[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 91 KB, 667x1000, 61wubGbULDL._AC_UF1000,1000_QL80_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22849099 No.22849099 [Reply] [Original]

why isnt this more popular?

>> No.22849106

>>22849099
its not entertaining and provides almost no literary value

>> No.22849110

>>22849106
huh?

>> No.22849123

>>22849106
filtered

>> No.22849134

>>22849106
Line tier opinion

>> No.22849136

>>22849106
True!

>> No.22849137
File: 47 KB, 548x634, 16456203616112.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22849137

>>22849134

>> No.22849152

>>22849106
fpbp

>> No.22849184

>>22849099
Because I keep forgetting to read it and normies don't even know it exists.

>> No.22849628

>>22849099
I loved the animated adaptation https://youtu.be/avMX-Zft7K4?si=crKex32qS00fVYOz

>> No.22849850

>>22849099
It's popular among high-n-gons and circles. I propose we vote for it on the top 100.

>> No.22849867

Ham-fisted theme. Boring.

>> No.22849873

>>22849867
Are you a mathlet? It's actually a metaphysical novel. The social themes presented are just narrative dressing and aren't necessarily even satire.

>> No.22849883

>>22849873
It’s easy to say that when Euclidean geometry itself has endless potential applications to metaphysics depending on the person’s beliefs and biases. Despite that being the case, I doubt there are any “metaphysical themes” commonly believed to be in that book which are novel at all let alone groundbreaking.

>> No.22849918
File: 60 KB, 600x450, tell lies.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22849918

>>22849106
>not entertaining

>> No.22849921

why do we have a third spatial dimension? it's useless, it just complicates things

>> No.22850343

>>22849883
It's an account of non third-dimensional alien life. Is that not metaphysical enough for you?

>> No.22850371

>>22850343
Nothing in my post suggests that the problem with the work is that it’s not “metaphysical enough.”

>> No.22850608

>>22849099
It's not very well written, super sexist, and about obscure mathematics. It's surprising how well known it is.

>> No.22850621

>>22849099
Annotated edition is a must have if you are going to read it. I didn’t realize how much I was missing until I read that edition.

>> No.22850632

>>22850608
It has a mediocre animated movie adaptation which is how I believe most people who know about it are aware of it.

>> No.22850648

>>22850608
>not very well written
why do you say this?

>> No.22850656

>>22850632
I heard about it from physics books, which is what I'm studying at college. But when I tried to read, I was not impressed. I mean I'm on /pol/ sometimes so the sexism didn't bother me. But the story wasn't really enough of an improvement over just reading a summary.

>> No.22850661

>>22850608
>super sexist
Who cares, redditor. Like that's a flaw LOL

>> No.22850670

>>22849099
ok but this cover makes it look like an architecture book

>> No.22850671

>>22850656
>sexism
That's like one of the best parts?

>> No.22850689

>>22849099
Absolute kino book. Everyone should read it. It's hilarious AND entertaining AND captivates the imagination.

>> No.22850717

>>22850648
I tried reading it and didn't enjoy it? If a novel doesn't keep me engaged and coming back for more until the end, then it fails in its primary job, zero stars.

Explaining the math concepts in a fun way is one thing, but I don't need to read all that if it isn't fun. And it's not like I can't handle long, dense works, I've made it through Henry James and Proust. (Well Swann's way, I never did go back for the rest.)

>>22850661
>>22850671
I wasn't complaining. I was explaining why it isn't popular. Normalfags would get pissed if they read it.

>> No.22850839

>>22850717
Retard. Just because you get filtered by a work doesn't mean it's written poorly.

>> No.22850861

>>22850839
OP here, i think you need a modicum of abstract geometric thinking to visualise the worldbuilding and most people are unironically too low iq for that, grim

>> No.22850934

>>22849921
A false question. The three dimensions of space are a human construct. Space only exists in relative distance between forces and particles.

>> No.22850950

>>22850934
Then what makes Flatland actually different from our reality?

>> No.22850960

>>22849099
Children love it. Baby's first geometry lessons.

>> No.22850979
File: 566 KB, 476x477, 1668020838102043.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22850979

What I want to know is why there is no rule 34 of the square and the sphere anywhere on the internet. Not even any fanfiction attempt at figuring out how interdimensional fucking would work.

>> No.22851023

>>22850839
>>22850861
I can do the actual math for higher dimensions that the book is about. I'm the one getting a physics degree >>22850656 I just didn't like the story.

>> No.22851055
File: 1.98 MB, 250x375, 1703053794539911.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22851055

>Gateways to Higher Mathematics<
START with Edwin Abbott

CONTINUE to Charles Howard Hinton:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Howard_Hinton

PROCEED with Morris Kline (Loss of Certainty / History of Mathematics)

READ Poincare (Science and Hypothesis / The Value of Science / Science and Method)

SPEED through E.A. Burtt (The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science)

BE AGREED with Norwood Russell Hanson (Patterns of Discovery)

SUPERSEDE to Gerald Holton (The Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought)

ACCEDE to Amos Funkenstein (Theology and the Scientific Imagination)

CONCEDE to Howard Stein (Logos, Logic, and Logistike: Some Philosophical Remarks on the Nineteenth-Century Transformation of Mathematics)

SUCCEED with Husserl (Origin of Geometry / Crisis of the European Sciences)

SNEED with Jacob Klein (Greek Mathematical Thought and the Origins of Algebra)

HEED Wittgenstein (Philosophical Investigations / Remarks on the Foundations of Mathematics)

BE FREED by Ouspensky (Tertium Organum)

>> No.22851064

>>22850950
Nothing. That's why it's relatable.

>> No.22851070

>>22851055
>SNEED
what does it mean?

>> No.22851257
File: 86 KB, 800x450, flatland.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22851257

>>22849099
Reminder that the STEMcels that make up 90% of this book's modern readership don't even know what it's about.

>> No.22851289

>>22851257
kek

>> No.22851298

>>22851023
I wasn't talking about geometry when I said you're filtered. Not liking the story isn't enough justification to label the writing objectively poor. Either make a proper case for the deficiency of its prose or fuck off to reddit with that shit.
>>22851257
This meme is the opposite of the truth. The book is about shapes and reality. Abbott was a freemason. The majority of discussion in the humanities on the book is about the other stuff in this meme.

>> No.22851318

>>22849921
Dodging and jump attacks

>> No.22851323

>>22851298
Yes it is. That is the first and necessary requirement if a novel. A restaurant that does not nourish, fails as a restaurant. A novel that fails to be entertaining is a failure. Other failures, Great Gatsby, Wuthering Heights, The Hobbit.

>> No.22851324

>>22849099
It seems like a fun book. From what I heard the book is actually more about the social nonsense of its time then the metaphysical aspects of it and the metaphysical dimensional stuff is more of a backdrop to tell that story despite it being the reason why it’s known today. Maybe that’s why? Few people read it hoping it’ll focus heavily on the 2d stuff but instead it puts a lot of focus on the nuances of 1800s life probably behind layer(s) of metaphor or whatever else that makes the book irrelevant/a bit confusing and disappointing.

But again I never read the book so I could be completely wrong, I’ll probably read it at one point though it seems fun even if it doesn’t focus on the dimensional stuff as much as people would like

>> No.22851334

>>22850979
There probably is not specifically for the book but in general

>> No.22851346

>>22851324
it's super fun

>> No.22851718

>>22851323
Solipsistic retard. You made the leap from "I didn't enjoy this" to "this is not enjoyable" with no justification. That's what separates the thinking man from the braindead.

>> No.22852086

>>22851718
Aesthetics is always someone's opinion.
>"I don't enjoy this" to "this is not enjoyable"
are the same sentence but for the passive voice. The justification is, "I didn't enjoy it."

>> No.22852104

>>22849110
its not entertaining and provides almost no literary value, ergo, its not popular

>> No.22852134

>>22849134
kekagon

>> No.22852146
File: 47 KB, 511x159, creed of sneed.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22852146

>>22851070

>> No.22852161

>>22852086
>Aesthetics is always someone's opinion.
No.

>> No.22853257

bump

>> No.22854288
File: 62 KB, 600x661, 1688651828787259.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22854288

>>22849099
The concept was cool. I literally got bored to tears reading the first half. The second half was not as much of a slog, though. I'm open to the possibility that I am simply a retard, or too dependent on something to stimulate my ape brain.

>> No.22854299

>>22849099
I thought that said FINLAND

>> No.22854310
File: 127 KB, 900x900, 1637790784629.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22854310

>>22851334
I dare you to find one (1) scientifically accurate interdimensional sex story.

>> No.22854318

>>22851334
>>22854310
https://archiveofourown.org/tags/Flatland%20-%20Edwin%20A*d*%20Abbott/works
is this it?