/lit/ - Literature

>>2194678
I would like you to now point out where I said White wasn't an expert.

>>1872466
>>1872466
>This characteristic, more than anything else, is why people on here don't recognize you as an expert.

You would have me deign to the level of the ignorant on your terms, but do you deign to the level of the street-corner doomsayer on the subject of politics or religion? No, you stand firmly at the station and wait for him to arrive. You don't the Sunset Limited back the way you came.

>>1872463
>I'm talking about "better" in the sense of "more pleasurable to read" by the way.

Then you're talking about it in a quite different sense than I am. The quality of a novel is not contingent on its capacity to induce pleasure, else Moby-Dick and Ulysses would fall far below a recent Grisham howler. Rather the quality is contingent upon aesthetic merits; that is, how well does the writer get his/her point across intellectually and/or emotionally? We then look at the ways language is handled, comparing the micro-level successes of this or that author (individual sentences, turns of phrase, metaphors) with the rest of the canon, as well as the macro successes (character, theme, overall voice). I'm speaking exclusively of novels now, but you get the point. Now on this basis of aesthetic merit, we (the elite critics) build standards of aesthetic merit by which texts are judged. The standards aren't objective in the sense that 2+2=4 is objective, but they are valuable nonetheless in compiling the canon--that is, those works that are more like to achieve their aesthetic ends than most other works,and which we put in their own domain for college study.

>>1872454
Who said anything about fun?

>>1872446
>make money
>miss out on literature, the greatest human project of all time

My pity for you is boundless.

>>1872433
Sounds to me like you're a wee bit jelly you didn't fling yourself wholeheartedly into lit crit when you were an undergrad.

>>1862848
don't I at least get a pity response anymore?

cunts

i'm sorry

>>1851369 Um ^^^

There's a certain threshold past which playful abuse becomes spiteful abuse, and you've crossed it.

Is there good literature beyond books, short stories, and poems?

Is there good literature in video games?

Is there good literature in movies?

Is there good literature in comics?

And if so, where is it?

Definition of good literature: rich and impactful storytelling.

>>1847869
While we are at it, fuck me as well.

Fuck the haters. You'll think of something.

http://www.mediafire.com/?ujcsupamrlnridt
uploaded for you qt <3

>greentext lol

big words big words lol

i'm gay

useless twaddle

DARKNESS
IMPRISONING ME
ALL THAT I SEE
ABSOLUTE HORROR

how cute

Testing

>>1840843
You sick pervert you disgust me. I only release my seed to the purity of the literature of Lolita. My pages are so sticky now I'm going to get a new copy and get it laminated.

test 1 2

>>1840838
>/sp/
>2011

Holy shit, I almost feel bad thinking about the terrible things I'll do to this fag's "reputation." Then I realize he never had one to begin with.