/lit/ - Literature

Because, in example, playing videogames is much easier than programing, while reading and writting are pretty much in the same level, for most people at least.

Because
1. There are specific boards dedicated to the creation of art (/3/, /i/, /ic/, /gd/), thus threads about these subjects are lacking on other boards.
2. Writing literature has a very low threshold - one simply needs to be able to write, whereas creating movies/music/animation/video games requires expensive instruments, software and lots of practice
3. There are in fact threads on /mu/ about making music, e.g. soundcloud threads, bandcamp theads, guitar general etc.

>>5993606
>only one that focuses on the craft
>superior
Goddammit, consider my jimmies rustled. Don't think for a fucking second that /lit/ isn't just as much of a shithole as the rest of this Bengladeshi shadow puppet theater.

language is simultaneously complex yet also the first complex system that everybody learns so it comes naturally for most people and we take it for granted

like chomsky said we're wired to understand language and recognize faces

Name a single insightful thing /lit/ has to say about literary technique

This is a board which thinks that 'prose' refers to a work's style and syntax.

>>5993666
/v/ has shown me that playing video games is really hard

>>5993606
ugh /lit/ fags not knowing shit about fuck and assuming that music theory is essential to creating "good" music. Music theory is meaningless shit purported by exceptional artists because I dont fucking know why.

>>5993748
prose is pleb by definition

its the antithesis of poetry

>>5993687
>3. There are in fact threads on /mu/ about making music, e.g. soundcloud threads, bandcamp theads, guitar general etc.

Exactly. /mu/ has plenty of content beyond memes

>>5993606
/lit/ is just small enough to not attract the memeposting scum from the big boards and large enough to still have fast enough responses. So it's a relatively high quality board

>>5993696
i thought this was the lebanese fabric sculptors association intranet

>>5993808
I LOV3EEEEEEEEE YOUUUUUU JESUUUUUUS CHRIIIIIIIIISSSSSTTTT

>>5993789
That's like saying grammar isn't necessary to knowing how to write. Theoretically (hue hue hue) someone could pull off writing without ever learning grammar rules, but they'll get nowhere as near as they could. Even when you are breaking the rules, that is to say tonal functions, it's the fact that you know what the rules are in the first place that makes it able to achieve the effect you want. Like if we didn't read most literature with many commas, Cormac Mccarthy wouldn't be special. And it's not like he's special because he breaks the rule, it just is a part of his style.
Louis Armstrong is really the only successful case ever of such a phenomena, and that's because he didn't write the songs he played, he just improvised over them so he only had one melodic line to worry about.

First of all it's nearly impossible to create chord progressions and thus any homophonic texture (which nearly all popular music is written in as well as most other genres) without at least some knowledge of diatonic functions. Then, if you want to achieve any polyphony, then you need to know how harmony works, and ought to know voice leading rules. If you want to write for instruments that aren't in concert pitch, you need to know how to transpose.

That's like saying grammar isn't necessary to knowing how to write. Theoretically (hue hue hue) one could pull off writing without ever learning grammar rules, but they'll get nowhere as near far as they could knowing them. Even when you are breaking the rules, that is to say tonality or grammar in the analogy, it's the fact that you know what the rules are in the first place that makes it able to achieve the effect you want. If we didn't read most literature with commas, Cormac Mccarthy wouldn't be special. And it's not like he's special because he breaks the rules, it just is a part of his style.
Louis Armstrong is really the only successful case ever of such a phenomena where the great musician knows fuck all about theory, and that's because he didn't write the songs he played, he just improvised over them so he only had one melodic line to worry about, which a good ear and talent at the instrument could make it possible to be good without knowledge of music theory.

Why can't you write anything without music theory? First of all it's nearly impossible to create chord progressions and thus any homophonic texture (which nearly all popular music is written in as well as most other genres) without at least some knowledge of diatonic functions. Then, if you want to achieve any polyphony, then you need to know how harmony works, and ought to know voice leading rules. If you want to write for instruments that aren't in concert pitch, you need to know how to transpose. Music theory just expands just about every ability at writing music. This isn't even scratching the surface, but you just can't write music without knowing the patterns of the scales and knowing diatonic functions.

>>5993930
for>>5993789