/lit/ - Literature

Oe - A Personal Matter.

It's about killing retarded babies because yolo.

I know where you are coming from op, and I would throw in authors that obsess over their own prose.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanticism#Romantic_literature

I am about to delve into the Waverly tales myself

>life affirming
>realistic
nice contradiction
>good
good luck with that lol.

>>4368341
the little world of don camillo...
also les miserables,
while a lot of sad stuff happens i think it has a very positive outlook on life.

Ever read Tolstoy? I'm thinking specifically of Anna Karenina

>tfw i keep recommending this book
>tfw no one here seems willing to read it

It's exactly what you're looking for, OP. It's also hilarious.

>being a believer in 2013
ugh

>>4368341
Here's a good place to start.

I've got a question.

How are non "life-affirming" themes "degenerate" or "liberal"? Do conservatives never feel depressed or pessimistic? I'm asking honestly. Do you find it hard to relate to these things?

>>4368437

The difference, in my view, is simply a matter of perspective.

Both agree that the world is harsh, cruel and ultimately tragic.

The difference is that many leftists or liberal authors dwell on the sadness and inhospitable conditions of life, and find ultimate salvation in the ability of humans to empathize with the existential plight of others -- usually, but not exclusively, through compassionate and self-denying acts. The central message is that our world is irrevocably evil, and we need to work together to achieve a world full of goodness (whether that world is Heaven-sent or built by man). Thus, these people hold a life-denying perspective.

On the other hand, while many traditionalist or right-wing authors agree that life is difficult and full of struggle, they find salvation and joy in the act of overcoming barriers that are thrown up against them. They also tend to use the ugly aspects of the world as a means to better accentuate moments of undeniable beauty and happiness. Thus, they turn even the most horrific scenes into life-affirming occasions.

One example of these two competing perspectives might be found by comparing the WWI works of Ernst Junger and Henri Barbusse. Barbusse paints the war as a brutal, ridiculous nightmare from beginning to end. On the other hand, Junger depicts the war much more cheerfully; he never denies the horrors, but he uses them to celebrate small moments of beauty and bravery that he witnessed as a front-line officer.

>>4368494
one of the more thoughtful answers i've seen in answer to this question. thanks & capped.

>liberal marxist
Wait what, you must be American.

>>4368494
That was actually super-helpful. Thanks, anon.

Tolkien

>>4368494
Agree completely. The only thing I'd add is that life-affirming authors, unlike their leftist colleagues, tend to believe that man will never be able to progress to a state of utopian warmth and contentment. In other words, life as it exists now is how it always shall exist; so because of that, it's better to cheerfully accept both the ugly and beautiful aspects of life, and appreciate their necessity.

>>4368341
Im writing one about an editor in japan looking to make a modern religion through literature

>>4368562

>make a modern religion through literature

You do realize this is an existing neo-liberal project, right? James Wood has been promoting the notion that "high literature" (read: contemporary, hyper-estrogenic, NYT-approved lit) should be treated as a secular religion -- because it promotes compassion and empathy. He's been on about this for the past two decades plus.

>liberal marxist
>>>/pol/

>>4368571

Correction:

To be fair, it's not all contemporary literature. Wood also includes authors like Chekhov, E.M. Forster, et al. in his list of "secular religious" authors who can purportedly save mankind by teaching us how to empathize.

>>4368571
Well I'm not even aware of such of movements. I think its better that I don't. It exposes the mind behind the ideology that wishes to exemplify good morals. Man vs Idea sort of thing.

Thoughtful comments, anons. I do think, however, that conditions do change and have changed throughout time, and thus we need not resign ourself to fatalism, i.e., "life as it exists now is how it always shall exist; so because of that, it's better to cheerfully accept both the ugly and beautiful aspects of life, and appreciate their necessity." Throughout time, profound alterations of what it means to be human and how we engage with each other have occurred, and we are the agency of that change. Things do not stand still, so it matters how we engage with the present, and what we do with it. I do not believe this is life denying, but life affirming.

Comments?

Knut Hamsun ''growth of the soil''

>>4368571
>neo-liberal

I don't even know what to make of this. The word has been butchered to meaninglessness.

>>4368355
>Tropic of Cancer

Come to me young Dasein and enter the realm of destining wherein truth may come into view.

>>4368571
Sounds like another pseudo intellectual, that's mad daddy told him his book learnings don't mean shit, who has taken to the unprovable case that books some how make a man moral. Ofcourse, the argument never fully gets shot down because well read people are still people and circle jerk their own ego in an academic hive mind

>>4368513
>>4368528
>>4368537
Either samefagging or this board is ridiculously retarded and full of shit

>>4368341
Why would you want to intentionally delude yourself, OP?

>>4368880
Most likely both.

If you want some real nice life-affirming shit, try Nihilist Communism by Monsieur Dupont, or The Right To Be Greedy by the Council for Generalized Self-Management.

stoicism.

>>4368887
Its delusional to be liberal and nihilist and anti-life....basically everything that came after French revolution has been a failure.

America chose the wrong allies in WW2 now all our art and media is degenerate our banks rule the world and ethical relativism is fine for every non-white non-european country...

Buy we have to abide by absolutist ethics that revolve around free market economics and multiculturalism..

>>4368925
Liberalism and nihilism are fundamentally opposed and your interchanging of the two really declares your profound lack of understanding.

Nihilism does not allow for the existence of morality. Claiming that nihilism enforces "absolutist ethics" is absurd.

/pol/ pls go

>>4368430
>Cioran
>not negative

EDGAR RICE BURROUGHS, OP.

ERB, all up in this piece.

>>4368424
its a great book

>>4368880

"Mom, people are posting things online that counter my perception of the world. Make them stop."

>>4369045
/pol/ pls go

>>4368896
>the Council for Generalized Self-Management

oh sure, i'll get right on that.

>>4369051

>>>reddit.com/r/anarchism

I hear they keep a cozy hug box over there.

>>4369066
r/anarchism is the worst thing to happen to anarchism since Noam Chomsky.

Go back to your /pol/ hugbox.

>>4369061
This made me laugh like a motherfucker

>>4368494
>The central message is that our world is irrevocably evil, and we need to work together to achieve a world full of goodness (whether that world is Heaven-sent or built by man). Thus, these people hold a life-denying perspective.

Conclusion does not follow from the premise.

What could be more "life-affirming" than the idea that mankind can, if we put our mind to it, achieve a better world?

>>4369069
I bet everybody in your Occupy group admires your dreadlocks, ear plugs, and Hakim Bey-inspired tattoos. Sure one day you'll be at the vanguard of a true workers' revolution, brah.

Whatever anyone tells you, and whatever your conscience tells you, never grow out of this phase. Ever. Just keep squatting, handing out fliers, and biding your time. One day the rest of the mankind will surely agree with you and your filth-caked comrades.

>>4369089
b-b-but they're the only ones in society who really GET it, man. if only the rest of us could, like, see past the institutional bullshit white noise of this terrible, like, moloch machine or something, fuck!

>liberal marxist
>degenerate

>>>/pol/

Hemingway?

>>4368429
*types fedora*

>>4368341
All those terms you used are terrible, just fuckijg die

>>4368341
>I'm tired of reading modernist and post-modern, nihilistic, negative, liberal marxist bullshit...

Guarantee you've never even come close to finishing a book that fits any of these descriptions because your mind is already made up about them (you're so weak willed that you can't see beyond your vague notion of some traditionalist ideology).

Grow the fuck up, you useless faggot. And get off the board.

>>4369156
Did you really type "fedora" or did you copy+paste it from another source?

this thread is full of spooks

>liberal marxist
what is this i don't even