/lit/ - Literature

Have you even read any Zola?
>Consider how much deeper a great poet can reach into the nature of man than an average person. Think of the extraordinary number of characters depicted by Shakespeare or Euripides, or the marvellous assortment of human beings that fill the pages of Zola

>Zola, who has so faithfully described the impulse to commit murder, did not himself commit a murder, because there were so many other characters in him. The actual murderer is in the grasp of his own disposition : the author describing the murder is swayed by a whole kingdom of impulses. Zola would know the desire for murder much better than the actual murderer would know it, he would recognise it in himself, if it really came to the surface in him, and he would be prepared for it

>Zola was a typical case of a person absolutely without trace of the Jewish qualities, and, therefore, a philosemite. The greatest geniuses, on the other hand, have nearly always been antisemites (Tacitus, Pascal, Voltaire, Herder, Goethe, Kant, Jean Paul, Schopenhauer, Grillparzer, Wagner); this comes about from the fact as geniuses they have something of everything in their natures, and so can understand Judaism.

>The Ladies Paradise (Au Bonheur des Dames) recounts the rise of the modern department store in late nineteenth-century Paris. The store is a symbol of capitalism, of the modern city, and of the bourgeois family: it is emblematic of changes in consumer culture, and the changes in sexual attitudes and class relations taking place at the end of the century. This new translation of the eleventh novel in Zola's Rougon-Macquart cycle captures the spirit of one of his greatest works
This seems like a fun Christmas story exploring the magic of early retail while also completely accurately relating how it started to distort people in real time and it's all believable. I think you're problem is that 'realism and naturalism' doesn't seem to have any rhetorical power because this random Indian person you mention can't actually describe anything accurately. Imagine if they actually could be accurate and they were also trying to be productive in whatever ideas their novels contained, it would be like magic

>>22191041
ah yes, anon, clearly we must throwaway the beauty of the classical architectural marvels and the structure of precision of neoclasisim, for some elusive life quality.

Most of life is boring npcs without heroic qualities.
I want the essence of the best of humans, not see my npc mother and aunt being npcs and having their npcs issues.

wow, so realistic, where nothing happens.
As good and amazing as looking at a family reunion.

I want to see the platonic ideals of a hero falling in love with the goddess that can't exist IRL (because all women IRL are npc whores) and they find a platonic super human love, perfect and free of dirty human imperfections, while defeating an unsurmontable bigger than life villain with reasons that are better than the heroe and that can trick me into being his follower.

WOW, I KNEEL to realism faggotry.

>>22191830
>most of life
>immediately cites society
There's your problem.

>>22191830
No, you’re wrong. The ‘goddess’ is a girl, who walks with a slouch. She’s pale and thin, and she’s carrying a large bundle of tattered old rags that she and her governess have to sew back into something resembling uniforms for the soldiers of some far off war that she will never see. Her hands are freezing from the cold, she can’t afford gloves. And she sits at her task for hours at a time until her fingers are gnarled just to be able to buy bread. And the hero is a man who doesn’t do much. He sits in his corner and reads all day. He doesn’t really care about literature, he doesn’t really care about much, except whatever appeals to his style of thought, or whatever makes him more of himself. He can’t find the will to really be interested in anything outside of himself, because he considers it instinctively imperfect, so he’s quite poor and sits at the bottom of life barely doing anything. It’s only sometimes, and rarely, and owing all what he’s stored inside of himself that makes him more of himself, that sometimes he can have a real flourish of style, can he say one good word to his dwindling number of acquaintances, or write some odd technical article or travelogue piece at random to what amounts to basically pennies. And he doesn’t do this for himself beyond what buys him his daily tea or whatever sort of drug that keeps him going. He walks in old torn clothes and beat up shoes. Whatever little money he does make from his style he spends on a box of bon bons, for that girl that walks with a slouch out in the cold. He doesn’t even know why he likes her, he doesn’t know why she’s the only thing outside in the world that he can care about, instead of buying new shoes or working on developing himself in anyway. Maybe it’s because she doesn’t have a haughty smile like other people, she doesn’t have their obnoxious and self proud laugh they have when they pride themselves on being impressed with something he knows isn’t perfect. Maybe it’s because even when she does smile it’s only for an instant, a glimpse at something real beyond, and even then through a significant amount of strain and discomfort. But he buys her his bon bons because that’s the only thing he can care about, that’s why he’s poor and at the complete bottom of life, and he tells her ‘make sure to suck the icing off carefully before you bite in with how sensitive your teeth are’. Also she’s about 15-16 (but she looks 12)

>>22192034
Now that’s a story. God I’m literally getting all gooey inside and writhing around just thinking about it. That’s something perfect, that’s what’s impossible. Not your hero’s and villains and everyone else that depends on something outside of themselves to have any real drama, not your deferential goddess’ that need worshippers, that’s pathetic to me. Once the villain arises, the hero arises. Once the hero arises, the villain arises. That is fundamentally a homosexual relationship. It’s unseemly, it’s horrifying and terrible. It turns my stomach and brings tears to my eyes on how incomplete it all is. No, give me my corners and my bon bons and my places where nothing ever happens. Nothing of course, besides a man being himself and himself until the very end, which is everything, which is everything that ever truly existed and had reality, man himself. That’s why Zola is good, he writes from the internal outward and masters the world. That is rhetorical power. Although truth be told I haven’t read one sentence of his work. He doesn’t appeal to my style.

>>22192034
>>22192038
>WALL of word salad with more literary mitwit WORD SALADS
>A literal brick of words.
Lmao nigga, I read that shit, but you're a mitwit.

lmao.

>Let's write a description of WALL of BRICK of text about some random girl with some guy you think is a loser
Just post some Chat gpt picture.

lmao.
You're stuck in 19 century wall of text faggotry.

lmao.

Your faggot description reads like all the "hemingway" homosexual garbage prose they teach in all writing courses.

You wont craft a shakespeare out of such mitwittery.

>>22192048
No, you’re wrong. God is an immigrant with a cancerous growth covering half his body, sometimes teeth fall out of the tumor. He's kept alive with a series of complicated machines despite no brain activity.

>>22192048
No Hemingway is the exact opposite of what I’m saying because he’s all about adventure or whatever idk I’ve never read one sentence of Hemingway. Also Shakespeare is a political writer, and in that respect I prefer Schiller. I’ve read all where Shakespeare gets his metaphysical ideas from like Palingenius Stellatus and I prefer to read that. I don’t really pretend to understand whatever political drama Shakespeare is trying to allude to in his plays and I think it’s phony to pretend it’s deep without really grasping why he wrote any of it like most people. He can write good phrases but that’s because he had significant rhetorical training from early childhood. He was a rich noble involved with big boy business. It’s impressive and important but maybe I’ll actually care when I’m like 40 or something because I’m not a retard trying to read out of my station like most people living in their larp. I already told you I don’t give a flip about literature, only genius appeals to me and it’s not to be found in your proto marvel movies that Cervantes was making fun of. In that respect I prefer Walter Scott, his girls are better

>>22192066
nah, literary catharsis is a consequence of reaching God.

some warhammer 40k being can't create the perfection of Bach.

>>22192079
Iliterate jokes of the pandemium.
Thou who can't elevate to the higher ranks.
Them, who them can't.
Study?
Nah.
Them can only copy paste some hellspawn style of prosaic stupidity, just like their semite intelectual owners.
Never greatness reach.
Blind and confuse.
They will never see the greatness of the divine, for as such they resent him, and his beauty, and his perfection.
They can only -and only them- afraid from his biblical perfection can only sucumb to the earthly tentation of mediocrity.

For as such faggotry of literary sodomy and gomoerra.
Why care?
Why care about them?
Why care about their mediocrity?

A riot.
A laughing stock them must be.

Cope, can only them reply to selves.

>>22191830
>Most of life is boring npcs
No, you're simply autistic

>>22192149
nah, I'm not autistic.

pic related.

>>22192111
>some warhammer 40k being
The cancer blob is the ultimate goal and highest good according to the premises society currently works from. There is no greater thing than being dependent and incompetent, it's what we should all strive for. One day we will all have our own private automatic heroin chambers to decay in and approach the perfect form of being, an amorphous blob of fat and tissue experiencing pleasure.

>>22192160
I don't think you'll brag about that when you're on your deathbed.

Such evil that exist on the world, need an obvious oposite force.
Extreme evil is real.

It's a logical conclusion that extreme beauty and good is also real.

Therefore the conclusion is obvious.

>>22192111
You don’t get why I’m saying. Realism and naturalism can have rhetorical power and influence if it’s accurate. If you could really describe people and things accurately, while also getting to the heart of whatever is bothering you about popular ideas or trends and seeking to humiliate it and conquer it while advocating for something productive and helpful for people you’d have done something far beyond 99% of humanities means. But I don’t even see why you’re complaining about naturalism when most people like these big marvel movie stories that you like, just write that and everyone will love you and call you a genius and go home with a happy warm belly without being challenged at all. I get most realism stories people write now are just weird and dumb but most importantly not accurate, they can’t replicate other people inside of themselves with any skill. But you don’t care, you like the ‘beauty’ and awe and power of the anti-christ, you want to worship something great that exists outside of yourself or fallen nature. You don’t want to drink Christ blood and sit at the heavenly table as a brother and a man unto yourself, you want what’s outside and great, so just go out and impressive other people like yourself with that, and they’ll worship you. Me, I’ll sit in my room with my bon bons, the girl with the slouch isn’t even here anymore, she got married off to some country baron. I’m alone, but I’m myself, from now until the end.

>>22192196
I never mentioned I enjoy anything made by a writer born in the last 150 years.

It's all garbage.

I don't think you've ever experienced the beauty of his perfection.

>>22191830
This is really sad pitiful bait, but I’ll humor you for a moment.
>wow, so realistic, where nothing happens. As good and amazing as looking at a family reunion.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand realism and naturalism. Zola, one of its founders, wrote naturalism under the principle that all the material needed for a story is present in unembellished reality. What’s important is that it is not HIS unembellished reality, but A unembellished reality. Take, Germinal, for example (arguably his most famous work): Zola describes in excruciating detail the drab and sordid lives of French coal mining families, all living in a company town. This does not remotely resemble his own life, but by investigating and studying the lives of these people in depth, he is able to craft an incredibly rich story for those who have no idea what it is like to be a coal miner. I cant make any claims about the coal miners themselves because they would not have had time to read this, but even they might get enjoyment out of experiencing the omniscient perspective of the work as a whole. Naturalism and realism does not fundamentally mean choosing what is mundane and banal, but finding areas of life which are niche and interesting to most people.

>>22192235
And that's why I'm impressed by the work of mediocre and lesser artists.

Not my cup of tea to waste my time with the average and mediocre.

>>22192243
I'm not *

>>22192243
Said the average and the mediocre. I think that's your problem, and it's a painfully common one.

>>22192263
ah yes, another son of that modern that funny liberal school of the sons of Saturn, the offspring of the illustration.

Yes anon, I love the modern liberals gifts of rationalism and science.

Yes, I am thankful for the utter mediocrity of the modern arts.

Sure anon, for as begginer works, begginer admiration.
Thou no shakespeare will craft never.
Begone, amateur.

>>22192273
Okay, you self-important retard. Keep using the world only to vaguely and unimportantly vent your insecurities like the dumbass you are, I'm sure you're enjoying life in your own best ways. God is a funny.

>>22192465
post some word smith of your literary modern taste, then pleb.

again, you wont craft a new seneca with faggot literary sodomy.

>>22191830
Retard

>>22192243
You just ignored everything in my comment and made a non sequitor. Congratulations. Search all you want, but you will find no strict correlation between subject matter and mediocrity or lack thereof, in fact even posing a strict correlation between the two, as you have been doing, is such a sign of either ignorance or mental infancy that I can’t really fathom. I imagine you have not been exposed to a lot of art and are clutching on to an aesthetic philosophy you read about somewhere since it’s your first exposure to this type of thing. I’d encourage going to some museums and reading more, but at the same time it’s your free time so feel free to do whatever you want.

>>22193432
post me a modern cervantes or shakespeare, then my mistress.

At least post a fucking modern milton or marlowe.

Not even a molliere you can.

If realism was where writing ended that would suck but thankfully we got a whole lot of loopy crazy post-Dostoevsky writing so I ain’t mad.

Naturalism I can only really think of Zola, who I can’t vouch for, because he wrote some pretty cardboard-ass characters, but I guess he’s good at describing machines and shit.

It's confusing because in theory I hate realism and naturalism but I find myself enjoying it the most

>>22193444
If, from the outset, you are defining as great the writers who conform to your tastes, there is simply nothing I can do to convince you. You saying “give me a writer as great as Shakespeare or Milton” only holds weight if I believe they are as great as you believe they are, and since you already believe they are great, whatever I recommend that differs from them you will immediately shoot down.