/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3661333]

>It will never be yours

[Anonymous No.3661345]

>tfw there is almost certainly at least one spider somewhere in there

[Anonymous No.3661358]

>>3661333
Looks like a mouldy little nest. I prefer the neo-spartan approach.

[Anonymous No.3661433]

Classic bed and night stand master race.
Minimal e-reader master race.
Welcome to 2013.

[Anonymous No.3661443]

>>3661433
what's a classic bed

[Anonymous No.3661466]

>living indoors
True minimalism is sleeping in the woods.

[Anonymous No.3661477]

>>3661443
4 poster?

[Anonymous No.3661508]

>>3661443
Wooden headstand on all fours.
Comfy as fuck mattress. Nothing else in the room but a white table, a laptop and a chair. The walk in closet serves to hold all of my shit.

[Anonymous No.3661522]

>>3661508
Well, minimalism is the new noble. A room full of trinkets means nothing any more when everyone can afford them. If anything, a certain sparseness is a sign of good taste. I'm really partial to modern platformbeds myself though.

[Anonymous No.3661528]

>>3661358
that's gotta be the least cozy room I've ever seen.

reminds me of fucking office space

[Anonymous No.3661539]

>>3661528
>2013
>not being minimalistic stoic master race

[Anonymous No.3661555]

>>3661528
That's part of the point. To instil fear into those of lesser austerity. Cosiness is a sign of weakness.

[« 零 » !Ry9.23Wow. No.3661576]

>>3661333

THOSE SHELVES ARE INCONVENIENTLY POSITIONED; THE BOOKS MIGHT FALL UPON ONE'S HEAD, AND/OR FACE, IN CASE OF A GEOLOGICAL DISTURBANCE –IF ONE LIVES IN AN EARTHQUAKE PRONE AREA– OR IN CASE OF ANOTHER KIND OF MISHAP.

[Anonymous No.3661592]

>>3661528
>least cozy room I've ever seen.
not true.

a space can only be cosy when it's immediately surrounded by cold

>The more so, I say, because truly to enjoy bodily warmth, some small part of you must be cold, for there is no quality in this world that is not what it is merely by contrast. Nothing exists in itself. If you flatter yourself that you are all over comfortable, and have been so a long time, then you cannot be said to be comfortable any more. But if, like Queequeg and me in the bed, the tip of your nose or the crown of your head be slightly chilled, why then, indeed, in the general consciousness you feel most delightfully and unmistakably warm. For this reason a sleeping apartment should never be furnished with a fire, which is one of the luxurious discomforts of the rich. For the height of this sort of deliciousness is to have nothing but the blanket between you and your snugness and the cold of the outer air. Then there you lie like the one warm spark in the heart of an arctic crystal.


It's like when you're curled up in bed and you stick an arm outside the covers. The comparison in temperatures lets you appreciate the limited warmth. Whereas if you were just under the covers, you'd get sweaty and restless

[Anonymous No.3661594]

>>3661576
Yeah and you could fall out your bed at night, spaz.

[Anonymous No.3661595]

>>3661592
A pic to support your theory, anon.

[Anonymous No.3661601]

>>3661595
Well perhaps not completely but it shows austere minimalism in a cosy sort of way because le contrast

[Anonymous No.3661611]

>that feel when the only thing I want in life is to live inside a small self-sustainable one person cottage built by myself in the middle of the great Canadian shield, where I'll farm my own food, read literature and hike everywhere

[Anonymous No.3661617]

>>3661595
exactly.

you won't see this face posted in summer.

[Anonymous No.3661619]

>>3661522
I'd be interested to see if /lit/'s desktop keeps minimalism in tact.

Platform beds are cool too. I just like headstand, it makes me feel scholarly for some reason. And that back support when reading.

Post more minimal set ups

[Anonymous No.3661641]

>>3661619
Monks know where it's at.

[Anonymous No.3661646]

>>3661522
>>3661522
my god shut the fuck up.

[Anonymous No.3661647]

>>3661646
Don't rustle your dreamcatcher now.

[Anonymous No.3661650]

>>3661647
>>3661647
Consider my dreamcatcher fucking rustled.

[Anonymous No.3661687]

Fuck minimalism.

[Anonymous No.3661703]

>>3661687
not cluttered enough

[Anonymous No.3661714]

>>3661687
Typical Persian scum.

[Anonymous No.3661722]

>>3661358
That looks almost perfect.
I'd trade the thing in the corner for a simple easy chair, and boom. you got your 2-point room

[Anonymous No.3661724]

>>3661358
That is very efficient.

[Anonymous No.3661727]

>>3661641

they probably think that sparse style of the room is secretly baller as fuck. which it is. smug monks

[Anonymous No.3661731]

>>3661724
Just don't open the closet

[Anonymous No.3661757]

>2013
Not knowing the awesomeness of contrasting decor styles.

Minimalist bedroom, overstuffed study/library, minimalist bathroom, special bedroom set aside just for storing stuff. shelves of food and sundries and all the things you're not using at the moment.

Instead of having a minimalist place that you can't keep from getting cluttered or a stuffed place you can't get-uncluttered you can vary your experience just by walking a couple feet.

And should you need to bring extra stuff in, you can, without ruining either scheme.

[Anonymous No.3661763]

>>3661757

cool tips bro

[Anonymous No.3661774]

>>3661757
hhmmmm

10/10 would take advice from again

[Anonymous No.3661808]

>>3661687

Quite right.

[Anonymous No.3661819]

>>3661757
Sounds like a horrible lack of unity to me.

I'd rather just have minimalist everything. Minimalist places are easy to keep from getting cluttered if you get into the habit of not hoarding shit you don't need.

[Anonymous No.3661829]

>>3661757
I couldn't agree more. I myself like a rather minimalist style when it comes to, say, kitchens, bedrooms, and to a certain extent living rooms. But my personal study/library room would, nigh certainly, appear extremely chaotic and stuffed. But that might stem from the fact that those former rooms are usually the ones being presented to visitors, while the study is the one room that fulfills the sole purpose of working, and being there for the self, in pursuit of self-fulfillment.

[Anonymous No.3661848]

I really want to try the 100 Things Challenge, excluding books. Has anyone here done it before?

[Anonymous No.3661862]

>>3661848

What is the 100 things challenge?

[Anonymous No.3661863]

>>3661829
>>3661829
you need to read zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance.

[Anonymous No.3661904]

>>3661757

Finally, someone who gets it.

[Anonymous No.3661906]

>>3661848
Yes. How easy it is depends on if you live alone and how much you cheat. The actual useful part is mostly making an inventory of your things and seeing what you can do without though.

[Anonymous No.3661910]

If you can't, apart from appliances and furniture, take everything you own with you on your average transatlantic flight you're owning too much.

[Anonymous No.3661911]

>>3661906
Do 'books' count as one thing? If not then I can't do it. If they do then I'm already doing it.

[Anonymous No.3661913]

>>3661910
That's a nice opinion, anonymous.

[Anonymous No.3661917]

>>3661910
Appliances and furniture account for most of the excess that people have though.

[Anonymous No.3661937]

So long as I have a large closet to store my books and vidya, I'm cool with just a bed, desk, kitchen, table and two chairs.

[Anonymous No.3661989]

>>3661911
I think I made 130 with every book counted separately. I cheated on socks and shoes though, I counted them per pair and phone and charger are one thing for example. Other than that every debit card, fork and candle holder is accounted for. This extreme autism isn't very useful except for a thorough diagnosis though. After a while having few things just becomes a good habit I don't think I'll ever own more than you can stuff in the back of a Ford Transit. Then again, the whole sleeping on a yoga mat and drinking nothing but water thing isn't for me either.

>>3661917
What about houses and gadgets and cars and toys and physical media et cetera? Dishwashers and chairs are the least of their problem mostly.

[Anonymous No.3661990]

>>3661910

What a horrible thing for someone on a literature board to say. Most of us enjoy owning books. Many in large numbers.

[Anonymous No.3662004]

>>3661989
>drinking nothing but water thing isn't for me either

If you drink nothing but water for like 3 weeks you'll never go back to anything else. With the exception of maybe coffee/tea. I can't remember the last time I've drank a soft drink/sports drink and I only drink alcohol at bars.

[Anonymous No.3662009]

>>3661989

Wow, that just seems incredibly sad to me. I'm not much a materialist, but the accumulation of possessions to which one can meaningful memories and emotions should be the natural outcome of an interesting and varied life. To have only 130 items strikes me as the result of a barren and sterile life. With perhaps a qualification for those who have lost everything in unfortunate circumstances, such as a fire or being forced to flee.

[Anonymous No.3662010]

>>3661990
I like reading, not collecting. In fact I despise collecting for it's own sake in all forms. Hoarding is vulgar.

[Anonymous No.3662015]

>>3661989
Christ, If I have to count little things individually, I would reach 1000 in paintbrushes, pens, paints and sprays. I would probably hit 1000 with metal and woodworking tools too. My gym - including all weights desperately -- would bring me up to the 100 limit.

There is no way I could narrow down to 100 things. Even throwing away everything I don't need, I couldn't even get down to 3000 without having to give up certain activities completely.

[Anonymous No.3662018]

>>3662009
>To have only 130 items strikes me as the result of a barren and sterile life.
You strike me someone who can't see the value in something if it isn't physical.

[Anonymous No.3662029]

>>3661333
You're saying you want to go back into the closet, OP?

[Anonymous No.3662035]

>>3662009
>such as a fire
Exactly. All the useless possessions that you horde receive a small part of your outsourced emotion. If someone came in to your house and broke one of your shiny plastic things, you would be upset. It's the investing of emotion into trivial consumer commodities that we are trying to reduce. This, and the realisation that half of the junk we horde, we really don't need in the first place -- half being bought as purchasing things seems to provide some form of counterfeit meaning, and half as we are bombarded with advertising and encouraged to compete in the accumulation of material junk.

[Anonymous No.3662036]

>>3662009
I'm more of the Thoreauvian/Diogenean "things you own end up owning you" / “It is desirable that a man live in all respects so compactly and preparedly that, if an enemy take the town, he can, like the old philosopher, walk out the gate empty-handed without anxiety” school.

All my items are of practical use and replaceable and I have an habit of purging the superfluous, including all memorabilia, photo's, letters, emails, texts, everything. If I don't remember something myself I don't mind forgetting it. Attaching emotional value to possessions is bothersome as far as I'm concerned and doing away with it leads to a certain tranquillity, which is why monastics and ascetics practice it as well. It's psychologically beneficial.

[Anonymous No.3662038]

>>3662015
>desperately
*separately.
Fucking auto-correct.

[Anonymous No.3662045]

>>3662018

I see plenty of value in the immaterial, my point was that in the course of just living life everyone could reasonably expect to accumulate more than 100 object that hold some sort of emotional importance to them. The don't have to be expensive, important or even permanent just that they would accumulate around the place. Like a paper crane folded by a friend or a ticket stub from a particularly memorable concert, to give to very trite examples. To have nothing like this suggests three possibilities; that everything has been lost in tragic circumstances; that nothing of significance happens in ones life; or, that everything is ruthlessly pruned down into sterility. The latter of which is at best suggestive of serious emotional or mental imbalance.

[Anonymous No.3662049]

>>3662045
>that everything is ruthlessly pruned down into sterility. The latter of which is at best suggestive of serious emotional or mental imbalance.
>mfw

[Anonymous No.3662054]

>imblying you can beat reading in the saloon of your £35,000,000 superyacht

[Anonymous No.3662058]

>>3662045
I don't see why you need to keep trinkets that have a connection to a memory that is stored in your head. There's nothing mentally unstable about wanting to rid yourself of what you don't need, and in-fact, maintaining a collection of small pieces of nothing with sentimental attachments is far more likely to stem from some sort of insecurity.

[Anonymous No.3662060]

>>3662054
Holy shit it's kitsch central. Sink it.

[Anonymous No.3662063]

>>3662049

I hate to make the inevitably edgy /r/atheism point, but considering yourself to be the son of god and his sole representative on earth isn't exactly the fitting of modern conceptions of a healthy mind.

>inb4 Buddhists don't believe in god

[Anonymous No.3662064]

>>3662045
>hoards trinkets
>calls others mentally unstable

[Anonymous No.3662065]

>>3661592
proust agrees with melville

>rooms in winter, where on going to bed I would at once bury my head in a nest, built up out of the most diverse materials, the corner of my pillow, the top of my blankets, a piece of a shawl, the edge of my bed, and a copy of an evening paper, all of which things I would contrive, with the infinite patience of birds building their nests, to cement into one whole; rooms where, in a keen frost, I would feel the satisfaction of being shut in from the outer world (like the sea-swallow which builds at the end of a dark tunnel and is kept warm by the surrounding earth), and where, the fire keeping in all night, I would sleep wrapped up, as it were, in a great cloak of snug and savoury air, shot with the glow of the logs which would break out again in flame: in a sort of alcove without walls, a cave of warmth dug out of the heart of the room itself, a zone of heat whose boundaries were constantly shifting and altering in temperature as gusts of air ran across them to strike freshly upon my face, from the corners of the room, or from parts near the window or far from the fireplace which had therefore remained cold

[Anonymous No.3662067]

>>3662063
My point was more that the most imperturbable, calm and stable people are the ones who don't care for hanging on to trinkets. See all great sages and philosophers etc.

[Anonymous No.3662073]

>>3662058

Its more the point of doing so compulsively, of course I'm not going to try and keep those little trinkets around forever and I would agree that at the the opposite end of the spectrum, hoarding, is a far more serious problem. But making a point of purging all sentimentality strikes not only as another form of insecurity, but also as deeply unhuman. Perhaps I'm alone in this view but the fact that almost everyone - no matter how rich or poor - seem to have more than 100 objects would seem to lend credence to my argument.

[Anonymous No.3662082]

>>3662065

All it took was one sentence to remind me why I gave up on reading Proust. Philistine of me, I know, but I just can't handle his writing.

[Anonymous No.3662084]

>>3662073
If your definition of 'inhuman' is 'unlike that of the general public' then yes I guess it would be inhuman. I'll gladly be inhuman in that case.

[Anonymous No.3662087]

>>3662073
Not purging all sentimentality, purging all fetishisation of stuff. You don't need little totems for your feelings.

You also seem to think hanging on to stuff forever is sickly, but so is throwing them out. Is there some period after which to throw your friends paper plane away that allows you to keep your humanity or something?

Actual poor people outside the first world don't have more than 100 things a piece by the way, check le privilege. And connecting one's levels of 'humanity' to the degree to which one is an owner is what I would call deeply unhuman.

[Anonymous No.3662104]

>>3662060
What's wrong with it?

[Anonymous No.3662110]

>>3662087

Checking le privilege, poor people in the 'third world' do not all live in squalor in mud huts, they are just like us, they have drawings by their children too and footballs and all sorts of other ketch trinkets just like us, just a lot shittier and more transitory because they're poor.

The point is there is natural medium which most of us inhabit, as with almost any human behaviour their are degrees to this it is when they are taken to an extreme are they often seen to be problematic or deviant. This is basically the way in which almost all mental disorders are understood and classified.

Finally, of course I do not not 'need' these little totems to my feelings, my point is that in the course of life these things should wash in and out almost unthinkingly. It is to make a lifestyle out of either purging them or hoarding them religiously that is problematic.

[Anonymous No.3662111]

>>3662104
It looks like how a fat guy from Mid-West US Awould recreate a victorian drawing room in his motorhome. It's tremendously tacky.

[Anonymous No.3662117]

I enjoy collecting certain things, but not to the point of clutter.
What does that make me?

[Anonymous No.3662118]

>>3662104

Nouveau riche kitsch of of what wealth and sophistication would or should look like.

[Anonymous No.3662119]

>>3662117
Normal and boring.

[Anonymous No.3662123]

>>3661522
You can buy that type of bed at Ikea.

>saving picture for future inspiration when decorating muh room.

[Anonymous No.3662124]

>>3662111
>>3662118
Well, I agree. Most rich people are very practical and I'd do the same given wealth.

[Anonymous No.3662126]

>>3661757
>all that books
>replaced by a single e-reader

[Anonymous No.3662127]

>>3662119
Only with regards to my property.

[Anonymous No.3662133]

>>3662126
Some people enjoy collecting books. Even if you disregard that, the feeling and smell of a book cannot be replicated by an e-reader.

[Anonymous No.3662135]

>>3662110
The purging is merely a means to the goal of non-attachment and cultivating a more stable form of happiness that is less reliant on external factors. It's actually good for one's mental health. There's a reason pretty much any wisdom tradition in the history of mankind recommends it.

[Anonymous No.3662139]

>>3662127

Be revolutionary and avant garde where it counts.

[Anonymous No.3662140]

>>3662123
>>saving picture for future inspiration when decorating muh room.
Or you could pick up an ikea catalogue.

[Anonymous No.3662144]

>>3662015
>Christ, If I have to count little things individually, I would reach 1000 in paintbrushes, pens, paints and sprays. I would probably hit 1000 with metal and woodworking tools too. My gym - including all weights desperately -- would bring me up to the 100 limit.
>There is no way I could narrow down to 100 things. Even throwing away everything I don't need, I couldn't even get down to 3000 without having to give up certain activities completely.

>2013, the year of jesus the lord
>not buying a wacom tablet and doing digital air
>not lifting weights at the local gym
>hording shit

[Anonymous No.3662145]

>>3662135
If you are careful and selective with material things, purging them is not necessary.

[Anonymous No.3662146]

>>3662139
I'm afraid that I honestly do not want that.

[Anonymous No.3662150]

>>3662144
That's far, far from hoarding.

[Anonymous No.3662158]

>>3662045
>that everything has been lost in tragic circumstances; that nothing of significance happens in ones life; or, that everything is ruthlessly pruned down into sterility. The latter of which is at best suggestive of serious emotional or mental imbalance.

Sounds like something an average American with his 3,000 feet home would say

>mfw America's storage industry goes in the billions in annual revenue
>people pay for space to store their junk

[Anonymous No.3662166]

>>3662133
>Even if you disregard that, the feeling and smell of a book cannot be replicated by an e-reader.

Not another "I like the feel and touch of books" faggot.

>2013
>concerning yourself with the medium rather than the message

[Anonymous No.3662162]

>>3662145
Purging is pleasant though. It's like a good shave after a few days of neglect.

[Anonymous No.3662168]

>>3662162
I wouldn't know, and I'm not inclined to try it. I'd love to hear a more detailed take on it from you.

[Anonymous No.3662169]

>>3662158
I can honestly say that chick looks better in the before picture. She at least looks like she's capable of some semblance of an expression, whereas in the after, she just looks like one in a million of blank-eyed and expressionless women.

[Anonymous No.3662173]

>>3662166
I likes what I likes. I concerns myself with what I concerns myself.

[Anonymous No.3662176]

>>3662150

Exactly, this is normal everyday behaviour its just that this thread is being overun by aspies and ascetics.

[Anonymous No.3662179]

>>3662169
>tfw no average corea gf ;__;

[Anonymous No.3662180]

>>3662176
You have to consider that normal, everyday behavior is associated with ordinary people, and most /lit/ posters consider themselves above ordinary people, who they hold in contempt.

Now you don't be an ass too. Ascetics are good in my book, even if I don't agree.

[Anonymous No.3662187]

>>3662168
It's like the healthy, springy light clarity you have after taking a good shit or practising meditation. Possessions, like mind and body, are best when they are trim, light and versatile.

[Anonymous No.3662198]

>>3662187
I understand that. I still don't want to get rid of my things. After all, they are nice. I like them.

[Anonymous No.3662212]

>>3662180

Hmm, your right I can certainly see the appeal in asceticism. But mostly because it is so subversive, as an escapist fantasy, I doubt I would feel the same way if it was a more wide spread practice. Although you certainly hit the crux, that the posters of /lit/ consider themselves above the ordinary. And that is perhaps my point, and my frustration with those arguing against the everyday collection and fetishization of stuff. Is that even the most radical and the most deviant are still mostly normal and ordinary most of the time.

[Anonymous No.3662217]

>come to /lit/
>reading area/library thread

>awesome

>minimalism thread again
>awwww yiss

>thread is shit

I hate you, /lit/

[Anonymous No.3662223]

>>3662198
I like my things as well, they bring me a lot of joy. It's just that I like them for what they offer me, not for their sentimental value. When my coffee maker breaks I just get a new one, I don't mourn it's loss because it was grandma's something something or whatever. My bed is more comfy than the floor but another bed will do fine as well. It's this interchangeability that leads to an anxiety free possession management as opposed to the "this one this is special and there is no other like it" because if the feelings you project on it. This is also why I dislike rare valuables. Valuing things beyond a certain point enslaves you to them.

[Anonymous No.3662224]

>>3662217
What's the matter?

[Anonymous No.3662230]

>>3662217

>library thread
>minimalism thread

Pick one, its when the too clash that they're shit.

[Anonymous No.3662233]

>>3662223
I respect that. Perhaps I'll see it your way eventually. Thanks for the responses.

[Anonymous No.3662238]

>>3662230
>implying

[Anonymous No.3662242]

>>3662223
I agree with this. In my experience, the more valuable something is, the more it occupies your thoughts, even if you're engaging/around it.

For instance, nothing brings me greater stress than my car. All the money I sink into it and the idea that I can't live without it with my current situation; coupled with the fact that a slight lapse in concentration could result in it being completely destroyed or useless and leaving me with debt and without the ability to continue my current life style. Unfortunately like most places in America that aren't large metropolitan cities, public transportation is useless.

[Anonymous No.3662246]

>>3662233
You're welcome.

Posting minimalist and decadent hybrid library porn for grumpy sage guy.

[Anonymous No.3662249]

>>3662246
That's my ideal lifestyle.

[Anonymous No.3662250]

>>3662246
I see these white floors often, what are they made of exactly?

I prefer a dark floor myself, black even. It gives a sense of stability underfoot.

[Anonymous No.3662253]

>>3662223

I think their is a balance to be struck here. I would not mourn the loss of my grandmother's coffee machine and if it were broken I would throw it out, but that doesn't prevent me from appreciating its as a gift from her or occasionally enjoying the sentimentality of being reminded of her when I make my morning coffee.

[Anonymous No.3662259]

le nirvana face

[Anonymous No.3662263]

>>3662259
Can you really call that minimalist when it likely costs a great deal of money to build?

[Anonymous No.3662270]

>>3662253
That's proper non-attachment in the best way. The thing is that it's pretty hard to practice that properly, so it can come in handy to lean a bit more towards the austere side to compensate our general tendency to get attached to stuff.

[Anonymous No.3662273]

>>3662263

Minimalism, or at least aesthetic minimalism is, and always has been, a rich mans game.

[Anonymous No.3662280]

The trick is keeping your reading area separate from your library. Then you get best of both worlds

or just use an e-reader

[Anonymous No.3662286]

>>3662270

Perhaps so, and since this is the way I have always treated my things I might well be overestimating the extent to which this is the way everyone else manages their possessions.

[Anonymous No.3662287]

>>3662263
It's more aesthetically than ascetically minimalist. I appreciate both in their own way. I find this very beautiful but would never want to own it, too much of a headache. If I were rich I'd probably just be homeless and live in hotel rooms and little rented apartments all my life.

[Anonymous No.3662312]

[Anonymous No.3662317]

>>3662287
This office looks like it was designed solely to look good with the Mac.

[Anonymous No.3662318]

>>3662312
>dat filename

[Anonymous No.3662322]

What are the other downsides of being attached to things, besides the possibility of losing them?

[Anonymous No.3662331]

>>3662322
Being attached to unnecessary things is, in itself, a downside.

[Anonymous No.3662334]

>>3662331
How's that?

[Anonymous No.3662335]

>>3662166
>implying anon doesn't care about the message
>implying anon can't care about both the medium and the message

[Anonymous No.3662339]

>>3662335
It's always one or the other here, with everything. You know that.

[Anonymous No.3662348]

>>3662334

If you're not spiritual you probably won't understand the downside. Non-spiritual dudes will try and claim to follow the same principle but really it's pretty much just like you said, assuming that the physical is all there is.

[Anonymous No.3662359]

>>3662322
Taking care of them (muh couch treatment), fretting over them (pls no shoes mind my peruvian shagedelic carpet it's an exclusive hurr), having them take up space (renting storage for my excess books, grandpa's chair and my babby memorabilia and family pictures) etc. Often you're better off not bothering with it at all.

I think that being able to afford something is not merely being able to pay for it but to be able to afford losing it as well, being affluent enough not to care when it gets destroyed. Only get fancy shades if you're unphased by your nephew sitting on them for example.

[Anonymous No.3662362]

>>3662348
But freedom from futilities is it's own reward, no spirituality required. See the dogfather.

[Anonymous No.3662382]

>>3662359

So based on your reasons for asceticism, if you could take all your old photos, videos, etc and digitize them and put them all on a tablet, that would be okay?

I'm seeing a lot of
>mfw physical stuff is a lot of work
instead of
>mfw zen and shit from having no stuff

[Anonymous No.3662383]

>>3662359
I feel it.

>>3662348
I admit that I don't get spirituality.

[Anonymous No.3662386]

>>3662359

Er, let me clarify above. Is it still asceticism if the reason we do it is physical convenience instead of the spirit of letting go of worldly possessions?

[Anonymous No.3662396]

>>3662386
They go hand in hand. The purpose is to free your mind from all that frivolous preoccupation in order to focus on something more worthwhile. For those who are spiritual, it can be God or whatever; for the who are not, it can simply be that of peace of mind.

[Anonymous No.3662403]

level one: freedom from emotional attachment to things you don't have.
level two: freedom from emotional attachment to things you do have.
level three: freedom from emotional attachment from things.

[Anonymous No.3662407]

>>3662396

I find it distressing you can make the same argument about people. Relationships and the valuation of other people can cause a great deal of stress, just like things. Why not renounce them too?

>inb4 stoics

[Anonymous No.3662409]

>>3662382
>So based on your reasons for asceticism, if you could take all your old photos, videos, etc and digitize them and put them all on a tablet, that would be okay?
Nope, I don't like attachment to digital files either. Apart from some ebooks and administrative documents I delete everything regularly.

>I'm seeing a lot of
>mfw physical stuff is a lot of work
>instead of
>mfw zen and shit from having no stuff

The two kind of go together. A lot of the tricks I apply I've stolen from the monastic life. Having little posessions frees you up. Wearing a 'personal uniform' frees you up. Having little obligations frees you up. Having a routine (paradoxically perhaps) frees you up.

[Anonymous No.3662412]

>>3662407
Not him, but I renounce most people as well. Feels good man.

[Anonymous No.3662421]

>>3662409

This seems more consistent with the ascetic lifestyle. But I'm curious -- you keep saying "frees you up" -- for what exactly?

>>3662412

Hard to argue with that one, especially since I gather most of us /lit/ards aren't exactly social butterflies.

[Anonymous No.3662426]

>>3662407
Not him either but I assume you're not just asking what the difference is between having emotional relationships with people and with objects?

But even valuing human connections, People still recognize that you can't "please everyone" and there are limits to our ability to socialize, and advise people to not try to get emotionally attached to what they are hoping to "get" from the other person. A sort of social interaction form of materialism.

Anyway, you don't have to stop wanting things, just stop needing things (above the homeostatic essentials, water oxygen etc.)

[Anonymous No.3662433]

>>3662036
I'm exactly the same.

[Anonymous No.3662435]

>>3662426

I understand the reason for asceticism, in the sense that it quiets some of the vicissitudes of life and pares you down to essentials, in the property sense. But based on this reasoning, I think you could carry it further into personal relationships. So I'm wondering if either I'm not getting the entire idea of the ascetic lifestyle, if there's another reason for it, or if there's a justification for recognizing the stress caused by people as worth bearing rather than the stress caused by property.

>mfw thinking out loud on /lit/ and having some pretty damned constructive responses. Kudos to all of you.

[Anonymous No.3662447]

>>3662421
>This seems more consistent with the ascetic lifestyle. But I'm curious -- you keep saying "frees you up" -- for what exactly?
To bum around as I please and indulge in my little whims untroubled like a forest faun. While I don't really live ascetically in the proper sense and I'm fairly decadent by Cynic standards I do tend to adhere to their notice that the good life is found in removing the fetters that bother you. I'm extremely bothered by having to do things, but I'm very content to do not much of anything at all. Existence is it's own reward if you live properly.

>Hard to argue with that one, especially since I gather most of us /lit/ards aren't exactly social butterflies.
It's mostly just a healthy disregard towards the opinions and demands of most people. Feeling compelled to please them is one of the greatest chains you can acquire.

[Anonymous No.3662449]

>>3662426

Anon, in recent month I've begun to desire less and less, to the point that even when something is offered, I do not take it (part of that is because I don't want to depend on anyone for anything financial). There are few 'needs' (Internet, television, the occasional vidya, pot, cell phone) I have, yet I still wish to be free of them.

Do you think there's a healthy spot to stop when dematerializing yourself? Some things, such as books and music, I feel I couldn't live without, but the others I feel I could be fine without.

[Anonymous No.3662457]

>>3662449
>Do you think there's a healthy spot to stop when dematerializing yourself?
That spot is basically having what is required to live healthily. Which implies basically the possibility of hygiene, proper diet and shelter from the elements and health care.

[Anonymous No.3662462]

>>3662435
>So I'm wondering if either I'm not getting the entire idea of the ascetic lifestyle, if there's another reason for it, or if there's a justification for recognizing the stress caused by people as worth bearing rather than the stress caused by property.

This is very much a part of the ascetic life style, and is the much harder/more controversial part. Just like you said, it involves weighing your personal relationships, and if you find that they are more a burden than a pleasure, then nobody of the ascetic mind would blame you for discontinuing the relationship.

>>3662447
>It's mostly just a healthy disregard towards the opinions and demands of most people. Feeling compelled to please them is one of the greatest chains you can acquire.
Like this guy said. If they aren't satisfied by your typical behavior, then it's probably not worth it.

>>3662449
No one would tell an artist to give up his paints and paintbrushes in order to adhere closer to asceticism. It doesn't have to be life-denying in order to be freeing, and if you manage to derive stress from having gotten rid of something, then you're doing it wrong. I guess the true ascetic would tell you that those are just frivolous pleasures that can be overcome, but nobody is forcing you to live a monastic life. Give up as much as you can give up to maintain a balance.

[Anonymous No.3662465]

>>3662447

>ITT: Simple life = happy life

It seems to me that if you had an ascetic try to convince someone who genuinely loves their possessions, whose love for those things outweighs whatever stress they cause, to give up those things and live a simpler life, they would be at an absolute impasse.

[Anonymous No.3662466]

>>3662435
>>3662449

Well, I don't actually espouse asceticism, I don't think denial of things for the sake of denial would necessarily be better than indulgence.
When I talk about freedom, I focus more on a sort of mindfulness, self-awareness, where you are in control of your emotional attachments to things and people. Sort of putting yourself into the driver's seat..no, that's a bad metaphor, but you get the idea. I can't speak for the ascetics, I just look towards enlightenment, where you're not removed from the connections, but you have control over them, sort of like a Buddhist article I was reading where the writer said it's not about ignoring or indulging the thoughts but being able to experience them without being thrown about by them. I hope that helps, I know I'm not using vary exact terms.

[Anonymous No.3662473]

>>3662449

Not who you're addressing (or anyone else in this thread so far) but imo a terror of the material is a pretty natural and healthy iconoclasm in the middle of a culture that worships consumption without limit. I think it only ceases to be healthy when you pursue it for its own sake, that is to say when you begin to desire a perfect and total opposition to culture rather than a merely reasonable one. It's this desire for perfection that makes you want to get rid of everything - at least it's what makes me want to get rid of everything. But living like Diogenes, so to speak, is simply impossible in the modern West. Even hoboes don't live like Diogenes lived; there isn't really a way of life for pure individuals anymore (if there ever was). Absolute simplicity is beyond me, so I live with relative simplicity instead, and I am mostly content with it.

[Anonymous No.3662477]

>>3662133

>Scratch and sniff e-readers will be the next big thing.

[Anonymous No.3662480]

>>3662466

No, the driver seat metaphor made perfect sense. I get the idea of wanting to be in the river but not beholden to its current. I think it comes at a cost, though -- if you remove yourself from the possibility of being negatively effected by some experience, it also dulls your being positively effected as well. I don't see how it's possible to insulate against the bad without doing it to the good as well. I don't know anything about Buddhism, does it speak to this?

>>3662462

And thank you for telling the artist to keep his brushes, seemed ridiculous to have him get rid of what made him happy in the name of asceticism.

[Anonymous No.3662486]

>>3662473
Yeah, theories about attaining happiness are problematic. It's much easier philosophically to find sources of unhappiness and weed them out.

I think if you overdo denial, you'll run up against a law of diminishing returns sort of thing, and end up unhappy in other ways.

Attempting to have a singular guiding principle can sometimes be nothing more than a desire to avoid having to think about each situation as it comes.

[Anonymous No.3662491]

>>3662465
I'd say the ascetic would have the upper hand since there's a sort of feeling of shame and sheer impracticality in being the guy that needs X to have the same level of happiness as the guy who doesn't need X. I think that most people intuitively find that needing more makes you a lesser person. That's why it's such a sadistic pleasure for people to watch those "spoiled bitches in rough circumstances" type of reality tv.

[Anonymous No.3662493]

>>3662480
>And thank you for telling the artist to keep his brushes, seemed ridiculous to have him get rid of what made him happy in the name of asceticism.
Some would say getting over the need to create art will make him happy in a more deep and stable way in the long run though.

[Anonymous No.3662498]

>>3662486

I guess my point is sort of that excessive adherence to any principles will wind up making you feel shitty because of your inability to reach a castle-in-the-sky.

[Anonymous No.3662502]

"It would be great if I were perfectly content with whatever I had, that way I would always be satisfied.
So I'm going to pursue being more content, and I won't be content until I'm perfectly content."

"But at a certain level, aren't you going to have to be content with how in-content you are?"

"Damn, you got me."

Yeah, I think a certain amount of uneasiness is inert and unable to be excised.

That's why moderation in all things is such a handy principle

[Anonymous No.3662508]

>>3662498
Yes. That's why the greatest are part sage part rascal if you ask me.

[Anonymous No.3662522]

>>3662502

Maybe it's getting late, but I didn't get a word of that.

I imagine a conversation between the two would go like this:

Jesus: You should give up your material things, you will be happier in the long run.
Paris Hilton: But I really enjoy my hotels and purse dogs, why would I give them up when I could be happier if I got another hotel and another purse dog?
Jesus: Your happiness is tied to transient things, things you don't need.
Paris Hilton: You want me, in the name of happiness, to give up the things that currently make me happy, to embrace a life in the hope that I'll be happy? Makes no sense Jesus. You straight crazy.
Jesus: Fuck it, let's sail on one of your yachts.

[Anonymous No.3662529]

>>3662493

I gathered most ascetics did so to simplify their life to focus on some greater purpose -- if art was that purpose, would that make it okay to keep his supplies?

[Anonymous No.3662536]

>>3662529
If making his art is his goal, of course. It all depends on the context. A lot of religious forms of asceticism would probably advice against it though.

[Anonymous No.3662549]

>>3662522
That wasn't a response to you, but I'll explain it.
What you're talking about is overcorrecting. That's what the ascetics do, thinking Less Stuff = Less problems,
I don't believe that, But I do believe that humans by default will be on the "Care too much about stuff" side of the line, and that happiness lies in the middle, so for the majority of people the advice of "learn to detach yourself from stuff" will be useful, because for most people, learning to want more stuff won't be a problem.

That's not to say those people don't exist, there are plenty of people who are miserable because they don't think of their own happiness enough, they don't believe a change will bring them any happiness, they need to learn to desire.

[Anonymous No.3662606]

>>3662118
this

[Anonymous No.3662617]

[Anonymous No.3662664]

>>3662617
That's not actually a comfortable nook.

[Anonymous No.3662711]

>>3662664
Have you been in it?

[Anonymous No.3662715]

>>3662711
I've experienced nooks like it. One needs a proper lounge chair or chaise longue.

[Anonymous No.3663202]

>>3662715
screw interior designers,
Hire a chiropractor to design your reading space.

[Anonymous No.3663261]

Contemporary minimalism simply shows that you're insecure.

It's easy, anybody can create a decent minimalist interior providing they have money, it requires no real knowledge of aesthetics to achieve. You'll notice the the majority of minimalist spaces are created by bourgeois city dwellers for this very reason.

[Anonymous No.3663269]

>>3663261
>anybody can create a decent minimalist interior providing they have money, it requires no real knowledge of aesthetics to achieve

That doesn't sound very insecure.

[Anonymous No.3663304]

>>3662238

I want.

[Anonymous No.3663396]

>>3662522
I think it's people buy material goods to fill the sadness and unhappiness created by fall of Adam and that Jesus is the only one to make you truly happy. At least according to Jesus and Christians.

[Anonymous No.3663493]

>>3663261
Decent can be done, but exquisite minimalism is a delicate matter. But that's juist concerning aesthetic minimalism. Pragmatic minimalism is just a pleasant and easy way to live.

[Anonymous No.3663495]

>>3663396
Jesus also said that having a lot of stuff and money excludes you from entering paradise. Feels good man.

[Anonymous No.3663509]

[Anonymous No.3663522]

http://www.e-architect.co.uk/residential_designs.htm

feel free to fap

[Anonymous No.3663528]

>bed
>window
>shelve
>bathroom

All I want in an apartment.

[Anonymous No.3663541]

>>3663528
Cooking your own food is a good thing though.

[Anonymous No.3663552]

>>3663541

Every place downtown has electric elements which just piss me off.
It is great to cook, but I'd rather use the money I saved to try different restaurants and see how they do things.

[Anonymous No.3663610]

>>3663552
>It is great to cook, but I'd rather use the money I saved to try different restaurants and see how they do things.
Eating at a restaurant everyday would be quite expensive wouldn't it? Especially if you want to try different places, and not just the corner bistro.

[Anonymous No.3663617]

>>3663610

I get most of my meals at the restaurant I apprentice at anyways.

[Anonymous No.3663649]

>>3663304
fake woodland panels stuck to your windows?

[Anonymous No.3663664]

>>3662111
b-but that's the saloon of the J-class Hanuman
there are only 7 others afloat

[Anonymous No.3663669]

>>3662060
>>3662111
>>3662118

>>3663664

I think you just proved our point.

[Anonymous No.3663673]

>>3663669
It's a racing yacht m8
Too large for the America's Cup

[Anonymous No.3663681]

>>3663664
>>3663673
Still a pleb boat.

[Anonymous No.3663682]

>>3663681
>imblying you know anything about yachts

[Anonymous No.3663685]

>>3663682
I know kitsch when I see it and that is some nouveau rich interior design. Boat dismissed.

[Anonymous No.3663687]

Sorry

[Anonymous No.3663694]

>>3662082
That's not French though so how can you tell?