the best of &amp

[Anonymous No.21162501]

>the best of &amp
Come on in and help decide what the best of &amp is.

&amp is/was an online literary magazine made with the goal to publish and embellish whatever schlock /lit/ can throw at it (including greentexts, poetry, short stories, serial pieces, etc.). With 12 literary issues there's a lot of material to draw from, so this is a chance to condense the best of &amp into a single volume.

>favourites
Now's the time to talk about your favourites from all the old issues, so post about them here if you want to improve the odds of getting them into the best-of. Posts screencaps if you can. And feel free to talk shit.
>contributors
If you've ever contributed to &amp and see your work on the list, feel free to send me any final edits or requests ([e-mail]).
>illustrations
To keep this thing from being barren I'll try to throw some illustrations in for the right pieces. I'll take any and all recommendations.

>the list so far
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TMyRTrB6SEjbDFkFixaMqNpr0--Fb3T9Pdv1x2s7Z7g/edit?usp=sharing
>PDFs of the entrants
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1EwsOjMkqL1CaKdIqVPf6yDmpYh4G_BBf?usp=sharing
>screencaps of the entrants
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1-Nugvttz1ju0OVVMZwn83UgNXdH3V5aS?usp=sharing
>old &amp issues
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1K3JNLg0xCcojM-Iuu0JtbLB5ngpPJdbs?usp=sharing

In the mean time I'll try to post some of the pieces that are on the list so far as well as any WIP materials I have for the volume itself. It's slow going, but the pieces are slotting into place.

If you want to get in touch, email me at [e-mail].

[Anonymous No.21162520]

Pic related is the most recent addition to the best-of list. I'd completely forgotten about it until an anon in an old thread brought it up, so don't consider the list final just yet.

[Anonymous No.21162530]

>>21162520
If you hate a piece, say so. Pieces stay on the list if they receive multiple recommendations, and I prune the shit that people dislike. Each star is a recommendation for a piece on top of the original suggestion. You can comment on the document or talk shit in-thread. And anonymous commenting is possible on the Google Doc.

[Anonymous No.21162541]

Here's an idea of how the typography is looking. Based on a really rough calculation the best-of is probably going to top a hundred pages with this sort of text density.

This is 5.5x8.5 rather than the usual 8.5x11, which I'm hoping makes it easier for anons to print their shit as booklets with standard hardware. That said, I've talked to an old editor and he offered to help get a version up onto a proper printing service (Lulu) like the normal &amp issues. My goal is for this to preserve a good selection from &amp and proliferate it a bit. If I have it in me I'll make an EPUB copy and get that onto libgen.

[Anonymous No.21162547]

This is a really rough representation of how illustrations might be incorporated. The dog picture got a thumbs up from a couple anons, though I dunno if I want the kid in it.

If you've got an illustration you think would match a certain piece well, throw it in here. Even just ideas are helpful and I can work from there.

[Anonymous No.21162553]

[Anonymous No.21162566]

These are the guts. I get each piece as a PDF first, I convert that shit into HTML, then I run it through a Python script to turn it to plaintext while keeping the basics of the formatting. Some pieces need to be tended to manually, but I'd say 90% of pieces convert relatively cleanly. Then the TXT files can be dropped straight into Scribus, where styling is applied automatically.

[Anonymous No.21162576]

>>21162501
The screencaps folder is far from complete, so if any kind anon wants to turn some of those PDFs into shit that can be posted here, it'd be much appreciated.

[Anonymous No.21162583]

>>21162541
I know it's a mockup, but remember that the first paragraph shouldn't be indented

[Anonymous No.21162654]

>>21162553
kek, cover looks like actual dogshite

[Anonymous No.21162659]

>>21162654
must be the &amp curse

[Anonymous No.21162668]

>>21162659
probs just that ur life is cursed

[Anonymous No.21162755]

>>21162553
>powerpunk yellow
thanks, pal.

[Anonymous No.21162796]

[Anonymous No.21163241]

>>21162501
>&amp
What the hell is &amp

[Anonymous No.21163291]

>>21163241
&amp is/was an online literary magazine made with the goal to publish and embellish whatever schlock /lit/ can throw at it (including greentexts, poetry, short stories, serial pieces, etc.). With 12 literary issues there's a lot of material to draw from, so this is a chance to condense the best of &amp into a single volume.
>lampbylit.com

[Anonymous No.21164134]

>>21162553
I preferred the older version of this cover, with the (somewhat slab/Egyptian?) serif type, I think that worked very well. I do like making use of the Futura-like font/&amp logotype, perhaps on the title page for "&amp" alone, or for another design (not sure if you're implying this WILL be the cover, over other contenders, or a still other impending design; though I myself wouldn't mind it, my reservations excepted); alternatively, the pic-related would also probably work with this typeface, but then I think the text ("the best of &amp") is too big, too close to the black border. (Don't mean to be too pedantic or imposing with comments on design, though I like to chip in my thoughts in the hope they'll be constructive.)

[Anonymous No.21164267]

>>21162553
jarring and i agree that the other font is better

[Anonymous No.21164721]

>>21162583
Gotcha, will do. Thanks for pointing that out.

>>21164134
>>21164267
You mean pic related? I see what you mean about the borders being too tight to the text.

Regarding the colour and font: League Spartan is the font generally used by &amp for its logo (from what I can tell), and I think the colour suits the sort of garish, eye-popping designs &amp had; I want to make sure there's still some visual lineage between the regular &amp magazines and the best-of since I feel like the visuals were important and I don't want this thing to be too barren or insincere.

[Anonymous No.21164728]

>>21164721
Here's V2 that does away with the background fuzz (way smaller file size for that reason too).

[Anonymous No.21164745]

>>21162547
Has anyone got thoughts on how the illustration/image is incorporated here?

I've also considered doing illustrations as full-page dividers, which could help with breaking up the best-of and save it from the typographic fiddling necessary to insert images in-line with text.

[Anonymous No.21164769]

>>21164721
it doesnt suit &amp at all. its boring and not eyepopping in a good way, it just looks cheap & tacky. there was way too much pointless shit about covers in old threads but pretty much any of the other designs that were floated wouldve been way better

[Anonymous No.21164942]

>>21164769
i think this is better suited to the best-of than any of the other designs

[Anonymous No.21164956]

>>21164942
(You)

[Anonymous No.21165031]

>>21164721
Yes, that's the one (or the one below). Perhaps League Spartan in the same size would also work, or just for "&amp" (though I dunno if that would mix well, and I like how &amp looks here as well). It is of course very different from all the &amp covers, but I do think it would fit. All the talk about covers and design in previous threads was good, but I didn't think any design produced topped this one (except perhaps the minimal ones with light gradient color schemes): too much became focused on illustrations, while the typography was not imo good enough, which I think is the most important element.

[Anonymous No.21165040]

p.s. I think I do actually like the italic "of" more

[Anonymous No.21166062]

>>21164769
>other designs wouldve been way better
I agree some of the other covers may have looked nicer (or at least fancier) than the yellow one, but ultimately none of them had any solid connection to &amp. As much as I like Egon Schiele's art, his shit doesn't fit at all with most of the material in &amp or the best-of--and likewise for the other illustrations.

>cheap and tacky
Sure, but tell me if &amp hasn't had those qualities all along. Editor's visuals have always been good, but the styling has always been very deliberately some kind of e-kitsch. (Not that the cover I posted necessarily pulls that off as well.)

I think the cover of L'anomie (pic related) is a good example to look to, but it's also a strict rip-off of La Nouvelle Revue Francaise. Being about &amp we have to keep some relation to the style of &amp, and cribbing from other publishers would muddle the whole thing badly (this is how I felt about the rip-offs of vintage Penguin). I think it's also a good idea to keep in mind that this shit is literally amateur; not to excuse anything being "bad", but I mean we have to be at least a little self-aware about the fact that this is foremost an amateur community magazine. And I don't think it'd be right to make the cover flashy either (even if that'd be closer to "true" &amp style) considering the point of this thing has been to strip away the visuals and the chaff to present the best pieces with a more literary vision.

At this stage I won't consider the cover decided, and I'll make revisions as needed, but I do think the League Spartan font is a good way to keep this thing linked stylistically to the "real" &amp. And I don't want this thread to fall down the hole of cover mock-ups ad nauseam again. Cover shit has been beatrn to death, so talking shit about anything else would be more productive. I appreciate the dissent, but the cover isn't worth focusing on if the insides are still undecided.

>>21164942
>>21165031
>>21165040
I'll take note.

All in all, I'd rather get an answer to this >>21164769.

[Anonymous No.21167043]

[Anonymous No.21167207]

are there any stories from &amp about europeans colonising the world and then in turn themselves being colonised by the world?

[Anonymous No.21167260]

>>21167207
You'd probably like Honest Work >>21162520. Or pic related if you're more of a navel-gazer.

[Anonymous No.21167366]

>>21167260
>dreams that terminate in half-awake hallucinations
wow he is literally me

[Anonymous No.21167503]

>>21167260
honest work was pretty decent
some of these insults are pretty creative
>burger punk waffle jockey in an apron
i don't know if i'm the only one but i'm beginning to get tired of these slice-of-life with a depressive twist stories that seem to be so common nowadays
i guess that's just spengler's ideas being put to the test

[Anonymous No.21168224]

website seems to be back up btw

[Anonymous No.21168691]

>>21167503
>honest work
I think it's a good piece to include. I've always found the opening dialogue pretty stiff, but I think the premise is interestingly unique and suited to a quick story like this. Plus the ideas all touch on something common without being (too) topical or blatant: conspiracy, being outside/above the world in a vague way, animosity toward the rich, and the failing glimmer of communion with the working class ("real" people). You got your mystical unionised construction worker at the start, and your ironically respectable laissez faire wagecuck at the end who really doesn't give a damn about your life. And despite being outside/above it all or even pulling the strings, our pal isn't ahead of anyone: the trap of (faux) conspiracy/spirituality/mysticism is that it makes you think you know, but doesn't actually serve you in life, and if anything it heightens the anomie typical of these types.

>slice-of-life with a depressive twist stories
A couple of these on the list are mine and I agree. They (I) have the problem of not going anywhere with the narrative. Admittedly that was half-deliberate with the shit-tych, but more than that it was coincidence; the thing is just a collage of three different things I had written in May which happened to follow a theme when I looked back on them. It's lowest-common-denominator stuff in my eyes: it appeals to the chan-type "literally me" crowd, for better or worse. Of the four(?) pieces I have in &amp, my navel-gazing sad-fics are the ones that received the most attention, so I guess that's just how it goes.
>spengler's ideas
Write it out for a pleb like me. I think it's worth hearing this stuff; I'd consider putting any insights in a preamble for the best-of

I'd like to write more, but I have to split.

>>21168224
Any talk about the website/015 is strictly haram.

[Anonymous No.21169849]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21169887]

>>21168691
I like how “Honest Work” examines honesty in society and in making money. The protagonist is a fraud but has some talent. The construction workers seem honest but have no identity. The weather lady lies on the TV. The author rips off Hamlet and A Farewell to Arms. The protagonists sees philosophers as conmen. Definitely a cool piece.

[Anonymous No.21170742]

>>21162501
Since, people are complaining about the cover, why not do a penguin parody? Here’s something i just made up. I suspose it’s boring compare to &amp’s magazine covers. Maybe have a dada asthetic. Grab a bunch of old photos related to to text and strung them together. Have a salon meeting where a guy is reading the book’s contents.

[Anonymous No.21171290]

>>21170742
There are alot of good cover options. Yours included

[Anonymous No.21171784]

>>21170742
>>21171290
Add covers to the list of haram topics.

[Anonymous No.21171809]

>>21171784
>anon’s shitheap of a thread is on the verge of death
>decides to put a moratorium on the only topics that posters seem interested in

kek

[Anonymous No.21171833]

>>21171809
Yeah, and I'm gonna start striking entries off the best-of list every time covers are mentioned. Every coverposter should list their favourites now so I can specifically remove those ones first.

I'm fine with the thread free-falling anyway. If there's no discussion to be had about content/typography then I'll just continue as-is.

[Anonymous No.21171852]

>>21171833
coverposter here. my favourite is Dog Killer

[Anonymous No.21171867]

>>21171833
coverposter here. Glad to see that Everyone Else is at Home from volume 09 didn't make the cut. Keep it off.

[Anonymous No.21171872]

>>21171833
> gonna start striking entries off
might as well strike the whole list while youre at it since no one cares

>I'm fine with the thread free-falling
lol, cope harder, asshole

[Anonymous No.21171875]

>>21171833
Get fucking working on the issue already. Nobody's interested in critiquing and you have over a hundred pages. What's the issue?

[Anonymous No.21171882]

>>21171875
the issue is that hes a faggot

[Anonymous No.21172150]

The cover should be a screen shot of the /lit/ catalog but every item is an &amp thread.

[Anonymous No.21172161]

>>21172150
Specifically, it looks like a desktop loading up /lit/ in an internet browser. Maybe use a retro browser for aesthetics.

[Anonymous No.21172352]

>>21168691
>Write it out for a pleb like me. I think it's worth hearing this stuff; I'd consider putting any insights in a preamble for the best-of
spengler was a historian/philosopher who wrote decline of the west around the time ww1 ended
it's a chasmic analysis of how civilisations are formed, how they function and die, sort of like a full spectrum analysis
anyway he recognised similar patterns among every civilisation that has ever existed and one of the most troublesome patterns is the "last man", the type of person who becomes more and more common toward the end of a civilisation's life, the last man is characterised by apathy, feebleness and no higher desire than feeling comfortable in the moment, sort of like some of those characters in honest work

he's pretty infamous at this point, you haven't heard of him?

[Anonymous No.21172609]

no! no cheap Penguin parody!

[Anonymous No.21172963]

>>21171875
>you have over a hundred pages
The trouble is that there's so much material. The whole reason for the starring system was to make sure that the pieces going into the best-of received at least two recommendations, but even that isn't enough to make me feel confident in some of the less-discussed pieces. That and the fact that a piece like Honest Work came up by chance even after the list seemed well-developed makes me worry that it's still not representative.

But you can sum it up like >>21171882 said, since it is just personal vacillating.

>>21172352
I'd heard of Spengler and seen the Decline of the West discussed in passing, but I've never read the guy.

[Anonymous No.21173112]

>>21172963
fuck man it must be such hard work sifting through dozens of stories and making a magazine while simultaneously flicking away retards on the &amp general
the energy involved must require 10 cups of coffee a day
so what's the main hold up at the moment? just need more recommendations for the stories to add to the best-of? is that all?

[Anonymous No.21174029]

>>21172963
> personal vacillating
vacillating over what exactly?

[Anonymous No.21174948]

>>21174029
Whether to consider the list "complete", how to approach editing, typography, illustrations, how to order the pieces--everything I said before.

[Anonymous No.21175191]

>>21174948
I dunno man, that stuff isn’t exactly a life or death decision

[Anonymous No.21175475]

>>21174948
I emailed you some ideas on how to finalize the list. Put everything in text for a digest size paperback book. Order the pieces in order of the issues. You can do it.

[Anonymous No.21175484]

>>21175475
> You can do it.
doubtful, 2bqh

[Anonymous No.21175601]

>>21174948
>Whether to consider the list "complete"
is any piece of art ever really complete? just do it and publish it
the world isn't going to explode

[Anonymous No.21175909]

>>21174948
saw some good suggestions a couple of threads ago

[Anonymous No.21176360]

Will there be some kind of editorial foreword?

[Anonymous No.21176550]

>>21176360
yes! it will be 20 pages long! and after that, a 25 page introduction!
a toast! to modern publishers!

[Anonymous No.21177142]

>>21176550
sounds about right

[Anonymous No.21177335]

>>21162501
I'm here for the bump

[Anonymous No.21178471]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21178663]

[Anonymous No.21178671]

>>21162501
Will this be available to order in print please say yes

[Anonymous No.21178764]

>>21178671
yes

[Anonymous No.21178807]

>>21178764
Please make it good cause I will order.

[Anonymous No.21179164]

[Anonymous No.21179197]

>>21179164
okay but this is kino
just move the side text up a bit and its perfect

[Anonymous No.21179199]

>>21179164
The
>luxury periodical
>for /lit/ by /lit/
block sticks out like a sore thumb, but otherwise this is the best cover I've seen for the best-of

[Anonymous No.21179232]

>>21179197
>>21179199
??

[Anonymous No.21179333]

>>21179232
Significantly better.
Maybe try all lowercase and on a single line, positioned to act visually as a faux-underline to the title.

[Anonymous No.21179469]

>>21179333
The all caps “Luxury Periodical” is positioned on the left as a homage to the way that the editor styles the covers of official &amp issues. What about this? I think the angle makes it look more visually balanced.

[Anonymous No.21179486]

>>21179469
Ah yeah, that does look nicer. Match the background repeated &amp font size to the horizontal one or make it even smaller, though. It's less of a background element in this one, my brain wants to treat it as text to read.

[Anonymous No.21179500]

>>21179469
You've got a white line down the right side. I'm partial to >>21179232, though; for some reason the angle on the background text bugs me. Really good stuff regardless. Best I've seen so far. Matches the &amp look way better than anything else while still being fairly simple. What software are you drafting these in?

[Anonymous No.21179568]

>>21179469
>>21179500
Also, I like this yellow. While powerpunk yellow was nice, this isn't as jarring and seems better-suited to a cover--more subdued. Good job on the kerning on &amp considering it matches editor's tiny bit of overlap between '&' and 'a' (maybe try to extend this to the background text?). How does it look with "the best of" and "001-014" bolded? And it might look cleaner if "LUXURY PERIODICAL by /lit/ for /lit/" was put into the same as size as "the best of"/"001-014".

[Anonymous No.21179576]

>>21179469
The angle is a big improvement.

[Anonymous No.21179657]

>>21179486
>>21179500

I did a version with a smaller font size. I can’t notice a white line; do you see it on this one?

All of my mock-ups have been drafted in Canva, which is what the editor uses to design the official issues. I’ve also used Photopea to add a noise filter to some of my older mock-ups, but not for these.

I’m pretty happy with this design, although I personally dislike the yellow—I used it because other anons seemed fond of it. Anyway, sorry for coverposting.

[Anonymous No.21179705]

>>21179657
which other mockups have you posted?

[Anonymous No.21179810]

>>21179568
Fixed the kerning on the background text, bolded the title, and changed the font size, as requested.

>>21179705
I did a bunch of mock-ups a while back that incorporated different kinds of art, but none were in this style. Took them down from the Google Drive though. This is more inspired by actual &amp covers, just simplified.

[Anonymous No.21179818]

>>21179576
updated angle version

[Anonymous No.21179846]

>>21179810
This is it for me. I'm not a fan of the gradients so far, but this mock-up hits the target. Bullseye.

[Anonymous No.21179876]

>>21179846
Do you think it’d look better with just the title text and no decorative gradient at all? I feel like that would look oddly stark.

[Anonymous No.21179966]

>>21179876
I don't mind the small text, but just the gradient feels off to me personally. Nobody else has complained about it so far, though, so it's fine

[Anonymous No.21179986]

>>21179966
Do you mean the gradient itself or specifically the angled version?

[Anonymous No.21180046]

>>21179986
The gradient itself. Not the block of text, the gradient.

[Anonymous No.21180048]

>>21180046
So you think it’d look better if I did it all in the same shade?

[Anonymous No.21180058]

>>21180048
I'm not sure, but probably yes. Maybe if it were all a really faint shade

[Anonymous No.21180104]

>>21180058
What about this, with a much fainter gradient?

Sorry for posting mock-ups ad nauseum— this is the last one, I promise

[Anonymous No.21180111]

>>21180104
This is much better.
Sorry for behaving like a dumbass client.

[Anonymous No.21180116]

>>21180111
time to kill myself

[Anonymous No.21180118]

>>21162501
Can you guys have a Lulu.com friendly pdf when this is done ?

[Anonymous No.21180839]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21180874]

>the gigachad anons are using my idea for putting "the best of" text within the borders of the "&amp" text
yay

>>21180116
don't you dare

[Anonymous No.21181001]

>>21180874
I actually might within the next year. I'm too scared to, though. If I saw a truck hurtling towards me, I would move out of the way.

[Anonymous No.21181020]

>>21181001
>If I saw a truck hurtling towards me, I would move out of the way.
fuck that's napoleon-esque
but don't do it anon, there's no point unless you do it to fuck over everybody's day by killing yourself in the middle of rush hour traffic or something
just don't do it

[Anonymous No.21181265]

>>21179657
Like this one the best out of the bunch: think the "Luxury Periodical" text is too big in the subsequent ones. For me, the yellow went well for the previous design, but I'm not attached to it as a colour. I trust, however, that whatever you do will ultimately be good

[Anonymous No.21181552]

>>21180118
Yeah, that's the goal. Might even be possible to have it up on the &amp page if Prussia still has the credentials. See: >>21162541.

Also hoping to have it in a format suitable for standard printing, and I may save it until after but I'll try to throw it onto libgen, maybe with a copy in a nice EPUB.

>>21180104
>>21179810
>>21179657
You should upload these to the Google Drive folder before you an hero. I'm gonna take a stab at recreating this in Scribus. There are a couple things I wanna fiddle with without spamming the thread with my own edits. I think I was wrong about copping the title kerning of "&amp" into the background text since it makes the background look a little cluttered. And my thought to normalise the fonts was probably misguided now that I look again and consider >>21181265.

[Anonymous No.21181560]

>>21181265
>that whatever you do will ultimately be good
this
gigachads will ALWAYS be helpful and friendly

[Anonymous No.21181777]

>>21180874
On the idea of having the rest of the title text nestled within the borders of the “&amp” text— I first came up with it back in June for pic related, which I made to shill for &amp submissions. Great minds think alike, I guess.

>>21181552
> You should upload these to the Google Drive folder
I deleted all my mock-ups from the old Google Drive, but I can email them to you if you’d like.

> before you an hero
I have no plans to off myself in the near future, but thanks for the suggestion.
Your concern for my welfare is truly touching.

[Anonymous No.21182363]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21182396]

>>21182363
this is really cool too. very reminiscent of the lampbylit homepage

[Anonymous No.21182561]

>>21182396
That’s what I was going for, glad you noticed :)

[Anonymous No.21182851]

>>21182363
Much better than the yellow and my favorite i think. The silver lining and the dark underbelly of the cloud taking up most of the cover is meaningful and looks tasteful. Maybe the gradient could fade in from lower down instead of halfway up, or even be taken out and the title moved down lower. Or maybe every repeated &amp is in a different font to convey the variety of content and design in the 14 issue run, but im not sure how it would look. And maybe a comma after by /lit/ so its “by /lit/, for /lit/.“

[Anonymous No.21182917]

>>21182363
A suggestion: a gradient of opacity that matches the average dark colour of the bottom and which follows the background text. It'd slowly block out features like the clouds in the lower right and potentially make it look a little cleaner. Also start the text gradient from below the lowest bright edge of the clouds on the left, again to clean it up.

[Anonymous No.21183065]

>>21182363
Can you angle it or other shape?

[Anonymous No.21183107]

>>21183065
Like this?

[Anonymous No.21183918]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21184052]

hello friends i have a great and funny idea what if instead of saying LOL and LMFAO we &ampers say &O& and &mfao

[Anonymous No.21184105]

>>21184052
literally &&&&ing right now

[Anonymous No.21184306]

>>21181777
>I first came up with it back in June for pic related, which I made to shill for &amp submissions
o-oh, i see...
>Great minds think alike, I guess.
y-yeah h-haha...

[Anonymous No.21184316]

>>21184306
what does this mean? whyre you typing like a little faggot?

[Anonymous No.21184317]

>>21184306
you dont have to take his shit homie be a fuckin man

[Anonymous No.21184321]

>>21184316
how do you know how little faggots type?

[Anonymous No.21184323]

>>21184317
??

[Anonymous No.21184342]

anyway back to the MEAT of the discussion
oh dear editor, are there any stories that you're having second thoughts on that you'd like us to read before you remove or include it into the newest edition?

[Anonymous No.21184418]

>>21184052
>&ampers

can you say something less gay please?

[Anonymous No.21184529]

>>21184105
based and &amp-pi&&ed

>>21184418
&&&& you

[Anonymous No.21185598]

bump

[Anonymous No.21186122]

>>21174948
How much more input are you hoping to get before deeming it “complete?” Are you more interested in suggestions for pieces to remove, or pieces to add?

[Anonymous No.21186288]

>>21184342
>>21186122
>go to list
>look for pieces without any/much commentary
>comment/post about said piece
ez pz
I don't care if you comment on the document or post in here, but at least say somewhere whether you think a given piece is good or trash. I've got no firm criteria for completion, I'm just going to accept it as such at some point.

Or if you've really got the itch, read an issue of &amp and look for something you like that isn't on the list.

[Anonymous No.21186791]

>>21182851
It’s my favourite too—I find the yellow too jarring.

>>21182917
Is this the sort of thing that you had envisioned? I think this is a little cleaner than the original.

>>21183065
>>21183107
I suppose I could, but I think it’d look weird.

[Anonymous No.21186828]

>>21186288
jibaku doesn’t seem to have any commentary. i think it should be removed. it has some good points but seems unfinished.

[Anonymous No.21187513]

>>21186828
Did you read both parts?

[Anonymous No.21187535]

>>21187513
yeah but the end of pt 2 seemed weird & abrupt

>>21186791
i like this one better

[Anonymous No.21187711]

>>21186828
I dunno, I remember reading it back around when it was released and I liked it quite a bit.

[Anonymous No.21187838]

>>21186288
> if you've really got the itch

picrel from #9 is nice, havent seen anyone talk about it

[Anonymous No.21188118]

>>21187838
>poem with a typo in the middle with it
I can accept small typos in larger pieces, but one right in the middle of a short poem is painful. And it's not one that can be easily corrected from context. It seems like it's supposed to be the reflection of the Sun, but is it "its" or "the"? "its" would be clearer, but "the" would match the following two sentences. Plus it's inconsistent to watch the Sun (implied to be directly observed) while also watching its reflection, so it's either slightly incoherent or the mistake is even deeper. (Could it be "the reflections"? that'd be even more consistent with the following sentences with "the" and a plural.)

It's like seeing spinach in someone's teeth. I don't wanna be the one to jam my finger in the author's mouth to get it out, and the author isn't here to do it himself.

[Anonymous No.21188196]

>>21186791
very nice, id vote for this as the official cover over the yellow. not fully sure about the gradient though

[Anonymous No.21188229]

>>21188118
i see your point here but other peices on the list have major errors i think. i even remember reading one story that had editing notes left in. how do you go about fixing shit like that? i think the errors can add character in a way

[Anonymous No.21188270]

>>21188229
Like I said, I can tolerate typos in larger pieces. That's partially because they provide more context to use in correcting them, and besides that they don't stand out as much. Language is especially vital to poetry, so they're not only more difficult to correct, but they also stick out more and actively destroy a large part of the effect (yes, typos are jarring in prose, but the significance is different). And again, length matters: that typo screws up a whole line, which is 10% of the poem (if you include the title as a line).

The piece with the editing notes in the middle is way easier to correct than an ambiguous typo in a poem--you just remove the notes. Though I guess you could argue the notes could have potentially been deliberate, but whatever. Luckily the piece with the editing notes in it is mine, and no, they're not deliberate.

[Anonymous No.21188374]

>>21188270
okay, i see your point about mistakes standing out less in longer piece. i guess maybe the poem i posted isnt good enough to make the cut. still liked it tho

> Language is especially vital to poetry
tru, its an art of its own. ever written any yourself? mine always turn out screwy

> length matters
thats what she said

> The piece with the editing notes in the middle is way easier to correct
i guess that was a bad example, but there are lots of other long pieces with spelling mistakes and fucked up grammar that should maybe be relooked at

> Luckily the piece with the editing notes in it is mine, and no, they're not deliberate

lmao, le editor doesnt edit his own shit, huh?

[Anonymous No.21188589]

>>21188374
>should maybe be relooked at
I'm pretty sure I've read every starred entry on the list and noticed whatever mistakes are present. If you think something is egregiously bad then go ahead and point it out. I've been asking people to point out pieces they think shouldn't make the cut, so don't be vague about it.
>le editor doesnt edit his own shit
Editor emailed me shortly before the issue went out to ask for my latest revision and I sent the TXT I had on my phone. I try to be careful with the pieces I send in, but yeah, I fucked up. I also write my shit in a text editor without spell-check, so I've probably screwed myself a couple of times unknowingly.

[Anonymous No.21188644]

>>21188589
what text editor do you use?

[Anonymous No.21189288]

Letter to the Editors

I am met with the feeling of total warmth when I see that my idea was taken up; to say one "owns" &amp is incorrect, although I feel no issue with suggesting I am someone who had the first idea. The second edition of the publication is, in some ways, all about the subtext--which, in some ways, is all &amp is about. Whether there is value in starting a magazine such as this one--started on a board dedicated to literature, "the symbol,"--and using the will of the counterculturalists to use no more than ten words in the entire edition is not a question. "Suicide stops with &amp." In established circles, bad fiction and bad art is lauded because of the image on the cover or the image of the author, or otherwise because the "plot" is used to make some people happy and others sad. Removing both "plot" and the "author" from literature is a bold move, but it does seem that these magazines will become historic as soon as the goobers are able to counterfeit copies and sell them.

The designers must be thanked. The "synthwave," "alt-J" art-style present throughout the series is some of my favourite. It is psychedelia. It's hot. Speaking of "hot," when are we going to get "&amp - Tits Out Edition?" Yes, /lit/ is a "Blue Board," but is blue not representative of death in the world of computers? Are you goyim such intense virgins that you cannot walk up to a woman and ask to photograph her mammaries for an anonymous internet literary magazine? Why can you not write something where there are just tits everywhere and also show a bunch of breasts in the images? Can there not be a connection between the photographs and the story? And if the writers make stories about tits, do you designers not have to just drop the Christian Minecraft thing, man-up and put some tits in an edition for once? And are you writers so sexless that you can't write hot erotica about tits and stuff? I want to masturbate to this series but I haven't so far. Make it make sense, please.

Best,

[Anonymous No.21189379]

>get into a debate with a guy
>instead of insulting me, he calls me his friend
>the longer the debate goes on, the more respectful and friendly the nouns become
>eventually he starts calling me his brother
>finally he starts calling me king
>mfw
you're NOT allowed to do that!
using those words in a debate is NOT fair

[Anonymous No.21189697]

is it possible to upload the magazines to archive.org? you think they'd be taken down for being politically incorrect?

[Anonymous No.21189723]

i pronounce &amp "and-amp."

[Anonymous No.21190363]

>>21189723
??

[Anonymous No.21190607]

>>21189379
>>21189288

[Anonymous No.21191018]

>>21186791
Have you got a full-size version of the background image that you can post?

[Anonymous No.21191088]

>>21191018
Yeah, but the file size is too large to post here and I don’t know how to compress it without making the resolution look like shit.

[Anonymous No.21191109]

>>21191018
Also, if there are changes you want to make then you can let me know, and I’ll adjust the design accordingly.

[Anonymous No.21191153]

>>21191088
>>21191109
You can just email it to [e-mail] if that's cool with you. I wouldn't want a compressed version.

[peepeeboy No.21191164]

>>21191153
we need to start namefagging

[Anonymous No.21191279]

>>21191153
That’s fine, although I sort of enjoy the process of making the changes to the design myself. I’m busy for the rest of the day but I’ll email you the file at some point, along with some modified versions of the design, other info about cover fonts/typesetting and etc.

Also, the warosu archive is migrating servers right now, and posts aren’t being archived while the site is down. So nothing that’s been posted in this thread since Thursday or Friday will be accessible later on. Anyone who wants these mock-ups for future reference should download them now.

[Anonymous No.21191386]

>>21191279
Archived.moe is still working, except you can only do numeric searches and files aren't guaranteed to stay up. I used it to find a thread on translations that sprang up during the Waruso outage.

[Anonymous No.21191603]

>>21191386
archived.moe seems sketchy af so im a bit scared to use it

[Anonymous No.21192831]

>Last time, on the best of &amp...
>the editor watched yet another episode of Dragon Ball
>and drank strawberry milk out of a squeeze bottle.
>Can he ever decide on a cover?
>After all this time, is the list finally complete?
>What will happen to the best-of?
>Don't miss the action on the next episode of...
>the best of &amp.
Someone's gotta give me a reason not to just NEET myself to death watching Dragon Ball. Anyway.

How would people feel about an unabridged version of the best-of? It'd be comparatively easy to throw every item on the list into a template in order of release and shit out a version sans edits and illustrations; it'd eschew fixes and images in favour of presenting the works as-is.

This would only be a stop-gap version meant to be a vaguely puritan version of the best-of. I'd want to do up a better version with embellishments and corrections, but this would at least get something out in the mean time. Only risks are changes interim and that it could totally deflate the little remaining enthusiasm for the best-of.

[Anonymous No.21192839]

>>21192831
Important note: even if you say this is a bad idea you probably can't stop me.

[Anonymous No.21192948]

>>21192831
I think it’s a bad idea. A low effort compilation of content isn’t going to offer much to the reader and seems pretty pointless. It seems antithetical to the original vision of the best-of. I think it’s worth waiting and taking the time to actually put together something that’s well-curated. Also, a stop-gap version would likely sap all motivation to work on a final version, as well as leave little remaining community interest in reading the final version when it eventually releases. After all the work that’s gone into the best-of already, why not see it through and create something you can be proud of?

Also, are you drinking Strawberry Nesquick syrup straight out of the bottle? Gross.

[Anonymous No.21193071]

>>21192839
its a shitty idea, dunno why your even considering it.

[Anonymous No.21193564]

>>21192831
please tell me you’re not gonna use a dragon ball z screencap as the cover

[Anonymous No.21194121]

>>21187838
dont like the repetition and "majestic" is the most common adjective for the sun

>>21192831
obviously dont do an unabridged version, but your main problem is edits and illustrations right? because the starred section seems finalizable (with the exception of longing which i still dont like). any more democracy and we will be pruning peoples personal favorites or adding stuff from the eh pile. and the last cover (>>21186791) is big progress in the right direction. i (IA) and the other fixtures could read and comment on the ones without comment in the unstarred section if you want.

is editing hard beyond just going through the texts, which will eventually be done anyways? also you could paste them into something like google docs and auto check for spelling errors. and are illustrations for every work, or even most of the works, or even some, even possible? it would be nice i guess, and its probably a lot easier if theyre going to be public domain images like the dog killer one. you could also consider ai generated images based on the texts themselves, but you werent keen on that iirc. anyways i believe in you editor. good luck

[Anonymous No.21194280]

>>21175475
>Order the pieces in order of the issues
Why is this better than alphabetical?

[Anonymous No.21194317]

>>21194121
> pruning peoples personal favorites
I think it’s okay to prune shit that is someone’s personal favourite if it receives valid criticism from others.

> adding stuff from the eh pile
I think the list is long enough right now that we can safely say it doesn’t need to be expanded. I doubt there’s anything vital missing. I think it’s a matter of figuring out what needs to be pruned at this point.

> the last cover is big progress in the right direction
Thanks, do you have any input/advice on its design? I have a lot of work right now but when I have the time I can make revisions.

> and are illustrations for every work, or even most of the works, or even some, even possible? it would be nice i guess, and its probably a lot easier if theyre going to be public domain images

I think it would be nice to have some illustrations scattered throughout, and I’m still down to create original artwork for the best-of when I have time. But also, there are some pretty nice illustrations available in Canva, and I have a Pro subscription so I can access all of the content there and use it without copyright issues. I can even add others to my Canva Pro account as co-editors using the Teams function, if anyone else wants to look at what illustrations/photos are available in their database or make edits to any of the cover mock-ups I’ve made.

>you could also consider ai generated images based on the texts themselves

I’m personally against this. I think it’d look off-putting and cheap.

[Anonymous No.21194392]

>>21194317
Not the best-of editor, I should add, in case that wasn’t clear.

[Anonymous No.21194538]

>>21194317
>I think it’s okay to prune shit that is someone’s personal favourite if it receives valid criticism from others.
sure but if there isnt a disagreement between comments as is i mean. no one will provide much new commentary at this point and it might be a good thing that the deciding committee isnt too big.
>I doubt there’s anything vital missing. I think it’s a matter of figuring out what needs to be pruned at this point.
from the starred pile? we can make a list of possibles to prune
>Thanks, do you have any input/advice on its design?
could be room for improvement on the gradient. im curious about how
>every repeated &amp is in a different font to convey the variety of content and design
would look.
and i stand by
>“by /lit/, for /lit/.“
or
>by /lit/
>for /lit/
>create original artwork for the best-of
might introduce inconsistency and be too time consuming
>I can even add others to my Canva Pro account as co-editors using the Teams function
great. we should then match every piece with something from there

[Anonymous No.21194581]

>>21194538
>might introduce inconsistency and be too time consuming
not him, but i'm willing to try my hand at illustration if there's someone acting as a general art director. that way we can reduce inconsistency.
>>21186791
also, this is it. this is the direction in which we should be going.

[Anonymous No.21194591]

>>21193564
It's Dragon Ball, not Dragon Ball Z.

>>21194280
My thinking was that it'd show the development of &amp while maintaining some of editor's choices (whether ordering was ever deliberate or not).

>>21194121
>eh pile
Most of those were drop-outs from the starred category anyway. If someone rec'd one from down there I'd consider it, but I'm not really concerned about them. The only pieces down there that I still think about are Noodle House (explained later) , Jibaku, and Rural Life.
>Longing
I thought we'd reached an agreement to scrap that one in favour of Newlyweds(?), so I'll scrub that one. Thanks for pointing that out

Recently I received another anon's list of favourites and every piece bar one was already in the starred section (I have to remember to add stars for that guy), which made me more confident in the current iteration. Only piece that was out was Noodle House, so I'm going to give that one a proper read myself in case I missed something--one of the few I never read myself. I remember it having strong support from some people, countered by being shit on in the document.

Anyway, I've been thinking of the current list as more or less complete for a while, but I was thrown for a loop by the Honest Work recommendation--it cast a shadow of doubt over me. I'm just a step from being willing to run with the current iteration. Close to the time when I'll do my final personal arbitration.

>editing
I've worked out something for that. I was having trouble extracting formatting (e.g., newlines) from the pages, but that's good to go now. I've got a spell-checker, so it's a matter of just going through the pieces now. It's edits for mistakes (e.g., inconsistencies, grammar) that I'm really concerned about, but I'm also wary of making those changes.

>>21194121
>>21194317
>illustrations
I'd definitely go the public domain root apart from throwing in my own shit, but the latter mostly only works for my own pieces. What's the actual copyright on the Canva stuff? I'm a little critical of using that as a resource (same reason as with AI art: soulless), but I'd take a look if you made it available.

I'll also take any and all suggestions for illustrations, and I can act as "director" as >>21194581 puts it.

>>21194538
>different fonts
I like the idea conceptually, but I think it'd look bad in practice. I'm a little concerned about homogeneity when it comes to illustrations and shit (I don't want my own style bleeding onto everything), but I think a cover is one place to focus on consistency.

[Anonymous No.21194594]

>>21194591
>pic related with the Halloween theme
Noice. Happy Halloween, fuckers.

[Anonymous No.21194629]

>>21194591
chronological is good. it would make organizing the .pdf file easier too. we could have a contents page separating the best-of issue into sections for each of the twelve issues. it's perfect.

i'm going to take a hard stance against AI art. AI art is horrible and ugly and anybody who has a passing interest in art can spot it from a mile away.

so, what're we gonna do about the art, director?

[Anonymous No.21194756]

>>21194591
>ordering
im for chronological ordering, with the poems segregated
>Noodle House (explained later) , Jibaku, and Rural Life.
noodle house recieved too much criticism and was pretty long iirc. i could read jibaku if it would help, but thats long too, though it looks interesting (i was saving it for the release). with rural life its fine either way with me. might be too trashy but it will always have a place in my heart. is the length of the starred section good or should it be shortened?
>inconsistencies, grammar
i mentioned google docs since it grammer checks too, but at that point id say just leave it. i think there are some mistakes pointed out in the doc tho.
>throwing in my own shit, but the latter mostly only works for my own pieces
>I'll also take any and all suggestions for illustrations
idk original art is too subjective of a matter, and blending the occasional art of two people (not many more would contribute) with canva images would neither be diverse nor consistent. i dont know how many options there are in canva, but one way or the other it should be simplistic throughout imo. the original maximalist &amp design is impossible and anything middling would be middling.
>>21194629
>AI art is horrible and ugly
all depends on the input. some are good but probably doesnt make sense for this projcet

[Anonymous No.21194764]

>>21194629
also i love pages 13-15 from issue 6 of &amp

[Anonymous No.21194844]

>>21194756
i'm sorry for my outburst against AI art.

>it should be simplistic throughout
i agree.
>the original maximalist &amp design is impossible
i disagree, but also, we've been trying to stay away from imitating the regular issues of &amp too much for the sake of distinction.

i think we should avoid using canva illustrations entirely. there has to be a sense of heaviness, and i don't think stock illustrations can provide that sort of "feel" to the issue. i also have apprehensions about using stock art because it generally alway seems... soulless. but i haven't seen any illustrations yet, so i might just be prejudiced

[Anonymous No.21195830]

>>21194844
The drawing I used in this mock up from way back was taken from Canva, for example.

[Anonymous No.21195984]

>>21195830
I'd vastly prefer custom or out-of-copyright art to stock image-type stuff. Maybe that runs the risk of being just as typical or kitschy, but I think it'd at least be more nuanced (more "honest", let's say).

[Anonymous No.21196115]

>>21195830
ye i can see why >>21194844 finds it soulless.
>>21195984
>out-of-copyright art
probably the best option. im against custom art since the style should fit the general air of the piece and there's only so much stylistic variety you can get out of two artists. and with the number of pieces, we would run the risk of it never getting done or ending up rushed
>>21194591
>I like the idea conceptually, but I think it'd look bad in practice.
can we still try it :3

[Anonymous No.21196890]

>>21195984
>>21194591
Okay, I agree that the illustration is not anything great. But Canva has a lot of nice photos that are free for commercial use under copyright law. That’s where editor pulls a lot of the images he uses. And it’s where I got the cloud image I used for the cover I made.

https://www.canva.com/help/licenses-copyright-legal-commercial-use/

>>21196115
>can we still try it
Sorry, I don’t have the energy right now

>im against custom art
I don’t really understand your rationale. I think it’s fine to blend styles since the thing is meant to be an eclectic compilation of many people’s work. It’s not going to be super professional but that’s part of the charm. I’d rather have eclectic art made by various anons than stock photos if it came down to it

[Anonymous No.21196973]

>>21196890
agreed.

stock photography amd symbols and logos are fine — stock illustrations don't really have the sort of specificity you'd want an illustration to have, i've found

[Anonymous No.21197555]

>>21196890
>>21196973
I think the risk with including art from anons is foremost that it could simply be mediocre. And although a variety of styles could work in concept, if it's two artists each doing more than one piece then it'll break the best-of into chunks stylistically--if it was someone/something new for each piece it could be okay.

[Anonymous No.21197570]

>>21197555
a lot of &amp writing is mediocre though, so is a lot of the cover shit. mediocre art would fit in

[Anonymous No.21197840]

>>21197555
i think the whole "for /lit/ by /lit/" ides is and should be the main principle upon which we base any decisions we make.
if we had the money we could commission a bunch of really good artists to illustrate for this magazine, but even though that would be better for the issue, it would be against the ethos of this magazine.
i think.

[Anonymous No.21198119]

>>21197555
Exactly
>>21197570
Willingly walking into mediocrity is a bad idea. &amp has almost always had impressive and varied design. And the pieces in the best of are a lot better naturally. Id even call a few my favorites even outside this context.
>>21197840
Well the lit by lit only extended so far in the original issues since editor ultimately decided almost all of the design choices and it stuck out badly when he didnt. It might even be unfair to let two peoples personal art styles color the tone of so many pieces. It would make things much more homogenous throughout when the whole point of adding visuals should be the opposite. Also i dont believe the two artists would stay enthusiastic enough to do one (and to do a good one) for EVERY piece. The project would be forced into a corner where its either rushed or never finished.

[Anonymous No.21198139]

>>21198119
>The project would be forced into a corner where its either rushed or never finished.
you're right; i concede.

[Anonymous No.21198344]

>>21162520
this was good.

[Anonymous No.21198819]

>A ribald face, sullen as a dean’s, [...] came forward, then blithe in motley, towards the greeting of their smiles.
hey.
>>21197570
i disagree with this. some of the pieces in the best-of are genuinely well-crafted works of literature, and any art has to also be genuinely well-crafted.

the most recent cover design isn't mediocre either. it's genuinely good. it's pleasing, it's simple, it's characteristic, and, like >>21182396 said and >>21182396 confirmed, more representative of the original &amp aesthetic than anything else we've seen so far while staying distinct.
that said, i think gathering and directing illustrators would be difficult, and, problems of quality aside, would result in a rushed, sloppy mess, having the opposite effect that illustrations are meant to have. either full-ass it or don't consider it at all.

[Anonymous No.21198846]

>>21186791
This is the best one. Good job anon.

[Anonymous No.21199028]

>>21196973
good things can be done with stock photos if there is a lot in canva, especially if altered. the dog killer one was good. is there a good out of copyright archive to choose from so we can work on pairing them with stories?

[Anonymous No.21199083]

>>21199028
archive.org seems like a good place to start.
the bigger issue is what we should be looking for.

[Anonymous No.21199161]

>>21199083
Wikimedia is another good source for photography, though it's rarely ever artistic and would need editing. Searching "public domain art" is honestly good enough to find plenty of sources, and if you know a particular artist is out of copyright then you can just try your best to track down good photos/scans and hope nobody is being a fag about the rights of the photo/scan itself.

I think the sentiment here >>21197840 is maybe the most important part of it. I definitely want to full-ass (>>21198819) the illustrations since I think the best-of would be too plain and run-of-the-mill without any. I picked up an author's short story anthology and the illustrations there were always full-page, which saved it from the dodgy typography of trying to incorporate them into the text.

Generally I also think we should stick to black and white. Saves on printing and would help to constrain the style of the illustrations (even if in essence they're distinct; decolorising also opens the door to scaling techniques that work best in B&W). Pic related came from a fairly mediocre source, but after fooling around in GIMP I'd say it's pleasing enough to put in print (not sure if I want the kid in it; does the full thing suit Dog Killer?).

There's also one author with a piece on the best-of list that was particular about the illustrations already in his piece as it appeared in &amp. With &amp being commit to the public domain I could technically just say fuck it and ignore him, but that wouldn't sit well with me (he was at least open to revamping some of the shit and removing the non-vital stuff). All that to say that we also shouldn't do anything to detract from pieces; some pieces really lost out on the graphic design and typography front, so this is a chance to make everything fairly level.

[Anonymous No.21199217]

>>21199161
>would need editing
certainly.
i agree with >>21197840, and i'm (>>21198819) wary of the project losing steam, but you've gotta try.
>black and white.
i agree! black-and-white is the way to go.
>fooling around in GIMP
what did you do exactly?
>not sure if I want the kid in it;
there's something about the kid that really solidifies the idea of dog-as-family-member. with the kid in frame, the image goes from eerie... to... just_a_dog with a kid, as your filename puts it so aptly.

[Anonymous No.21199246]

>>21199217
The GIMP process:
>desaturate
>scale image with no filter (work in integer factors closest to desired resolution)
>apply Gaussian blur until pixels are obscured
>apply Filters>Distorts>Newsprint
>fiddle as needed
Extra fiddling with levels can help after it's been made B&W.

Also, your point is that it's better without the dog, right? I can probably remove the kid (and the rug would more than likely), but I'm a little concerned about the edit being too crude.

[Anonymous No.21199250]

>>21199246
>and the rug would more than likely
*and the rug too, more than likely

[Anonymous No.21199256]

>>21199246
>Also, your point is that it's better without the dog, right?
no, i like it with the dog. it would be weird without the dog.
and i like it better with the kid, too.

[Anonymous No.21199272]

>>21199161
where’d u find picrel?

[Anonymous No.21199295]

>>21199272
i mean the og image source, not the edit

[Anonymous No.21200684]

>>21199272
>>21199295
It's actually a photo from a friend that I had lying around. The kid is him, and I think I met the dog when I was much younger. (And he's cool with the photo being used, though I'd be a little more cautious with the original.)

[Anonymous No.21200736]

>>21200684
> a fairly mediocre source

u consider ur friend fairly mediocre? kek

[Anonymous No.21201730]

>>21199246
didn’t you do a version without the kid in an old thread? post it so we can compare

[Anonymous No.21201763]

>>21201730
That was just a cropped version.

[Anonymous No.21201777]

>>21201763
yeah, with the kid it's better

[Anonymous No.21201816]

>>21201763
its better without the kid, we dont need a pic of some random little shit in the bestof

[Anonymous No.21201834]

>>21201763
Its good if the good boys gonna peek out the edge of the page but not if hes centered

[Anonymous No.21202204]

>>21201777
>>21201816
>>21201834
Insightful. I posted an example of how it could be incorporated into the text earlier >>21162547, so it'd be helpful if someone had something to say about that in particular.

[Anonymous No.21202222]

>>21202204
The curvature of the text around the image looks a bit odd, in my opinion. It would be better as a full page illustration—perhaps it could be used in a title page for the story.

[Anonymous No.21202810]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21202886]

So you have a dog; now we need a cat. (May &amp, with a nod to the Yellow Dwarf, be a literary cat!)

[Anonymous No.21202950]

>>21202886
OH, there's the Abu Ghraib poem

>Yellow Dwarf
?
>literary cat
?

[Anonymous No.21203175]

>>21202950
Cat in Abu Ghraib had ASCII art that I plan on keeping as part of it (I'd imagine the author submitted it like that).

[Anonymous No.21203195]

>>21203175
Roughly how many of the pieces do you think should have art/illustrations along with them? Half, or perhaps 1/3?

[Anonymous No.21203211]

>>21203195
not him, but perhaps the ones with triple/double stars?

[Anonymous No.21203224]

>>21203211
I don’t think that basing it on stars is a good approach, because there are some highly rated works that are so abstract in concept that it would be very difficult to find fitting illustrations for them.

[Anonymous No.21203252]

If they're here, is the writer of Thine is the Kingdom willing talk a bit about the work? I'd like to know more about it. It's great

[Anonymous No.21203254]

>>21203252
Editor-anon wrote that one.

[Anonymous No.21203262]

>>21203254
Editor-anon wrote Runner/Jumper too, didn't he? What other works did he write?
Also, how do you know?

[Anonymous No.21203278]

>>21203262
>Runner/Jumper
Yes.

>What other works did he write?
Go through old issues and see if you can tell.

>how do you know?
Discussion in old threads.

[Anonymous No.21203303]

>>21202950
>??
An amusing little piece from The Yellow Book, Vol. X (July 1896).

[Anonymous No.21203496]

What about pic related as an illustration for SuburbPunk? It’s a Canva stock photo that I edited. I like the idea of incorporating illustrations throughout for that piece, but the graphic design of the original looks bad, in my opinion. The layout is weird and the images are too varied in quality, style, and size— the whole thing is messy and lacks cohesion. Perhaps I could replicate all of the images in this sort of style to polish it up,

[Anonymous No.21203510]

>>21203496
Oops, forgot to make it horizontal before posting.

[Anonymous No.21203545]

>>21203496
>>21203510
That's the one with the author who was particular about illustrations--specifically the bird. He'd said it was his own drawing based on a similar illustration from a Calvin and Hobbes strip, and that he'd want it to remain close to that (and probably incorporated into the text). He said the end text could be made plain, and vaguely mentioned the flower illustration being important but I have no idea if he wanted that to be kept in the same place. I agree that the graphic design was bad, but I think it could be improved while keeping the key elements.

[Anonymous No.21203612]

>>21203545
The edit I made, when flipped and with the legs removed, is pretty close to the original in concept (though not in execution). It could be incorporated into the text to give a more polished look, if he’d be open to that. I could replicate the poppies in a similar style. That would improve the piece while keeping the key elements, I think.

Nothing against the author and I respect his intention, but the execution was lacking. The bird drawing sort of looks like a low-effort MS Paint doodle, and I don’t like the idea of including it in the best-of. I think it’d look out of place.

[Anonymous No.21203676]

>>21203612
burst out laughing.

i think we should keep the drawing. it can be improved upon.

[Anonymous No.21203695]

>>21203676
>burst out laughing

Why? Is the suggestion of replacing it that absurd?

> we should keep the drawing. it can be improved upon

How, by having someone else redraw it and do a better job? It would also have to be reversed to black-on-white, as I assume if people are going to print their own copies at home we don’t want to have a black background with white text.

[Anonymous No.21203749]

>>21203695
>Why? Is the suggestion of replacing it that absurd?
no, because the drawing is so ridiculous

>How, by having someone else redraw it and do a better job?
perhaps. or by having the artist himself redraw it. either way works

>It would also have to be reversed to black-on-white,
correct

[Anonymous No.21203761]

>>21203749
wrong, actually. a line drawing with halftone/hatched shadow would ssve even more ink than a black blotch of a bird

[Anonymous No.21203765]

>>21203695
redrawing it by hand and scanning it, then evening out the line color to 100% black and background to transparent/white would be alright I'd reckon - as long as it's a smooth line, and not a pixelly mspaintjob as it looks now.

[Anonymous No.21203960]

ok I am gonna give it a try now /lit/ faggots

[Anonymous No.21204011]

>>21203749
>because the drawing is so ridiculous
Exactly my point, and I don’t think it’s worth it to go to the effort of redrawing, scanning, and editing it. Maybe the alternative I proposed isn’t the best, but it serves the same sort of general purpose.

The only artistic purpose I can think of for the style is that perhaps the author intended it to be a representation of something that the narrator’s child-self might have drawn after the event? But I’m stretching to come up with a justification— it doesn’t immediately appear “childlike” in style, just low-effort, so the association isn’t strong enough to be readily apparent to the reader. And of course I have no idea what his original intention was, so I’m just speculating. Personally, I don’t feel that its current form does anything to enhance the story, and I find it aesthetically off-putting. Though of course this is subjective, and others might disagree.

Also, I agree with >>21199161 that it would be rude to just say “fuck it” and ignore the author’s request, but I also don’t think that the best-of issues’ stylistic choices should be dictated by someone who doesn’t have a good aesthetic sense when it comes to graphic design. The story itself is quite good, but the design and typography used in the published version serve to detract from the reading experience. I see including a bird illustration and flower illustration with some conceptual resemblance to the original as sufficiently respectful, unless the author would be wholly opposed to the idea.


>>21203761
Sure, but the difference in ink usage between two small illustrations of different styles is so minor that I see it as irrelevant. I only brought it up to point out that having the entire piece use a black background (as in the original format) would be a significant waste of ink.

[Anonymous No.21205304]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21205323]

Some guy dumped his &amp submissions on me thinking I was editor (not the first time). There's a poem about Beowulf that includes the line
>Awash with gold and is of large chode
lmao
Should I dump here or is that a dick move? I told him he had the wrong email, and 015 is vaporwave anyway.

[Anonymous No.21205338]

>>21205323
One of these is 23 fucking pages, by the way. (The Beowulf poem is 8.)

[Anonymous No.21205356]

>>21205323
>”unfinished” but done

Sending in massive quantities of unfinished schlock for publication is a dick move. I say post ‘em. He wanted an audience anyway.

[Anonymous No.21205365]

>>21205323
Don't be mean to the poor guy. We all have vulnerable moments. Here is your chance not to add evil to the world.

[Anonymous No.21205374]

>>21205365
I wouldn’t call sharing his shit evil or mean, considering that if he’s sending it out he clearly wants people to read it. It’s not as though you’d be reading his private journal and uncovering vulnerable moments; it’s stuff that he actively sought to have published.

[Anonymous No.21205387]

>>21205374
True but there's also an element of it being good enough for publication or not, which is what he was trying to find out by submitting it. If it was good, and got published, he'd be able to make sense of his own "am I good or deluded?" inner conflict, which we all have. If it gets posted, all he gets is mocked by faggots who not only are probably worse writers but never would have actually written something or had the balls to submit it. And no I'm not him, I just know how it feels.

[Anonymous No.21205441]

>>21205387
&amp accepts literally anything so that’s a bit of a moot point.

[Anonymous No.21205491]

>>21205323
I'm the one. Feel free to dump it. :^)
Include other subs, though, if nothing made the cut?

[Anonymous No.21205500]

I apologize for sending lots of stuff but I didn't think you'd feel compelled to read more than you're necessarily able to digest.

I am already published and simply wanted to donate texts to the magazine if it were so-interested; I have no interest in claiming what was sent and intended it to be an anonymous sub.

[Anonymous No.21205636]

>>21205491
>>21205500
>I am already published
Where? I'm curious.
And, as said before, I'm not the &amp editor and &amp doesn't really do acceptance/rejection--everything that's submitted goes in, regardless of quality. Admittedly I'm a little critical of the people who dump material on &amp like it's a drive-by, but I'm glad you're at least engaging in here; have you ever read much of &amp?

And since your subject line specifically called attention to the public domain element, I'm interested in whether many contributors have really considered the implications of that: that their work can be used by anyone anywhere for any purpose without any attribution, e.g., someone could plant (or even change) any of the pieces in &amp in an anthology and make money off it without saying a word to the author. In some sense I think that's how material on the internet is treated in general (regardless of the true legality of it), so maybe it's not on anyone's mind. It's odd to consider that I'm fiddling with other people's work without asking, even if they gave it away.

[Anonymous No.21205668]

>>21205323
tfw you will never read this 8 pg masterpiece about large chodes :(

[Anonymous No.21205728]

>>21205636
I am F. Gardner--so, on Amazon and I believe in some of the periodicals.

[Anonymous No.21205738]

>>21205728
You're not Joey B., fuck off.

[Anonymous No.21205740]

>>21205728
post proof as i suspect you’re a liar

[Anonymous No.21205764]

>>21205740
uhh, kinda unkempt--plus the published photos of me are edited slightly. the, uh, thing about "Joey B" is it's clearly a baseball reference but also contains my last initial. otherwise, i am afraid i can't prove much. :x

[Anonymous No.21205775]

>>21205764
fuck off

[Anonymous No.21205778]

>>21205764
>misusing the word "unkempt"
Sorry, I shouldn't have doubted you, Gardner.

[Anonymous No.21205791]

>>21205775
the thing is: i returned to this electronic board recently and to my dismay discovered that people are still pretending to be me and there are other sets of people constantly accusing these people of actually being me. i have no idea why you think i would fuck off at this point? it's great?

>>21205778
thank you.

[Anonymous No.21205792]

>>21205323
I wanna see G-ma

[Anonymous No.21205797]

>>21205792
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11-TRDIkt5f7J3aWNg5rmhnlAPFXBP1gHtDEv7bD_mZE/edit?usp=sharing

thanks for the interest, anon!

[Anonymous No.21205806]

>>21205797
>click on suspicious link
>get megavirus
7/10 wouldn't recommend

[Anonymous No.21205812]

>>21205797
post Beowulf chode ode

[Anonymous No.21205814]

>>21205806
everything i have ever written is a megavirus mfw

[Anonymous No.21205819]

>>21205812
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fCBWjYzT5sfyehJ0EQ0tg5hTbe6CigsSzAmBvl8DOrE/edit

[Anonymous No.21205842]

>>21205814
G-MA IS WITH THE LORD G-MA IS WITH THE LORD G-MA IS WITH THE LORD
I liked it a lot, although the prose was stilted in places.

[Anonymous No.21205851]

>>21205842
Thank you for the review. Consider this an official F. Gardner reference to further your career as a literary analyst/critic. The "stilt" of the tone was intentional, and you're correct that I could have been more extravagant; but it was a stylistic choice and I am not sure the work would have had quite the effect I intended for had I sharpened it more. I really appreciate the feedback and will consider for future fictions.

[Anonymous No.21205865]

>>21205851
no, I meant it should've been less extravagant

[Anonymous No.21205868]

>>21205865
Ah, yes. This is why I referenced (you).

[Anonymous No.21205873]

I thought 015 submissions were a haram topic

[Anonymous No.21205878]

>>21205873
Best-of anon brought it up

[Anonymous No.21205885]

>>21205878
seems like a sudden attitude change

[Anonymous No.21205903]

>>21205885
not sudden

[Anonymous No.21205921]

>>21205873
>>21205878
>>21205885
>>21205903
The only truly haram topic is my nine-year-old wife.
And this is pretty different from 015 talk anyway.

[Anonymous No.21205967]

>>21205921
> The only truly haram topic is my nine-year-old wife

paedo

[Anonymous No.21205976]

>>21205921
okay edgelord, we all know ur the ceo of incels

[Anonymous No.21205986]

>>21205976
That was not F. Gardner. I did not say that. It is the other way for me. I like them older.

Are my Goodreads quotes being updated at all or do they just sort of sit there in a sacred and unchanging order?

[Anonymous No.21206002]

also mfw people think i'm an incel. i am not interested in having sex rn. gosh. i literally did sex work, you assholes. almost died in a strangulation attack in an apartment i was lured into. did hard fucking time in the psychiatric ward for disrupting traffic on a bridge and meanwhile found love in many places. i am entirely at peace with God, have achieved eternal happiness, am a person with direct biological descendants so i am not sure how incel co-operates with that and i just wanted to share some fictions i wrote to contribute to a humble magazine i am pretty sure i had a role in founding? and my readers, whom i have personally asked to ridicule me in the most atrocious ways possible have truly succeeded. thoust are the finest of plebeians. patricians, even, some of you. i suppose i did not consider that every submission is accepted as i have been outside of the community for a while--believe it or not, just living--and really do wish to express apologies to the editors if they actually have to admit it now? as i think was one of the posts? anyway, personally i think the g-ma one and the machine one are the best. peace and sorry to disturb it upon entry. yours,

[Anonymous No.21206015]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUWu8vQQQ0k

[Anonymous No.21206044]

>>21206015
What does this have to do with &amp?

[Anonymous No.21206085]

>>21206015
??

[Anonymous No.21206238]

>>21206044
They played it at editor's funeral. Gardner dug the grave and carried the casket single-handedly. Ogden delivered the eulogy. K-Anon was inconsolable. I made special-/k/ brownies for the wake, and Justice ate them all.

R.I.P. editor. Can't outrun the &amp curse on a bike. 015 never ever.
>No matter what I have to do, I'll wait for you
>I'll be waiting

[Anonymous No.21206244]

>>21206238
Waiting for 015?

[Anonymous No.21206247]

>>21206244
What else?

[Anonymous No.21206251]

>>21206247
I don’t know, considering that you just said 015 never ever.

[Anonymous No.21206256]

>>21206251
That wasn't me, also those two things are not mutually exclusive.
One can wait for something that will never arrive.

[Anonymous No.21206262]

>>21206256
> One can wait for something that will never arrive.

Yeah.

[Anonymous No.21206279]

that was beautiful. BRRRAAAAPPPPP

[Anonymous No.21206613]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21207239]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21207645]

>somehow 015 will be back

[Anonymous No.21208467]

>>21205986
> I like them older.

Gardner’s cougar fetish confirmed.

[Anonymous No.21208996]

>>21203960
give what a try?

[Anonymous No.21209196]

>illustrations
So the idea has at least been floated to use full-page illustrations (or at least pages dedicated to a single illustration) as title pages for specific pieces. How should that look? Should it be done such that it's always a left page with the illustration/title, followed on the right by the associated piece? Right page with the piece following? No preference? Smaller illustrations could still appear elsewhere sparingly.

>sections/chapters/grouping
And does anyone have suggestions for pieces that should be grouped together? If the illustration idea above is used, the title pages should necessarily be sparse, so larger pieces could be treated as style-definers and have various pieces trailing from them. Pic related has all/most of the current contenders listed in order of descending file size (which is a good proxy for length on-page, though it's not perfect*). From the top of the size-ordered list:
>Jibaku Parts 1&2 (010&011) [if they make it in, these together are the longest]
>The Only Computer Crime for Which Theologians are Consulted (011)
>Void (012)
>Suburbpunk (006)
>Honest Work (010)
>Burgerpunk Delivers (009)
>Shit-Eater Triptych (014)
>The Justice System (001)
Going loosely off these as nominal "chapter leaders", I'd hazard that there are already some fairly clear themes to group by.

Computer Crimes could be the starting piece for anything based heavily in internet reference or something distinctly inspired by 4chan or &amp, though it's a little dark for that category.

Suburbpunk and the Shit-tych could go together with the more "serious" pieces without fantastical elements.

The more absurd and abstract could include Void and Pinakes.

I have more ideas for pieces to include in these groups, but I'm going to shut up about it for now so I can get suggestions and keep the final order/form a bit of a surprise.


*Some pieces aren't fully picked up by the text recognition software, so a few of the smaller pieces are empty or incomplete; and this isn't a finalised list, so don't think these will all appear in the end (Crabomorphosis and the Alex Bienstock Pro Phile for pieces that are already out).

[Anonymous No.21209403]

how is this retarded thread not archived yet

[Anonymous No.21209429]

>>21209403
>he doesn't know how to sage
You can blame it on fags like you bumping it.

[Anonymous No.21209482]

>>21209429
thanks 4 teaching me 2 sage, faggot

clearly ur still posting this old ass shit cuz ur a loser, kek
all u lameass fags in here shld give up and get a life

[Anonymous No.21209509]

>>21209482
*hi-fives you*

[Anonymous No.21209527]

>>21209509
kek, i wouldnt touch ur unwashed neet hand

[Anonymous No.21210666]

bump

[Anonymous No.21210960]

>>21210666
based frogposter

[Anonymous No.21211003]

>>21209196
This is a solid list. No clue on how to group things, stories are all over the place except the burgerpunk pieces, which there are many.

>>21210666
Chrcked

[Anonymous No.21211088]

>>21210666
Which piece is this an illustration for?

[Anonymous No.21211097]

>>21210960
it looks like a toad. there used to be toads in my grandparents' backyard.

[Anonymous No.21211604]

>>21211088
Not best-of anon, but I meant it as an illustration for Bog Brother. Perhaps it could go at the end of the piece? But I think it looks a bit shitty, so if people think it should be scrapped then fair enough.

>>21210960
>>21211097
It’s a toad.

[Anonymous No.21211629]

Yes, I have a furry crocodile fetish. Yes, I post on "plebbit." Yes, I believe in science over God. Yes, I will say "I am that I am." You cannot stop us. Put this in your "Luxury Periodical": I'm erect right now.

[Anonymous No.21211793]

>>21211604
i like it. how about something like this? maybe a halftone/newsprint effect would help?

[Anonymous No.21211994]

The United States Penis Inspection Service
Register now at your nearest high school

[Anonymous No.21212025]

maybe spread the word on tiktok that there's this cool mag called &amp where you can read - for free - all these sekrid kewl e-literature, so the site can be taken down again

[Anonymous No.21212288]

>>21212025
too soon, anon, too soo

[Anonymous No.21212865]

>>21206238
Sad, but based

[Anonymous No.21213618]

&ump

[Anonymous No.21214257]

>>21211793
That looks a lot better. Maybe I’ll redo the original image with a similar effect just to see how it looks.

[Anonymous No.21214951]

>>21214257
that's how it looks. i redid the original

[Anonymous No.21215037]

>>21210666
>blurry copyrighted image
>>21211793
>low-res image of dubious origin
try harder

[Anonymous No.21215049]

>>21210666
>>21211793
>>21215037
>using copyrighted images of toads when Wikimedia has literally hundreds of sick frog illustrations
pathetic

[Anonymous No.21215052]

>>21215049

[Anonymous No.21215093]

>>21215049
It’s not copyrighted. It’s an edited stock photo.

[Anonymous No.21215096]

>>21215037
aren't these going to be really small on the page
>>21215049
wikimedia is great, but toads and frogs are different creatures. different genii. geni? genuses?

[Anonymous No.21215103]

>>21215096
it's genera. i'm a dumbass

[Anonymous No.21215110]

>>21215049
I used a toad because the story in question mentioned a toad specifically. I will concede that the frog x-ray is pretty sick

[Anonymous No.21215116]

>>21215093
If the best-of goes with &amp's usual public domain declaration, stock images can't go in. And I'd much rather have strictly "free" images over ones with convoluted copyrights that can't be easily tracked down.

[Anonymous No.21215143]

>>21215116
It’s an image from Canva so it’s fair game. Most of the images in &amp are taken straight from Canva

[Anonymous No.21215632]

>>21215049
People here just don't know a thing.

[Anonymous No.21216022]

not graphic-design anon, but here is a concept for The Only Computer Crime. what do you think? i want to do something like this but with an abstract depiction of the hell streams on the monitor

[Anonymous No.21216197]

>>21216022

[Anonymous No.21216487]

>>21162501
newfag here coming out of lurkmode to ask what the hell this is? Is this some graphic design passion project with focus on multiple anon’s writings?

[Anonymous No.21216560]

>>21216487
murk lore

[Anonymous No.21216805]

>>21216022
who is graphic-design anon?

[Anonymous No.21216833]

>>21216487
&amp was a magazine that took all of its submissions from /lit/ (and technically /p/), currently sitting at 14 issues (2 of which were photography-only) with a 15th that's become vaporwave. Everything submitted was published indiscriminately--no rejection or acceptance--meaning the issues gave a wide slice of the people making up /lit/. But it also meant that some pieces were way better/worse than others. (Though I found it interesting to read even the shitty or mediocre stuff.) I'm not the editor, but I contributed a number of times.

I figured it'd be good to take all of the best entries to &amp and collect them in a single volume. I dug through the archives for &amp discussions where people would mention their favourites, and a lot of anons have contributed their opinions either in threads or in the Google Doc above. The list feels pretty close to finished, so now the concerns are for editing, illustrations, and typesetting. Eventually there'll be a nice PDF of all of the best material that made it into &amp issues 001-014.

All of the old issues are up at lampbylit.com.

[Anonymous No.21216835]

>>21216805
this (>>21210666) anon

[Anonymous No.21216838]

>>21216833
>vaporwave
You mean vaporware?

[Anonymous No.21216847]

>>21216838
Fuck, yeah I do.

[Anonymous No.21216883]

>>21216847
thread just hit bump limit, anyone wanna make another?

[Anonymous No.21216918]

[Anonymous No.21217152]

>>21216883
Possible OP pic?

[Anonymous No.21217216]

>>21217152
Spacing was off, fixed it

[Anonymous No.21217256]

[Anonymous No.21217320]

>>21217256
https://um.pl.xo.b/001014

[Anonymous No.21217327]

>>21217256
This is an interesting design. I think that one of the best parts of the computer crimes story is that the reader is never fully exposed to the actual contents of the hell-streams. It creates a sense of dread and uncertainty because the disturbing elements are implied, not stated outright (though insinuated more towards the end), and that triggers the reader’s imagination. I think using a design like this with overtly disturbing and religious imagery is too on-the-nose for a title page, and might make the opening of the story less impactful.

[Anonymous No.21217344]

>>21217320
not gonna click that sketchy link

[Anonymous No.21217365]

>>21217320
don't even try that shit here man what the fuck??? mods???
>>21217344
checked.
based hell stream avoider

[Anonymous No.21217369]

>>21217256
Me scrolling through multiple images of Molly Bloom getting her big mommy milkers fucked by Blazes Boylan on a rule34 hentai forum

[Anonymous No.21217391]

>>21217369
don’t pollute this thread with your repugnant coomerism

[Anonymous No.21217421]

>>21217216
spacing still looks weird and its triggering my ocd