/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17984514]

>reading book written by female
>she starts describing the character's outfit

[Anonymous No.17984531]

>>17984514
>read book written by male
>he starts describing womens breasts and butts

[Anonymous No.17984534]

>reading book by male
>he describes the landscape in autistic levels of detail

[Anonymous No.17984547]

>>17984514
happens in male written books too mane

[Anonymous No.17984557]

>>17984534
This is fine

>>17984531
this is not fine

[Anonymous No.17985125]

>>17984557
>fantasy could be the best genre
cmon anon

[Anonymous No.17985140]

>>17984534
there is nothing more based than this

>>17984531
there is nothing more cringe than this

[Anonymous No.17985222]

>>17985140
The duality of man

[Anonymous No.17985244]

>>17985222
master builder
checked

[Anonymous No.17985265]

>>17984514
My favorite is when the author (usually a male) goes into autistic detail describing a craft that a character is doing that has almost nothing to do with the plot. Like the very technical aspects of fishing in Hemingway or talking about boat building in the magic mountain. It’s beautiful.

[Anonymous No.17985336]

>>17985125
Fantasy as a (defined) genre has existed for much less time than other genres of fiction–unless you consider the earliest epics as works of fantasy, which is up for debate; at most, these early epics, e.g., The Odyssey, The Iliad, The Epic of Gilgamesh, would qualify as what Mendlesohn calls "the intrusive" mode of fantasy. However, In modern times, when we talk about fantasy books, we are discussing works that can be classified under Mendlesohn's "immersive" mode of fantasy, so most of those older epics don't count. "Immersive," modern fantasy's potential as a genre has barely been explored–Literary fiction as a genre has been thoroughly examined and eviscerated to death by academics, but fantasy still has unexplored frontiers. So I am quite confident in saying that yes, fantasy could be the best genre of fiction, simply because it is currently one of the most unexplored.

[Anonymous No.17985347]

>>17985336
Not the anon you're replying to, and I like you anon, but I feel like you need some new definitions. Doesn't "epic" or "poetry/prose" etc. better encapsulate ranking Homer and the like?

[Anonymous No.17985527]

>>17985140
>>17984557
>>17984531
And what is wrong with it? If one is not pleased by the description of a pleasing object (a UNIVERSALLY pleasing object), then one is not an aesthete: such a one deserves excommunication from the global brotherhood of pseuds

[Anonymous No.17985650]

>>17985347
"Poetry/prose" is simply a way of categorizing a work of fiction by the method it was written. To classify it as an "epic" is a bit more interesting, because for something to be classified as an "epic" it is more often judged by it's narrative or plot rather than it's setting–which is more useful in a historical context rather than a genre-defining context. When talking about fantasy fiction, the easiest way to classify it is by its setting, and how the fantastical elements interact with the characters and the assumed "base" reality the characters are living in. So yes, while you could easily classify the early epics as just that–"epics"–they can also be classified and considered in fantasy terms

[Anonymous No.17986498]

>>17984531
I knew that this would be the first post.

[Anonymous No.17986713]

>pick up a book
>character wakes up
>detailed description of the room he wakes up in
>detailed description of the character's appearance
>character looks like the author's portrait on the cover

[Anonymous No.17987553]

Oscar Wilde confirmed to be a woman. No wonder that book sucked so much.