/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6853293]

Do you immediately stop listening to someone if they use "it's awesome/amazing" to simply mean "I enjoyed it?" Do you think people in general fail to put much thought into the words they use?

[Anonymous No.6853303]

Stop being an elitist twat. Everyday speech doesn't have to have artistic merit.

[Anonymous No.6853324]

>>6853293

Yes. "Powerful" also triggers me hard. YA MEAN YA LIKED THE BOOK, AND YA THOUGHT IT WAS GOOD?? It's like 'awesome' for a more arrogant (but no more intelligent) grade of person.

[Anonymous No.6853325]

>>6853303
Disliking words that have been smothered of meaning doesn't make someone an elitist twat. You're saying you would hold equal value between a carefully thought-out opinion and common buzzwords?

[Anonymous No.6853345]

Words that trigger my jimmies into PTSD mode when used non-ironically:

>shan't
>simply wonderful
>delightful
>awesome
>hella
>'tis
>incredible
>enchanting

I immediately view the person as attempting to embody some literary persona, you know the kind - someone who is so into books that their heart skips a beat type shit. It's words on a page and they can be really cool, but you can stop with the hyperbole you shits

[Anonymous No.6853393]

>>6853325
>smothered of meaning
Being an elitist twat is all fine, but a failure from trying too hard is the worst.
>inb4 it's a metaphor JohnGreen.jpg
That's not how the verb works, scram.

[Anonymous No.6853401]

>>6853293
I think that's indicative of a dismissive approach to your interactions. Not that I blame you, I'm often guilty of the same thing.

I get where >>6853303 is coming from too, because you're talking about having an averse reaction to buzzwords but the reaction you're referring to is a buzzreaction. Honestly, you could have worded your initial post to better convey you what you said here >>6853325. I don't think he's saying that at all though, he's just reacting to your post because it wasn't as well worded as it could have been and you did sort of come off as a twat--or you spoke in a way which lends itself to it's interpretation.

IMO we're all reflections of that use of buzzwords/vague language in one way or another, just on different levels. Your initial statement, on a base level, had to do with annoyance at inefficient, unspecific language which does not show a depth of consideration you might appreciate, but your own language was vague enough that it inspired responses like mine and anon's. So I guess what I'm asking here is, do you think that people should/would dismiss your questions statements based on their lack of initial clarity the way your posing in your opening question? I mean, you clearly have a passion for words: "smothered of meaning" is a clear and efficient phrase which you rely on to convey your considerations about the subject. So would you say people using buzzwords are also trying to convey their passion about whatever subject and their use of them is, on a less articulate level, a reflection of your own actions?

Although, it only came out after you were dismissed, so maybe that was good? What do I know.

[Anonymous No.6853408]

>>6853324
Powerful is something different than "I liked it". I can even mean you disliked it. "Pwerful" is like "striking", it means "fuck, whoever did this is hardcore and not a pussy".

Though I agree it's not the best qualifier.

[Anonymous No.6853409]

>>6853401
its*
you're*

[Anonymous No.6853424]

>>6853324
I'm a Californian so I use the word "awesome" regularly. I'd say that word has pretty much lost its meaning and you guys are over thinking it. "Powerful" on the other hand has heavy meaning. It carries the connotation of something being emotional or important, and I completely agree with you that it's used poorly. Usually when someone uses it it means "look at how culturally sensitive I am, everyone else thinks this book is important so I do too, wow it stirred me deep".

[Anonymous No.6853476]

>>6853401
Fair enough. Discussion is certainly important in refining a thought or opinion, and there's probably some amount of value in every approach to a response. My initial wording may come from the feeling that a headline-style assertion is necessary to catch people's attention and draw responses.

I do think there is a difference between thoughtless and thoughtful critiques, and that the belief in and avoidance of overused words isn't a wholly inaccurate delineation. I don't know if this is the most accurate way to categorize reviews, though, and I'm curious to see what others think.

[Anonymous No.6853598]

I just feel bad when I hear or read somebody saying "X is epic" or "X is a legend"...
How can you use such words for a person, like an actor who has just started acting and has landed a role in a movie that sold well?

[Anonymous No.6853697]

>>6853293
>Do you think people in general fail to put much thought into words they use?

Sure, but it does not bother me, if you do particularily wish to somehow influence a person, you do not need to actively adjust your language.
Whats more important nowadays is actually observing you opposite imo. that is what lacks much more in todays world.

>Do you immediately stop listening to someone if they use "its awesome/amazing"

No, at first I ask them why it was awesome/amazing, if they fail to explain it, you will change the topic anyway.

Stop being autistic OP.

[Anonymous No.6853718]

>>6853293
>Do you think people in general fail to put much thought into the words they use?

Definitely. Most people are on auto-pilot when it comes to language. They just speak without thinking about how they're going to speak.

This is not always a problem and >>6853303 is partially correct, but I think there are also a lot of times when people should pay more attention to the words they use. Language is extremely important so it pays to consciously choose your words and choose words that will accurately and meaningfully convey what you're trying to communicate.

[Anonymous No.6853759]

>>6853476
>My initial wording may come from the feeling that a headline-style assertion is necessary to catch people's attention and draw responses
That's understandable, though that style of media has a notable history of spreading misinformation. It's a trade off, right? How do you get people to listen while also asserting nuances the entertaining which requires discipline the general population doesn't usually have a background in? But I find that this is the value of environments like /lit/. Though this board can be largely reactionary, I find that there are a lot of posters who are genuinely curious enough to engage a question on its intricacies.
>I do think there is a difference between thoughtless and thoughtful critiques, and that the belief in and avoidance of overused words isn't a wholly inaccurate delineation
Truly. I agree. People like Jonathan Heidt might argue that the initial human response to anything is largely emotional. Which, I suppose, supports the headline-style approach. However, the responses we're talking about have, at least in some cases, a trace of emotional reaction to whatever the material/subject of discussion is, which at least indicates interest which can then be encouraged through rational discussion in careful steps. I think this is more encouraging than discouraging, because there's at least something there which can be converted into serious consideration with the right relationship to the material, through a relationship with an individual.

[Anonymous No.6853856]

I start feeling that way whenever someone says "deconstruction".