Explain to someone from /v/ why novels like Harry Potter or Game of Thrones are bad. Please.

File: 59 KB, 455x451, 1311589769340.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:18:40 2013 No.3412990 [Reply] [Original]

Explain to someone from /v/ why novels like Harry Potter or Game of Thrones are bad.

Please.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:21:27 2013 No.3413000 They're not, it's just that they're babbys first book. It's like the Skyrim or Uncharted of video games.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:23:14 2013 No.3413006 tell them they're the angry birds of literature.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:23:29 2013 No.3413007 It's the intent OP. The intent.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:23:44 2013 No.3413008 File: 4 KB, 188x212, 1317157817887.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] but I liked HP

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:24:14 2013 No.3413010 >>3413006 This is actually a pretty great analogy.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:24:14 2013 No.3413011 you wouldn't get it, you're only accustomed to media that's designed to pander and market well to huge demographics. i'm not being mean, but if /v/ is all you do, we have no common point of reference other than the tired "hamburger/steak" dichotomy.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:25:16 2013 No.3413014 File: 48 KB, 256x315, Dark_Souls_Cover_Art[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3413011 >implying

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:26:01 2013 No.3413017 >>3413014 Jesus christ get out.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:26:01 2013 No.3413019 >>3413018 But I thought the plot was the important element in a story?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:26:31 2013 No.3413018 Because they don't have a creative grasp of language and they're fully reliant on plot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:27:03 2013 No.3413022 >>3413019 because you're a pleb from /v/?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:27:33 2013 No.3413021 >>3413014 >implying implications The point still stands. Being difficult doesn't make it different, it's almost one of the most popular games at the moment.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:31:51 2013 No.3413028 >>3413000 I have a hard time seeing Game of Thrones as "babbys first book," The series is pretty solid, although the latest book was probably the worst so far.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:32:21 2013 No.3413029 is the giant man Hagroid supposed to be a pedophile? because i think that should not be in a children book.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:33:06 2013 No.3413031 >/lit/ hates harry potter >you all read the fuck out of the books when you were younger and loved them MUH TASTE filthy hipsters

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:33:22 2013 No.3413033

>>3412990
Harry Potter is well written for a series of children's books. Alone, however, they do not have any real messages or skillful prose. I liked them, but then again I finished the last book at twelve. They're hugely overrated, because people like to hop on the pop-culture bandwagon.

I, however am 2edgy4dat.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:34:07 2013 No.3413035

>>3413022
Don't listen to this fool.

Plot is central when judging the merit of a good book. However, it just one of the factors that you judge a book from. Othere are underlying themes, prose or even prosody.

This anon have gone blind in his obsession to rise above the rest, so he has forgotten that reading is a passion and that fun is allowed as well.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:35:38 2013 No.3413037 I don't think they're bad, it's just that they're too superficial and don't have any deeper meaning. It's okay if hardcorely into books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:36:24 2013 No.3413041 >>3413037 >if not*

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:42:28 2013 No.3413053 harry potter is for kids and game of thrones is just standard fantasy. doesn't mean they're bad, just not worth the time of an adult reader who is interested in neither children's books or fantasy.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:45:13 2013 No.3413066 Here's an essay written just for you, OP. http://hicsuntleones.deviantart.co#/d2on4cj

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:45:29 2013 No.3413068

>>3413053

You might think this is harmless fantasy, until you realize that every young Harry Potter fan with a troubled home life spends his or her days waiting up for goblins to carry them off to a land where wizards don't come home drunk and yell at witches all night.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:48:31 2013 No.3413080 >>3413068 >implying all Harry Potter readers have autism

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:54:51 2013 No.3413100

They're not bad, they're just not the kind of thing that people here generally prefer to read. The idiots who run headlong into ASOIAF/HP threads with their sages and adolescent elitism are what's known around here as 'shitposters' and should be ignored.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:55:35 2013 No.3413103 >>3413031 /lit/ doesn't hate Harry Potter, allot of people acknowledge that they enjoyed them when they first came out. Guess what though? Tastes develop, it's a process.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 14:55:50 2013 No.3413108 >>3413068 >that feel

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:01:55 2013 No.3413133 Harry Potter are good children's books but they're children's books. You know those people who are adults yet will watch nothing but Pixar and Disney? Those are the film equivalents of adults who read little beyond books like Harry potter.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:02:55 2013 No.3413140

They are formulaic.

That means that if you don't mind, you'll like it. If you are tired of that formula and can see through it, it will just bore you to tears. Prose is not compelling enough if you want something more.

Honestly, that's all there is to it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:04:41 2013 No.3413149 >>3413140 >They are formulaic. You haven't read ASOIAF.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:07:14 2013 No.3413160 >>3413149 I watched the TV show. inb4 /lit/ and Aes. Rock made me 2edgy4tv

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:09:45 2013 No.3413170

>>3413149
Really bro they are, the characterization is very formulaic and settings are pretty standard for fantasy worlds.
The plot twists and turns a bit but so do detective dramas on tv.
They're fun and easy reads nothing more, accept this an move on with your life.
Don't want to do that? Write a paper on them then.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:10:16 2013 No.3413172 >>3413160 the TV show is not a great adaptation. Even so, did you find Ned's beheading, for instance, predictable or formulaic?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:12:17 2013 No.3413177 >>3413170 >the characterization is very formulaic Apart from perhaps the Stark children I would disagree with that. You don't get characters as complex and polarising as Stannis or Jaime in your run-of-the-mill genre fiction.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:16:20 2013 No.3413193

>>3413172
>>3413177
(me again)

For the record I am not arguing that it is a great or important work of literary fiction, I just think that it is top tier genre fic, with a lot more to it than your average fantasy series and indeed most of the good ones, too.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:16:35 2013 No.3413195 File: 574 KB, 295x221, 1358222911330.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3413177 >>3413177 >You don't get characters as complex and polarising [...] Jaime

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:18:51 2013 No.3413202 >>3413195 You're the guy who has only watched the TV series, aren't you?

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:20:06 2013 No.3413205
File: 90 KB, 705x607, 1356626376481.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>tfw my drawing class professor is a god at drawing
>but praises Harry Potter as the best book ever
>likes The Avengers
>and The Police
>Mocks me for not having seen The Godfather
>Hasn't seen STALKER by Tarkovsky
>No one in class has even one bit of taste apart from the mainstream so they mock me too

Is this what being a patrician feels like? ;_;

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:20:06 2013 No.3413207 >>3413202 I haven't watched it either. I'd probably like it as a television series but because I hate the novels so much I've avoided it so far.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:21:07 2013 No.3413211 >>3413177 I stand by it, they may be better developed than other genre fiction characters but they're still a long way off literary fiction. Jamie is just a poor man's Byronic hero, giving a formulaic template from which to work from.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:21:23 2013 No.3413212 >>3412990 Board cynicism and general pretentiousness. As in, what pretentiousness actually means, not whatever the hell people think it means these days.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:21:53 2013 No.3413213 >>3413202 no, i'm the guy who has a lot of reaction images. >omg he got his hand cut off!! >and he stopped being such an asshole!! >OMG SO COMPLEX

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:22:38 2013 No.3413216 >>3413205 no, a true patrician would have seen the godfather. if you haven't but have watched tarkovsky, you're just a tryhard.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:23:39 2013 No.3413218 >>3413202 I'm that guy, and I have the first two books. I just have about a dozen other books I wan't to finish first, and I read slower than a retarded sloth.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:26:13 2013 No.3413226 >>3413218 Well, he gets more interesting from SoS onwards, when he becomes a POV character. I didn't think much of him prior to that point and now he's one of my favourites.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:30:03 2013 No.3413239 >>3413205 What's wrong with The Police and The Godfather? I don't love The Police, and I didn't get The Godfather, but I still understand why others would like them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:31:20 2013 No.3413242 >>3413068 But wizards do come home and yell at witches.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:36:29 2013 No.3413259 >>3413205 A true patrician can relate to the common man as well as the intellectual.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:42:22 2013 No.3413289

I smirk at all the "taste evolves" and "the language is too simple" post. Is writing not used by the competent to purely transmit ideas, sights, sounds, smells, feelings, information, from one mind to another? Does language not become hollow when used for the sake of writing, when you forget about the goal and focuses on a extravagant journey? When you try to bankrupt our language when trying to find synonyms and idioms to impress with your OH so amazing writing skill?

Threads like these may be evidence that our imaginations dimish as we age. See how people now disregards something they once loved because they are now "evolved", I say we might not have evolved but rather devolved. Look at the simple style of Harry Potter, it was once good enough, It did the job of putting us in Harry's place. It sparked our imaginations, we started to fantasize about the caslte and the magic and the people. We were building, imagining, creating. The story evolved in our imagination because it was so easy to trigger.

But no more, it is harder now a days. We need MORE adverbs, MORE expressions, MORE similies, MORE idioms, MORE words and LONGER sentences. Our imagination may have settled down, it is no longer on a hyper active run every time a small catalyst comes a long.

I guess I miss it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:44:53 2013 No.3413303 File: 26 KB, 462x320, 1331840545296.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3413289 Sadly this is true

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:45:23 2013 No.3413306 >>3413205 Try "hipster"

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:46:39 2013 No.3413310

>>3413289
>Is writing not used by the competent to purely transmit

nope

>Does language not become hollow when used for the sake of writing

nope

> We need MORE adverbs, MORE expressions, MORE similies, MORE idioms, MORE words and LONGER sentences

you're an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:50:43 2013 No.3413331 Harry Potter does not impart any philosophical, linguistic or avant-garde ideas whereas most of the literature on /lit/ does to a greater extent.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:51:28 2013 No.3413337 >>3413031 Who's hating HP? Be serious, man.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:56:02 2013 No.3413361

>>3413289
There are a few things in your post that are just not true, you have an erroneous view of what it is all about and being prejudicial, much like one can be against Harry Potter.

First, writing is not to "purely transmit" because it was never about that, not with genre fiction nor with anything else. The words are not the things, the way you say it IS what you are saying, the author is not just mentioning stuff, he is inventing them and convincing you.

Second, "writing for the sake of writing" and "extravagant journey" is not what the opposite of genre ficiton is about. Do not confuse good prose with purple prose, or as if it was pure decoration. It is exactly because they realized that the prose is not just the decoration that they put an effort to make it better. It's not about rambling, it's not about those MORE things you pit it.

Third, some people talk about "evolve", though I don't see it that way. But I find it funny that you've chosen that world. Isn't the great mistake to confuse evolution for progress? To be more evolved here is not condescending or superior, it just means people adapt themselves to different things as they read and live more and more.

Imagination did not settle down, bro.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:56:46 2013 No.3413360

Maybe I shouldn't judge /lit/ based on just this thread and whatever random posts I saw scrolling down the front page, but from what I've seen, you guys are arse holes. I assumed that a common interest in literature would dispel a little of this "hurr durr we r anoon" edgy crap, and while, yes, some of you seem reasonable and balanced, most of you sound like teenagers. Angry teenagers who think reading above other people puts them in first place because they're intellectual.

Intellectualism isn't supposed to be smug. You people are a disgrace to academia and I'm not coming back.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 15:57:16 2013 No.3413363

>>3413289
But there was nothing of value in Harry Potter, it just has basic morals that you'd hope kids pick up from their environment anyway( although in today's society, who knows?). It really did seem great back the, because we really didn't know much about literature. We didn't use to care if we learnt anything; but now we do. If we just kept reading Harry Potter and the like, we wouldn't advance as people.

Varying your language makes your writing more appealing to children and adults alike, and it helps diversify the English language by reminding readers of these words' existence. No one who knows shit about literature thinks "longer sentences = better story", that makes no sense. Also, similes are rarely used; metaphors read much better.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:02:21 2013 No.3413377

Harry Potter sucks, its literary merits are a sham. When you look at the Rowling's series closer it does not hold up to the hype and celebration it receives. It's uninteresting, unoriginal and written primarily to flatter the ego. There is absolutely nothing in the Harry Potter books that merit any praise or literary merit.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:05:06 2013 No.3413386 >>3413289 This is true for most artforms. Thos that enjoy specific pieces purely because they are "hard to make/do" always sounds like idiots. >Oh you don't like Radiohead because there are no unnesecarily difficult guitar solos, good on you.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:06:23 2013 No.3413390

>>3413360
>most of you sound like teenagers. Angry teenagers who think reading above other people puts them in first place because they're intellectual.

Why do you say that? How can you conclude it from this thread? What are the posts that made you think that way? Was that when people say that HP and GoT aren't that good? What's so wrong about it?
No one is saying that those series are bad, but don't get your feelings hurt because people don't say what you want to hear.

I hate posts like this, fuck. Stop feeling attacked when someone says something you don't like.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:06:53 2013 No.3413392 >>3413386 B-but I like Radiohead

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:14:28 2013 No.3413418 >Explain to someone from /v/ POO BAD! B-AA-D! NO TOUCH PO-POO!

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:15:29 2013 No.3413422 >>3413360 exactly

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:16:59 2013 No.3413423

>>3413377
It's a good children's series, that's all. No serious critics claim it's anything else. The hype is just people wanting to be happy. If LOVING Harry Potter for no other other reason than it being "THE BEST SERIES EVER!!!" makes them happy, then why not let them?

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:24:20 2013 No.3413451

>>3413361
I still think writing , like almost all other artforms, is about transmition. You have propably just mistaken what I meant, I never meant that using more colourfull describtions beyond the most basic. As long as the words are not needlessly added to "disguise" the text as something beyond the transmition.

Harry Potter is great in the way that it is made with the knowledge that its target group have a much wilder imagination and that it therefore does not NEED the massive describtors that clog up a piece of litterature that was fine the whole time.

It seems you think I meant that any more than "the sky was blue" is a waste of space and time, I do not. If it is relevant to the mental picture you're trying to project then all might to you. But when the piece's greatest strenght is the ability to kickstart imaginations then the number of words and long sentences (which seems like the things that a lot of people believe it is "high litterature") becomes obsolete and sometimes even damaging.

My point is that it is silly to attack a piece written for sparckly imaginations on it's writing style, when that writing style fits the genre perfectly.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:30:24 2013 No.3413466

>>3413363

I don't know about you, but I was truly inspired by those books, suddenly I WAS a wazard in a cool castle. Same thing with Star Wars. It's escapism, I know, but isn't that a genre by itself? is stories with more or less simple language not perfect for those who just wish to enter dreamland where wands and star fighters are real?

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:34:12 2013 No.3413484

>>3413451
You still don't get it! No one even considers the number of words or the length of sentences, unless of course the sentences do drag on, which we hate. There's nothing we despise more than purple prose, or disguising the text, as you put it. This is easily identified and frowned upon to say the least.

No one is attacking Harry Potter for its' imagination or its' writing style, but calling it a "fine piece of literature" is a disgrace to the art. It's a children's book, and its' simple language is fitting for such a book. This does however mean that it cannot be compared to true, literal greats, and it is this that angers us. People saying Harry Potter is great; that it's the best; that it has quality, when it doesn't. It's a children's story, and it should not be considered anything more.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:35:43 2013 No.3413486 >>3413466 How could you "be a wazard"? It's written in the third person past tense: the least personal narrative style there is.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:36:27 2013 No.3413490 >>3413451 >like almost all other artforms i just want you to know, i think you're a moron. and i suspect possibly a teenager.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:38:15 2013 No.3413496

>>3413451
No, no, no, that's not what I meant at all. I'm telling you that you are attacking "nothing".

It's not about adding words, making it longer, "disguise", say more than the necessary or have more or less imagination, it's not about any of that at all!

The thing that other writers are trying to transmit is different, they are building a different "mental picture". If you have a paragraph talking about the sky is not because the author is trying to describe it, nor because he wants to fluff it up with fancy words, you'll realize it was never about the sky in the first place, but about something else that he associates with the sky. It demands more imagination, in a way.

>the number of words and long sentences (which seems like the things that a lot of people believe it is "high litterature")
It was never about this. Never. That's not "high literature" in any sense of the term.

What you're saying is incredibly simplistic.

And I'm not attacking Harry Potter. You're attacking people for enjoying something other than Harry Potter, claiming they have less imagination and that you lose this as you get older. It's not like that, you just get interested in different things, naturally, without forcing, without trying, without having to prove to anyone. You imagine other things, you access other ways of thinking and that is nor better or worse than liking Harry Potter, it just naturally comes. Much like there is no use in making a war between adults and children.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:43:48 2013 No.3413522 >>3413484 >its' no apostrophe.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 16:45:04 2013 No.3413525 >>3413289 I'm usually annoyed by the use of the word pleb, but these are truly the words of a pleb. I don't even need to explain myself as I'm sure most of you know what's wrong with this post.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 17:05:30 2013 No.3413578 /lit/ is not one entity, /lit/ doesn't share opinions. There's no consensus on anything here most of the time. I don't understand how people don't get that and base opinions of it. If you're one of those people, please stop.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 17:26:59 2013 No.3413638 >>3413578 >wat is hive mind /lit/ disagrees on the little things, but most major disagreements are caused by our e/lit/ism, and our edgy desire to be unique. All in all, most of us share most opinions, such as disliking ASOIAF and Toweling.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 17:37:25 2013 No.3413667 File: 116 KB, 480x360, smug.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw I detest reading genre fiction because it's not intellectually stimulating enough

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 17:51:53 2013 No.3413707 File: 71 KB, 448x473, n503ae0b05a291.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >because

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:09:21 2013 No.3413766

>>3413289

>Is writing not used by the competent to purely transmit ideas, sights, sounds, smells, feelings, information, from one mind to another?

No, it's not. What in the world made you believe that?

>rest of the post is baseless generalizations

Would you please stop that?

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:14:53 2013 No.3413782

>>3413451

>clog up a piece of literature that was fine the whole time

So the piece of literature is some kind of platonic text that exists outside time and space? That doesn't sound very compelling to me. Isn't the work the sum of syntax and semantics conceived aesthetically?

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:22:44 2013 No.3413812

Hey dudes, I'm writing a Harry Potter fanfic. What do you think?

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8897631/Tom-Riddle-s-Tale

Basically, the challenge is to use hermeneutic interpretations to make Voldermort not a psycho. I think it's kinda impossible, but fun.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:24:45 2013 No.3413821

>>3413011
so you're saying there are no video games that someone created with an intent other than to "pander and market well to huge demographics?"

although most devs probably do that, some actually approach game design artistically.

like you said though, i can't list games as we have no common reference.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:29:20 2013 No.3413834 >>3412990 My dad didn't let me read Harry Potter because it had witchcraft in it. Well, look at me now, dad. Look at the pseudo-intellectual you created.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:37:16 2013 No.3413860

do books always need to have a message and/or impressive vocabulary and style to appeal to a mature taste?

i enjoy Alan Watts' works, as they really make me think about the nature of my self and everything around me. these fall in the "works with a message" category.

i also enjoy harry potter/eragon and such, as they show me the authors creativity in, for lack of a better term, creating a fantastical realm, plot, and characters for me to get immersed in. if done well, i sort of leave reality and get lost in the world the author single-handedly created; living vicariously through the characters.

when the story ends, i didn't learn any message, but i sure as hell loved the experience the book brought me.

but yeah OP whether are not they're bad is up for you to decide.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 18:56:59 2013 No.3413924 >>3413812 Pretty good. You could definitely use some polish though.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 21:01:27 2013 No.3414301 >>3413451 What the fuck is "transmition"?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 21:05:14 2013 No.3414313 >>3413860 >>do books always need to have a message and/or impressive vocabulary and style to appeal to a mature taste? This. At least the message thing. The search for a message is bane on literature. Really.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 21:55:49 2013 No.3414426

>>3412990
>harry potter or game of thrones

That's retarded, that's like saying 'moves like teletubbies or die hard'
They aren't at all comparable. That said, harry potter is a good childrens book, and game of thrones is a fine low fantasy book. /lit/ is being a faggot

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 21:57:05 2013 No.3414434 >>3413006 >>3413000 I don't get that. I enjoyed ASOIAF a fair bit, and I'm pretty damn far from entry leveru

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:00:07 2013 No.3414436 >>3413029 Is Hagroid the fucktard that can only say "Hagroid"?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:08:12 2013 No.3414470 They aren't. >MUH PROSE >MUH SERIOUS LITERATURE

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:11:58 2013 No.3414483 >>3414426 Harry Potter, especially the later books is some extremely good literature. It's well written, and while it's not on the level of GoT in certain ways, I can bet you that 100 years from now, it will still be relevant and considered good lit.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:16:47 2013 No.3414496

>>3413033
You really can't read if you actually think that Harry Potter doesn't have any real messages.

Power corrupts,Mortality, Female on Male rape, Racism,elitism, child soilders, even heroes can be fallible, love is something that needs to be understood, the list really goes on.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:20:05 2013 No.3414506

>>3413211
if you're going to go that route, every stock character EVER, which amounts to the greater sum total of all literature is formulaic. All literature is in some way derivative of previous works or experiences.

What is the difference between Odysseus, and his hubris and his journey and encounters with magic and monsters that is different from Harry Potter? In the end, nothing but peoples perceptions of it.

inb4 lol Odysseus

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:21:50 2013 No.3414512 >>3413213 stop trolling so gently, nobody is going to take that bait.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:26:39 2013 No.3414528

>>3413484
Yeah, Alice in Wonderland is a children's story, Grimm's Fairytales are children's stories, a host of literature, from catcher in the rye on up to Harry potter have been written for children or teens. That has nothing to do with the pretentious notion that "children's literature" somehow can never amount to "literary greats.

You sound like the kind of person that can't accept that literature is broader than your idea of what literature is.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:29:11 2013 No.3414533 File: 80 KB, 688x514, I AM THE SUN.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3413418 Say that to may face bitch nigger.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:33:58 2013 No.3414542

I've never read HP. My girlfriend keeps trying to get me to, but I keep refusing. I never have read anything that is not literature. I swear to you, the first book I read for fun was Anna Karenina. Perhaps, when I was 10 or so, I read some kids books, but usually I would forget about them, and I really never read much. When I started reading, it was for education and enjoyment.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:41:19 2013 No.3414564 >>3413035 >Plot is central when judging a good book. Meanwhile a book about a guy going early to bed as a kid and eating with his family and a book about a guy walking around dublin are considered the world's top two books.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:47:07 2013 No.3414584 >>3414564 What's the first one?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:53:41 2013 No.3414604 File: 105 KB, 289x283, STOP.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3414528 >Catcher i- Did not finish reading.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:55:28 2013 No.3414609 >>3414584 La recherche

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 22:58:30 2013 No.3414622

Sorry swamp ass OP looks like you don't understand story telling.
>They're gad damn wizards
>They have crap tons of fun wishing they could fuk they best bitch friend
>They fight evil
>And Snape!

Gosh to goodness it's not written to the quality of Wilde.

PS suck a dak!

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:09:24 2013 No.3414663

>>3413423

No, it's not a good children's series. It's a cheap trick put off on children that lower's their standards on appreciating any kind of literature. It show's them books should be appreciated because the writing flatters them. And the whole celebration teaches children how to react to the next shallow piece of shit writing that gets pandered on to them-- that they're suppose to love it.

Harry Potter is not good literature, let alone a good children's series.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:13:28 2013 No.3414666 ASOIAF isn't bad, silly. It's just that the language is easily digestible and isn't the strength of the work. Plus it has achieved mass popularity. I guess to /lit/ that means it's bad. Silly /lit/, stay ignorant.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:15:47 2013 No.3414670 >>3413423 >Doesn't think Bloom is a serious critic

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:16:17 2013 No.3414672

I'm smarter than most people on /lit/ and know more about literature. Harry Potter and Game of Thrones are quality products that are far better than 99% of what /lit/ reveres.

Basically, you have pseudo-intellectual faggots who have this idea of "literature", being fiction with a purpose, that hides things within the language and writing. The problem is, there's no such thing as "genre fiction" and "literary fiction". It's not black and white. Even bathroom novels can be subtle. And a lot of what they make you read in your English classes are quite shallow. Basically, you have edgy teenagers who were influenced by crap like Atlas Shrugged and started believing that any book that tries to talk about deep things in a psychological way is a masterpiece. They're objectively wrong.

Whether it's novels, film, or vidya, masterpieces come from CRAFTSMANSHIP, not meaning. CRAFTSMANSHIP, not meaning. /lit/ things that deep things are deep, when deep things are nearly always shallow. A book is useful when it can manipulate you through manipulation of the language, not by having philosophical themes.

As such, you can feel superior for liking something like Harry Potter, because it is written with the same skill level as most of what /lit/ reads, but it's far more entertaining.

>/lit
-loldeep themes
-crappy writing
-boring stories

>you
-purposely shallow themes
-crappy writing
-exciting stories

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:31:47 2013 No.3414713 >>3414672 >I is butthurt wit' da Harry Pooper bashing >MUH HARRY POOPER

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:32:33 2013 No.3414714 They're not bad. They're just not good.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:34:49 2013 No.3414719 >>3414713 Compelling argument. >>3414714 Sure they're good. They're extremely entertaining, which is the goal of fiction. >BUT I THOUGHT FICTION WAS HERE TO UPLIFT THE SPIRIT OF MANKIND AND GIVE US INSIGHT INTO THE HUMAN CONDITION. It isn't.

Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:38:52 2013 No.3414735

>>3412990
> Explain to someone from /v/ why novels like Harry Potter or Game of Thrones are bad.
> Harry Potter
> literally babby's first book
> Game of Thrones
> I really want to enjoy soap operas like my mom does, but feel too ashamed; that's why it comes packaged in a shitty faux-medieval setting

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:42:41 2013 No.3414747 >>3414719 >They're extremely entertaining, which is the goal of fiction. >goal Are you retarded or just pretending?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:43:26 2013 No.3414749 I am stunned at the amount of people here who actually think that Harry Potter and ASOIAF are good.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:46:44 2013 No.3414756 >>3414749 I am stunned by your lack of perspective I find it hard to believe you can even see in three dimensions

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:48:30 2013 No.3414763 >>3414735 >soap operas >faux-medieval >The two established, go-to terms when /lit/ can't intelligently criticize asoiaf.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jan 29 23:51:31 2013 No.3414770 >>3414756 I laughed really heavily, for some reason.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:00:38 2013 No.3414800 >>3414714 Incorrect.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:06:42 2013 No.3414812 >>3414496 Female on Male rape...? It has been a while, but hmm?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:10:43 2013 No.3414819 >>3414496 Anybody can pull bullshit themes out of anything. For example, Alice in Wonderland is really an expose on the pros and cons of anal fisting.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:17:49 2013 No.3414833 Where was the female-male rape in Harry Potter?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:28:42 2013 No.3414849 >>3414749 I'm smarter than you, and I know they're good.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:32:14 2013 No.3414856 >>3413053 Damn that's a narrow perspective. Ugh, you guys. Standard fantasy, not worth the time of an adult reader...Really? This is simplistic and dismissive as hell, even by this board's standard.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:32:30 2013 No.3414858 >>3414483 what the hell? I said it was good myself. I think it is excellently written. But they're completely different genres and have massively different target audiences

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:34:33 2013 No.3414864 >>3414819 it's not really an ass pull, racism, at least, is just short of anvilicious, holy shit. voldemord is a hitler, we get it.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:41:58 2013 No.3414879 >>3413033 12 when deathly hallows came out, 17 now. Please, tell us more about your refined taste in literature. (USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:43:58 2013 No.3414883 >>3414849 I'm smarter than you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 00:56:37 2013 No.3414902 >>3414883 My dad could beat up your dad

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 01:02:39 2013 No.3414909

I'll never comprehend the, 'ASOIAF is good, nothing more, just entertainment' mentality rife here. It's got to be one of the most unfairly spurned works I've ever come across. I sit in astonishment at how things like its particular societal+ historical treatment/paradigm are almost never mentioned or given due credit, yet I know similar themes in literary novels that aren't as profound earn tons of praise.

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 01:04:56 2013 No.3414911

>>3414909

Write this up and maybe someone will take it seriously. I'm not innately opposed to your point of view, but let's be honest, the majority of the ASOIAF fanbase doesn't appreciate these things you're talking about and I think it would do a lot of good if someone who did could elaborate his point of view.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 01:19:06 2013 No.3414929 >>3414833 Voldemort's mum date raped Tom Riddle Senior using a love potion.

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 01:38:03 2013 No.3414975

>>3414911
>but let's be honest, the majority of the ASOIAF fanbase doesn't appreciate these things you're talking about
Sure but I'm also certain that the books attract enough well read individuals and literary enthusiasts to have already made some headway in changing the books' perception as more than entertainment (not that I think merely entertainment is necessarily bad whatsoever). Maybe outside of /lit/ things are a little bit different.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 06:01:13 2013 No.3415512 >>3414856 Well cmon dude let's get real, cmon.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 06:04:16 2013 No.3415519 >>3413213 Honestly, this.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 06:25:45 2013 No.3415567 >>3413638 >such as disliking ASOIAF and Toweling. Neither is true. There are a bunch of people that like Tao Lin but still make fun of him. ASOIAF is disliked by most people but threads about it get a lot of replies, including positive ones.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 06:30:49 2013 No.3415571 >>3415567 a phenomenon known as ghettoization

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 06:59:37 2013 No.3415619 >>3413021 You obviously don't know anything about it outside of it's difficulty. Dark souls has done story wise, very new things.

Joshua M. Ruch Wed Jan 30 07:24:09 2013 No.3415652
File: 10 KB, 271x186, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Jack. I just agree... Cheryl`s article is really great... last thursday I got GMC sincee geting a check for $6811 this last five weeks and-also, 10/k this past-munth. this is certainly the easiest job I've had. I started this 5 months ago and straight away began to bring home minimum $82.. per-hour. I work through this website,, http://Bing30.com

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:38:47 2013 No.3415677 Explain to someone from /lit/ how DMC is on any more of a substansive cultural high ground compared to DmC?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:41:05 2013 No.3415679 >>3414663 >lower's their standards Oh wow. Just wow.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:43:06 2013 No.3415681 >>3414719 >They're extremely entertaining No they aren't. They may be for you personally, if it's the first book you read; but objectively they're pretty bland, repetitive shit.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:44:52 2013 No.3415682 >>3414763 Babby's butthurt. Boo hoo.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:54:28 2013 No.3415692 >>3414879 reported. called your mom, send the fbi, launched missiles.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:55:44 2013 No.3415695 thing is that /lit/ don't consider them deep enough. i wonder what would happen if suddenly we discovered that HP and ASOIAF were written by Borges, Tolkien or Kafka.

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:56:00 2013 No.3415699

>>3414663
I wonder if you do this to make yourself feel better or because you actually believe it?

Harry Potter is good literature. The first book may be more childish, but the MC is a child, the books reflect his growth. If you don't like a series, if you're not into fantasy or fiction, that's cool. Nobody said you have to enjoy it, but please stop equating your beliefs with fact.

Just because you're an elitest hipster who can't enjoy literature unless it's contrive and obfuscated does not mean that you have a better or more succinct grasp on "real literature"

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:57:00 2013 No.3415702 >>3413000 Skyrim being babbys first game? Skyrim is by far the most advanced RPG in both technology, and dynamics.

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:58:45 2013 No.3415704

>>3415695
Then they would find ways to justify liking them, and forgive any faults they previously had.

Like infinite jest, people though that shit was just THE BEES KNEES, and it was just a lot of convoluted rambling for people that enjoy drawing out contrive meanings and symbolism.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 07:59:01 2013 No.3415707 >>3415619 I'll never get that. If it has done anything it is "let's make a story that is extremely sparse and poor, and even to get that little bit there is, you'll have to look damn hard" wow, great

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:02:49 2013 No.3415713
File: 15 KB, 323x268, 1346883629273.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3415677
Neither us all that great, but atleast DMC had the escapism thing going for it. Old dante was very meta, in a comical way. and it had a bit of integrity.
It's an early example of a great in it's genre, which makes it more historically valuable.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:10:55 2013 No.3415730 >>3415699 Good literature whose all characters are one dimenzional (with the exception of Severus), and whose every book's plot is solved by Deus ex machina. Yeah. Not to mention the bunch of poorly fixed plot holes, and retardness.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:11:11 2013 No.3415736 >>3415702 good graphics =\|= good game...

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:12:56 2013 No.3415737 >>3415730 >All the characters one dimensional Confirmed for not having read the books.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:13:12 2013 No.3415740 >>3415736 saying arbitrary things =/= a critique. Implying that people think Skyrim is a good game because of the graphics is nigh on retarded. I suppose you think Fallout sucks too right?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:13:56 2013 No.3415739 >>3415702 Lol, you better not say that on /v/ son

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:14:57 2013 No.3415743 >>3415740 Not that guy, but Fallout really DOES suck, and Skyrim was thoroughly mediocre.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:15:13 2013 No.3415744 >>3415730 Lmao, you can't be this fucking retarded? >plotholes >one dimensional >dues ex machina lmao, please elaborate.

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:19:45 2013 No.3415751

>>3415740
>I suppose you think Fallout sucks too right?

I haven't really played 3, but I what I saw was not overwhelming, certainly not on par with 1 and 2. The fact that I feel obliged to assume that by Fallout you mean Fallout 3 and not Fallout 1 and 2 makes me hate the both of us.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:23:03 2013 No.3415759 >>3415704 'Infinite Jest' is a fun and pretty simple sci-fi book. Also, you're a mouthbreathing moron.

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:29:37 2013 No.3415771
File: 6 KB, 71x70, serious_zalgo.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>3415702
I hate you. It's easily the most dumbed down shit, with an extremely uninspired cliche mess, of a story. No choice of consequence, pretty much no interesting quests, pretty much no choice and consequence. no stats, no interesting events, short main story.

It is not advanced, and it is not dynamic.
Technologically, games like The Witcher 2 are far more impressive, dynamically, fucking ULTIMA is more impressive. and neither of those are qualities to strive for in the genre. how about plot? setting? characters? C&C? It fails miserably on all of those.
You're really one of the worst people.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:31:22 2013 No.3415778 >>3415751 i quit 2 after i got to the first town because i literally could not give a shit about playing it. there was nothing redeeming about the game up until that point loved new vegas though

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:31:38 2013 No.3415780
File: 77 KB, 225x300, 8966786876786786.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>someone from /v/ makes a thread on /lit/
>Becomes nothing but shitposting
>IMPLYING IMPLYING IMPLYING
>LOL FILTHY HIPSTERS! SEE! THEM THINKING HARRY POTTER IS FOR GRADESCHOOLERS IS PROOF THEY ARE ALL HIPSTERS!
lel

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:32:39 2013 No.3415783 >>3415702 But they're part of the package. And I also noted the dynamics of the game. The AI that governs the whole virtual society with economy and relations of this quality was unseen before Skyrim.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:33:09 2013 No.3415784 >>3415707 they're very new, like he said

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:33:24 2013 No.3415786

>>3415740
Fallout 1 2 3 or new vegas? all but 3 were great.

What a stupid ass thing to say. That's like defending twilight by saying "I suppose you hate Ulysses too". Attempting to link it to a good game does not make it a good game you conceited cunt.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:34:40 2013 No.3415788 >>3415783 it really wasn't, though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:35:10 2013 No.3415790 >>3415771 relax.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:35:11 2013 No.3415795 >things are bad because i don't like them

Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:35:56 2013 No.3415794

>>3415771
What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I’m the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little “clever” comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking dead, kiddo.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:36:42 2013 No.3415796 >>3415794 i just thought of this

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:42:02 2013 No.3415810 File: 141 KB, 722x800, Fanny PAnny.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>3414672 I think its funny you spent all that time writing that despite this entire thread being a hunking steam of shit mailed to us from /v/eee CULTURE

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:42:31 2013 No.3415809 >>3415771 wow, that could have done with a bit of editing. Sorry about that. But I was very distressed.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:46:35 2013 No.3415821 >>3415795 It's the only reasonable reason.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:49:55 2013 No.3415826 >>3415790 Passion should be encouraged anon no matter what it's for.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jan 30 08:55:49 2013 No.3415832 >>3415790 Why should I? he practically insults everything I stand and live for.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature