/lit/ - Literature

>>23325438
Its a package deal. And when he’s “bitter” he’s always interesting

>>23322709
True, it's also why his writing is so good, same with Rowling. Hate filled people who managed to make kino literature that seemingly make fun of certain stereotypes and ideas until you realise the authors are more sincere about it than you thought.
If Dahl were alive today and had a Twitter account he would be hated 1000x more than Rowling or any other British celebrity.

>>23325416
What do you mean by “actual Christian”? Do you have an idiosyncratic personal definition or do you just mean bending the knee to the Pope?

>find book on amazon that I am thinking about buying
>$160
>check the next day
>price is down to $120
>don't feel like buying it then
>price goes back up to $160
>process continues for a week, going up and down continuously
>manage to find a review of the book and realise that I definitely want it
>price is $160
>been checking it for the past week twice a day
>price stays at $160
>check price today
>it's gone up to $186
Goddamn it

I adore Tolstoy but the more I read of him, the more I cant help see these streaks of bitterness and condescension in his work that just completely disrupt the otherwise transcendent beauty he can often revoke

>>23325428
>. The moment itself felt like some dark ceremony, losing part of myself to something alien. Honestly wasn't too impressed by the results but the funny thing is all of this, the degenerate-drive, the horniness, whatever you call it, it's like a bottomless well, the deeper you go the more it seems like if you go just a bit farther some amazing treasure is lying there waiting for you if you'd just go a little more, a little farther- ended up going deep indeed, crossdressing, blew over a grand on silicone, rewired brain in ways still not understood, discovered things I never knew my body was capable of, but at end of every session always regretted it, felt unsatisfied.

Is a great way of describing it. Of course the music could be polished a bit -- can't it always! -- but it captures the experience very well.

>>23325165
>Third Position and fascist literature.
Shit that failed even harder than Communism is "the light?"

>>23325415
>So when are you going to drop revelation for empirical reality?
Again, this is not about my personal beliefs, I have not said anything that is logically inconsistent, only you have. You can try to muddy the water by making this about my personal beliefs but it's transparent that you are doing this and it just makes you look worse to everyone else who is reading this.
>If logic is just handmaiden to lawyerly deceit then what use is complying with your terms to parse out what is true or false?
Whether what you said is logically consistent or not is an objective fact, it's not "my terms" but it exists independent of my personal beliefs. If you want to be taken seriously or have people be more open to things you support and argue for like Buddhism then it's a good idea to at least be logically consistent instead of blatantly contradicting yourself.
>You are fundamentally dishonest.
You have not given any example of anything I've said that is dishonest.
>I am not talking about Buddhist dogma I am talking about yours. Your whataboutism is blatant
Nothing I've said was 'whataboutism'.

>>23324117
If you think that is bad... Just wait until you read something by Henry James he has the worst prose ever put to paper. It's like he sat down and asked himself "Whats the most tedious way I could possibly write this scene?" and then did it.

Did I get an incomplete copy of this? Almost none of the major plot threads were resolved

>>23321997
You can't do anything practical without a metaphysics dummy. Knowing what is real, the whole point of metaphysics, is the grounds for doing EVERYTHING else.

>>23325422
Can you point to where in his life he ever got a girl pregnant and left her or when he got between some husband and wife couple? Or when he simply moved on after bring told no? You are such a piece of shit bitch.

>>23324803
you forgot to mention it's an easy vehicle for less than scrupulous payoffs

>>23325398
Ideally, she'll get a dude who's on her level looks and/or status-wise and whom she has some degree of chemistry with. In reality, a lot of women (not all, but a lot) are just literally incapable of being content with a man only as good with them
because of their built-in hypergamy. For example:

>Li Yufei, an English teacher at a suburban high school in Beijing, began her search for a husband in 2017. Since then, she’s gone on about 100 blind dates a year, yet none have led to marriage. In China’s matchmaking market, Li would typically be seen as a catch. Now 32 years old, she’s been living in Beijing for 14 years, is good-looking, has a stable job, and holds a coveted Beijing household registration. She arrived in the capital as a student in 2010, completed her master’s degree, and worked at a major internet company before transitioning to teaching two years ago.

>Li agrees that her profile makes her “highly marriageable” and insists her standards aren’t “excessively high” when it comes to screening potential suitors. So why have her rigorous efforts failed to produce the desired result?

>"My ideal partner is someone slightly older than me, relatively mature, and stable. In the past, my mindset was such that I’d hoped to find a partner who was highly accomplished and could lead me in my career, almost like a mentor. Now I feel that this condition is difficult to meet. As long as we’re well aligned, with similar family backgrounds and life goals, that’s enough. Many people question whether my standards are too high. I truly don’t think so. On dating apps, I’ve already lowered my standards significantly. I don’t care about height; anything above 167 centimeters is fine. Appearance-wise, as long as they are decent looking, I’m not picky."

>"I realized long ago that there are very few genuinely handsome guys on dating apps. Maybe around 5% are handsome, but of course, if they look like the “pretty boy” type, that’s an absolute no-go. On apps like Tan Tan, there are many guys wearing big gold chains, posing with one hand on the steering wheel, or taking shirtless selfies to show off their abs. If I see any of these, it’s an automatic “no.” After so many blind dates, my standards are gradually changing. Initially, I liked meeting men with government and institutional jobs, thinking that the state had already “vetted” them for me to some extent. But after I went on blind dates with several government employees, that illusion was broken. Many of them were arrogant, feeling they have a certain status and are highly desirable in the marriage market. On top of this, they are often a little too comfortable. One man told me, “I just want a stable life. There are ways to live well at every income level, whether it’s 3,000 yuan or 8,000 yuan ($415 or $1,100) a month,” rationalizing his low income. I still hope for a partner who is ambitious, daring, and willing to grow with me."

>>23325375
What stood out to you?

>>23325395
I didn't get a chapter
>>23325411
>But it will all amount to a simple concept, it's about power and perceptions of power
Money *is* social power. Your point is moot.

Welcome to fatherhood Forest Anon. God bless your family if you ever see this

Giovanni Colacicchi - Psychology as Ethics

Kinda indirectly but that's the most important takeaway. The basic point is we have to accept and integrate all our instincts; suppressing any one of them, like the tribalistic instinct, is a pathway to misery and disaster.

>>23325402
I spoke too soon and got filtered by the Kozuch Theory bits. Ordering PC next. Thanks.

The only remote chance of happiness and fulfillment i could find in life would be in academia and teaching but academia and education are both so terrible. I refuse to ever get a higher degree or participate in that in protest. So now I'm just lost.

>>23325408
Source: his life and own writings. Are you saying Goethe wasn't a continual womanizer and restless romantic?

>>23321965
Thanks for proving his point anon.

>>23325096
Stein has some good stuff. Woolf is not bad.

Beautiful people are morally better than ugly people, this is a fact. Read Rígsþula.