/lit/ - Literature

Because it's more enjoyable and you get to use your IMAGINATION.

>Because they're bad

>>5941337

Define "book".

>>5941337
just do what you want who gives a fuck

>>5941337
different strokes for different folks

Why watch tv shows or play videogames when we live in a time where almost all books can simply be downloaded?

Because women can like shitty TV like GoT and shit games like Gone Home but women don't read Thompson or Mishima because there's no social leverage to be had.

I'd type out a response, but you probably wouldn't read it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cVLpdzhcU0g

To make yourself feel smart. That's not why I read but it's probably why most of /lit/ does.

Because variety is nice

Reading is for nerds, prove me wrong.

Can somebody explain to me why anyone would watch a movie when we live in a time where there's a near unlimited amount of books and tv shows on offer, and also video games?

Can somebody explain to me why anyone would play a videogame when we live in a time where there's a near unlimited amount of films and tv shows on offer, and also books?

Can somebody explain to me why anyone would watch a TV series when we live in a time where there's a near unlimited amount of films and books on offer, and also video games?

Can somebody explain to me who would be so insurmountably retarded as to cut off an entire medium of artistic expression and entertainment for literally no reason?

What's TRULY frightening about this post is that it's a question that is legitimately being posed by nearly everyone alive today.

Because Vida and TV still sick as story telling mediums. I do watch plenty of films

>>5941837
Being a nerd is good, prove me wrong.

>>5941966
nerd rhymes with turd, prove me wrong

>>5941451
yeah you can start out trying to make yourself feel smart, but you can also actually start enjoying it

>>5941966
Every imageboard and forum.

>>5941969
Turd is good, prove me wrong

>>5941337
they're just different
but i like how with reading you come up with the imagery. It's like checking out your brain

>>5941337
What kind of normal person pigeonholes his interests into one medium? You can enjoy all four you fucking faggot.

>>5941337
Because >movie is 1hr 30 mins average, book is roughly 300 pages. Which do you think can say more? and move one deeper? and change ones outlook? (the book) Movies are for nerds, though i like cinema I do not take it as seriously as literature..

and TV shows... Dont even, Half of the crap thats around today is well.. crap. And without the "bookz" there would be no "tv shows" especially the decent ones as most are based on literature, oh and screenplays..

And video games, Extremely expensive and require more than just the video game... You need a console, or a decent computer to properly enjoy a game of now days.. Where as a book all you need is the book, and eyes.. heck, you can even get audio book and get away with no eyes.


Why am i even replying to bait

8/10

Thanks to using the internet and computers for as long as I can remember, I can read about 900 words a minute and type 135wpm

>>5941337
Because you reach a higher hermenautic synthesis of being.

Because I need to know vocab and linguistical rules for the GRE

Already got bored of video games.

There aren't that many good tv shows to watch. I've pretty much watched all i'm interested in.

Films are fine but i prefer literature. Lit is more engaging.

>>5941337

bigger selection of titles
better interior life description
helps vocabulary
can leave Mother's basement to do it

Why would I restrict myself by some pleb director's visualisation?

>>5941337
Because it's fun. Do we really need a higher purpose in order to read?

>>5941337
>you're not enjoying yourself the right way!

>>5943438
I know how to enjoy MYSELF alright ;)

In reality, almost every single form of entertainment these days is digital, and very abstract. To get in touch with human nature, you must read, and read well.

>>5941337
>Can somebody explain to me
No, you're a pleb.

>>5941372
>3:00 my advice in a nutshell
>START WITH THE GREEKS

why does anyone who isn't morbidly convalescent bother with entertainment in general when there's a more-than-generous amount of interesting, fun things to achieve in the world that don't involve passive consumption?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8Y1MalRrDc

Do you see anyone reading books or watching movies or playing video-games in this? And something like this, going on a road trip, meeting people, isn't even remotely exemplary, it's closer to the bottom of the barrel than anything else, they're not even achieving anything. To a real achiever or creator, a fully-fledged athlete or artist, this would be nothing more than mere entertainment. That's probably why they have to add in the extremer aspects in the video.

>>5943581

The fuck is this cunt talking about now?

I'm not watching your shitty "music" video either.

>>5943589
He's a cunt, but he's got a point.

>>5943603

Cuntish point.

>>5943589

i think his point is that people who read books, play video games, and watch tv are losers and that well-adjusted people have outgoing social lives.

i agree, but not about books. books are not contrary integrated into a healthy socially active lifestyle. video games on the other hand....

>>5943581
idk that guy got shot doesn't seem like something i want to do tbh with u

>>5943609

What's the difference between novels and video games? They've both received the same criticism from their detractors when they were a new entertainment.

And on the other hand, what's the difference between going out and partying with drunks and getting drunk on your own?

What's the difference between anything at all?

>>5943609
>read books
He didn't even talk about books. Reading implies being active, it's not passive consumption.

>>5943616

yes he did

>Do you see anyone reading books or watching movies or playing video-games in this

i suspect he's talking about reading fiction, however.

i wouldn't be surprised if he thinks fiction isn't serious material because it isn't the explicit domain of the philosopher. and therefore it is just as junky as video games.

>>5943616
>Reading implies being active, it's not passive consumption.

Same applies to playing GTA5.

>>5943613
>What's the difference between novels and video games?
(Good) novels are meant to teach you something worthwhile and touch you in a way nothing has ever did.
>They've both received the same criticism from their detractors when they were a new entertainment.
Are you talking about Plato's dialogues? Some stupid asshole character used by a well known troll isn't a very good example of a legit detractor. Also, it's about the written word in the sense of philosophy, not about novels (novels would fall into the category of "poetry" which had already been refused for stupid /pol/-tier reasons).
>And on the other hand, what's the difference between going out and partying with drunks and getting drunk on your own?
Human beings need social intercourse for their psychological health. Alcohol is only a tool to make it easier. If you seriously think it's just about alcoholism as an end you're missing the point (which implies you are already some pathetic shut-in and it's too late for you to escape your self-destructive spiral which will end up in depression or even worse: becoming a /r9k/ poster).
>What's the difference between anything at all?
Dayum das some 2deep4me shit going on here m8

>>5943625
In an intellectual way, not pressing some buttons.

>>5943636
>(Good) novels are meant to teach you something worthwhile and touch you in a way nothing has ever did.
rapelay touched me in many ways, like nothing before ever did, none of them consensual

>>5943640
>looking at words
>intellectual

get out

>>5943620
Looks like my mind unconsciously erased that part for being too stupid.
>i suspect he's talking about reading fiction, however.
I hope so. Anyway, it's still retarded.

>>5943645
>reading
>>looking at words
It's not the same when you have actual reading comprehension. You'll understand when you grow up.

>>5943612
I'm sorry anon, but those are the risks you have to take if you you go on an epic road trip with a psychotic qt 3.14. And isn't it the same or worse with any serious undertaking in life? Top athletes risk death or severely crippling themselves, top artists risk throwing their entire lives away on an idea or passion which may never come to fruition, which may as well be the same thing as death. Achievement is a risky business, which is there is so little of it compared to why there is so much entertainment.

>>5943650
i can grow up and start making profound statements such as "playing video games is just pressing buttons"

>>5943642
I obviously didn't mean it in a "your drunk uncle when you were 6" kind of way.

>>5941337
Not enough with good storytelling games (last one was fucking Heavy Rain, at least AAA, lots of nice indine ones), not enough with good movies/shows (lololol, michael bay/jersey shore). Infinite amount of fucking awesome literature.

>>5943652
> is just
See? This is what I meant when I was talking about reading comprehension. It's ok, young anon.

>>5943660
i got the inference. you don't literally have to say 'just'. i think you need to look at some words some more

>>5943581
>Do you see anyone reading books or watching movies or playing video-games in this?
I mean, you do actually see people playing video-games, but they're self-evident evident betabois.

>>5943666
Some words change the meaning of what you are trying to say, specially when someone puts them in your mouth for a reason. I know there are a lot of mental inferences your brain makes when you play tetris.

We read books and notes because language makes you use your brain. When you watch TV all you do is expect some pleasant stuff with words that you already know. So on TV you go like HMM I KNOW THIS WORD I HAVE HEARD IT BEFORE, I DONT HAVE TO THINK OF ITS MEANING or I DONT KNOW THIS WORD BUT THE JAPANESE SURE ARE FUNNY. There is a study that shows that mindless TV watching leads to weak brains.

This is the first reason.

We read books and notes because they are objective: ie I can watch a 2 hours movie or read its plot in a online wiki... in TEN MINUTES. When I read its plot in a online wiki I find that I know more about the movie than many viewers. Even to be fair, and not read it, the fact the movie whores hate spoilers shows that they are fucking crazy in the first place. Movie whores cannot read books for this reason. Even if I made a plot text considering their reading speed to be equal the time length of the movie itself, meaning it would be pages long and deep enough, they are addicted to novelty not language.

They are so crazy about novelty that they cant replay their favorite movies.

This is the second reason.

We read books because it is Fun. It is actually very fun to read books, specially book we or our friends wrote ourselves.

>>5943670
i already got 666 trips don't even bother

>>5943676
F-fuck you...

>>5943675
>There is a study that shows that mindless TV watching leads to weak brains.

so watch mindful tv

>>5943675
>There is a study that shows that mindless TV watching leads to weak brains.

wtf is a "weak brain"? And that handwavy "there's a study that shows", a half-sentence that starts off the majority of bullshit on the Internet [1], does not really support your case..

[1] As in, "there's a study that shows that microwaving your food causes cancer!"

>>5943680
I think I understand you. That leads to books anyway.

>>5943683
DFW fans, ladies and gentlemen.

>>5943687
I just like footnotes :3

>>5943683
I am sorry. I dont like saying "there is a study that shows" either.

>>5943651
idk im going to be real with you i don't think she's qt enough for it to be worth the risk

YOU CAN BRING A BOOK ANYWHERE

I don't know about the rest of the board, but I read because i developed an "addiction" to imagination. Reading the words and creating a mental movie is amazing to me, and it's much more enjoyable than watching an actual movie.

I read A clockwork orange in one sitting, but I don't actually remember reading the words, just the images I formed in my mind while I did it. I don't know how to put it into words, but it's amazing.

>>5943736
That is natural.

In the long run, those who spent more time reading will be of more value to society.

I'm not even kidding or trying to be pretentious, it's true.

>>5943636

>plato's dialogues have something to do with novels
>novels teach you stuff
>stuff I like is better than stuff you like

Fucking 10/10 debate there m8. You're the mutt's.

>>5943640

>playing video games is just pushing buttons
>how dare you suggest reading is just looking at words and that turning the pages on some FOTM hipster shit isn't superior?
>I am afraid of emergent art forms and would have called for Ulysses to be banned.

>>5943675
>When you watch TV all you do is expect some pleasant stuff with words that you already know.

I've read The Waste Land about a hundred times. I can recite most of it by heart. I have a weak brain I guess.

>>5943797
Of course your brain is strong. You will get the meaning of what I said.

>>5943736

accepting you're a plebe is the first step anon

>>5943788
It's 2015, get with the times - admitting to playing video games makes you an utter reject destined for the bowels of 'nerd' culture. Now grow up.

>>5943651
All they do is party and steal from people. Quite degenerate, 0/10. It's hip to be square.

>>5943779
>>plato's dialogues have something to do with novels
Wrong. Your reading comrpehension is shit.
>>novels teach you stuff
Some do (you would know if you like read one).
>>stuff I like is better than stuff you like
True. But not just because I like it.

>>5943840
Does she think it is wrong to say this stuff is good and that stuff is bad?

>>5943840

The funny thing about this is that I know for certain I've read 10 times more novels than you at least, and even funnier is the fact that I'm twice your age, and you sound like my grampa.

plus ca /lit/ plus ca meme /lit/

>>5943853
go back to /pol/

>>5943853
>my dick is bigger than yours
>on the internet
You're right, it's funny.

>>5943581

>this fucking video again
now post darkjazz ensemble

>>5943855

Nicely irrelevant rejoinder chum. If only I'd said something /pol/-like, then you'd be quids in.

>>5943863

OK gramps. Isn't it time for your nap anyway? I'll try not to keep you awake with the bleepin anna bloopin and the kids with the pacman and the space invaders Mr. Cosby.

>>5943877
But I actually enjoy playing videogames, dumbass. I loved the fuck out of FFs when I was 10-15 and I thought their plot was great. I'm just not stupid enough to argue that they're as intellectually stimulating as Dostoyevsky.

>>5943888

>implying I said they were
>implying Dostoevsky is anything but entry-level shitfic for edgy teens
>implying you have any idea what you're talking about and you're not just shitposting things you've read elsewhere on /lit/ and think it's cool to regurgitate
>implying I give a fuck either way now I've got everything I want from the sharethread and my aaaarg invite and now I don't need to kill time poking retarded condescending kids on /lit/
>implying 10-15 is more than 3 years ago.

>>5943894
You sure showed me, m80.

>>5941369
this

>>5943904

Yup. I sure did. You got any more shit to post or are we done?

>>5943894
>accuses normal people of shitposting
>shitposts herself
WHAT ELSE HAHAHAHA

>>5943967

>has literally no response

> Dostoevsky is entry-level shitfic for edgy teens
Oh, for fuck's sake, just shut the fuck up.