/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.5195009]

>Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.
What does this mean?

[Anonymous No.5195011]

read the book to find out

[Anonymous No.5195014]

It means that it was both the best of times and worst of times.

[Anonymous No.5195016]

Exactly what it says. Is it an obvious questions thread ?

[Anonymous No.5195027]

Give a bad girl the dick and your life be like a chocolate box
church

[Anonymous No.5195033]

No, what does it *do*?

[Anonymous No.5195035]

>>5195009
>toastoy.jpg
That filename makes promises the image doesn't deliver.

[Anonymous No.5195040]

>>5195009
Ah, interesting question OP. I think it means that whereas families more on the dopamine-abounding side, so to speak, tend to have less psychological diversity and variety than unhappy families with dopamine-deficiencies (not to mention serotonin), since there are many possible reasons for a depletion of dopamine or serotonin.

Or, if you wanted to put it simply, you could say that happy families are all alike, but every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.

[Anonymous No.5195042]

It means that Tolstoy didn't want to start with Dmitri waking up.

[Anonymous No.5195052]

>>5195009
If you want the second best answer after >>5195011, it would be that the closer you approach being 'one' with god, the more of a cardboard cutout of virtue you are. Comparatively, unhappiness and the myriad of personal hells is a wild west of sin, debauchery, expressions of misery, and cycles of pain in the family unit.

[Anonymous No.5195057]

>>5195016
This

[Feminister !!F9QVQ82MjmE No.5195063]

A functional family is a pretty straightforward type, but there are plenty of kinds of dysfunctional families.

[C No.5195073]

>>5195063

How's it going?

[Anonymous No.5195078]

>>5195063

A piercing scream and the sound of a window being smashed shattered the silence of the night. Feminister's boyfriend jumped out of the closet and scurried downstairs. As soon as he entered the living room where his beloved female mistress was sleeping, he froze. There stood Shrek. 7 feet tall, 500lbs, and a look of sheer anger on his face. And much to his surprise, there was his girlfriend, on her knee's with Shrek's green manhood in her mouth. Her eyes watered as she tried to take Shrek's Slimy rod all the way in. Feminister's boyfriend was in shock. "W-w-what are you doing?", he stammered. "Oh nothing, babe. Just sucking Shrek off. Take a seat and watch", came the reply. Feminister's boyfriend obeyed and took a seat on the couch. He felt his penis hardening, but, his girlfriend locked him in a chastity belt and threw away the key. With a look of defeat on his face, Feminister's boyfriend sat back on the couch, sobbing, as Shrek fired 3 gallons of ogre fluid down Feminister's throat.

[Anonymous No.5195111]

>>5195009

kek

[Feminister !!F9QVQ82MjmE No.5195123]

>>5195073
sup

[Anonymous No.5195125]

>yfw Szasz and Foucault were right and they're planning to round up the "crazies" the same way they rounded up Jews and witches
>yfw you realize modern media for children portrays unrealistically happy & functional families, and media for older people shows grotesquely unhappy families with serial killers, suicides, abuse, self-destruction, etc…
>yfw you just got Hegelian synthesis'd and everyone without a perfect family like they saw on TV when they were little (thesis) feels compelled to believe they're closer to an unhappy family (antithesis)
>yfw this same culture of glamorizing serial killers and child abuse leads to people thinking of unhappy people "oh, that guys a loner/creepy, he could probably be a serial killer"
>yfw this pushes people with any unusual family/sadness to "therapy" and "self-help"
>yfw this is all propaganda so they can either institutionalize/forcefully medicate the undesirables (this is done to children/teens, and those deemed not sane enough to decide for themselves), or teach them to find their only happiness in working harder for the state
>yfw media also mixes this up with the occasional heroic portrayal of the rebellious teen or even grandma who won't take their meds, bait to make the crazies try and rebel so they can get buttfucked even harder

>inb4 you're a fucking lunatic
I bet you plebs don't even watch the most popular shows on TV to see the propaganda they put in there.

[Anonymous No.5195130]

>>5195123

Not much. Just getting ready to go out with my girl for dinner. Waiting on her. What about you?

[Anonymous No.5195132]

>>5195125
>le 1984 is here face
You're a looney.

[Anonymous No.5195133]

>>5195009
snowflake compensation

[le trole faec ಠ_ಠ !Avm1fqtITk No.5195145]

>>5195125
This is an interesting idea, can you fill it out and argue each point in more detail, with examples?

[Anonymous No.5195146]

>>5195009
Its a very common thing, so common it has a name
>Anna Karenina principle

You can apply it to lots of things, it basically means "perfect" people or things are boring, and that our faults are what set us apart.

I find myself thinking of this often.

[Feminister !!F9QVQ82MjmE No.5195153]

>>5195130
I'm probably going to stay in today and practice with my pan flute.

Hope you have fun!

[Anonymous No.5195154]

Does anyone else think of this every single time someone mentions Tolstoy

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7KK7bXJV2c

[Anonymous No.5195159]

>>5195153

Sounds peaceful. Thanks though, likewise. Anyway, I'm out of here. Talk later.

[Feminister !!F9QVQ82MjmE No.5195171]

>>5195159
Cool beans

[Anonymous No.5195307]

>>5195125
bump for truth

[Anonymous No.5195316]

profligate on my prostate while I lie prostrate

[Anonymous No.5195538]

>>5195171
Are you really a girl?

[Anonymous No.5196030]

>>5195125
bumping for more discussion on this.

[Anonymous No.5196033]

>>5195154
bumping for more discussion on this.

[Anonymous No.5196043]

>>5195035
you rang?

[Anonymous No.5196048]

>>5195040
>leo_tolstoy.jpg
>that response

>>5195042
holy shit my sides, please stop lit

[Anonymous No.5196813]

>>5196043
That pic could be pressed into service for Toastoy easily enough. Especially since that's surely not Dostoyevsky in the first place.

[Anonymous No.5199338]

>>5195145
(1/?)
Read "The Myth of Mental Illness" by Thomas Szasz, and "History of Madness" by Michel Foucault. Read them skeptically, though, and keep in mind that perhaps you shouldn't agree with everything they say. But I agree with their main points in the end, which is the immorality of involuntary institutionalization/medication, and the role of the mad as scapegoats and villains.

The main argument of Szasz (a really important one), I can sum up like this: imagine some official or worker comes up to you and says "Hey, your ways of thinking, acting, and behaving are wrong. I can to fix this by giving you drugs and by talking to you."

You'd hopefully tell him to fuck off. Now imagine (if you were underage) he tells you it's not your choice and your parents have given them permission to do this, or, (if you're deemed legally insane) you can't decide for yourself and they're going to take you in anyway.

Now imagine this: Someone comes up to you and says, "I'm a doctor, and I suspect there's a disease in your thoughts and behavior. I can fix this through medicine and through theraphy."

Same situation, but different words. Even if you're not under the jurisdiction of a guardian/parent and you're deemed legally sane, you might still feel tempted to think, "Huh, a disease? Maybe this guy is right and I'm sick and need to be cured." Szasz's main point is that a disease of the "mind" (or of thoughts, behaviors, actions, etc…) isn't the same as an actual illness in the body, and conflating the two is a veiled way of telling people, "Your way of thinking and acting is unacceptable."

Consider all of the recent shootings this year and the past few years the media went nuts about, and how many of the shooters were said to have psychiatric issues and to have taken/been taking medications or went to therapy. I'm not saying these people were any less crazy or evil, just that the media definitely likes to exploit these things without necessarily saying the blame lay on incompetent psychiatrists. Also note that, apparently, the Navy Yard shooter

>showed up at a Providence, Rhode Island VA emergency room complaining of insomnia, and he was prescribed 50 milligrams of Trazodone, a serotonin antagonist and reuptake inhibitor antidepressant.[67][68][69] On August 28, he sought treatment for insomnia in the emergency room of a VA medical center in Washington, D.C., where he told doctors he was not depressed and was not thinking of harming others. He was given 10 more tablets of Trazodone.

Which is pretty fucking incompetent for some people called "doctors". Psychiatry didn't seem to help any of these people, but more people, obviously, will be bound to become prejudiced against the "crazy" than they will become prejudiced against the institution of psychiatry itself.

[Anonymous No.5199357]

>>5195145
(1/?)
Read "The Myth of Mental Illness" by Thomas Szasz, and "History of Madness" by Michel Foucault. Read them skeptically, though, and keep in mind that perhaps you shouldn't agree with everything they say. But I agree with their main points in the end, which is the immorality of involuntary institutionalization/medication, and the role of the mad as scapegoats and villains.

The main argument of Szasz (a really important one), I can sum up like this: imagine some official or worker comes up to you and says "Hey, your ways of thinking, acting, and behaving are wrong. I can to fix this by giving you drugs and by talking to you."

You'd hopefully tell him to fuck off. Now imagine (if you were underage) he tells you it's not your choice and your parents have given them permission to do this, or, (if you're deemed legally insane) you can't decide for yourself and they're going to take you in anyway.

Now imagine this: Someone comes up to you and says, "I'm a doctor, and I suspect your mind is diseased. Or, in other words, that you're mentally ill. I can fix this through medicine and through therapy."

Same situation, but different words. Even if you're not under the jurisdiction of a guardian/parent and you're deemed legally sane, you might still feel tempted to think, "Huh, a disease? Maybe this guy is right and I'm sick and need to be cured." Szasz's main point is that a disease of the "mind" (or of thoughts, behaviors, actions, etc…) isn't the same as an actual illness in the body, and conflating the two is a veiled way of telling people, "Your way of thinking and acting is unacceptable."

Consider all of the recent shootings this year and the past few years the media went nuts about, and how many of the shooters were said to have psychiatric issues and to have taken/been taking medications or went to therapy. I'm not saying these people were any less crazy or evil, just that the media definitely likes to exploit these things without necessarily saying the blame lay on incompetent psychiatrists. Also note that, apparently, the Navy Yard shooter

>showed up at a Providence, Rhode Island VA emergency room complaining of insomnia, and he was prescribed 50 milligrams of Trazodone, a serotonin antagonist and reuptake inhibitor antidepressant.[67][68][69] On August 28, he sought treatment for insomnia in the emergency room of a VA medical center in Washington, D.C., where he told doctors he was not depressed and was not thinking of harming others. He was given 10 more tablets of Trazodone.

Which is pretty fucking incompetent for some people called "doctors". Psychiatry didn't seem to help any of these people, but more people, obviously, will be bound to become prejudiced against the "crazy" than they will become prejudiced against the institution of psychiatry itself.

[Anonymous No.5199748]

>>5199357
(2/?)
Secondly, you should watch the latest shows on Disney and Nick if you want a good idea of what the children of today are being taught to think about the world. It's filled with many odd situations like single mothers, fathers in the army, being raised by an older brother (all from one show --- iCarly), being sent to special schools (ANT Farm, Victorious), being raised with foster siblings by a nanny who is a very young adult (Jessie), etc..., Itit is, to the mind of someone who's not a stupefied kid, nonetheless full to the brim with what (putting it extremely) I call psychological torture porn. This is basically what anyone would call it when you watch it critically and realize that almost every character is an indefatigably happy, self-absorbed sadist, communicating only by making jokes that only the audience can laugh at, not the characters, where every character can be a possible favorite by virture of how they all seem to have something over the other characters in their given moments of self-absorption. This is the state of happiness they show, and all possible "serious" issues are always quickly, cheesily crushed within the span of an episode so that it can end with a cheerful, ironic ending.

Next, just watch some popular adult shows on television. The new episodes of Criminal Minds are a particularly "good" one, but don't forget ones like House, Cold Cases, whatever new version of Law & Order they have now, etc… I call Criminal Minds a good one because the new episodes show a completely bizarre, twisted portrayal of a serial killer where any pretty much normal person who undergoes bullying, a death in the family, or any other trauma is immediately driven to create a godlike delusion of either revenge or resurrection around the event that they can solve by killing people in a certain pattern and certain brutal type of way. This is the typical formula. So much for the children's shows where the protagonists, despite their self-absorption, are usually cleaner and nerdier than most and easily, unrealistically overcome any problem like bullying or the possibly unmentioned death of a parent.

The average kid, who might even watch both of these types of shows at a young age due to shitty parental supervision, is obviously going to feel kinda fucked, which'll probably lead to a wariness of the creepy loners serial killers are usually described as in older TV shows, the same creepy loners who don't seriously show up in the children's shows. Thus, in a frightened state, the child will feel one of two things: worry themselves with anxiety and depression that the type of family they saw in children's shows isn't like their family, and they might end up like the family in "adult shows" (this usually lands them in therapy); or, worry themselves with anxiety and depression and overcome that by being the same unsubtle, self-absorbed, media-addicted, well-adjusted teenager shown in kid's and teen's shows.

[Anonymous No.5199757]

>>5199357
(2/?)
Secondly, you should watch the latest shows on Disney and Nick if you want a good idea of what the children of today are being taught to think about the world. It's filled with many odd situations like single mothers, fathers in the army, being raised by an older brother (all from one show --- iCarly), being sent to special schools (ANT Farm, Victorious), being raised with foster siblings by a nanny who is a very young adult (Jessie), etc… (more about this later). They are, to the mind of someone who's not a stupefied kid, full to the brim with what (putting it extremely) I call psychological torture porn. This is basically what anyone would call it when they watch it critically. You realize that almost every character is an indefatigably happy, self-absorbed sadist. They all communicate by making jokes that only the audience can laugh at, not the characters. Every character can be a possible favorite by virture of how they all seem to have something over the other characters in their given moments of self-absorption. This is the state of happiness they show, and all possible "serious" issues are always quickly, cheesily crushed within the span of an episode so that it can end with a cheerful, ironic ending.

Next, just watch some popular adult shows on television. The new episodes of Criminal Minds are a particularly "good" one, but don't forget ones like House, Cold Cases, whatever new version of Law & Order they have now, etc… I call Criminal Minds a good one because the new episodes show a completely bizarre, twisted portrayal of a serial killer where any pretty much normal person who undergoes bullying, a death in the family, or any other trauma is immediately driven to create a godlike delusion of either revenge or resurrection around the event that they can solve by killing people in a certain pattern and certain brutal type of way. This is the typical formula. So much for the children's shows where the protagonists, despite their self-absorption, are usually cleaner and nerdier than most and easily, unrealistically overcome any problem like bullying or the possibly unmentioned death of a parent.

The average kid, who might even watch both of these types of shows at a young age due to shitty parental supervision, is obviously going to feel kinda fucked, which'll probably lead to a wariness of the creepy loners serial killers are usually described as in older TV shows, the same creepy loners who don't seriously show up in the children's shows. Thus, in a frightened state, the child will feel one of two things: worry themselves with anxiety and depression that the type of family they saw in children's shows isn't like their family, and they might end up like the family in "adult shows" (this usually lands them in therapy); or, worry themselves with anxiety and depression and overcome that by being the same unsubtle, self-absorbed, media-addicted, well-adjusted teenager shown in kid's and teen's shows.

[Anonymous No.5199761]

>>5195009
It means Tolstoy is an idiot.

[Anonymous No.5199784]

>>5195009
"There are a million paths that lead to misery, but only one that leads to happiness."

- Paulo Coelho

[Anonymous No.5199804]

>>5199784
there are a million pleb authors, but only one pleb-king: paul coehlo

[Anonymous No.5199863]

>>5199357
>>5199757
bump

[Anonymous No.5200088]

>>5199357
That was interesting, thanks. I'll check out Szasz

[Anonymous No.5200115]

>>5199761
Still really rich though.

If I didn't have a fucking 40 hour job, I would think of awesome phrases to start my books too.

"Everything you eat, must come out the other end"

[Anonymous No.5202494]

>>5195009

Who would have thought that this teenager, with that arrogant ugly face and smug pose, would become the greatest writer of all time? He doesn’t even look like a count: he looks like an ordinary Latino boy in that pic.

[Anonymous No.5202507]

>>5202494
He remained an arrogant ugly smug cunt throughout his life, anon.

[Anonymous No.5202516]

>>5202507

Yes, I know.

Is funny to see people hailing him as a saint and regenerated man, when the fact is that he was only in it (all that religious missions) for even more glory and fame. Well, I can’t really blame him: at least he used his enormous ego and arrogance to accomplished great things.

Also: congrats on really knowing what Tolstoy was. You don’t know how rare it is for people to really see him for what he was.

[Anonymous No.5202533]

>>5195009
That happiness is achieved by similar means, comfortable living, hobbies passions etc. Where as there are many ways of being unhappy

[Anonymous No.5203789]

>>5195125
>glamorizing serial killers
Well, of course that is to be expected given that they appeal to our base desires for violence, struggle and competition.
Crime dramas help this association, because they´re inoffensive easy-to-digest entertainment that portrays serial killers as intelligent, charming psychopaths, who then are seem as desirable role models because they represent both the modern values of intelliigence and social charm and the primitive values of struggle, violence and strenght.

>Glamorizing child abuse
That doesn´t happen, ever. Popular shows don´t show childern getting abused physcally and even corporal punisment is protrayed as either a sligtly backward, boorish thing that we´re supposed to laugh at (I.e. Bart getting strangled in the Simpsons) or something so oldfashioned and outdated that is it outright riduculous (the " Do you want me to cut a switch?!" form)

Do you have some examples of child abuse beig glamorized in shows for teens and adolescents?
I can ´t imagine a way to spin it positively, except with a mesage of "What doesn´t kill me makes me stronger," and can´t see that resonating with teeagers, because they don´t ave enough self- awareness and motivation for self-improvement,to be motivated by that
I am interersted in your response anon.

[Anonymous No.5205183]

And a bump.

[Anonymous No.5207652]

>>5199357
>>5199757I
Is really no one else interested in discussing this?

[Anonymous No.5208085]

>>5207652
I'm still trying to build a position on it. It clearly defines some of my musings and fears in some places (disney, institutionalization), but I believe that the obsession with degenerate crime drama is from the sanitized media in the US and lack of firsthand knowledge of violence and it's effects. Also this whole thing reeks of an NWO conspiracy. Muh tinfoil. I like it.

[Anonymous No.5209976]

>>5208085
I don´ t intend to call you a /pol/ack but I would like to know what exactly about crime dramas you consider degenerate? The definition I use ( pic related) applies on to behaviour, and lifestyle, so I can´t see what how it applies to media.

Isi the glorification of violence? Portraying it as art to be ejoyed for aesthetic and emotional fulfilment. I don´t think that applies, unless the violence portrayed is outlandish or ridiculously overeleborate (as in the Saw moviies, for example), so I don´t think this makes crime dramas degenerate. Your opinion?

[Anonymous No.5210391]

>>5209976
it's not the glorification so much as the fetishization of it. I guess it could be a primal response from people to the lack of violence, blood, and concrete fear in modern society, but the way it's being presented is increasingly less about any sort of drama and more about trite goreporn. .

[Anonymous No.5210501]

>>5199357
>>5199757
While this is interesting, I see absolutely no reason why this theory should have precedence over others.

The entire topic you are bringing up can be very easily attached to anything, and can very easily be taken over by another theory which also appears interesting yet ephemeral.

I mean, maybe these shows are there for, you know, just making money? Maybe kids are given candy to shut them up so parents can work to buy the candy the kids now so badly want, and old people need to be frightened during the show, so that when commercials show up and are all happy and everything is guaranteed, they want to buy buy buy?

See how easy that is?

[Anonymous No.5210520]

happy families are boring

[Anonymous No.5210535]

>>5199357
Szasz sounds like a scientology shill

[« Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ » No.5210536]

>>5209976
>Explorer
W-why?

[Anonymous No.5210747]

>>5199357
I have a question. Do I need to know about some specific philosophers to understand Foucaults History of Madness?
Ive got basic knowledge of early philosophy, mainly ethics.

[Anonymous No.5210758]

>>5195009
There are no happy families. At least not lastingly.
Happiness is a side effect.

[Anonymous No.5210765]

>>5210536
wud fuc tht grls mole off her face

[Anonymous No.5210787]

>>5199357
>>5199757
Double 57 of truth automaticaly validate any argument declared in those paragraphes.

[Anonymous No.5211016]

>>5210787
Whoa