[ 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: 807 KB, 1208x3896, 1354574393050.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3268414 No.3268414 [Reply] [Original]

What is more beautiful -- an incredible amount of detail and attention which very strongly expresses the intent of the author, or a more vague, minimalistic form of writing? Is it better to say something with more words or less words? Does explaining things too much stop the reader from thinking for themselves? Or does it help them understand a point of view?

>> No.3268419

You are not me

I am not you

>> No.3268421

>>3268419
What I am asking is /lit/'s opinion on minimalism in writing. Is it a good or bad thing? Does it have its place, or is it the sign of poor writing?

>> No.3268432

it's a thing that is

>> No.3268433

Where is Faulkner?

>> No.3268438

>>3268421

>Is it a sign of poor writing?

So, basically, what you're saying is you need everything spoon-fed to you like a babby?

>> No.3268442

that feel when no one on /lit/ will share their favorite passages of prose

>> No.3268443

>>3268438
Everyone does, until they can feed themselves. That's called learning.

>> No.3268444

>>3268438

No, I'm asking /lit/'s opinion on a writing style.
Why is it so hard to get an opinion out of /lit/?

>> No.3268447

>>3268444
because /lit/ doesn't believe anything

>> No.3268451

>>3268444
i don't have opinions i just take the opposite position and see what happens

>> No.3268543

The best way to write prose is both. A good writer knows when to keep it minimalistic and when to expand greatly. That is one of the defining, shallow differences which are easily spottable between good vs bad writers.

>> No.3269366

>>3268447
>>3268451
That's a little depressing.

>> No.3269389

titan tier is more like troll tier

replace that with tolstoy and then maybe you're on to something.

>> No.3269409

>>3268543
Not OP, but are there general rules for when it is best to use one or the other? Or is it more of an intuition thing that comes with experience.

Phrased differently, are there moments when you like to see one used more than the other?

>> No.3269695
File: 727 KB, 1208x3504, Litcore.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3269695

Posting accurate version.

>> No.3269699

>>3269695
it is really depressing how many posts you see treating !!!BOOKS!!! as if it amounts to the authors on that list, and the more skilled you are the higher you climb

fuck guys i just finished nabokov's ada and i'm ready for ulysses, i even technically acknowledged literature outside /lit/hipstercore long enough to read a spark's notes version of the odyssey in preparation. when do you think i'll be ready for pynchon??

>> No.3269717

>>3268414

Nabokov belongs in titan tier, and I won't hear otherwise.

>> No.3269721

>>3269699
are you retarded or am i lacking reading comprehension?
it's both

>> No.3269723

>>3268433

This.

>> No.3269727

>>3269699
Brofist, anon. I'm also starting Ulysses within a couple of days. Did you read Hamlet before it? How about other Joyce works?

>> No.3269729
File: 16 KB, 442x555, Victor Hugo.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3269729

Where is he?

>> No.3269745

So, let me get this straight you guys don't like Atlas Shrugged?

>> No.3269760

>>3269745
We pretend to hate it. It's to prevent newfags from contaminating the Rand fandom.

>> No.3269763

>>3269745

It's pretty awful, though it's no We The Living

>> No.3269848

>>3268433
where is Burroughs??

>> No.3269858

>>3269848

Intentionally absent.

>> No.3269864

>>3269729
No Romance authors aloud.

Duh.

>> No.3269879

>>3269729

No Romantic stoners allowed

>> No.3269884

>>3269864
>aloud

Goddammit, I need to be put down like a fucking dog.

>> No.3269909

why in fack is stan tier polluted with that jewess mongoloid whoreskang cunt? what raisin for putting that rotting twat, i never approved of this.

as to op, i think minimalism (and i think of bert camels, tao lin, and that retarded polish drunk when i think of minimalism) only appeals to the autist and prole, as they cannot appreciate or grasp eloquence. this is of course to be differentiated with minimalism regarding plot (such as Beckett's works for example) which most often is elevated by the suberb prose and style.

>> No.3269912

>>3269884
why are you being so mean. i didn't reallize it was such a doggy dog world on /lit/

>> No.3269915

>>3269912
Don't take good grammar for granite.

>> No.3269917

>>3269912

>doggy dog

you should of thought about this before writing it, you sound like an idiot

>> No.3269920

>>3269917
what? for all intense and purposes i did think about it.

>> No.3269923

>an incredible amount of detail and attention which very strongly expresses the intent of the author
So basically thinking that the reader is too stupid to read between the lines

>more vague, minimalistic form of writing
Giving the freedom to think

>> No.3269930

>Borges above Kafka

This is how we know whoever made that image hadn't actually read the authors.

>> No.3269931

>>3269917
Are you playing doubles advocate Satan?

>> No.3269933

>>3269920
>for all intense and purposes

I always thought it was 'for all intensive purposes.'

>> No.3269938

>>3269933
Sometimes you've got to turn a blonde eye to these things and stop putting you own ideas on a petal stool.

>> No.3269945

>>3269933
>>3269933

it would be a blessing in the skies for you to end your life with bob wire

>> No.3269949

>>3269930

he should be above kafka.

what i can't understand is camus not being next to tao lin

>> No.3269967

>>3269949

Borges was a notch above a pulp writer. Not that guy.

>> No.3269968

>>3269949

>putting the student above the master

Borges is good and all, but Kafka he ain't.

>> No.3269986

>>3269967

you dont know what youre talking about. i mean you could have levied that usual attack against him, something along the lines of "herp derp beyond the obscurantist involution and random references borges isnt saying anything about anything (which is in some sense, true)", but pulp? have you read borges and/or do know what pulp is?

>> No.3270068

>>3269968

>implying aristotle didnt surpass plato
>implying freddy didnt surpass schop
>implying mill didnt surpass bentham
>imp sartre didnt surpass heidegger

seriously hope progerian.jpg

>> No.3270105

santa is the best poster on this board

>> No.3270114

>>3270068

>Aristotle surpassing Plato
>Sartre surpassing Heidegger

You were trolling here, right?

>> No.3270133
File: 119 KB, 736x689, is this guy serious.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3270133

>>3270068
>>>imp sartre didnt surpass heidegger

>> No.3270147

>>3270068
>implying aristotle didnt surpass plato

no sates what are you doing

>> No.3270156

>>3270105

3rd worst poster itt

>> No.3270172

>>3270105
lol

>> No.3270570

>>3270068

>being this terrible at interpreting a post

satan, you truly are a supreme shitposter

>> No.3270623

>Does explaining things too much stop the reader from thinking for themselves?
Of course it does. It's a keystone of high school-tier /lit/. It coddles the reader, teaches them it's okay to be spoon-fed every subtlety. It's just preachy, pedantic, and utterly unnecessary.

>> No.3270661
File: 833 KB, 200x150, 1353085848392.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3270661

>foster wallace

>titan tier

>> No.3270681 [DELETED] 

>>3270114


he made an inane claim, resting the weight of his argument on some rudimentary disctinction between students and their masters, the former as being inferior to their latter (in virtue of said relationship alone) and i, continuing in the inane method of his post, told him that in many instances the student surpasses the teacher.

so what, then, you twattening cunt, did i misinterpret exactly?

>>3270156

who are the first and second worst?

>> No.3270695 [DELETED] 

>>3270681

niggerfucking to the* latter

>> No.3270748

>>3270570


he made an inane claim, resting the weight of his argument on some rudimentary disctinction between students and their masters, the former as being inferior to the latter (in virtue of said relationship alone) and i, continuing in the inane method of his post, told him that in many instances the student surpasses the teacher.

so what, then, you twattening cunt, did i misinterpret exactly?

>>3270156

who are the first and second worst?

>> No.3270755

Why do you guys hate Tao Lin?

>> No.3270760

>>3270755

I maintain a state of placid indifference to him. No hate.

>> No.3270779

>satan being a massive shitcunt again

Give it a rest bro you're already the saddest figure on this board and no one is challenging you for that title so stop feeling like you need to defend it all the time.

>> No.3270808

>>3270779

>constantly responding to a tripfag you 'hate', following him around threads like a little faggot dog, hoping to get his attention through obnoxious barks.

why are you secretly in love with me and I'm the greatest hth

doesn't that rank you

>> No.3270810

Seems legit except for the parts where it's wrong
>George Orwell
>Prometheus tier

>David Wong
>Human tier

>> No.3270816

>>3270810
>Straight from Demigod to Demon tier
Oh /lit/, how I love your polarization.

>> No.3270837

>>3270808
you were never d&e
you were never even caracalla- or bb-tier

>> No.3270864

>>3270837

>you were never d&e
>you were never even caracalla- or bb-tier

>comparing me to /lit/'s 40 year old vigin, some autistic homeschooled shut in, and some inconsequential teenager who used this board as his social networking site.

i better not be in their tiers lele

>> No.3270899

>>3270864
lel i thought you were a virgin shutin too

>> No.3270948

>>3270899

Ah, but DONT YOU KNOW? HE's THE "ADONIS INCARNATE" SUPER BADASS REVOLUTIONARY INTELLECTUAL DRUG ADDICT UBERMENSCH SUPER DUPER WHITE POWER MASTER RACE AWESOMENESS! YOU MEAN TO TELL ME YOU'VE MISSED HIS MASTURBATING RANTS? DO YOU EVEN /lit/?

I did it for you Stan so you didn't have to.And if you just dropped that trip, everything would be better for us all.

>> No.3270974

no mention of vonnegut in a discussion of minimalist aesthetics. Damn, I must be an idiot or something.

>> No.3270987

>Vladimir Nabokov
>Below Pynchon

I don't usually care about these lists, but you have to put Pynchon and Nabokov together. I don't care if you put them together in a shit-tier category.

They clearly got together at Cornell and went around listening to girls' conversations on buses. There is no other way.

>> No.3271354

>>3270816
Nigga I think you be trippin

>> No.3271456

>>3270974
that's because vonnegut isn't that good