Write What's on Your Mind – Duplicate threads Edition

[Anonymous No.17827059]

[Anonymous No.17827063]

>>17827059
>What's on Your Mind
pusy

[Anonymous No.17827075]

Duplicate threads on the front page are very important.

[Anonymous No.17827084]

>>17827059
This board is cancerous for people who actually want to be writers. It enforces conformity of thought and speech, to the point where people hoping to become writers of novels, of long poems, of screenplays, are reduced to single-word replies and meme-speak. Anything that doesn't fit within the narrow confines of acceptable opinion, tone and style is ridiculed: the nail that sticks out is instantly hammered down. Praise of canonical classics is expected; meaningful discussion of these works is not. Icy cynicism, easy irony and depression posting are welcomed; any words tainted with other emotions are not. People here are so terrified of being seen as "Reddit" that they'd rather make single word posts, or not post at all, than put themselves "out there". This place's whole identity is not positive and self-sufficient, but self-conscious and reflexive: /lit/ defines itself by not being Reddit. That sucks, because this is still the best place I've found on the internet where I can, at least in theory, talk with people about classic literature and philosophy, talk with people about ideas and writing. People who are into literature and philosophy should be open-minded, sharp thinkers, risk takers to a fault in all things creative; aspiring writers should love writing long posts, having drawn out conversations. Or if they don't like those things, then why come to a board meant for discussing literature and philosophy? I know the kinds of replies this post will get, if it gets any at all. But this board is gay, filled with timorous automata, in love with the idea of being superior of intellect, perhaps even famous for their groundbreaking ideas and magnificent style, yet too lazy and chickenshit to write decent posts and put themselves out there. Yes, I'm talking to you.

[Anonymous No.17827088]

>>17827084
Have sex

[Anonymous No.17827094]

You can analyze and objectify everything. Even pure mathematics (I suppose). That is why there are so many destroyers in contemporary philosophy, but few builders. The ability to criticize is tremendously sharp, while our buildings have remained buttery soft. If everything can be criticized to death, anything is permitted.