/lit/ - Literature

>>3563497

I have a fuckton of both, but even the pop fiction threads used to be better than this.

>>3563496

why


why would you do that?

This board has gone to shit. Sorry, but REALLY? 'What if LOTR were mecha?' SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT

>>2977713

Especially a problem for people who only want to be writers to excuse/rationalize the swinish egotism they have already decided to make their way of living.

>>2923610

Hey!

>>2923573

Like I told you, stop begging me, you will achieve nothing.

>>2923493

I've read the book(s). They suck too, but far more interestingly. They're a portrait of how various pre-modern values hold together a basically damaged mind, and the disappointments of middle-age.

No, as illustrations they're bad because they keep moving and shit. As shitty movies for mouthbreathers to make a greaseball rich, they excel.

Oh, and yeah, no sex.

Agarian conservatism.

>>2922491

Why do you lie when I will always be here to correct you in public?

It's wonderful.

If only there was an extension so that weak people with half-formed ideas based on self-regard and hysteria could avoid ever having to engage with people who might break their bubbles.

My participation in this thread has, thus far, been perfectly civil. If someone's going to welp at me to go away, I will say 'eat a dick' without remorse, because that person is being ridiculous.

>>2919193

No I'm not, you are for talking about this shit, and no, I never will. End of discussion.

>>2919154

Whatevs, bitch.

>>2918935

The problem with this is that I do understand analogy, and you didn't make one. Why can't you honestly admit when you haven't understood something?

Fantasy books, that's why.

The emotional meltdown I've been attempting to reason the sufferer out of during the last few posts sums up perfectly why this genre can't have nice things - the greater part of its readership is literally too psychologically incontinent to stand them.

>>2918872

No, what you've done there is juxtapose two entirely unconnected quotations.

>>2918866

> are you sure you aren't talking about your self? After all, they say the empty can rattles the most. And you rattle on ALOT.

Wow, what willful stupidity.


> Once you start arguing if some knows the meaning of the word 'doubt'

You have repeatedly used the word 'doubt', on its own, without qualification, in connection with my posts. You have made a accusation you're not even explaining, and then backing away rather than giving me a clear idea of what it is you're accusing me of. What does it mean to 'harpoon the thread with doubt'?

>>2918838

What's clear is that you're too emotive to write straight. You said I said something I didn't. You've then flown into angry defensiveness rather than simply acknowledging that you misunderstood what I said. You haven't raised any relevant issues yet, it's just these repeated attempts to lecture me - inaccurately - about something I didn't get wrong in the first place. Again, explain what you mean by your persistent use of the word 'doubt' in the abstract. What do you think the word 'doubt' means?


>>2918777

^ This is the last post that was about something other than your emotions. Address these issues I've raised and I'll answer you.

>>2918816

No, 'pretentious' is using your hasty misreading of someone's point as the pretext for pompous, inaccurate pontificating, then bitching when it's pointed out that you were wrong. All you have to do is admit you misunderstood what I said. It's very easy, providing obnoxious self-assertion isn't all you've got going for you. Just admit that you were wrong.

> after a rage delusion captain
> determent
> you're

Dude, if you can't write coherent English, don't attempt to patronize people who can. You will just look silly.

> By that we could divine that you're attempts to harpoon this thread with doubt and weight throwing

What is it you think the word 'doubt' means? In what sense am I 'harpoon[ing] this thread with doubt'? YOU'RE the one trying to throw your weight around.

>>2918782

> by the very nature and attitude
> unshakeble
> when it truth
> makes you age

Ah, how you must hate literate people, chode.

>>2918782

> Well aren't we just a brick wall of unfun and doubt.

This sentence doesn't mean anything.


> You do realize by the very nature and attitude that someone is eventually going to defy this 'conventions' you've put forth or believe to exist.

This sentence doesn't mean anything.


> when I pointed out that you just said fantasy as a major genre came to the fore 30yrs ago

No, I didn't say that. At all. In any shape or form. Read what I said again.