[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.5872966 [View]

>>5872952
>>5872950


COCTEAU

Appreciation of art is a moral erection; otherwise mere dilettantism. I believe sexuality is the basis of all

http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/4485/the-art-of-fiction-no-34-jean-cocteau

GOAT interview

>> No.5872921 [View]

>>5872862

>On the plane, after a cup of black coffee, Paul thought of Taipei as a fifth season, or ‘otherworld,’ outside, or in equal contrast with, his increasingly familiar and self-consciously repetitive life in America, where it seemed like the seasons, connecting in right angles, for some misguided reason, had formed a square, sarcastically framing nothing–or been melded, Paul vaguely imagined, about an hour later, facedown on his arms on his dining tray, into a door-knocker, which a child, after twenty to thirty knocks, no longer expecting an answer, has continued using, in a kind of daze, distracted by the pointlessness of his activity, looking absently elsewhere, unaware when he will abruptly, idly stop.

Do you guys not like this?

>> No.5872862 [View]

>>5872779

he whips up some very powerful, somewhat intimidating prose every know and then; which alone makes him ok in my book. I can give this as an example, I guess:

>Daniel arrived with his friend Fran, 22, whose intriguing gaze, Paul noticed with interest, seemed both disbelieving and transfixed in discernment, as if meticulously studying what she knew she was hallucinating

I can't praise him much for his observational skills, but he's good enough.

>> No.5863825 [View]

>>5863111
> In Islam, the universe is deterministic, and God controls everything.

I don't think that's true.

>> No.5859118 [View]

I start most of my friendships based on a mutual appreciation of careful word choice. I think it's one of the biggest shows 'my kind of people' have.

>> No.5844720 [View]

>>5844688

>Of course you can simply be non-concerned with the question, but that's a different proposition.

I have never seen someone wreck their own case so elegantly.

>> No.5844598 [View]

>>5844561

yeah that was an obvious response

but i always substantiate my arguments and they're open to rebuttals, and i make an effort not to be a defensive dick and accept defeat when it's due.

new atheism is a tribe mentality. their hubris is collective.

>> No.5844549 [View]

>>5844518

I think they are right in their idea that the holy books have made a lot of claims that were torn apart by scientific discoveries and that this is a really pertinent argument against the authenticity of abrahamic religions

i think they are wrong in their belief that this has any power of killing religious belief as a concept


they are entry level intellectuals with colossal hubris which makes them sort-of-annoying-i-guess but they ultimately don't matter and i really don't understand why people feel so threatened by them

>> No.5844524 [View]

>>5844508

don't be like this, that's not what a fallacy means

>> No.5844361 [View]

>>5844175

I spent a lot of time coming up with a reply, I wasn't really sure what you meant by original thought. And I think it's possible that you aren't, either.

You think in language and language isn't something you're born with so yeah, there's nothing completely 'untouched' in you, if that's what you're looking to say

but any train of thought that has you end up with something you didn't know before is an original thought. thinking is, above all, a mechanism.

i think possibly what you mean by 'original thought' is more in the vein of original 'preferences', or maybe opinions. If you can't justify to yourself why you're feeling a certain way about something and this leaves you feeling alienation/dissociation, try analysing the thing, try writing about it, try to be rigorous. If you're feeling that you should have an opinion on something and you don't, consider the possibility that this is completely okay.

>> No.5844270 [View]

>>5844249

oh and that swings both ways,

people will call watertight arguments overanalysis, as a defense mechanism.

>> No.5844249 [View]

>>5844210

>aren't all different

dude it's because they refer to the same thing but overanalysis is sugarcoating it.

>>5844068
>no one has ever analyzed something too deeply

this is spot on. overanalysis as a concept doesn't even make sense.

>> No.5844106 [View]

>>5844092

sorry i'm allergic to trolleys! but i think it is wrong, yeah.

>> No.5844096 [View]

>>5842765

L A C A N
A
C
A
N

>> No.5844058 [View]

>>5843915

my one and only axiom is "it is wrong to consciously harm others"

I know that it sounds so very obvious but it really helps me to have this to fall back on in any circumstance.

>> No.5844012 [View]

>>5843995

they refer to the same thing but they have different tones, overanalysis doesn't carry the pejorative vibe. it's a defense mechanism.

>> No.5842376 [View]

>>5842334

send it with a tripcode, obviously

>> No.5842094 [View]

>>5840765
>>5840949
>>5840964
>>5841253

#represent

>> No.5838127 [View]

>>5838113

i don't think it's very ambiguous

it is one of [the most important pictures that were made by someone] makes sense,

while

if you wanted to say 'it is one of the most important pictures, it was made by someone', you neither need to nor should subordinate it with 'that'.

>> No.5838085 [View]

>>5838070

yeah that's what i figured, i can understand that

++ french is amazing for this sort of thing, you literally say 'it's me who AM [bringing sexy back, etc]'

>> No.5838063 [View]

is everyone trolling in this thread or is this something that's not extremely obvious when you're a native english speaker?

>> No.5837824 [View]

>>5836595

i dig your style fagve

>> No.5815687 [View]

>>5815208

quality post

>> No.5806526 [View]

camels yo

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]