/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2310395]

Why do people think fantasy/sci-fi readers are escapist manchildren? Is it because the stories they read take place in an imaginary world? But isn't it the case with all fiction? Assuming a world is fictional and the author may fill it with whatever he wants, who cares whether it's a seemingly realistic world filled with hidden and not so hidden plot devices or a magical world with trolls? What's the difference, formally speaking? Should we conclude that every fiction reader is an escapist manchild?

[Anonymous No.2310414]

the readers of speculative fiction are in search of something to pass the time with.

so-called highbrow readers are concerned with the aesthetics of prose. while this could also be defined as escapism, it's an entirely different kind.

inb4 14 year olds who think they're clever because they know what 'subjective' means.

[Anonymous No.2310431]

>so-called highbrow readers are concerned with the aesthetics of prose

Does that mean they don't care about what the story tells but rather how it's told?

Pic unrelated obviously, it's Moby's Dick.

[Anonymous No.2310433]

>>2310414
Wait, when you say the aesthetics of prose, what exactly do you mean?

[Anonymous No.2310438]

>>2310414
Are you implying you can't have good prose with wizards and dragons?

[Anonymous No.2310447]

as a reader whose staple literature is fantasy and sci-fi I would just like to say that I am an escapist manchild

[Anonymous No.2310449]

>>2310414

[Anonymous No.2310452]

>hy do people think fantasy/sci-fi readers are escapist manchildren?
Because they're pretentious assholes who read for the sake of seeming intelligent, instead of for the sake of reading.
In short, /lit/.

[Anonymous No.2310451]

Here's what I've noticed:

1) A lot of science fiction has ideas dangerous to the establishment.
2) For the most part those supporting classic fiction and literature are entrenched in the university system.

It's not that long ago that speculative fiction was based in pulps and basically considered comic-book-mind-rot garbage--so if you're one of the folks in the "legit" reading camp you're going to do everything you can to protect your job / your worldview etc.

I mean according to R. Heinlein I should be gettin' with my clone sisters right now; imagine trying to bring even 5% of these ideas into real life and you'll see the potential for subversion is HUGE.

[Anonymous No.2310460]

>>2310414
What is the phrase "pass the time" supposed to mean? Aren't all pursuits done to "pass the time". Pass them with entertainment, fun, and enjoyment, but still passing the time. Unless you are asserting that fans of sci-fi and fantasy aren't as heavily invested in their books as readers of more realistic books. And if that is what you are asserting, then it simply isn't true.

[Anonymous No.2310467]

>>2310431
precisely

>>2310433
literally the aesthetics of prose

>>2310438
no, but the people who write about wizards and dragons rarely have the inclination to do good prose.

>>2310452
>they're not like me
>therefore they're pretending

all plebs are and say the same, no appreciation for beauty. why would you 'read for the sake of reading'? without a discerning taste and with only reading as an ultimate goal you might as well find a generator of random paragraphs and read literal nonsense until you die, since you're only 'reading to read'.

>>2310460
>What is the phrase "pass the time" supposed to mean?

use as disposable entertainment with blatant disregard to the aesthetics of the medium. 'reading for plot', i guess.

[Anonymous No.2310494]

>>2310467
>no appreciation for beauty
What do you mean by appreciation?
Beauty to what standards?

[` No.2310517]

>>2310494
>What do you mean by appreciation?

What is it with you people? I mean exactly the words I use.

>Beauty to what standards?

Human ones.

[Anonymous No.2310525]

Several reasons. While i wouldn't say that the genres are incapable of producing meritorious books they tend to produce middling little high-concept escapist crap. Its easier to generalize than it is to cherry pick anything good.

Second most of us read a lot of sci-fi and fantasy as kids and grew out of it into more fulfilling fare. So thus we see it is childish/manchildish stuff.

Finally so many of these people read only sci-fi and fantasy, which is just too narrow.

[Anonymous No.2310542]

>first post of thread not 'yes'

yes, op. to answer your question

[Anonymous No.2310622]

>>2310467
.all plebs are and say the same, no appreciation for beauty. why would you 'read for the sake of reading'? without a discerning taste and with only reading as an ultimate goal you might as well find a generator of random paragraphs and read literal nonsense until you die, since you're only 'reading to read'.
let's dissect this piece by piece
>all plebs are and say the same,
we're not on /mu/, you don't get to say pleb.
>no appreciation for beauty.
>implying there is a standard for beauty
seriously, this is basic shit right here
> why would you 'read for the sake of reading'?
for the love of the written word? for the love of stories, of learning about new places and characters, meeting heroes and villains and those in between, looking through the eyes of another for a short period of time to experience something wonderful? if you don't understand that feeling, then you're the ultimate idiot- an ape using words as a social tool to beat down others and make yourself feel superior, and you would be better off dead.
fuck the rest, it's clear you're another buffoon.

[Anonymous No.2310646]

>new places and characters, meeting heroes and villains and those in between, looking through the eyes of another for a short period of time to experience something wonderful
Confirmed for escapist manchild

[Anonymous No.2310654]

>>2310646
number one
>escapist
>bad
number two
>implying escapist = manchild
number three
>i ain't even mad
number four
>implying reading Tolstoy, Steinbeck, Dumas isn't immersing yourself in a story, equaling escapism

[` No.2310657]

>>2310622
>we're not on /mu/, you don't get to say pleb.
lol, our medium has been pissing on plebs for centuries behind music even got their golden age.

>implying there is a standard for beauty

there are many. anyway, whichever one you subscribe to is better than ignoring beauty altogether. i thought i'd placed my "inb4 14 year olds who think they're clever because they know what 'subjective' means" disclaimer there.

>for the love of the written word?

what? people like you don't feel anything towards the written word. we love prose because it can be beautiful, we love words so much we're willing to study apparent nonsense until it makes sense on six or seven different levels. someone who's shoving down 1000 pages of ASOIAF clearly has no love for the written word or if he does, he's putting it aside for the duration of the book.

>for the love of stories

that was my point. escapists don't love books as a medium, they love stories. they're very different things

>if you don't understand that feeling

i understand the feeling, i just don't care for it.

>an ape using words as a social tool to beat down others and make yourself feel superior, and you would be better off dead.
>say this while being an ape insulting people

im sorry i like beauty and that you find this threatening.

>fuck the rest, it's clear you're another buffoon.

because you had such insightful rebuttals to my previous statements, rite?

[Anonymous No.2310659]

>Is it because the stories they read take place in an imaginary world?
No, it's because most of those stories are so far removed from reality, common sense, and logic there's no way a normal person would identify with any of the characters or events of fantasy. Enjoying such stories would be like escaping to a world where the level of retardation matches that of the reader.

[Anonymous No.2310665]

>>2310657
>people like you don't feel anything towards the written word.
I'm sorry, just because I don't read books that have been approved by the people around me so that I seem cooler to myself doesn't mean I don't love the written word.
> we love words so much we're willing to study apparent nonsense until it makes sense on six or seven different levels.
using your logic, inkblots are the highest form of art
>. someone who's shoving down 1000 pages of ASOIAF clearly has no love for the written word or if he does, he's putting it aside for the duration of the book.
> escapists don't love books as a medium, they love stories. they're very different things
you seem to be implying that books are not a medium for stories. What are they for, then? Music? Pictures?
Prose is fine and beautiful and all that, you can circlejerk over it and I'll be fine with that; but try not to spit down on the people who enjoy books and writing instead of the feeling of having read books.

[Heraldry Anon No.2310671]

OP, you'll notice most people who dislike fantasy/sci-fi tend to be a bunch of pricks. (Not saying they all are, but a good number of them.)

I would recommend you adopt a more haters gonna hate attitude. Because trust me, nothing you say is going to change these peoples minds.

[Anonymous No.2310683]

>>2310657
I like both books as a medium and stories, and find the two are at their best in unison.

[Anonymous No.2310684]

>>2310683
Question: How do you have a book as a medium without transmitting a story?

[Anonymous No.2310697]

>>2310659
>>2310659
>>2310659
>>2310659
>>2310659
>>2310659
>>2310659

right here ladies and gents

[` No.2310700]

>>2310665
>I'm sorry, just because I don't read books that have been approved by the people around me so that I seem cooler to myself doesn't mean I don't love the written word.

no but the fact that you read things with obviously mediocre prose does.

>using your logic, inkblots are the highest form of art

by your logic, apparent nonsense is the same as literal nonsense. see why I doubt your love of words? you can't even read something you've yourself quoted

>What are they for, then?

prose or poesy, obviously. the plot is incidental. the same is true in pretty much every other dramatic medium, the beauty is almost never found in the stories themselves.

>but try not to spit down on the people who enjoy books and writing instead of the feeling of having read books.

you're so totally fine with prose that you still think you enjoy books more than we do, or that we fake our appreciation of beauty. well, no, it is you who do not enjoy books at all. you could replace the medium with a play or a movie and you would be perfectly fine with it as long as it followed the same story. you don't like books at all. you find them convenient but don't appreciate what separates them from other medium and cherish that which is common to all. don't pretend you've got any love for books. just go about your way and leave beauty to those who care.

[Anonymous No.2310721]

>>2310700
>it is you who do not enjoy books at all

oh i'm sorry, all this joy i've been having must not be real. christ kid, people like different things, move on with your life. deal with it.

you sound like a massive pretentious asshole

[Anonymous No.2310726]

>>2310700
> the plot is incidental.
so a string of beautiful, meaningless words is highest art?

[` No.2310727]

>>2310721
>move on

you're the one who originally replied to me.

>oh i'm sorry, all this joy i've been having must not be real

i'll take your post as a concession since you're clearly too retarded to understand words.

[Anonymous No.2310732]

Fantasy/sci-fi fans. If any literary types give you shit about the books you read, just respond with: "No it's okay, this is Magical Realism."

Works every time.

[Anonymous No.2310730]

>>2310727
>you're the one who originally replied to me.
wrong person, buck-o

[` No.2310733]

>>2310726
not all meaning is plot, a string of beautiful words without plot may be beautiful, but remember that i never said plot detracts of the beauty of words, it is equally possible to find a beautiful string of words that do contain plot. what I mean by plot is incidental is that the beauty of prose is not dependent on plot, not that plot's absence is an enhancement to prose.

[Anonymous No.2310740]

>>2310733

[Anonymous No.2310742]

>>2310740
unarguable refutation

[Anonymous No.2310746]

>>2310742

[Anonymous No.2310751]

>>2310746
a veritable intellectual tour-de-force

go back to /b/

[Anonymous No.2310754]

[Anonymous No.2310781]

>>2310754

[Anonymous No.2310812]

>>2310467

'herp derp I'm an English major and I've outgrown pleasure reading (how low-brow! More caviar book club friends?) because I'm so intellectual. Albert Camus is my favourite author because I'm such an enigma of apathy and intelligence.'

Get over yourself -- people read for fun, and to grow, which is incidentally the reason people write, too.

[Anonymous No.2310817]

>>2304996

[Anonymous No.2310828]

>>2310812
math major, and i said the difference lies in that some people take pleasure in the prose and some in the plot. those who appreciate beauty fall into the first and the escapists fall into the second. whether the appreciation of beauty as opposed to mere consumption of plot also falls within the definition of escapism is rather a matter of semantics. and why would an english major have a frenchman as a favourite author? why didn't he become a french major?

also, why do people that those who don't share their tastes literally don't have fun? i don't question the fact that you people take pleasure in stories.

[Anonymous No.2310838]

>>2310828
beauty is subjective.

[Anonymous No.2310837]

>>2310812
eww, I neither read nor write to "grow," and anyone who does is either stupid or a hack. Dat som new age bs rite there. Believe it or not there's a whole section of your local book store devoted to "growing," known as "Personal Growth." It's for the sort of person who watches Oprah and CSI: Miami. You are a pleb.

[Anonymous No.2310844]

>>2310837
This isn't /mu/, we're better than that here.

[Anonymous No.2310850]

>>2310837

Speak for yourself, but I definitely feel like a more well-rounded person after reading Crime and Punishment, which to me signifies growth.

Lol, pleb

[Anonymous No.2310864]

>>2310838
NO FUCKING SHIT. do I have to post the "inb4 14 year olds who think they're clever because they know what 'subjective' means| disclaimer every post? no one is saying there is a measurable amount of beauty in every sentence, or that we have a sure-fire method to distinguish beauty from uglyness. the fact that beauty is subjective doesn't mean we can't talk about it, or appreciate it or that it should be ignored.

god.

[Anonymous No.2310875]

>>2310864
yes, sir, just calm down a moment. you implied that only the prose contains any beauty and that there is none in the plot. as i said, its subjective. there may be none for you, but there will be for others. no need for hostility, friend.

[Anonymous No.2310898]

>>2310875
sorry. it's a particularly annoying thing to me when people pull out the subjective card. what I meant by beauty was the beauty inherent in the medium, which is that of the prose, while the beauty that may be found in plot (which i don't deny exists) is not particular to the medium and as such those who appreciate it over prose are less particularly into literature than those who appreciate the unique qualities of it, given that their interest shifts over a variety of media given that their main preference is shared between pretty much any medium.

that is in a nutshell the crux of high-brow vs. low-brow. the so-called high-brow care more for the aspects of literature that make it unique in regards to other media, while the so-called low-brow appreciate traits (that is, storytelling) that are shared between many media and so, in the eyes of the so-called high-brow, don't appreciate the medium as much as they do.

[Anonymous No.2310901]

>>2310395
Because those who read fantasy are manchildren but not *because* of reading fantasy, but because of arrested development. enjoying escapist fantasy is a symptom, not a cause.

While this is totally anecdotal, every fantasy fan I have met is socially inept. They read fantasy because it's an easy way to avoid the intricacies and nuances of every day social situations. There is no euphemistic language or subtle manipulation in fantasy - you cleave your enemies' heads from their bodies.

That being said, these very same neckbeards that I know also read sci-fi.

They read simply for pleasure and escape rather than any appreciation of the art. They want to be distracted from the world while they take the bus and ignore girls.

[Anonymous No.2310939]

>>2310898
I cant really think of any arguments to refute your points as they all seem pretty fair.

Good show, friend.

[Anonymous No.2310954]

>>2310726

[Anonymous No.2311016]

>>2310898
Certainly if you restrict your attention to "realistic" novels taking place in or around the present day, there isn't much to distinguish between the plots. Most of the basic plots were played out around about the 1930s. The only thing that can possibly distinguish them is the quality of the prose.
In contrast, with other genres there are other qualities that can distinguish one novel from another. The setting of A Game of Thrones is interesting because it has elements that echo elements of actual British history (York, Lancaster, Hadrian's Wall etc.). The reader is constantly wondering how, when and whether other elements of actual British history will come into the plot, and how that will illuminate actual British history. This is intellectually stimulating for some people.
Something similar could be said of Lord of the Rings. Tolkien disavowed any explicit allegory, but it's clear that a major theme is the renunciation of power that corrupts. Casting this theme in a fairy-tale setting with archetypal figures is a powerful way of reinforcing its universal meaning, as opposed to, say, exploring it in a "realistic" novel about a politician in a specific country becoming corrupted.

[Anonymous No.2311024]

>Why do people think fantasy/sci-fi readers are escapist manchildren?

because many of them are. ofc many of them are also intelligent and mature and totally cool, and of course science fiction and fantasy can have literary value and be really good, and there's no reason to dismiss fantasy and science fiction as escapist out of hand. but you also have to acknowledge that a lot of it sucks and a lot of fantasy and science fiction fans are annoying neckbeards.

[Anonymous No.2311039]

>>2310898
i basically agree with your critical stance but i think that there are works of fantasy and science fiction that stand up under close examination - there are works of science fiction and fantasy which do not derive their excellence entirely from plot... i actually think that LotR falls into this category, for reference.

>>2311016
just to add onto this, what tolkien meant when he said that his work was not "allegory" is that the characters and happenings of his work were not created in a one-to-one correspondence either with real historical events, or or with abstract concepts - it's not a roman a clef, and it's not an allegory in the way that pilgrim's progress is an allegory... it's an imaginative, literary, artistic creation.

[Anonymous No.2311046]

>>2311016
yes, of course, i don't deny that plots can distinguish a novel from another, what I was trying to express was that plots in and of themselves aren't particular or unique to literature, thus making their appreciation over the traits that are unique to prose and poesy seem like it's some kind of disregard of the medium as a mere tool for storytelling.

anyway if anyone wants to talk about writing or literature my email is on the email field. i gots to go. you're all very interesting people, by the way.

[Anonymous No.2311090]

"I like cakes. My favorite kind of cakes are chocolate. People who like vanilla are stupid, because all chocolate cakes are fantastic, and all vanilla cakes are poorly baked. If you like a vanilla cake, you must only like it for the frosting and decorations, because the cake part is always shit."

>this thread

[Anonymous No.2311691]

>>2311090
Very true. Plus the annoying "prose over plot" asshole.

[Anonymous No.2311710]

I'm starting to wonder what kind of fantasy/sci fi books /lit/ actually did like.

[Anonymous No.2311716]

>>2311691
like the guy who bumps shit threads is any better

[Anonymous No.2311727]

>>2311716
This is an excellent thread you little shitstain.
It accurately gauges the pretentiousness of /lit and I must say it is at an all time high.

And it seems that posts made by the "prose over plot" asshole have been deleted.

Interdasting.

[Anonymous No.2311729]

>>2311727
People who seriously use the word pretentious on /lit/ are as bad as tripfags.

[Anonymous No.2311741]

>>2311729
Let it just roll over your tongue - pretentious.
Like you.

[Anonymous No.2311745]

>>2311741
I'm the plebbiest of plebs, it is you people with your 'pretentious' vs. 'pleb' that shit up the board with dead-end meta-arguments about taste. You're the shit at the end of the barrel that just won't come off no matter how hard you scrape it. You are personally the reason why /lit/ is shit, and why it will never be anything more than shit.

[Anonymous No.2311756]

This is the first time I've visited /lit/. I usually lurk /mu/ but that's gone downhill.

Are there levels of fantasy/science fiction that are widely accepted on this board? For example: two books that I absolutely love are The Lord of the Rings and Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep.
Here's a picture of my (messy) bookshelf. Is it worth lurking /lit/ or will I just be called an escapist manchild?

[Anonymous No.2311759]

>>2311745
In order to facilitate meaningful communication between us, I will try to lower myself to your level.
I even included visual aids in this post, just for you.

U MAD BRO?
U MAD?

[Anonymous No.2311766]

>>2311756
>R A Salvatore

[Anonymous No.2311774]

Fantasy/Sci-Fi are alright as a time passer I guess, but if you think it's possible to get anything out of either other than some cheap enjoyment you're probably 17 years old or an escapist manchild.

[Anonymous No.2311776]

>>2311774

What fantasy/sci-fi have you read? Try to think of the "best" ones.

[Anonymous No.2311781]

>>2311776
Dune, LOTR, Asimov, tried some WoT and GRRM but they were rather tedious.

[Anonymous No.2311784]

>>2311774

>this nigga actually thinks all fantasy is shit like LoTR and all sci-fi is shit like Star Wars
>this nigga actually thinks sci-fi is about predicting shit for the fun of it

[Anonymous No.2311787]

>>2311781

Wow that is even more generic than I expected

[Anonymous No.2311792]

>>2311781
>>2311787
Please stop responding to trolls.

[Anonymous No.2312995]

>>2311792
this whole board is trolls

[Anonymous No.2312998]

>>2312995
Every board is all trolls. Why do people not realize this?

[Anonymous No.2314685]

there's nothing wrong with fantasy in principal, but the fact is most of it is shit. And I also have a problem with the (apparently pretty large) element of fantasy readers who _only_ read fantasy, because they tend to be massive anti-intellectual douches.