/lit/ - Literature

>>4078900
Same way it made me feel the other 30 times this thread was made.

Grey's prose is amazing. You can really see the influence of existentialist thought from Dostoyevsky to Sartre.

sage

OP is trying too hard.

Her book is most certainly not ghostwritten.

>>4075855
Snooki and /mlp/ have published novels as well.

It's not that big a deal.

>>4078900
how does it feel to be so angry at someone you don't even know, does it feel like it's killing you inside

>>4078912
Thank you, based /lit/izen

>>4078912

>>4078941
OP here

I actually think it's pretty charming and cool she wrote a book and has found her way out of an industry that chews a lot of young women up.

On the other hand I know there are a lot of sexually-repressed, hyper-misogynistic betas on 4chan who hate women with a passion and who hate slutty women achieving something even more.

Hence, the thread. Let the jimmies rustle.

>>4078900
Publishers exist to make money selling books. This means they will publish the most salable books they can find. What they want is:

1. Books written by people who are already famous.
2. Books written to satisfy existing markets.
3. Books written to say controversial things.
.
.
.
.
100. Well written, thought provoking books that establish new literary ground.

>>4078970
>new literary ground
>21st ce
lol. we pomo pastiche now. ain't nothing new under the sun

>>4078975
If that's true, find me a series of books written from a dog's point of view in a GoT-style pseudo-medieval fantasy realm.

>can't do it

>The porn star. The woman who takes big loads up the ass. The slut who groans for more on all fours, then sucks a giant cock, her mascara smeared, and chokes down the semen as another man fucks her from behind.

none of this bothers me in the slightest (in fact if anything it slightly warms me to her)

what does bother me is that she's an insufferable idiotic pretentious hipster wannabe

>>4078991
>what does bother me

>2013
>Getting trolled by Sasha Grey
toplel

>>4078997
it's not even her trolling me anymore, it's transparent 4chan jokesters

i don't know why it bothers me so much. must be on account of my misogyny

>>4078991
>that feel when I imagine her getting ass blasted while she reads some thought-provoking philosophy

>>4078999
I also 'bothers' me, but I don't feel enraged or angry, it just makes me laugh.

Sasha Grey; the only writer in the history of english literature to have had sex.

>>4078900
>The woman who takes big loads up the ass
I was of the idea that she took those loads on her face and mouth, maybe I just haven't seen enough videos.

>How does it make you feel that someone good enough to write even a mediocre book has to settle for being the ghostwriter of a cumslut?
I think the fact she's a cumslut is unrelated to her lack of talent, thus rendering the first paragraph irrelevant. It makes me feel very little. If it was ghostwritten he might feel glad to get some money and on the large scale it might give him new clients which in return will result in more money and a much more comfortable situation therefore.

>how does it make you feel that Sasha Grey is a published author and you are not?
It's been a long time since I realized that the art market is just as sales driven as any other. So I can't say I even felt disappointment. It makes me feel that the market is working exactly as they intended it to. It is even reassuring to know that in some way at least, the market is very predictible

It was probably a ghost writer.

>>4079023
>I was of the idea that she took those loads on her face and mouth, maybe I just haven't seen enough videos.

No, piss on the face, cum in the ass.

>>4078975
there is people that say that in all epochs, but in every epoch of which we have written fiction there is something particular to at least one of those works that you don't see in any other epoch

As you probably know, /lit/, James Joyce has written a novel. Yes, James Joyce. The lecher. The man who once fucked every fart out of his sweet whorish Nora: big fat fellows, long windy ones, quick little merry cracks and a lot of tiny little naughty farties ending in a long gush from her hole

You all know him.

That said, how does it make you feel that James Joyce is a published author and you are not? How does it make you feel that he is able to get his book out there, regardless of whether it's a great piece of lit or not, and you are not?

>inb4 ghostwritten
Even if it was, someone who's good enough to render something publishable has settled for doing just that, secretly writing for a weird Irish pervert and not getting his/her own name on the cover of that book. How does it make you feel that someone good enough to write even a mediocre book has to settle for being the ghostwriter of a pervert?

>>4079025
that explains it. im not a big fan of piss. Mostly I watched her videos with the academical purpose of studying the amazing contention capabilities of her throat.

This thread is stupid and patronising. Jean Genet was a prostitute. He took a lot of dicks. He got fucked from behind. He was also an excellent author.

>>4079053
sasha grey, however, is not

I don't care. Anybody can get published and I've just began work on my book. Stephanie Meyer went through several dozen agents and somebody finally said yeah, I'll publish what is rightfully concluded to be trash. And if a mediocre writer has to settle as a ghostwriter that's probably best. I rather see Sasha Grey's name on a book so I can mentally evade it than to waste time being curious and trying out some mediocre novel by some no name.

>>4079056
Have you read the book? I haven't, so I'm not going to put forward my opinion, because my opinion in the worth of a book I haven't read is worth exactly shit.

If I had pre-judged the book, however, that would make my opinion worth less than shit. It would make my opinion prejudiced, reactionary, vicious shit.

>>4079063
Pretty much this. Basic rule of proper thinking.
Sasha Grey may have published a good book. Maybe she published shit. Who knows? I don't care enough to find out.

can't believe this OP bumped his thread so many times.

As you probably know, /lit/, Jean-Paul has written a novel. Yes, Jean-Paul. The philosopher. The man who failed his university admission test and fucked every fart out of his sweet whorish Simone. The one who spend all his youth drinking coffee and taking drugs, the one who managed to equilibrate his professional and personal life keeping an eye on philosophy and Simone at the same time.

You all know him.

That said, how does it make you feel that Jean-Paul is a published author and you are not? How does it make you feel that he is able to get his book out there, regardless of whether it's a great piece of lit or not, and you are not?

>inb4 ghostwritten
Even if it was, someone who's good enough to render something publishable has settled for doing just that, secretly writing for a ugly exotropic french and not getting his/her own name on the cover of that book. How does it make you feel that someone good enough to write even a mediocre book has to settle for being the ghostwriter of a pervert?

>>4079063
>>4079077

ahem: >>4078912

it reads like something written by a horny 13 year old, and not even a particularly imaginative horny 13 year old

>>4079106
do proust next

>>4079110
Well there you go. Like I said, I don't care to find out. I don't even feel like reading that.

It's not such a hard feat to write a shitty self-insert book after licking a toiltet seat. Everything is better from that point.

hey if she can get published, why can't I? :D

It doesn't bother me nearly as much as it bothers you, OP.
That much is clear.

>>4079011
this. whoever shares ops pov needs to grow up

>>4079126
maybe you need to suck more dick?

>>4078970
exxxxxxxxxxactly.

>OP is most likely in high school
>butthurt hormones slathered in oh-so-tasty bacne and teenage angst.

>/thread

It's not what you write, cos publishers these day don't give a fuck.
It's names, 500+ pages, bullshit pr.

>>4079126
she gives sloppier blowjobs

>>4079151
great, now I have to fap again.

>/lit/
>judging people by their sexual history
and you people fancy yourselves enlightened

>>4079184
>he's not an ascetic

wow what a pleb

As you probably know, /lit/, Kierkegaard has written a novel. Yes, Kierkegaard. The virgin. The man who played a scoundrel to break off his relationship with his fiancee and devote himself more earnestly to God. The hunchback who wrote under two layers of pseudonyms in Danish to confuse heathens.

You all know him.

That said, how does it make you feel that Kierkegaard is a knight of faith and you are not? How does it make you feel that he is able to teleologically suspend the ethical, regardless of whether the crowd is untruth, and you are not?

>inb4 ghostwritten
Even if it was, someone who's good enough to render something publishable has settled for doing just that, secretly writing for a hunchbacked virgin and not getting his/her own name on the cover of that book. How does it make you feel that someone good enough to write even a mediocre book has to settle for being the ghostwriter of a frail theologian?

>>4079208

I'm a 30 year old virgin who published two books.

>>4079208
bravo

>>4079203
good luck finding that virgin qt 3.14, oh blueballed one

>>4079208
Kierkegaard wasn't a knight of faith brah

>>4079208
>How does it make you feel that he is able to teleologically suspend the ethical

HE can't do that, he says God can.
It's like you don't even know 1% of what he said.

>>4078912
it's like shitty palahniuk erotica
>inb4 "oh so you just mean palahniuk"

>>4079315
The ethical is nevertheless suspended in the individual, otherwise it wouldn't be a suspension at all. Isn't it clear that one can reject this suspension?

>>4079310
Whether he's a pure knight of faith, his spurning of Regine Olsen constitutes an act of faith, not resignation. Why discuss knights of faith at all if only Abraham is worthy?

I always enjoy being educated more about Kierkegaard, but I'd prefer it in the form of something more substantive than pithy remarks.

I'm guessing there was no ghost writer?

That excerpt wasn't too bad, I cringed at the concept (secret societies is just boring to me) and the rhetorical question near the beginning, but other than that I loved it.

>>4079379
I seriously doubt it was fah, that kept S.K. getting close to igine. Maybe he was impotent, shy beyond anthing, small dick, etc. we never know.

>>4079490
>but other than that I loved it.

Jesus Christ, get some taste.

>>4079490
be careful man. people who think for themselves arent too welcomed around these parts

>>4079507
>>4079503
see.

>sasha grey

This woman literally means less than nothing to me. I had to look her up.

>>4079532
i'm sorry but you have to be mildly retarded to think >>4078912 is anywhere near acceptable writing. it's worse than the bollocks katy price publishes.

>>4079536
Watch some pornography some time, loser.

>>4079379
>Why discuss knights of faith at all

Kierkegaard's "Knight of Faith" is something like Nietzsche's over-man. It's something longed-for, but not achieved.

Kierkegaard wishes he could be that knight, but he knows he can't do it, he isn't capable of it, which is in part why the knight of faith fascinates him to such an extent.

Anyway, back on topic, OP should be ashamed for pretending to be a sexually repressed misogynist in order to bring them out of the woodwork. /lit/ can be so much better than that.

>>4079538

professional porn makes me limp as a wet noodle.

>>4079537
my statement still stands. hes not speaking for anybody else but himself, and you immediately chastised him. i think you are the one with the problem

She is also a "musician" and an "actress" (she has acted in a few regular films, not just porn). Now, she's also an author. She's just a chick who got famous being a whore and then writes some shitty book and make some shitty music. She'll probably at some point direct some movie so she can call herself a director as well. It's just a sham thing celebs do to pretend they're more than just an actor or musician or whatever

>>4079536
>not knowing about the queen of /lit/
New

>>4078970
>teachers tell us that so and so's book got rejected 500 times by publishers before being published as inspiration to work hard and never give up
>mfw they were actually rejected because of capitalism and market demand

>>4079559
and had she not done those acts on camera youd prob be thinking shes the cutest girl on earth and wouldnt be complaining about her success. she had sex, big friggin deal.

>>4079569
Welcome home, Comrade.

>>4079571
she had sex on camera for money knowing that guys around the world would watch and touch themselves to it.

She's a whore and unpure. I suggest everyone get a waifu for this very reason.

>>4079559
I thought she was pretty good in that movie The Girlfriend Experience but she was basically just playing herself

>>4079576
Don't quote, don't reply. Report and let him rot.

>>4079576
lmao unpure? wtf are you even talking about,

>>4079580
report me for what, riling up the betas who think sex is some magical thing that defines a person?

Sasha Grey has taken countless anal poundings, sucked all kinds of dicks, been covered head-to-toe in cum, and had a book published. I haven't done any of that shit and I'm older than her.

>>4079591
For some reason there are a lot of dudes on 4chan who think that any woman who has ever even thought about having sex before marriage is a trashy slut. They wouldn't even look at a woman if she weren't a virgin.

>>4079106
>good enough to render something publishable

>Sartre
>publishable

also
>filename

>>4079603
well it's true. I mean if you think about it, every time you kiss a girl who's given someone head, you're essentially putting your lips on hundreds of guys penises at once.

My statement still stands. She is unpure and my waifu will never betray me.

>>4079611
That's retarded. You're retarded.

>>4079574

I feel like I'm turning my back on my country men though.

>>4079611
10/10

>>4079574
Source?

>>4079617
Your country men, as you were, are unconscious, comrade. But inside each and every one is a sleeping giant, waiting to wake up.

>>4079635
http://www.artnet.com/artists/vitaly-komar/

>>4079623
Lol, so you think that kissing a girl that's sucked another dick is like making contact with another dick?
The insecurity is strong with this one.

I don't see how it matters that she had sex on camera. Have you been brought up by Mormons or something?

Ok OP's autism aside, who's gonna actually read it?

I'm pretty interested

>>4079541
That professional pornography part was superfluous.

>>4079611
Actually, if you think about it at all, that's totally fucking stupid.

>>4079668
uh no. but people that think that are pretty sad and usually very lonely id assume

>>4078900
Almost all people that get published are inferior to me, I'm quite used to it.

>>4079611
This thought makes me restless. And horny.

>>4078967
>has found her way out of an industry that chews a lot of young women up.
>implying the damage hasn't been already done a long time ago

Don't you see those dead eyes?

As you probably know, /lit/, Michel Foucault has written a book. Yes, Michel Foucault. The homosexual BDSM star. The man who takes big loads up the ass. The slut who groans for more on all fours, then sucks a giant cock, his discursive formations governed by particularities of given domain and period, and chokes down the semen as another man fucks him from behind.

You all know him.

That said, how does it make you feel that Foucault is a published author and you are not? How does it make you feel that he is able to get his book out there, regardless of whether it's a great piece of lit or not, and you are not?

>inb4 ghostwritten
Even if it was, someone who's good enough to render something publishable has settled for doing just that, secretly writing for a postmodernist and not getting his/her own name on the cover of that book. How does it make you feel that someone good enough to write even a mediocre book has to settle for being the ghostwriter of a cumslut?

>>4079712
gdi. I lol'd

>>4079712
Brilliant

>>4079712
He probably did nastier things than her, I would imagine.

>>4079725

I was gonna say Obama has good shooting form, and then I noticed his double-clutch hand positioning on the ball. Ugh.

>>4079759
He's still a warmongering fascist on the brink of impeachment.

>>4079765

Whatever.

>>4079765
You don't know what a fascist is, do you?

>>4079712
The thread was worth it for this.

>>4079712

>>4079774
(not him) While it's an exaggeration, Obama did do some pretty morally reprehensible stuff, notably ordering the assassination of a (supposed) terrorist and his innocent son. On US soil.

>>4079774
I suppose a Liberal should explain this to me.

>>4079780
Not to mention the killing of countless Syrians in the coming weeks. Against the approval of his own nation.

>Coalition? Who needs a coalition when you're 'Murica?

>>4079791
What does this even mean? Naive fucking Americans always trying to compartmentalize everything political into one of two vague yet polarized camps in their silly, corrupt political system.

Reality check: Neither the Democrats nor Obama are "Liberals" (dat cap) by the standards of any other country in the Western world. Obama is a conservative, the Republicans are ultra-conservatives.

Having said that, he has far less power than the heads of state in virtually every other Western democracy, making his actions, reprehensible or not, far from fascism in every sense of the word.

>>4079823
A rare breath of reason; I always feel obliged to point these out on /lit/.

>>4079830
fucked up some how, >>4079829

>>4079838
While I'm not too heavy on capitalism either, this is so propagandic I feel bad for the people who actually believe this.

>>4079829
When a man hints at an executive decision to conduct a military strike against the will of his own people, I hardly find it appropriate to declare our nation as "democratic".

And yes, as other people have pointed out, the usage of 'fascist' was an exaggeration.
You should maybe tone down the knee-jerk emotions.

>>4079838
Nothing like an infographic to get your point across

>redpill
>HAPPENING

>>4079844

The guy that wrote it is a fascist. It's not a viewpoint you get very often.

>>4079844
You have to admit, the presentation was nice.
If only there existed a person who wouldn't succumb to the gross amount of power that goes along with a government like that.
And there lies the biggest problem with a facist government.

>>4079864
And government in general. To bad the 'lel let's not have a government at all' alternative is retardedly naive.

>Implying Sasha can't write.

Everyone can write, writing is not some super superior art, it's one of the most basic forms of expression.

I'm not saying i like the way this bitch writes, in fact i don't give a shit about her, but everyone can write.

Everyone.

>>4079895
Stunning discovery, friend. Anyone can also take pictures and film shit and draw. Anyone.

Wow.

Everyone.

>>4079856
>>4079864
It's mainly that he's writing about his ideal, fantasy fascist government with random things thrown in there like "fascism also supports animals' rights!" that have nothing to do with fascism itself.

captcha: iittle essay

>>4079902
You're saying the exact same thing he's saying to the OP, sarcasm and all.

>>4079895
I can't. I am functionally illiterate.

>>4079902
you sound like a faggot

>>4078912
>...would write the greatest work of erotic literature the world has ever known. The 120 Days of Sodom. The only book ever written that outdoes the Bible for sexual perversion and violence.

I give it edgy/10

bump for literary event of the century.

I don't see the problem. You people really need to chill out. If they didn't think it would sell (aka people wanting to read it) they wouldn't publish it. The reader is always smarter than the writer, just because you have some splatter of words imitating James Joyce doesn't mean it will sell, nor does it mean it isn't shit. It can be shit and sell, it can be good and not sell. Now, knowing /lit/ it most likely falls into shit and not sell category, but ideally you'd want to find the balance between writing something that could sell without completely abandoning your principles. I guarantee you, the few who are good enough to get published here, will not because they keep writing stuff nobody wants to read aside from them, nothing wrong with that IF your goal isn't to get published.

>>4080857
I wholeheartedly agree.
If you're marketing in a first-world nation, you're selling a product. Seeing as how a majority of the public tends to side with things of 'common' interest (i.e. celebrity gossip, oh-no-you-didn't rhetoric, etc.) then your best bet is to write something they would buy.
No one is going to buy your compendium of philosophical rants or novels on teenage angst that lasted well into your late 20's.

If you want to sell, you need to write something people will read...if you happen to like what you write, then that's a plus. Congrats.

>>4078967
It doesn't matter what she achieves, she'll always be subhuman shit. Why would anyone be rustled?

>>4080866
If getting published is your first priority when writing then suicide should be the advised route to take.

>>4080881
You do realize there is plenty of room between wanting to be published as the first and only priority and writing everything the way you want in your delusional little fantasy world then complaining nobody is seeing your brilliance? Grow up.

>>4080886
I like the second one without the complaining part and I'd rather not grow up into a sensible compromising word merchant. It's perfectly possible to write what you want without compromise if you don't expect to live off your writing.

>>4080908
By all means, I implore you to enjoy that road.
In no way did I ever say the things you accused me of--and in no way did I intend to insult your writing or aspirations.
However, what I said was the truth. All successful writers of our time touch on topics of commoner interest. If you can't handle that, then I would advise you to re-read the last sentence of this: >>4080881

>>4080908
Lolz, my mistake. I mean the last sentence of this: >>4080886

As you probably know, /lit/, David Foster Wallace has written a novel.[1] Yes, David Foster Wallace. The autist. The socially awkward dork who hung himself with a belt.[2] The poor man's Pynchon who hid from irony behind even more irony and actually thought he could single-handedly kill postmodernism with his limp, sprawling prose.

And but so you all know him.

That said, how does it make you feel that David Foster Wallace is a published author and you are not?[3] How does it make you feel that he is able to get his book[4] out there, regardless of whether it's a great piece of lit or not, and you are not?

>inb4 ghostwritten
Even if it was, someone who's good enough to render something publishable has settled for doing just that, secretly writing for a weird bandana-clad grammar nazi[5] and not getting his/her own name on the cover of that book. How does it make you feel that someone good enough to write even a mediocre book has to settle for being the ghostwriter of a former junior tennis star?

[1] "Novel" of course being one of those ontologically prickly terms, as in e.g. "essay," "short story," or "novella," which terms are notoriously difficult to pin down and differentiate; but as with pornography, sometimes you just know it when you see it.

[2] Kenneth Cole REACTION Men's Waldorf 1-1/2" Reversible Leather Belt, black. Product of Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc. (NYSE: KCP)

[3] Presumably.

[4] Wallace, David Foster. Infinite Jest: A Novel. Boston: Little, Brown. 1996. ISBN 0-316-92004-5.

[5] Or SNOOT, his (Wallace's) own personal n.d.g. for a person whose anality and obsessive conservatism w/r/t to language and usage[a] borders on unhealthy, or at the very least kind of droll, to the outside observer.

[a] i.e. prescriptive grammar, that discredited and frankly kind of cultish strain of dogmatic linguistic thought that makes contemporary linguists shudder the same way phrenology must surely make the medical profession shudder, even now.

>>4080986
...is...is that you, Dave?

>>4080986

I've not read the book, so can't comment on what I think of her work substantially. I'm not at all fussed by the fact she's a book published. Sasha Grey is "who" she is in media because of consumers. Viewership equates to money, which equates to outside interest, which equates to more money. No consumers, no house-hold names.

Since there are consumers, where there are is seen as money and fame to be gained. Immediate money in this case for the publisher, immediate money and publicity thus elevated chance of more money in the future for Sasha and her team. Money and fame; with either one will attract opportunities significantly beneficial to all parties involved.

Likely she did not decide to write a book on her own accord; her life -- which is marketed as an image -- is the basis of her career. Spending time making something to sell she didn't know was definitely going to land a deal in order to (most wannabe-paid writers can't take advantage of the fact they're known by millions) would mean she'd be unable to publicize it as up-and-coming. Her team wouldn't allow her to spend time (money) on such. My point being: since "Sasha Grey" is essentially a commercial port, it's reasonable to assume her and her team were "seen to" and followed through on simply because of the fact releasing material under Sasha Grey's name benefits Sasha, her publicists, and the publisher. She started writing after hands were shook, not before.

The means of her fame aren't relevant, to note.

>>4081009
I think we've already established that marketability isn't why we here on /lit/ read and write.

>>4081009
>She started writing after hands were shook, not before.
Holy fucking shit hold the horses. No fucking way. My mind has just been blown to shreds. How did you come to this conclusion? You truly have a brilliant mind anon.

>>4081019
I never said otherwise. I was referring to those with spite towards Sasha when all she is is a money pawn. The fact she's published isn't her "fault", as is implied by some here.

>>4081027
No need to be condescending. The explanation was towards those bashing her. I know it's all otherwise obvious.

>>4081028
sasha is a figure of ridicule/spite here on 4chan because she is a complete pretentious idiot. she's been a meme here for at least 5 years now. read one of her many social networking profiles if you wanna know what started it all (and of course see the infamous "sartre to dostoevsky" selfie posted earlier in the thread.)

>>4080986

holy fuck so awesome.

>>4081060
Yep, I know. I was talking about this thread specifically. What I wrote was in disagreeing of either however. I don't get the mindset behind anons calling her out. Every image she uploads is uploaded for a reason. She's a businesswoman, and her life is her career. Nobody actually knows who she is as a person. Calling her regardless an "idiot" seems itself pretentious.

>>4079034
Nice.

>>4079106
>keeping an eye on philosophy and Simone at the same time

I imagine that she makes a better porn star than an author but really, who cares? Sahsa Grey decided that she didn't want to be remembered solely as that one crazy bitch that licked toilet seats, so she retired from that business to try something new. She's trying to class up her image a little bit by taking pictures of her reading philosophy books. She wrote a mediocre book. So what? These things don't effect me in the least but it's probably made her life a hell of a lot better. Let her make money off her shitty book.

>>4079992
i never face palm and i did reading that part.

>>4081177
It's the character's opinion, not necessarily the author's.

>>4081166

but muh misogyny

how can I feel better about my failings if I can't sit around calling a porn star I routinely masturbate to a dumb slut

>>4081181

Let's be real here: the main character in The Juliette Society is as obvious an authorial self-insert as there has ever been.

>>4081184
On what basis can you accurately claim this besides knowing her personally? Regardless of how you word it, all you're doing is assuming.

>>4081194

On the basis that I have read a lot of books and can sniff out an authorial self-insert when I see one: the facts of the main character's life suspiciously mirror the facts of Grey's own -- interest in film and feminism and sexuality, flippant attitude toward social convention, even down to manner of speaking (the narration is indistinguishable from how she writes and talks in nondiction/day-to-day life).

Oh, there's also this: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/27/sasha-grey-on-her-novel-the-juliette-society-james-deen-and-more.html

>There’s a great line early on in The Juliette Society that says 120 Days of Sodom is the only book that outdoes the Bible for sexual perversion and violence.

>[Laughs] It’s funny because I’ve spoken with you a few times, and I wondered if you were going to ask about that. Yes, it is a viewpoint I share.

>>4081202

*nonfiction, my bad. Anyway, read the link: she all buy directly says the main character is based on her.

>>4081184
>>4081194
>>4081202
The main character in "The Juliette Society" was a teenaged porn star who got AIDS and was forcefully ejaculated out of the bottom of the porn industry.

>>4080986

I've never read DFW before, but I assume he used footnotes as an edgy ironic criticism of ownership.

>Women and young girls aren’t taught to be proud or confident in their sexuality because they’re easily labeled as “sluts” or “whores,” which is both good and bad, because 14-year-old girls shouldn’t be running around like, “Let me get that dick!”...
--Sasha Gray

>>4081211

Since you've never read DFW and freely admit you are therefore making a baseless assumption, what is the point of this post? Do you really believe anyone on Earth gives a shit what you think about an author you haven't even fucking read? How fucking asinine. What are you, 15?

I was first published when I was 13 years old.

Can't say I'm too bothered.

>>4080986
That's probably the best fake DFW-speak I've ever read. You went for the obvious jokes (footnotes, "and but so then it's like," etc.) but you also did a great job of mimicking his style. Seriously, this is great.

>>4081266

It's because I spent the early part of this summer reading Infinite Jest and am at this very moment reading Consider the Lobster (seriously, as in it's in my lap right now), so I've been kind of steeped in it recently.

>>4079034
>>4079106
>>4079208
>>4079712
>>4080986

>>4081221
what book

I hope my kid actually writes and tries to be published. I would pay to get it made into a sexy hardcover and just own my own custom copy

As you probably know, /lit/, Barney Gumble has made a movie. Yes, Barney Gumble. The drunkard. The man who takes big loads of booze down the throat. The degenerate who groans for more on all fours, then sucks Moe's beer taps dry, his shirt filthy, and chokes down the Duff as another drunk claws at him from behind.

You all know him.

That said, how does it make you feel that Barney Gumble is an accomplished film producer and you are not? How does it make you feel that he is able to get his film out there, regardless of whether it's a great piece of cinema or not, and you are not?

>inb4 produced by film school students
Even if it was, someone who's good enough to render something filmable has settled for doing just that, secretly filming and editing for a drunkard and not getting his/her own name in the credits of the film. How does it make you feel that someone good enough to produce even a mediocre film has to settle for being the uncredited producer of a degenerate boozehound?

>>4081638
10/10, poor Barney

>>4081620

Needs the OP to make sense.

>>4082175
This

>>4081620
I'll fix it for you

>>4082746
Where is Barney Gumble

>>4082757
Moe's Tavern, where the elite meet to drink.

I've always believed that writing even a single book doesn't take a few months, it takes a whole life, in the sense that your experiences and the people you meet form you as much of a person as an author.

In the case of Sasha, I feel her road in life eventually led her to writing, whatever it is she published

I've always believed that writing even a single book doesn't take a few months, it takes a whole life, in the sense that your experiences and the people you meet form you as much of a person as an author.

In the case of Sasha, I feel her road in life eventually led her to writing, whatever it is she published. I'm not mad that she got published, I'm actually kinda happy for her, but i do agree that a lot of bulshit books get put in the market all the time. But it exists for the sole reason that someone somewhere will buy it and enjoy it, if not, then what the fuck are we even alive?

So yeah, in short, the biggest slut in all of history published a book, so what? If even she can do it, it means we've got nothing but possibilities.

>>4081620

God bless you.

>>4082746

/lit/ gold

Is it supposed to make me mad or something? Being published isn't an indicator of skill, just ability to sell.

>>4082746
Excellent.

>>4079208
Very nice I like.

>>4080986
I don't think I've ever seen imitation writing this good before

>>4078900
She has such a classic decker face. No wonder she went into porn. Everybody she meets must want to rape that shit-eating grin off of her fucking face.

>>4083144
Seriously though. I finished the Pale King two days ago and I honestly can't see a single word he wouldn't have written himself, excluding a few sentence-structure things made mandatory by the format.

>>4080986
Can you finish The Pale King?

>>4082746
thanks

>>4078922
OP is trying to sell a book. that's all

Although I am fully aware that this is a third rate troll carried over from /b/, I thought I'd just let you guys know that I actually am published in my university's undergrad publication, and I believe I'm headed for some great things.

>>4085050
I don't think it's a "troll" at all, I think it's a satire of /lit/ that banks on the pretensions and misogyny that characterize so many of the threads here. The fact so many people have become defensive and replied with hostility just makes it all the more funny.

Also congratulations on the publication, anon.

>>4083150
Amen to that. I don't even like hardcore porn but want to see her get her brains fucked out, then want to see her take a few punches to the face.

>>4085077

You basically just elaborated on what an instance of trolling typically is. But yeah thanks.

>>4085097
>carried over from b
>not caried over from lit

you do know the original post on this thread was made two days ago?

where can i download this?

>>4085097
No, trolling is deliberately trying to provoke people into responding. If the superficiality of one's statement is obvious (I read the OP as highly sarcastic) it'll only "troll" those foolish enough not to pick up on that.

Maybe I'm expecting too much out of /lit/ though.

Also you're a tool for boasting about your publication on /lit/, especially in a thread about the publication of books. No one cares you got something into an academic journal no one will read.

>>4085104
Not the guy you responded to, but I've been curious about this because I'm a freshman in college. Is it meaningful at all to get something published in an undergrad publication? Is it worth trying?

>>4079053
To each his own.
From the excerpt published here I can say with certainty that Sasha Grey is a more talented author than Jean Genet. Jean Genet couldn't even troll right; He just tried to be disgusting which in our days reads tame.

>>4085110
>Is it meaningful at all to get something published in an undergrad publication? Is it worth trying?

Yes and no. It depends entirely on the journal, the field, and what your ambitions are. If you're looking to go into an academic or quasi-academic field (e.g.: law), having publications under your belt is excellent since it shows you're able to produce something written of merit and quality.

Some journals are a joke, though, and will literally take anything. The better the journal, the louder your accomplishment speaks.

>>4085120
Correction: they won't literally take anything, but many receive very few submissions and unless your article is total shit or too poorly written to suffer, you'll be able to get it included. The Harvard Law Review, for instance, will get heaps more submissions than The Baptist University of Southwestern Mississippi's Journal of Feminist Agriculture.

>>4085120
an acquaintance of mine got a writing job for having been published in vanity press. he is an autist. he can't write for shit. but they luckily did not care to read his shit.

>>4085139
You mean "a" vanity press?

>>4085143
Probably. Yours is not my native language.

>>4085120
That makes sense. I suppose there's no good reason not to submit it. Publication probably can't make you appear any less serious a writer, anyways. And even if it can, said publication need not be admitted.

>>4085144
A vanity press means you pay to get your own work published, so I'm not really sure what you meant. I was a senior editor for a legal academic journal (one of the best in my country) and we received a lot of poorly written submissions. If they conveyed a strong substantive argument we'd send them back to the author and conditionally agree to publish the work provided they get it up to a reasonably presentable standard. From there we'd do our own editing.

If the argument was garbage and the writing was excellent, we rejected. The same went for anything that was too awful to be salvageable, despite a potentially good thesis. You can only do so much work as an editor. It's ultimately up to the author to do the heavy lifting.