/lit/ - Literature

EVERY FUCKING TIME I COME ON /lit/ IT'S A FUCKING TAO LIN THREAD

tl;dr - jaded college student takes Adderal and writes a controversial reddit comment.

How's your novel coming along, /lit/?

> a teenager experiencing his first existential crisis

Said crisis will end when you realize *why* nobody cares.

> I’m interested in semiotic collaging

I said that to a girl once and she slapped me.

> wonder if /lit/ has improved in the six months since I last clicked into it
> Ayn Rand thread

Good job, guys.

What does /lit/ think of pseudonyms?

Did I just get trolled?

This board would be better if I was around more, but if I'm around more, I have less time to read. What do?

>>1645351

Stagolee has at least one vagina.

> Java

Nope.

I have and I did and this is the best thread on /lit/ right now.

My favorite is pretty obscure. You probably haven't heard of him.

>>1632173

http://www.amazon.com/Pregnesia-Harlequin-Intrigue-Carla-Cassidy/dp/037369413X

> Former navy SEAL Lucas Washington was an expert at tackling impossible missions. But when a striking--and very pregnant--woman turned up in a car he was repossessing, suddenly he was in over his head. Shaken and bruised, she couldn't remember what had happened to her or why she was terrified of going to the police. Lucas made it clear he could be trusted, and vowed to protect her until she was safe. Hours turned to days as they searched for clues to her hidden past. Then a family came to claim her, and a happy ending seemed imminent. But had he just delivered his Jane Doe to safety...or into the hands of a killer?

Tripfag master race. But master of what?

OP fails. In reality, no woman is ever going to sit there and explain her lack of attraction to you as if it were a decision she made, because attraction never works that way. If you're hoping, expecting, or desiring such a thing to happen you're being the same self-absorbed douche the the supposedly female speaker her is accusing you, the reader that identifies with the male figure, of being. This is just porn for your self-loathing.

You want rejection to be personal, so you can feel like your navel-gazing self-centeredness is justified. It isn't personal: it's not because you do this or that, it's because she's not attracted to you. You want a woman to tell you in absolutely clear terms that it's never going to happen, so you don't have to make the decision to stop pining for her. You want her to tell you that what you are and what women want are mutually exclusive, so that you can resist any effort to improve yourself by claiming that you don't want to be a different person. You want her to say you're bad in bed, because then you can pat yourself on the back for spending so much time worrying about your average cock and poor stamina. You want her to demean the things you're genuinely interested in so you can justify all the concealment and pretending you do to appear interested in other things.

In reality you don't need any of that shit.
You just need to love yourself. That's all confidence is.

> Part the first:

I wish I had stopped reading right there.

>>1620913

How does it shit the bed at the end?
It's been a while since I read it, but I don't recall being disappointed.

I would subscribe to Harpers & Laplam's Quarterly, but I've moved around too much to enjoy getting mail.

I subscribed to Wired when I was a kid, but I've found they rarely do better than one good article a year. I read the Economist at the library sometimes, and GQ is a guilty pleasure.

Can somebody summarize this series for someone who has not read it and has no intention of ever reading it?

I would like to see more of her explicitly aesthetic dimension.

Serious question: was /lit/ ever good?

But...I have!

> implying anybody on /lit/ reads books anymore

The real question is: was /lit/ ever good?