/lit/ - Literature

>>5148757
oook

Nah you're just not cut out to be a writer.

>start writing
>realize you have 0 story inside of you
>stop writing

>>5148770
Does insulting anonymous people whom you know quite literally nothing about, literally nothing regarding their education, literally nothing regarding their personal experiences with writing, literally nothing regarding their writing ability and literally nothing regarding the entirety of their relationship with literature make you feel as though you're not a failure?

I hope so.

I mean, otherwise why would you do it.

>>5148779
Does literally reacting like a literally illiterate retard who literally just got provided with criticism that is literally legitimate make you feel like an asshole? a literal asshole that is literally an opening where literal (not figurative btw) shit comes out from? Because like you literally should.

>>5148779
negative comments are all invalid because only assholes are negative! haha!
if you don't have anything nice to say don't say anything at all! haha!

>>5148779
not him, but if you're having trouble articulating through writing alone then you're probably not writing well.
I'm saying this in the most impersonal way possible. I couldn't care less whether or not you're a good writer, but if you really can't convey thought convincingly without the use of another supporting medium then that's a blatant sign that something is wrong.

>>5148779
>literally
>literally
>literally

>>5148779
is it weird that i read this in the voice of a teenage girl

>>5148779
>you shouldn't be allowed to criticize someone who comes to a literature board which is (literally lol) a board about writing and complains about not being able to write

>>5148815
I just wanted to share my thoughts.

Sometimes its fun to share how you feel, anon. Otherwise we feel alone.

>>5148822
considering the use of the word literal, i can literally imagine that you literally read this in the voice of a literal teenage girl

Words are a pretty terrible way to communicate, but everyone just accepts it. Even verbal language is extremely easy to misinterpret.

It's part of the challenge and part of the fun

>>5148823
>criticize
you mean write off completely for no real reason

>>5148809
this a literally underrated post

>>5148822
It is a biological mechanism. The human brain has evolved to read any sentence with more than two "literally" in a teenage girl's voice.

Some studies point towards a similar mechanism among some species of non-human apes.

>>5148839
>write off for no reason
If you have trouble expressing your thoughts through words, it's a pretty good reason why you should not be a writer

>>5148850
I expressed how rekt you were pretty well, faglord.

>>5148757
>literally

>>5148860
I was going to point put that that sentence has no relevant meaning, but then i remembered i was talking to someone who literally (top kek) said that they can not express their thoughts through words

>>5148757
>tfw writing some dicks
fuck man this is the best
"he grabbed from his shaft and stroke across, and tickled the tip"

>>5148873
I didn't say that i literally just alluded to it being difficult without the ability to draw.

My thoughts are literally so lurid and crisp that it takes me some time to re-work the slightest of descriptions as a result of how hard i literally assfucked your mother.

>>5148835
>Words are a pretty terrible way to communicate
Derrida would like to speak with you

>>5148850
>implying people can't improve

>Start writing a short story, even a nonsense article to blog
>Feels mediocre at best
>Plug in maybe an hour or two before taking a break
>Start writing gay scaly porn
>Don't stop
>Pump out a stellar as fuck first draft and then masterbate to it
>Back to trying to write more legitimate works

Feels conflicting.

>>5148894

He would agree completely with my point though, so I don't know what you are trying to say. It's not that using words is bad, it's that they are a flawed way of getting across an idea by their very nature.

Multiple meanings can be deduced from the same exact text and how you interpret it defines what it means to you.

>>5148919
>Multiple meanings can be deduced from the same exact text and how you interpret it defines what it means to you.
If the writer is shit, sure.

>>5148919
>Multiple meanings can be deduced from the same exact text and how you interpret it defines what it means to you.
That's why you're supposed to use the differences of other words to create contrast-effects to give the text a definite meaning. Understanding writing as an imitator of speech makes writing an inferior form of conveyance (logocentrism), but to recognize writing in terms of deconstructionism makes writing arguably the ultimate form of conveyance. This is admittedly difficult to do, because it takes a savant level of knowledge of context and grammar, but in theory it means that writing can hold a certain definite meaning to it within the text.

>start writing
>realize its actually hard
>masturbate instead

>>5148757

>Start drawing.
>Realize its almost impossible to articulate your thoughts without being able to write.
>Stop drawing.

Everytime. And quite true for me.

>>5148936
>>5148994

Regardless of how talented a writer is, there can be no universal meaning deduced from a text. Definitive meaning is impossible, even individual words have completely different connotations for different people, even if they are understood in a similar way. Words refer to a symbol in your mind and it's going to be slightly different for everyone.

I'm not sure why you have so much faith in the ability for a language to convey ideas objectively. Personal interpretation is such a huge part of it. Even just thinking about a single person, they will often get something out of a work the first time they read it and something completely different on subsequent readings.

You could fault this on humans rather than the language I suppose. But it doesn't change the fact that no matter how perfectly you construct a sentence it will never mean exactly the same thing to everyone.

>Start writing
>One and a half page a day
>Finish a short story
>Leave it for a month
>Re-read it
>Feel so disgusted by reading the first page I delete it

I don't like it

>>5148994
>recognize writing in terms of deconstructionism makes writing arguably the ultimate form of conveyance.

If you think deconstruction does anything like that, you need to go to M.H Abrams Glossary of Literary Terms and look it up.

>>5152977
never leave for a month, continuously rewrite so there is always one part youre proud of so you just have to fix the other parts to bring it all up to an acceptable level

repeat ad infinitum

>>5148909
You're destined to write gay erotica. You could probably make some good money off it.

>>5153004
What if you can't stand anything you write when you look back on it?

>>5153014
Then you've got at least a year between you and any real skill.

>>5153021
Achso, just yet another year then.

>literally start writing
>realise it's literally impossible to articulate your thoughts without literally being able to draw
>literally stop writing
>literally write a thread on /lit/ about how literally annoying it is
>literally choke on the big black dick that's literally pumping sperm into my mouth