/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.20252253]

Why do we only ever discuss the same writers over and over again? Every time I make a thread about a writer outside of the /lit/ canon, I get zero engagement.

[Anonymous No.20252262]

>durrr why do they discuss the most influential and widely read authors??!
gee i really do wonder why

[Anonymous No.20252269]

>why do people only discuss the things most people can discuss because they know it
Try reading statistic and logic textbooks for a while

[Anonymous No.20252270]

We can smell the threads made by dumb frog posters.

[Anonymous No.20252272]

>>20252253
>Why do we only ever post the same shitfaced frog over and over again instead of reading?

[Anonymous No.20252279]

>>20252262
Most of the writers I've tried to start discussions about are among the most influential and widely read authors, they're just not a part of the /lit/ canon (the writers /lit/ discusses over and over again). On top of that, many of the writers in the /lit/ canon are nobodies that are only known on 4chan (i.e. BAP).

[Anonymous No.20252356]

>>20252262
theres basically like 5 writers that are discussed here. doesto, tolstoy, kafka, homer, mishima, shaespeare, but the last two rarely get their actual books discussed, more the idea of them.

[Anonymous No.20252362]

>>20252253
We need to democratize the canon

[Anonymous No.20252632]

>>20252279
>Most of the writers I've tried to start discussions about are among the most influential and widely read authors
Which ones are those?

[Anonymous No.20252662]

>>20252632
Woolf, Poe, Dickens, Balzac, Turgenev, Zamyatin, Pasternak, Gogol...the list goes on. They're not discussed because they're not read.

[Anonymous No.20252663]

>>20252632
The ones I can remember off the top of my head are Chaucer, Balzac, Emerson, and Arthur Miller. There are also writers, Wilde for example, that get engagement but that engagement is just anons spamming the thread with shit posts.

[Anonymous No.20252668]

>>20252253
He has a point doe, here’s the problem
>barely anyone here reads
>janny trannies ban the erudite posters

[Anonymous No.20252685]

>>20252253
>Why do we only ever discuss the same writers
I've browsed here intermittently for 6 years, and I have no idea what sort of literary discussion you are referring to.

[Anonymous No.20252688]

>>20252356
You forgot Nietzche

[Anonymous No.20252705]

>>20252663
Anon if you make an Emerson thread I promise I will be there to post.

[Anonymous No.20252706]

>>20252663
>Tolstoy
>Dostoyevsky
>Joyce
>Tolkien
>Pynchon
>McCarthy
This is 80% of /lit/ discussion, 5% for freshman philosophy (Plato, Hegel, Kant, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer; Hume or Russell if someone is feeling adventurous), 5% for Homer/Virgil/Ovid/Dante (almost always about translations) and 5% bait/demoralization threads. That leaves 5% for actual effortposting and genuine questions.

[Anonymous No.20252713]

>>20252262
First post worst post.

[Anonymous No.20252753]

>>20252705
I’ve tried to make five Emerson threads in the past. Only one got any engagement, and that engagement amounted to a single comment. :(
I’ve had a little more luck with Thoreau and Whitman, but American transcendentalism - Emerson especially - is sadly overlooked by /lit/ for the most part.

[Anonymous No.20252763]

>>20252262
Some of us don't work in layers of irony

[Anonymous No.20252779]

>>20252753
We all know that things ride mankind. He doesn't seem to offer anything a more eloquent author hasn't stated elsewhere. What about Emerson or his works should compel interest?

[Anonymous No.20252788]

>>20252779
>He doesn't seem to offer anything a more eloquent author hasn't stated elsewhere.
Name one writer that came before Emerson that discussed the same ideas in a more eloquent way. I’m waiting.

[Anonymous No.20252809]

>>20252706
>This is 80% of /lit/ discussion

You forgot
>picture of some ethot
>blogpost about relationship problems
>Books for this feel?

Granted, mods have gotten better at cracking down on these, but it's still a good 10-15% of the catalog.

[Anonymous No.20252817]

>>20252779
He started Transcendentalism, a lot of his ideas are unique within the context of his broader worldview even relative to those who took it up. For example, his ideas regarding Intuition are fairly original.
>>20252753
See that is strange. A few people I've met insist that Emerson is basically a household name in the US. I assume most people here are from the US, so it is strange to me that people would not be interested.

[Anonymous No.20252825]

>>20252788
Which ideas? I'm not being snide, I'm asking you because I'm curious.

[Anonymous No.20252839]

>>20252688
i didnt but i just didnt want to spell his name out cause i always forget how

[Anonymous No.20252843]

>>20252817
>See that is strange. A few people I've met insist that Emerson is basically a household name in the US. I assume most people here are from the US, so it is strange to me that people would not be interested.
I had to take an American Literature class my junior year of high school as part of my school’s English curriculum and Emerson (or any of the other transcendentalists) weren’t even mentioned let alone read and studied. I think most Americans would vaguely recognize the name Ralph Waldo Emerson but most wouldn’t know anything about him or his writing.

[Anonymous No.20252848]

>>20252662
There was a Poe thread yesterdsy

[Anonymous No.20252852]

>>20252848
poe at least is read in schools. poe and melville is the only 1800s american literature ive seen discussed here.

[Anonymous No.20252860]

>>20252825
Nature and its relation to human consciousness and spirituality and spirituality, self reliance and originality, the great men theory of history, pantheism and the universal mind, etc.

[Anonymous No.20252864]

>>20252253
>Why do threads about widely known authors catch? Why don't my threads about esoteric authors only I know about not attract attention?
If you can't answer that, I can do without your recs.

[Anonymous No.20252869]

>>20252662
I think Woolf, Poe, Dickens and Balzac all get a decent amount of attention.
Gogol is discussed fairly often.
Zemyatin and Pasternak are NEVER discussed.

[Anonymous No.20252870]

>>20252848
The Gordon Pym thread? Yeah, but there's no discussion, a thread full of shitposts and wiki info to disguise the fact that nobody on the board has actually read him, including the OP.

[Anonymous No.20252873]

>>20252843
What you've described was my intuition about Emerson's reception in the country. I need to stop listening to the over-educated and their filtered views of who and what is "the case," for the average person.

[Anonymous No.20252879]

>>20252253
>Why do we only ever discuss the same writers over and over again?
Because we don't read and we larp instead.

[Anonymous No.20252882]

Its almost as if more people are likely to engage if they know or have read the author before and not if they dont know who they are

[Anonymous No.20252885]

>>20252864
see >>20252279

[Anonymous No.20252942]

Imagine if /lit/ went 1 months without discussing a single german author. No Nietzsche, Marx, Hegel, Kant, Heidegger, etc.
This board would be FORCED to finally discuss something new

[Anonymous No.20252985]

>>20252942
Mods, can we PLEASE make this happen?

[Anonymous No.20253026]

>>20252253
I have begun to read seriously about one week ago and I discovered /lit/ three days ago, so I have little to say but I'm actually interested on discussing about non-canon authors. My problem is I have little vagage, being philosophy the subject I'm most versed in. I have read like 20 books in my life, so you can get an idea about my level of literature knowledge. If op or other anons are interested in a particular topic I could share my experience from a first read pov and my opinions but I takes time to read a book so I really can't answer to threads because they dissapear quickly.
A solution I think could work is make collective readings like the Quixote one because that way I, and I guess some other anons, have time to read the book of which the thread will be about. Also, doing that we are all in the same page so it's easier for everyone to collaborate.

[Anonymous No.20253045]

>>20253026
Cutie

[Anonymous No.20253084]

>>20252253
You actually come to /lit/ and discuss books? Go somewhere else or to your local book club.

[Anonymous No.20253088]

>>20252942
>>20252985
Also forbid threads on the Greeks, specifically on their translations. There's at least two threads every week on which Homer translation to pick, it's absurd how much text must've ended up in the archive discussing this matter that apparently nobody can be arsed to look up. It's always the same circlejerk about muh Pope this, muh Fitzgerald that, and muh Wilson has annihilated western culture.

>>20253026
>but I takes time to read a book so I really can't answer to threads because they dissapear quickly.
Tbh you've just wonderfully described why /lit/ is shit. Books are a marathon, but the addictive imageboard format is focused on the short bursts within individual threads that last a few days at most (except for that /po/ thread). I'm dreaming of finding a classical forum that discusses literature with some intellectual pretensions, it would make /lit/ utterly unnecessary.
Also, get out. Now. People on imageboards like to pretend to be above the common rabble but the addictive mechanism of F5ing the catalog is the same as using Facebook and TikTok and Instagram. It should all objectively be treated as an opioid.

[Anonymous No.20253093]

>>20252942
>1 months without discussing a single german author
Instant boner

[Anonymous No.20253109]

>>20253088
>it would make /lit/ utterly unnecessary.
/lit/ is already unnecessary.

[Anonymous No.20253141]

I think making generals for the most widely discussed topics, writers, and books (and pruning excessive threads about them) would go a long way toward increasing the quality of /lit/.

[Anonymous No.20253178]

>>20253141
Won't work, just taking a look at the few general like /sffg/ and it's just going to be shit.

[Anonymous No.20253193]

>>20252253
if you think /lit/ is bad for this, wait until you find out about /mu/
also
>frogposter
this has to be bait

[Anonymous No.20253194]

>>20253193
I stopped using /mu/ years ago

[Anonymous No.20253216]

>>20253088
If you found that forum, share it please. I have search but either doesn't exist or it's unknown and unreachable.

Thank you for the advice of getting out. The thing is I want to discuss lit and in my life there aren't those people. I guess I will click just on the serious threads. If it is a bad idea too I can look for a discord chat or something but they are difficult to find

[Anonymous No.20253226]

>>20253093
>>20253141
Stop dreaming, do something about it. I don't say necessary on /lit/, there are more internet than 4chan

[Anonymous No.20253231]

>>20252356
Protip: No one wants to actually read, they just want to have given off the appearance of reading so as to acquire social capital. People post about these authors pretending to have read them then go back to watching anime or something.

[Anonymous No.20253254]

>>20253231
i agree with mishima. i think people on this board have actually read dostoesvsky at least, but it gets tiring only talking about him when there are so many great writers. Most everyone before modernism seems to get dismissed outright unless ur a meme like homer.
this board trciekd me into getting into lit and i started with doesto like everyone else but that made me want to keep reading because its a very compelling activity

[Anonymous No.20253257]

>>20253254
>i think people on this board have actually read dostoesvsky at least
Stop being optimistic.

[Anonymous No.20253259]

>>20253257
theres too many memes about crime and punishment at least. I guess its possible people just read the first half and called it good.

[Anonymous No.20253260]

>>20253254
Not sure what Mishima quote you're referring to, however:
>Most everyone before modernism seems to get dismissed outright unless ur a meme like homer.
This is typically an example of:
>they just want to have given off the appearance of reading so as to acquire social capital
Because modernism and postmodern maximalist novels are perceived as the "hardest" forms of literature to read, it's the /lit/ equivalent of telling someone to git gud on /v/.

[Anonymous No.20253262]

>>20252253
Most of /lit/ goes out of their way to derail conversation on books which lack an extensive wikipedia entry. Interpret that how you please.

[Anonymous No.20253297]

>>20252253
You only need to read Gravity's Rainbow and maybe a Burroughs or two

[Anonymous No.20253344]

>>20252942
>>20252985
It would be fun to have themed months but mods are too much of faggots to trust them with it

[Anonymous No.20253556]

>>20253109
Well, I can't disagree with that too much.
It's good how it introduces many people to the classics. For those who weren't taught well, it finally shows these topics as something accessible and emotionally relevant and involving.
The problem is that it leaves people stagnating, re-reading the Greeks and the memetic modernists forever. I've said this many times and I still stand by it: the christfags are the only distinct group of posters who systematically read and know their shit, who go beyond the generic recs that get posted over and over.

>>20253216
I'm quite pessimistic about it. I've found good places to talk about linguistics, classical music, and even film, but literature is for some reason fruitless. The best I've found are some subreddits that receive a new post once every two days.

[Anonymous No.20253851]

On the verge of filtering frog images.

[Anonymous No.20254911]

>>20253556
>but literature is for some reason fruitless
Pretty sad, I guess I will have to make people around me read or develop an imaginary friend who can talk with me about lit

[Anonymous No.20254935]

>>20252253
Okay, so let's start a reading group that focuses on obscure writers and works.

[Anonymous No.20254951]

>>20254935
Why not? Three committed people are enough

[Anonymous No.20254953]

>>20252253
The best chance a thread has to not disappear quickly is if it's about a book or author that a lot of people have read, or at least have a strong feeling about. Thread survival ends up like those /lit/ top 100 lists: it's always the same old shit because those have the largest number of people familiar with them.

[Anonymous No.20254970]

>>20254951
and then there were two