/lit/ - Literature

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224687]

/lit/, I don't think you'll disagree that historically science has been ousted from many forms of literature in favour of religion, sociology, psychology, etc. But authors like Pynchon, Calvino, Heller, Vonnegut, etc have shown that science can be just as much an inspiration.

So why are many(most) authors still afraid of using science? Is it because it makes literature seem less human?

also please don't bring up sci-fi. 1. it isnt literature. 2. most scifi authors dont seem inspired by science itself & just like to guess how science will evolve or include it as nothing more than part of the novel's background/setting.

[Anonymous No.1224689]

Equations make bad reading.

/thread

[Anonymous No.1224690]

Getting science right is hard work. You can fudge religion, sociology, psychology, etc..

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224691]

>>1224689
>But authors like Pynchon, Calvino, Heller, Vonnegut, etc have shown that science can be just as much an inspiration
sigh...

[Anonymous No.1224698]

>sociology, psychology
>not science

I hate people like you.

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224699]

>>1224698
sociology & psychology are about as hard as my dick right now....

[Anonymous No.1224700]

>>1224699

What does that have to do with anything?

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224704]

>>1224700
so by calling psychology science we're also calling psychoanalysts scientists?

[Anonymous No.1224707]

Hello, I'm a scientist specializing in experimental psychology. We call psychoanalysts "the unclean", and lob rocks at them during conferences.

[Anonymous No.1224708]

>>1224704

Psychoanalysis is outdated, and probably not science by modern standards. I should say that I'm a layman, though, so I could be speaking from misconceptions.

But yes, psychologists are scientists.

[Anonymous No.1224709]

>>1224687
Because science is hard.

And Vonnegut wrote sci-fi. Deal with it dot jpg.

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224711]

>>1224707
Until you cleanse those subhumans from your field you ain't rolling with the big boys

[Anonymous No.1224719]

>>1224687
Hey OP, there' usually this unspoken rule about how people who don't read Sci-Fi shouldn't talk about Sci-Fi because--surprise--they don't know shit.

Also, you talk about Vonnegut like he didn't write Sci-Fi. See, there's also this unspoken rule about people that don't read Vonnegut...

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224722]

>>1224719
Calling Vonnegut sci-fi is like calling Dream Theater a metal band instead of prog....

[Anonymous No.1224728]

>>1224722
Ice 9: not Sci-Fi.
Alien Abductions (or hallucinations thereof): not Sci-Fi
Interplanetary war in the 22nd century: not Sci-Fi
The last descendants of humanity evolving into seal-like creatures over a period of millions of years: not Sci-Fi
Totally mechanized society with no need of human laborers: not Sci-Fi

What I'm saying here is that you've convinced me. Vonnegut was 100% not a sci-fi writer.

[Anonymous No.1224730]

>>1224722
They're progressive metal.

[Anonymous No.1224731]

>>1224730
>implying Vonnegut is progressive sci-fi

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224732]

>>1224730
>progressive metal
>metal
>progressive

[Anonymous No.1224733]

>>1224722
>Likes Vonnegut
>He can't be Sci-Fi because I like him

Oh, must you be so childish? You've got it all wrong. What you're doing, to use your same analogy, is that you're calling Dream Theater rock because you just don't like prog. He's a Sci-Fi writer.

[Anonymous No.1224736]

>>1224731
>>progressive sci-fi

That's a thing? I didn't know that was a thing.

>>1224732
>>progressive metal
I know that's a thing.

[Anonymous No.1224739]

>>1224732
>>1224722

Oh hey, first picture on the wiki page. . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_metal

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1224742]

>>1224739
>Progressive metal (sometimes called prog metal) is a subgenre of heavy metal, which blends the powerful, guitar-driven sound of metal with the complex compositional structures, odd time signatures, and intricate instrumental playing of progressive rock
so basically it's prog-rock with no-taste full distortion. seems just prog rock to me.

>all the bands listed are either prog or shitty metal bands
figures. metalheads just want a way to claim the good prog bands that dabble in metal sounds. metal is like punk, as soon as it gets complex you've lost the main part of the genre.

[Anonymous No.1224744]

1. real science makes for a boring read, with very few exceptions
2. it's easy to make a mistake with science and then be called an idiot for it, while with something like religion, you can make shit up and people won't care

[Anonymous No.1224748]

a) Novelists are usually arts students
b) Huxley used science in a posh way in BNW

[Anonymous No.1224754]

>>1224736
I don't think there is, but I kind of like it.

It's definitely much less concessionary than "literary sci-fi" and less forced than "speculative fiction". (Sorry Harlan Ellison.)

[Anonymous No.1224762]

>>1224687
literature (ˈlɪtərɪtʃə, ˈlɪtrɪ-) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]

—n
1. written material such as poetry, novels, essays, etc, esp works of imagination characterized by excellence of style and expression and by themes of general or enduring interest
2. the body of written work of a particular culture or people: Scandinavian literature
3. written or printed matter of a particular type or on a particular subject: scientific literature; the literature of the violin
4. printed material giving a particular type of information: sales literature
5. the art or profession of a writer

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1225014]

BUMP MAGGOTS

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1225024]

>>1224762
>1. written material such as poetry, novels, essays, etc
circular
>2. the body of written work of a particular culture or people: Scandinavian literature
too broad, too vague. Is a Scadinavian record-player instruction manual literature?

>3. written or printed matter of a particular type or on a particular subject: scientific literature; the literature of the violin
too broad; not all written or printed matter of a particular type or a particular subject is literature. Instruction manuals, again. bus tickets

>4. printed material giving a particular type of information: sales literature
lol where do they come up with this shit, see 3

>5. the art or profession of a writer
just plain dumb

idiots and their lexical definitions

[Anonymous No.1225031]

>>1225024
You're taking actual definitions of a word and basically saying "That's not what I define it as so it's wrong". Well it's the definition of the word. Sorry if it offends you with it's correctness.

[Anonymous No.1225033]

Bitches don't know about my Hard Sci Fi.
Seriously though it's good.

[None !WvWWh.l.CE No.1225035]

>>1224762
>>1225024
>>1225031
who cares, you know what i meant since i refer to the lit that we talk about on here.

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1225038]

>>1225031
>You're taking actual definitions of a word and basically saying "That's not what I define it as so it's wrong"
Sort of, except really I'm representing a commonsensical view that road signs don't constitute literature.


>Well it's the definition of the word. Sorry if it offends you with it's correctness.
I'm not particularly offended given the fallacious nature of your claim (appl 2 authrtry), and no, consensus does not define definition

[Anonymous No.1225044]

>>1225038
>consensus does not define definition
>it's common sense that road signs aren't literature
So it's common sense, which varies from person to person that defines definition?

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1225045]

>>1225038
that and these definitions don't capture the nature of Literature, the Platonic Form teehee

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1225048]

>>1225044
>So it's common sense, which varies from person to person
Puttin words in my mouth bro, I simply said that your definition includes things that most of wouldn't call 'literature' (like road signs & instruction manuals), this is on my part an appeal to the majority though. I have to admit right here, I'm not going to waste my time with someone advocating that road signs can be considered literature.

Literature is Family Resemblance, by the way.

[Anonymous No.1225054]

>>1225045

>>consensus does not define definition

Sorry brother but I don't really see the point in any other definition. Seeing as how consensus is the closet thing we humans can ever hope to have to reach some sort of objective truth. Arguing for the infinitely subjective is fun sure but kind of pointless. Although I guess that is the point eh?

[Anonymous No.1225056]

>>1225048
Oh I have no issue with literature, just definitions in general. I didn't post the definition of literature, that was another.

[Anonymous No.1225065]

>>1225048

>Literature is Family Resemblance

i agree wit dis guy

[Anonymous No.1225070]

Physicist here, psychology and sociology are science as much as rotting food in a dumpster is dinner for WASPs.

Also, definitions are kind of decided by consensus. That's pretty much where they come from.

[Deep&Edgy !pSkjEcB9sQ No.1225072]

>>1225054

come back to me when you can not run into an infinite regress or a plain ol contradiction by stating how subjective it all is bro

[Anonymous No.1225135]

>>1225072

I can't, that's the point bro but it doesn't mean I have to like it. That infinite regression only leads to one thing, regression, which I don't believe is helpful, striving for that warm naive comfort of the womb for the rest of your life is no way to live.

[Anonymous No.1225195]

Sci-fi is not literature...

What's the matter? 2deep4u?

[Anonymous No.1225210]

My god, today /lit/ has rammed the stick particularly high up its arse.

[Anonymous No.1225212]

>infinite regression
It's nice seeing other people learned about philosophy from Escape From the Planet of the Apes.

[Anonymous No.1225676]

>>1225212
Holy shit, I lol'd hard.

[Anonymous No.1225685]

>>1225212
Perhaps they read Hofstadter?