that, I can't be sure, but what remains a fact is that list of authors is entry-level and your credentials to promote palahniuk unimpressive.

>>2198940
If you knew it wasn't and you aren't an idiot then why did you call it that?

You are an idiot, john

>>2198768
>tickled me off

>>2198946
can you stop making the worst arguments? who gives a shit about credentials, that's a terrible way to approach the question

>>2198946
It is all about good manners, which you do not possess.
Ruefully, your self-denial, angsty teenager M.O. rants will grant you nil success in this onerous road you are travelling.
I almost feel bad for you, for having such a clouded mind. *Almost*.

>>2198957
corteous motherfucker

>>2198956
I'm not the one who brought them up.

>>2198957
>It is all about good manners

Lol, sure. Hide behind your hurt feelings, then.

>>2198908

jesus, stop making this place even worse. those other guys at least tried to make sense, you sound like my 15 year old brother, it's embarrassing

>>2198967
Ah, Misericordiam is what your ill-sighted perception sees right now? With such lurid comprehension skills I wonder how are you alive.

>>2198974
Or the 'tough' dude in class without a sense of humor who took shit way too seriously despite being kind of a dumbfuck. Everyone has one at their school.

>>2198908
general consensus says you're a fag. get the fuck out.

>>2198979
/lit/ was never a democracy.

>>2198976
Wow guys this guys like totes a genius he swallowed a thesaurus

I'm kinda scurrd rite nao.

>>2198981

>>2198982
That is so hurtful of you. Ouch Anon, ouch.

Sincerely,
Lord James Reginald Ansberry IV

Dictated, but not read.

>>2198985
I can play this game too.

>>2198982
>>>/b/

>>2198987
You kno, because of mindless discussions like ours over here, this board is sucking more and more by the day.

>>2198986
What I looooves bout the joker is that he kinda makes like a lot of sense when you think bout it... um im kinda scuurd does that make me a bad person?? so much moral scaredness stop frustratin me joker!!!1!

>>2198990
Golden age thinking, /lit/ has never been anything other than what it is now. There's always been either a surplus of newfags, normalfags, tripfags or simple trolls.

If anything, we're just helping maintain the status quo.

>>2198999
Allow me to be a fag and say that your trips are an undeniable truth.
For the first time I understand what it is to be a necessary evil.

>>2198999

nah, there's def been a downturn, especially since d&egate

>>2199005
Now you've got it.

>>2199007
It's an expected fluctuation in quality.

>>2199008
Well, let us sink this thread into oblivion.
That major fag starting a shitstorm made it turn into this.

>>2199011
Who you callin' a faggot, boi?

>>2199007

me indirectly getting rid of that fag was the greatest thing to happen to this board.../lit/ is now better than ever.
this is a five star thread.

>>2199023

I will always be around
I will be always watching
Waiting
my member erect and throbbing
poised
and ready

>>2199023
Fuck you, I'd take three D&E over half a you.

So what exactly happened with d&e? I've been out of the loop.

>>2199042
his trip got out during a /sci/ trolling session

>>2199042


This asshole>>2199023 decided to troll /sci/. Then someone from /sci/ came here and leaked D&E's trip (hence >>2199035) as some weird form of revenge.

>>2199040
Well, I'd take Jimanon over all the fags around here. And I don't see much of him, so who gets the bad end here after all?

>>2199051
>>2199050
1) What is his trip?
2) I find it absolutely hilarious that satan of all people like to Deep's demise.
3) I know /sci/ is do-not-fuck-with tier, but how on earth did they figure out his trip?

>>2199055
led* to Deep's demise

Whatever the reason, I'm glad D&E is gone.

Satan, may I suck your dick?

>>2199054
I'd take satan, three D&Es, fabulous and quentin over that fucking asshole, I hoped he choked on a dick.

>>2199054
boy I miss that guy. he actually posted a poem of his last tuesday, holy shit.

>>2199061
haters gonna hate for sure.

>>2199062
And it was really good, I was actually surprised. Dude said he's making a thread next monday.

>>2199064
he's the worst.

>>2199065
2 more threads this month. let's hope he keeps his word. got me really curious about it.

>>2199055

here you go:

#ddets278A

>>2199055
Please respond.

>>2199066
yes, yes, let the butthurt flow through you.

>>2199069
>>2199069
makes me wonder of D&E ever read a book in his life.

>>2199069
Satan, how did they do it man? How did they jack Deep's trip? Also, any archived threads from the chaos would be great.

>>2199067
Lol, he mentioned hatred controversy and some other shit.
Last time he promised that his thread got over 250+ replies. Kinda looking forward to it.

>>2199076
think that was around september if I'm not mistaken. I feel like a fanboy but damn that dude can write. saw that megaupload short story he wrote back in august and holy shit.

>>2199079
Can't blame you, we had some pretty awesome conversations here. Managed to get his MSN address (surprised he even has such thing) and talked to him for a little longer. And yep, saw that text. I was quite impressed tbh, and I don't get impresssed easily.

>>2199080
I suppose you won't be giving it out, amirite? by the way, what does he look like? no homo

>>2199084
Lol, you can ask him that next monday. I promised I wouldn't give it out.
For what I saw on his pic on MSN he looks like a mix of Nick Drake and Morrison himself. It's ok to ask, I was curious about it too lol.

Who's jimanon? A quick google didn't turn up anything.

>>2199091
Anyone?

>>2199079
>>2199080
>>2199084
>>2199088
>>2199040

his fanclub is almost as cancerous the man himself...

>>2199074


i think they were using science and/or scientific things..

>>2199088
I will, wish I could meet that guy IRL. fucker actually changed my perspective on life with some of his threads. sorry for the late reply, internet crashed.
why doesn't him looking like morrison and drake suprise me at all?

>>2199102
u jelly?

>>2199091
/lit/'s poet per se. dude has some weird philosophies about life and MOST people love his arse. he call him jimanon cause when he posts he uses images of jim morrison

>>2199106
Know where I can read his stuff? I'm interested.

Sure is getting samefag in here Jim.

>>2199102
Someone's butthurt....

>>2199106
I know other people whom were changed by him. He's quite friendly after you show some humility. Easy to talk to and shit.
I was actually expecting him to look like basement dweller nerd, but he looks rather good for a 4channer. No homo either lol.

>>2199106

/lit/'s poet??
he was just some fucking hippie on acid telling people to open their third eye and other half baked bullshit.
its a safe bet you're him.

>>2199111
know what you're saying. but it's understandable, who likes a smug ass asshole? just look at this thread, that royal fag got his ass delivered to him for being a conceited prick.
>>2199109
look for his stuff in the archive. I think 2 of his threads got archived. I'll try to post that short story, having a hard time finding it in this pc, new one.

>>2199112
faggots gonna fag. u jelly brah? lets see some of your work.

>>2199112
Agreed, but people like that sort of shit. No thought required, just internalize the bastardized babble.

>>2199115
I found a few posts from him about drugs. Nothing related to poetry or fiction though. If you could post that story I'd be thankful. Might just give me hope for this board yet if it's any good.

>>2199111

au contraire fuckface

you're the one who's butthurt that your gay little role model is gone...now you're going to have to pick another one quick before you have another one of those..existential crises

>>2199112
Just because people actually consider the dude a good bro, you get angry? Jealousy can be a bitch Lol.

>>2199115
Exactly what I ment by that.
Good luck, have to go now. We'll probably again on monday, I'm using this trip for the lulz. Take care.

Satan were you proud that after so many months of D&E being a twat to you, you were finally able to kill him indirectly? I mean come on, that has to be a source of pride/amusement.

>>2199119
thats not very nice, we should all love one another man. If we could all sit in a virtual circle and chant the same mantra in unison, we would be one step further to enlightenment, free from mental distractions. Lets burn our material burdens man, lets free our minds brethren.

He's relatively creative compared to other writers getting published right now. His writing style is shit, but his plots are somewhat quirky and unique. I think he's like a contemporary Vonnegut.

I feel that he's generally overrated by the media, and underrated by /lit/.

He's a good writer to initiate someone into reading serious literature, but that's about it. He has kind of a cult following too.

>>2199117
to some it may come as a guide. questioning the meaning of life and shit.
>>2199118
took a screenshot of a poem of him from last tuesday, lemme look for it. if I'm lucky in a couple if minutes I'll find the short story.
>>2199119
so it is wrong to take someone into consideration because they actually think and not follow? makes you sound like a conceited jerkoff. your butthurt and jelly is so obvious that it makes me laugh.
>>2199120
goodbye man, nice talking to you.
>>2199122
speaking of conceited jerkoffs....

I'd like to read some jimanon if anyone out there has content from him.

>>2199121

very amusing.

though to be fair, I would always try to start shit with him first.
after that he just developed this sort of "shut the fuck up satan" thing...i thought it was all pretty funny

>>2199128
>>2199118
found the poem!

>>2199131
Lol, I remember that one.

>>2199131
Not bad. 8/10.

>>2199129
Well I envy you in a way. I guess that's one upside to having a trip; you get occasional moments of hilarity like that. Sure do wish I could've been there for the leak though. Damn.

>>2199138

not funny

>>2199140
No, I meant it was good. That was a good grade for the poem.

>>2199141

still not funny

>>2199141

which is why he said not funny

>>2199142
>>2199144

>>2199131
>Just ride
>Ride the train
I'm not the biggest doors fan, but I can spot stolen lyrics.

>>2199150
prove what you're saying or begon.

>>2199150
better let him know he has to start using a tripcode becuase of fags like these
>mfw

>>2199152
OK, i'll prove it. Go to youtube and search for a live version of 'The End' by the Doors. that specific line is near the end of the song with all that "west is the best.... ride the snake... ride the train... the blue bus" shit.

I can't tell you which version because Morrison never sings the same lyrics twice. but you will hear a few other things from his 'poem'.

>>2199161
I've listened to the doors before, in fact they are amongst my favorite bands. but a verse from a poem similar to one verse from morrison's lyrics is plagiarism? you're those kind of people who lack of originality and think everybody else does too? kind of pathetic brah

>>2199173
>is plagiarism
Yes, you are correct. Verses from a poem clearly taken from doors songs (Written by a man who exclusively uses pictures of Jim Morrison to identify himself) does constitute plagiarism.

Reading that poem I initially thought the whole thing was a doors song. There's nothing wrong with idolizing a man if thats what he wants to do. I liked Bill hicks when i was younger, and occasionally stole lines.

>>2199187
I'd advise you to look for the definition of plagiarism in the dictionary.
also, you just heard about the guy for the first time. he doesn't idolize morrison, he simply likes his poetry and shit. if you actually look through his texts and philosophies about life he keeps mentioning the train. learn your stuff bro.

>>2199192
Plagiarism:
>to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
>to use (another's production) without crediting the source
>to commit literary theft
>to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.

>he simply likes his poetry and shit.
I can tell that by reading his poem.

>if you actually look through his texts and philosophies about life he keeps mentioning the train.
I seriously hope you are talking about Morrison here.

>>2199202
you're making yourself look like a fool. next thing you're gonna say that aldous huxley copied william blake. or that lord byron copied john keats. it's quite pathetic to see parasites like this...

>>2199202
Not the guy you're replying to, but if you look into the context of the poem you can clearly see that Morrison and him speak of different subjects.
Clear as water.

>>2199208
Ok, I'm sorry, i really am. Obviously you are right. About everything. Could you give me your honest opinion on something. Its a little Poem i wrote. Its all my own work:

I am the passenger, and I ride and I ride.
I ride through the city's backsides.
I see the stars come out of the sky.
Said an angry cow devoid of grass.
Glancing up at the empty sky.

>>2199150
>>2199152
>>2199161
>>2199170
>>2199173
>>2199187
>>2199192
>>2199199
>>2199202
>>2199208
>>2199216

all aboard the shitpost train

>>2199218

>>2199218
Lol, someone's uber pissed.

>spot this thread
>expect actual discussion about Chuck and his works
>read through the thread
>tripfag circlejerk
>outright trolling
>not even pretending to discuss anything
I guess it's my fault expecting anything but this, but God, this is the worst board on 4chan.

>>2199843
You already wasted your time reading the garbage and you want to waste even more time talking about it?

Youth.

>>2199845
I'm sorry for the intention of discussing literature on a board for discussing literature. It certainly won't happen again.

>>2199855
Here's a protip for you: Palahniuk isn't literature. He's mere "books" at best.

>>2199843
>implying Chuck has written more than one book
>implying there isn't a thread about this shitty author every week

There's not much to discuss, we've had enough discussion to come to a general consensus about the guy.

>>2199857
I was actually counting down from 10 when I saw that post and was waiting for someone to make that remark.
I only made it to 8.
Just to let you know how clever you are.

>>2199860
Now, now. If Joyce was writing today, he would owe his popularity and legacy to a movie starring Brad Pitt, too.

>>2199862
The truth doesn't need to be clever, little boy. It just needs to be.

>>2199860
What's the point in hopping in this thread specifically to tell others that you won't participate in any discussion about the topic at hand? I mean, am I the only one who thinks this is kind of dumb?

>>2199868
So true, The only reason anybody has heard of the Iliad is thanks to Brad Pitt.

>>2199870
This thread isn't about Palahniuk. Deal with it.

>>2199868
I wasn't talking about the cleverness of truth, just about yours.
But rest assured, you don't need to be clever, either, it's just about sufficient if you just be.

>>2199878
Not that guy, but this post makes no sense.

>>2199880
That's okay, don't be hard on yourself, just work on it.

u know how i kno ur gay? u pressed the like button in this trhead