/lit/ - Literature

No, complaining about how others think is.

>>6314816
Is reading comic books a sign of mediocre intellect?

>>6314816
Not necessarily, but I do think it's a huge waste of time. All this cheeky meta-ironic am-I-self-aware-yet lit is just a smokescreen used by cowards too afraid to attempt earnest discourse, because what if they write something very serious and, heaven forbid, it turns out not to be universally respected? Safer to play the "I'm (kind of) kidding" and "It's a commentary" game.

>>6314829
I'm not complaining, I'm posing a question. Did I touch a nerve?

>>6314832
Only if they aren't "graphic novels" :^)

>>6314836
Well said.

>>6314836
All this second-analytical anti-ironic "this is just a smokescreen used by cowards too afraid to attempt earnest discourse" is just a smokescreen used by cowards too afraid to admit they once liked it so much they have simply grown bored of it by now, because what if they write something very serious and, heaven forbid, people put it down for not being just oh so tastefully self-aware? Safer to play the "I'm so sincere" and "They're just afraid to take risks" game.

>>6314836
on point

>>6314832
No. A sign of a mediocre intellect is someone who pretends that their exposure to a "higher" art form somehow grants them a profound insight or intelligence.

Intelligence is more about the insight or analysis you can provide when you're exposed to things.

A person who reads a comic book and has a profound insight is going to be of more interest to me than a guy who says, "I read Ulysses."

Well, what can you tell me about Ulysses? If you can't say anything then you're an idiot.

But think, there are people who read even comic books and can't think. Now that's scary.

>>6314836
Also it has the aspect of narcissism: a refusal to look outward, at just looking for the embellishment of the medium itself without any regard to a message.

>>6315181
>A person who reads a comic book and has a profound insight
Too bad people like that don't exist, as there is nothing profound or insightful one can say about a comic book

>>6314816

Can somebody explain what is happening and said in those last two panels? I cant follow it at all..

I don't think "metaness" or breaking the fourth wall are inherently either good or bad. I do think the concepts are becoming more common and mainstream and as such we naturally see a reduction in quality.

>>6315210
What utter, utter horseshit.

Daytripper, All-Star Superman, Watchmen, V for Vendetta, Y: The Last Man, East of West, Preacher and The Unwritten might not be to your taste (you're free to hate the entire medium), but to assert that no one ever could get an interesting idea from such books is nonsense.

You've just been conditioned to assume mindless superhero capeshit bollocks is all the medium devotes itself to.

>>6314816
No.

Also what's that comic book

>>6315250
It's the conclusion to The Multiversity.

>>6314816

Western comics look so fucking shitty, it's unbelievable.

I think meta-trash is reddit fuel, personally. I don't want references or fourth wall breaking or epic "trope" subversions. Fedora neckbeards want that shit because they have a chip on their shoulder over being unathletic and cling desperately to their "superior taste" and "intelligence" being pandered to.

You can't beat a good story, even if it's soldiers versus space aliens. There's a reason why arnie is iconic and you're a fucking faggot.

>>6315262
Wrong. Second to last entry.

>>6315282
I stand corrected.

>>6314836
/thread

>>6315287

this isn't reddit, you don't need to post humble retorts to show how much of a good sport you are.

>>6315275
>You can't beat a good story, even if it's soldiers versus space aliens. There's a reason why arnie is iconic and you're a fucking faggot.

I may not agree with your post entirely but I'll be damned if this shit didn't make me crack the fuck up.

>>6315275
>There's a reason why arnie is iconic and you're a fucking faggot.
No one takes Arnold Schwarzenegger seriously. The joke is that he's a shitty actor. His most memorable role is the one where he talks in monotone for fucks sake.

>>6314836
You know, it's good to see that there are a considerable number of people on here who think this way.

I'm so tired of ":^)" on here, "all lowercase i mean what even" tweets & posts, and the stupid straightface humor where people don't even say funny things.

>>6314816
>>6314836

been proselytizing this a lot here lately, but read DFW 'Octet' then tell me where you think metafictional devices can go

No. Studying metaness is quite important. For example, if Gödel didn't start investigating metamathematics he would've never arrived to his incompletitude theorem. Looking at things at a meta level helps us understand many things about different about what we are observing.

>>6315275
>There's a reason why [...]you're a fucking faggot.
because i like cocks?

>>6314836
When does this ever happen?

>>6315339
Are you American? If your answer is no, I will read it. Be honest.

>>6315343
What about the meta of the meta? This is what the OP is trying to discuss, the meta of the meta....

>>6315430
Mein skipper. I don't read anything recommended by the white whale either.

>>6315326

>No one takes Arnold Schwarzenegger seriously.

Excuse me? Arnold is a thousand times the man you will ever be, and I and many others have immense respect for the man.

Your first mistake is thinking of him as an actor, while he is so much more. The fact that he's such a bad actor, yet has several famous movies to his name should tell you enough.

I also bet you're too fat to respect his bodybuilding.

>>6315326
Nice troll mate you really had me going for a second

>>6315240

Sandman should definitely be mentioned as well

>>6314836

Generally true, but meta as a trait doesn't always have to be a curtain to hide behind. It can also be a genuinely unique and interesting quality of a work. Borges is incredibly meta and at the same time totally sincere and far from being a waste of time.

It doesn't always have to be "I'm so meta even this acronym."

>>6314836
Agreed. Although I think that there is a difference between: ":^)" and "I'm not taking myself too seriously; I'm aware of the fact that I'm on an anonymous image board plastered in (un)ironic frogs."

>>6315240
Preacher is the only worth of that list.

>>6315240

>Daytripper

Mah nigga.

>>6314816
>meatness
Meatness is awesome.

>>6315074
Is better than
>>6314836

>>6315287
>>6315282
>>6315250
>>6314816

Can somebody storytime it? Wether or not "Meta" is good or not has to do with the execution. I want to see if they managed to pull it off or not before I pass judgement.

>>6319920
https://archive.moe/co/thread/70634369/#q70634369
It's pretty standard comic book fare. Probably better written than Morrison's usual, but nothing like his good works.

>>6319975
It Is? I never read comics but this is pretty cool.

>>6320020
My analysis of it seems to be that it's a metaphor for how comics tend to be pretentious but never really live up to their hype.

Action is fundamentally more interesting than reaction.

>>6317203
borges is more sofisticated in meta, at best . but never really sincere. im only reading two books from him but...

>>6314816
I think there are some that can do it well, but unfortunately a lot of it either tries to force an air of intelligence and almost superiority, or it's a clumsy deflection of criticism as mentioned earlier.

I really want to write an extremely meta essay entitled "how to speak like a normal person" where on one level it's a practical guide to understanding how to have a conversation but on a lower level it's a discussion of the modern sexual economy

>>6320069
Honestly I think Morrisons wish to avoid any type of pretentiousness in his stories despite his narrative complexity is very interesting.

'Meta' is okay in books but pretty futile in comic books. Fedora or no fedora, comic books are for people who move their lips when they read, and this stuff is just the writer going 'look, I'm clever enough for lit even though I'm trapped in this dunghill'.

>>6320265
>Morrisons wish to avoid any type of pretentiousness
That impression only comes from his defense of the "super-hero" lines of comic books that basically all other writers now deride. That aside, quite the opposite.

>>6315240
Ever read Fun Home? While the subject matter is ever so slightly SJW (the memoirs of the author as a young girl and her relationship with her maybe-gay-maybe-not-now-deceased dad), it alludes to a tonne of classic literature in its construction, even staging her relationship to her father as similar to that of Ulysses' Daedelus and Bloom.

I think I can appreciate meta satire a lot more if the writer is criticizing themself and their own work, instead of acting like they're miles above all the other writers in their genre.
It makes it feel less masturbatory and more personal.

>>6315330
_____________________:^)______________________

>>6320532
But the writer constantly going off about how his writing is shitty is an incredibly good way of beating suspension of disbelief to pieces if done incorrectly.