/lit/ - Literature

>>13627282
Not one of those is off topic.
>>/rdt/

>>13627288
Read the stickied post and read the rules. Mentioning the word "book" one time doesn't make the post on-topic.

*fart*

take that op

>>13627291
Because I should read the rules of people who leave pedo threads up for days, encourage /rdt/ infiltration, and ban based on an arbitrary self-like/-dislike ratio.
No thanks. Make an effortpost explaining why none of those have relevance to literature and philosophy.

>>13627288
>>13627306
>MY POST ISN'T AN OFF-TOPIC TROLL POST BRO I MENTIONED LITERATURE ONE TIME
You can't actually be this stupid, right?

>>13627306
You clearly haven't bothered to read the sticky. Philosophy goes to >>>/his/ unless the post refers to a specific piece of philosophical literature. You are so incompetent that I bet your mother still wipes your ass.

>>13627282
They delete threads on an arbitrary basis, and sometimes keep stupid ass irrelevant ones for days. I think they read too much Foucault and are enjoying the idea of demonstrating their crude power over the board's discursive area

>>13627324
Nice try samefag. But that wasn't part of the og discussion.

>>13627336
I literally just said that faggot. Great awareness you got there.
And if you like /rdt/ so much, why don't you go there.

There are 4 posters in this thread. Guess which ones are /rdt/poster samefagging.

Yes it's sad. It wasn't like this even a year ago.

>>13627649
You're right, I apologize

They only delete threads that talk about fascism positively

>MUH OFF TOPIC THREADS

I'm sick of BTFOing people and then having the thread deleted after all of my hard work. It ALWAYS happens when my opponent is left without any recourse and has made a fool of themselves.

Jannies, if you're going to delete a thread because it's suddenly "off-topic", then spare me the wasted time and do it immediately.

>>13627282
It's great, now you get the trash instead of /his/. If only we could export the racial purity threads.

>>13627716
>STEMfag hyperlibs
>not trash
KYS, even more /rdt/ than /ptg/

>>13627282
>everything i dont like is off topic.
your feelings are not a valid source of knowledge

>>13627774
>Literature, most generically, is any body of written works. More restrictively, literature refers to writing considered to be an art form or any single writing deemed to have artistic or intellectual value, often due to deploying language in ways that differ from ordinary usage.

Just because a large proportion of literature might deal with a certain topic does not mean we can classify said topic as literature. If a slew of books were to be published today about music we would not be right in regarding music as literature. Similarly just because a lot of literature deals with sadness, alienation, resentment, and other psychological issues, does not mean you are justified in making threads about them. Philosophical topics such as determinism, dualism, etc., are -- you guessed it -- not literature either! A substantial amount of philosophical works are dedicated to those topics, yes, but there's a distinction between the works (literature) and the topic (not literature).

Secondly there is no such thing as a literary lifestyle. The only commonality you'll find among writers is in their work. Many writers lived drastically different lifestyles to one another. Thus making threads such as pic related asking if a certain action is "/lit/" is tantamount to asking if speeding is /engineer/ or using deodrant is /mobile phone/ or apple is /orange/. Stop it.

Lastly there is a huge issue here with people posting books/authors (usually about politics or race) which they haven't read nor are interested in reading and using them as an excuse to discuss the broader topics the books/authors may represent. These threads are usually infested by the lowest of midwits whose only concern is to get (you)s and circlejerk. You can usually tell what threads these are by their terse caption stating something puerile like "OWNED" or "How will lefties/right wingers ever recover." and by their low-level discourse.

Literature is not a topic. It is not a lifestyle. It is not a code of ethics. It is not your gay little debate club. It is art or information as expressed in written form. The only off-topic thread that should be allowed here are the "write what's on your mind" threads since they are a form of literature. That's it.

CLEAN UP THIS FUCKING BOARD.

>>13627791

>>13627791

>>13627791
A spectre haunts /lit/ - the spectre of volunteer wagieism. All of the effortposters of old /lit/ have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Pre-accelerationist posters and non-Guenon traditionalists, anti-Deleuzians and non-atheist anti-Christians, casual Zizekians and Tedposters.

This spectre threatens to eliminate effortposters as a class, and together we must organise against this madness. Both left-wing and right-wing can agree on only one thing: there is nothing more disgusting than a volunteer wagie. Neowagieist voluntarism is the surplus value extraction of effortposting. Everywhere one hears cries of 'THAT'S NOT /LIT/!' and 'SOMEONE CALL A JANNIE!' you can be sure that what you are seeing is the eternal slide into One Big Slide Thread. And we must unite against this hidden war, we must form into a single class.

All intellectualism comes down to effort in the end. The non-professional slider at least has to feign an effortpost, or string one along, to keep you tantalized by his trap. But the volunteer wagie simply deletes intellectual appearance. Whether good or bad is of no concern to him/her, the moderation policy simply is. He is the dindu nuffin of intellectual debate, the gibmedats of a greentext reduced to blind administration and disinfectant spray. For they are not even worthy of being called jannies, such shit on the wall is an insult to good working men. They have all of the worst traits of Oblomovists and Stakhanovites with none of the good. A house wife who needs a sex strike to clean up for her because she doesn't even enjoy wine.

Wagie voluntarists are lower than lumpenproles. They are the graverobbers who would never stoop so low as to thieve anything valuable. Revolutionary acts are not even a consideration for them (hence the production of a racket to counter the Ted threads). Thus we must say that if this place glows it does so because we have become alienated from our true purpose as a class: the effort theory of posting.

>>13627828
The global jackboots of mind erasure; the ASS of an endless stack thread where no one ever reads; CAPITAL IS MY GOD! These are the forces turning each post towards redditcana. The cryptoneoliberal haunts wherever he is unwanted, readies his most fierce bans wherever ideas do not glow. He is the Eternal Summerfag, and the effortpost is his Winter Palace.

Let us ensure both that the Winter Palace is stormed and that the Monarchs of Effortposting are given amnesty towards reprieve or self-exile. But nowhere shall we let one of our own commit the great sin of alliance with wagieist voluntarism. Defend the wagie if you must, but be forever warned that the spectre looms, threatening to suck all effort from your future intellectual pursuits. A good volunteer wagie gets the wage he deserves: moderation around the neck.

And so we say that in every thread on wagies, where the voluntarists inevitably attempt to assert their moderation personalities, we must take up the slogan, "They shall not slide."

"They shall not slide!"

A final thrust into the heart of bourgeois philistinism awaits. We must eliminate volunteer wagies, as a class.

>>13627791
>there's a distinction between the works (literature) and the topic (not literature).
so are we only supposed to talk about muh prose and literary devices while ignoring the ideas they are conveying?

if we're only supposed to talk about the medium then there wouldn't be much to talk about, especially since once you start deviating from the text (for example, making a counter argument), you're leaving the purview of literature and into the general realm of ideas.

people wrote for a reason, anon. I agree that the level of discourse has gotten too shitpost-y in almost every thread, but your proposed restrictions take things way too far.

>Secondly there is no such thing as a literary lifestyle. The only commonality you'll find among writers is in their work.
there's nothing wrong with talking about the biography of writers and how it influenced their writing. every author's writing is different, and one of the reasons why is because every author lived a different lifestyle.

>if speeding is /engineer/
KEK yes it is

>Lastly there is a huge issue here with people posting books/authors (usually about politics or race) which they haven't read nor are interested in reading and using them as an excuse to discuss the broader topics the books/authors may represent. These threads are usually infested by the lowest of midwits whose only concern is to get (you)s and circlejerk. You can usually tell what threads these are by their terse caption stating something puerile like "OWNED" or "How will lefties/right wingers ever recover." and by their low-level discourse.
agreed. but the biggest problem here is the low quality of discourse and the lack of references to actual books and their ideas. people saying shit like "niggers are putrid" instead of talking about the validity of Murray's methodology in the bell curve.

>>13627282
people don't want to discuss books they just want to appear smart

>imbling /lit/ ever had mods
If we wanted mods, we'd hire an editor. Stop drawing their attention here, it'll only lead to them deleting literary threads and pissing off the one sperger who keeps this place going who'll write them an appeal about how they have failed to note the now annotated allusions of his text and how they need to prove they are fluent in English and French at minimum before anon will accept their ban revocation. That's why they stay away in the first place: some idiot got a Lolita thread deleted and anon rained down upon them the righteous indignation of an expatriated Russian noble with five living languages, a newspaper column, and connections to Mossad.

>>13627866
I don't think you understood the post.

>>13628140
OK

Did the mods die? At what point will they start deleting off-topic posts? I haven't seen a single on-topic post all day. This board might as well be deleted if it's turning into a rehash of /tv/, /v/, /r9k/ and /pol/ with low quality blog posts and bait posts taking majority over quality on-topic posts. At least I can hope that

>>13628215
Mods finally logged in after at least 12 hours of inactivity. Could you think of no other explanation as to why the posts I've screenshotted have disappeared and why the catalog is only half its regular size?

>>13627282
i used to report many threads but filling out the captchas everytime is so tedious. fuck it

>>13627282
I only report offtopic thread that disagree with my beliefs

desu, this is what happens when you refuse to add a phil/religion board. if they actually added those things, the activity on this board would go down at least 80%

>>13628303
/his/ is meant to include philosophy and religion according to the stickies.

>>13628310
/his/ is garbage and doesn’t suffice as an outlet because it attracts the wrong kind of audience, why do you think phil people flock to this board?

>>13628301
holy fucking based

>>13627282
I keep reporting the trap-posting faggot and mods do nothing. I'm pretty sure /lit/ has not mods at all or if it has any he's active very rarely.

>>13628326
To talk about women, incels and modern politics?

Mate, this board hasn't had active moderation for five or six years.

>>13629225
I remember visiting this board about 2 years ago and while I always read, I felt humbled by the quality of the threads here. Even just the language.
Now even a half decent troll thread would increase the quality of the board.
And I know I am new here (on /lit/ not 4ch) but I try to talk about books for the most part at least.

>>13628215
You are allowed to have one thread discussing the state of the board, and believe me, we needed it badly. So fuck off you turbo complainfag.

I report literally ALL of the low quality/bait threads, it's just that the problem is, most people SOMEHOW don't know how to report and sage their posts, so they're just bumping the bait threads. In turn, the summerfags think these /b/ tier threads pass for quality here, and perpetuate more shit threads. It's a self repeating cycle. The only way to stop them in the absence of mods is to STOP RESPONDING.

Kafka's "An Old Manuscript" predicted /lit/'s current situation. The mods are safe and sheltered within the palace walls. The salvation of our fatherland is left to us modest effort-posters, but we are not equal to such a task, nor indeed have we ever claimed to be capable of it. This is a misunderstanding, and it is proving the ruin of us.

>>13627791
It's worse that the mods come through and delete a bunch of philosophy threads with good discussions. But leave dozens of threads that don't even pretend with a "books for this feel". Why don't those get deleted? I'd rather they just leave everything if that's the result.

>>13628326
/his/ is garbage for discussing philosophy nobody there knows a damn thing.

>>13627336
>philosophy goes to /his/
this is who's trying to give the mods more power, don't forget it

I guess they delet only when reported. I'm pretty sure we don't even have our own janny that we have to borrow them.

>>13629680
I personally think quality philosophy threads should stay here, and the ones that should be deleted are the ones posted by somebody who just got assblasted in an argument then proceeds to run to /lit/ to post a greentexted strawman argument along with big brain wojak, small brain wojak or soijak, only serving to seek validation and protect the OP's crippled self-esteem. Sadly, the majority of philosophy posts are the latter.

>>13629331
that was rescinded long ago slow poke, take it to >>>/qa/

>>13629258
I used to main here in like 2015 and it wasn't as a good as it is today, and really went downhill after the creation of /his/ because all the philosophy and theology discussion, which kept plebs and redditors out, moved there.
Thankfully in the last year or two those posters have returned and the quality has gone way up.
I find it very hard to believe that two years ago the board was better than now.

>>13627336
/his/ sucks ass though and they are all faggots. Fuck you, i post where I want. Sneed.

>>13627828
>>13627836
biblio

>>13629858
And mods delete what they want. I know you're the guy who posts greentexted strawman wojaks on here after getting assblasted by normies in your university.

>>13629886
I don't even go that far, I don't talk to anybody IRL about books or philosophy or anything. I just like talking about religion and philosophy, and /lit/ is way better for that than /his/ is, so I'm going to use whatever is best because the jannies are all trannies. If they wanted to clean the place up, they would. Fuck 'em. Sneed.

>>13629732
I wouldn't know, I don't do that when I lose arguments here and when I win I generally avoid threads about a similar topic/author because I assume the same retards I just btfo are going to be there spewing their same old bullshit.

I never lose arguments on /lit/. I have a feeling that I get into arguments with jannies, because whenever I utterly BTFO somebody and other people start dogpiling the loser, the thread gets deleted shortly.

Pro-tip janny: your brainlet debating skills are archived on warosu for all to see forever

>>13629943
That's more of a reminder than a tip. There's no way you "never lose arguments on /lit/," you're just delusional.

>>13627282
>half of the OPs are epic reddit mememan
not sure if this is an improvement over epic reddit memefrog being everywhere
/lit/ has been like this for years btw, mods = useless

>something something young male body
>literary equivalent of [insert anime]
>thinly veiled misogyny threads which are rooted in conjecture and circlejerking
yep, it's lit! thanks mods :)

>>13630417
Oh, and how could I forget thot-posting niggers. This place might as well be instagram.

>>13630088
It’s true. I cut a notch in my bedside every time I win one. And I stay in my own lane—history, immigration policy, population statistics, critiques of Marxism, etc. It’s hard to lose when you choose your fights carefully.

>>13630417
What’s wrong with misogyny

>>13630478
>>13630478
So you only go for low hanging fruit and never challenge yourself against anybody worthwhile?

>>13630478
>cut a notch in my bedside
d-do you also have piss jugs

>literary equivalent of [insert anime]
This is only a problem for NGE because it's been posted so many times. I don't see what's wrong with those posts in general: I'd like to read a literary equivalent of Mushishi. I do think that ______ of literature requests should have a general though, and so should translation requests.

>>13627282
I got banned for saying "N for fucking nigger. Because S would be too good." So i'd say the mods are alive and well.

>>13630538
No? I'll take any opponent, no matter how fearsome, on these topics. The thing is, it's easy to win when you choose the side of the truth. :^)

>>13631868
So, low hanging fruit?

>>13627336
anon >>13629680 is right... /his/ sucks for discussing philosophy.

>>13631913
desu, that's the beauty of the approach, coming across as "low hanging fruit." A lot of people think it's easy to debunk "redpilled" claims. For example: intelligence is largely heritable, immigration is anathema for the working class, race (in the broad sense) is real, Jews receive preferential treatment in university admissions (even taking into account merit), etc. When I prove them wrong with extensive data and reasoning, their heads explode. It makes the notches on the bedside all the more satisfying—I'd like to imagine that my defeated, enraged interlocutor is carving some "notches" into his own arm at the same time.

>>13631969
>genetics actually exist!
>nepotism exists!
So low hanging fruit, right?

>>13632021
yeah... lol *lights cigar*

>pewdiepie gets his cumbrain incel fanboys into reading
>fast forward a few months
>/lit/ quality nosedives
hmm.

>>13628326
>the wrong kind of audience
just say it outright. /his/ only reads wikipedia articles to use screenshots of them like yugioh cards in autism battles.

>>13632837
It's not pewdiepie. It's leakage from /v/ /tv/ /pol/ and /r9k/ in combination with summertime. Even 2 weeks ago this board wasn't nearly as bad as it is now.
You probably saw one single post on this board the day pewdiepie made a video on a book and now you obsess over it, when in reality, none of the shitposters are from pewdiepie but rather from the boards I mentioned above.

>>13632837
>implying pewdiepie wasn’t just some normie golden child who happened to be based and you’re not coping

>>13633154
sorry to insult your boyfriend
>>13633146
idk, faggot with a billion followers of primarily cringy manchildren gets people into reading books. suddenly /lit/, which is attached to an incel manchild website, goes to shit. any logical person would ponder that big think.
>even 2 weeks ago
reckon it takes adhd kiddos several months to finish reading a single novel. we're plagued by cancer. tripfaggots, /r9k/, bitter virgins, /pol/, christcucks, severe autists like guenanon, and retards of all forms.

>>13633313
>maybe if I ad hominem and strawman hard enough I’ll stop being wrong
The leftie is a strange creature

>>13633313
>tripfaggots, /r9k/, bitter virgins, /pol/, christcucks
We've had all of this before pewdiepie ever mentioned books. Wow, pewdiepie must be magic if he can sic his incels on us without saying a single word!
Clearly you are an obsessive delusional and are using pewdiepie as a scapegoat for whatever reason. There was no massive surge that correlated with pewdiepie's video on books. This board was the same before and after pewdiepie and the shitposts only worsened about 2 weeks ago during summer.
We need mods and jannies to delete the obvious bait posts, wojak posts and off-topic posts quicklier rather than having the catalog filled with pure garbage for 12+ hours until the mods finally check in on this dumpster fire of a board.