/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10461124]

>the prose!

[Anonymous No.10461133]

>the plot!

[Anonymous No.10461135]

>>10461124
>start with da griks

[Anonymous No.10461137]

>enjoying challenging prose shows how special i am, fucking normies!

[Anonymous No.10461144]

>>10461124
>the blatant symbolism!

[Anonymous No.10461149]

>>10461124
>bottomless pit when?

[Anonymous No.10461155]

>the themes

[Anonymous No.10461159]

>da pictures

[Anonymous No.10462484]

>>10461159
true

[Anonymous No.10462491]

>>10461159

>"What good is a book without pictures?"
>you can buy a version of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland without any pictures

[Anonymous No.10462575]

>>10461135
didn't even pick up the greeks, did you?

[Anonymous No.10463179]

>>10462575
no i have never read anything outside of /lit/ threads and my diary desu

[Anonymous No.10463239]

Reminder to sage, report and/or not reply to /his/ threads

[Anonymous No.10463266]

>>10461149
bugs.. /dgg/ leaking

[Anonymous No.10463325]

>>10461124
Ah yes, the prose. The prooooooose. the PROOOOOOOSE. There's a reason why the pseuds on this website are always so willing to talk about "the prose" of a book when discussing its merits or flaws. Why attempt to analyze the merits and effects of the literary devices used to add to the development of characters, why attempt to understand the interplay of the perspectives of different characters and the emphasis this places on different themes, the spectrum of ironies used throughout the novel, the historical significance of the novel and the influence it has spawned in literary tradition or the influences seen throughout the work, the specific structure and literary underpinnings of the novel and the way it influences the tone, the author's relationship to the characters and the theme, the presentation of the novel itself to the audience and thus the relationship between reader and text --- why do any of this, when you could talk about "the prose?" You know that you have such a deep understanding of the book, don't you, when you talk about "the prose," the "musicality of it," the "sparseness." What a great artistic touch you have, don't you! Such a highly refined poetic sense! And you feel like such a true reader of literature when you are able to compare these styles: "I am partial to the lyricism of Joyce's prose, as well as the clean and scientific prose of Borges," you might say. What a deep understanding you show! Because the "prose" of a work is such an accessible topic, something that is felt immediately in the body and senses, a nice little sensation and flutter of the heart. Art obviously has nothing else to it, nothing other than the little sensations that I experience, because why should i attempt to understand it on a deeper level than this, when I have such a "refined" sense of the "prose?" Why even attempt to analyze the prose and the poetic and rhythmical underpinnings of it, when I could use a pretty little metaphor for it? It matters little that virtually every reader of literature has access to the music of the words and so my understanding is not quite so advanced as I would think, that form is something that goes hand in hand with theme, that I missed all the deep relationships between characters and between text and reader that existed in the work and that comprise a large part of the literary merit of the text, for my understanding of "the prose" shows such a mastery of language, a fine-tuned sense of the magical flow of the words! Having understood this work, I may as well move onto the next, the next bundle of pretty sensations to experience, the next bagful of fun linguistic treats!

[Anonymous No.10463521]

>>10461124
GIVING BAD PEOPLE GOOD IDEAS
I KEEP GIVING BAD PEOPLE GOOD IDEAS