/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.21059471]

Have you read posts here that were really brilliant?

This thread will probably be more suitable to people who have been here for a few years.

I'm not talking about jokes, ironies, humor and memes but about really serious posts, posts that showed great verbal aptitude and imagination: poems, or pieces of prose, or literary criticism, excerpts from work in progress or philosophical comments, etc., which, if they were inside the pages of some famous author's book (rather than on an obscure anonymous forum) would be considered brilliant and hailed by critics.

I've seen threads where Anons ask the best of /lit/ and the only things that are posted are memes and jokes. I'm not talking about this kind of thing. I'm talking about something that really struck you as out of the ordinary.

Do you ever find an original post by someone here, an excerpt in a critical thread, that showed something like a possible sign of developing genius?

[Anonymous No.21059476]

pee pee ah poo

[Anonymous No.21059480]

this post has a fedora on it

[Anonymous No.21059481]

>>21059471
Typically when there's a great post, it's due to the poster's level of knowledge about a particular topic and not so much that they've posted a great piece of writing they've done. It's odd the level of knowledge that some anons have about really niche literary subjects.

[Anonymous No.21059486]

>>21059481
the threads about Marx on this board are legitimately awful, like up there with the BAP threads but occasionally there are people there that do genuinely know what they're talking about

[Anonymous No.21059492]

>>21059471
No, this is pseud central and all posts are bad

[Anonymous No.21059512]

>>21059471
>Have you read posts here that were really brilliant?
no

[Anonymous No.21059527]

>>21059486
There's a fair number of people in the classical languages threads who know a lot. In terms of literary and publishing knowledge, one memory that stands out in my mind is getting into a conversation with an anon who seems to know practically everything about Alec and Evelyn Waugh's early publishing efforts, and even linked me to copies of Alec's correspondence hosted on a website affiliated with alumni of his boys' school. A lot of posters are idiots but every so often you get lucky.

[Anonymous No.21059540]

>>21059471
The other day I read a post about some dude talking about English medieval poetry or something of the sort, and I was really humbled by the knowledge of the poster

[Anonymous No.21059543]

>>21059527
>A lot of posters are idiots but every so often you get lucky.
this is applicable to the internet as a whole honestly, the vast majority of people online do just talk out of their ass

[Anonymous No.21059556]

Just memes and shitposts. The tryhard blogs are rarely impressive and if they are it's usually because they present a lot of gathered knowledge not insight from the poster.

[Anonymous No.21059557]

There are some threads up about Robert Brandom, Pragmatism and Hegelianism. OP knows his stuff in and out, but people here are either too dumb or shallow to engage with him. They resort to calling Brandom fat and irrelevance while providing no proof for his supposed irrelevance. If posters were a bit more gracious to him for sharting his knowledge, we'd actually have some good threads here.

[Anonymous No.21059559]

>>21059557
holy fuck brandomfag you've been shilling this guy two days and you're already acting like guenonfag's dementia 3 years in, are you speedrunning schizophrenia?

[Anonymous No.21059574]

>>21059559
I'm trying to generate some feedback on Brandom. He is the single most important philosopher living today and why he is basically invisible here is beyond me. im not American and neither do I study philosophy - and I still recognise the supreme value of his reading of Hegel. This board is supposedly in love with the PdG but the second somebody deviates from the canonical reading of it, they lose their shit and start foaming at the mouth with ad hominem attacks. I've watched this trend on here increasing for a long time and decided to do something about it

[Anonymous No.21059575]

>>21059471
https://archived.moe/lit/thread/20889883
This
Wish he posts more

[Anonymous No.21059583]

>>21059471
I saved picrel as a great post.

[Anonymous No.21059588]

>>21059471
I've plucked and bookmarked many hidden gems from this board over the years.
>>>/lit/thread/S19431541#p19432183
If you can make a correct synopsis of the materialism pill posts I will pull up the Roerich posts. (barrier to entry)

[Please Read Robert Brandom No.21059594]

>>21059559
Btw the proof's in the pudding. Just read through some of the active brandom threads now and then try calling me the schizophrenic one. The mention of his name alone sends people here into mega spergouts about nothing. They just can't stand the idea of an analytic touching their oh so precious canonical Hegel

[Anonymous No.21059625]

I'll dump my favorites

[Anonymous No.21059671]

>>21059476
>>21059480
>>21059481
>>21059486
>>21059492
>>21059512
>>21059527
>>21059540
>>21059543
>>21059556
>>21059559
>>21059575
>>21059583
>>21059588
>>21059625
Brandom haters, just because you don't understand him doesn't mean that you have the right to ignore him

[Anonymous No.21060400]

>>21059671
doesn’t he teach in Pittsburgh? (or taught)
i mean cmon lol

[Anonymous No.21060432]

>>21059556
That meme is too accurate. The gap between the Greeks and the moderns is revolting.

[Anonymous No.21060900]

>>21059671
Holy shit fuck off

[Anonymous No.21060952]

>>/lit/thread/S19286732#p19287202

[Anonymous No.21061071]

I miss this little schizo. Even in her ramblings, she was pretty original and knew a lot. What happened to her?

[Anonymous No.21061201]

>>21061071
who?

[Anonymous No.21061277]

>>21059471
Effortposts always come off as weird to me. Whenever I start writing a long post, I stop half-way, think "What the fuck am I doing?", delete it and then make a shitpost instead.

[Anonymous No.21061378]

>>21061277
You aren't going to get good discussions here unless you put in the effort

[Anonymous No.21061405]

>>21061201
angelica

[Anonymous No.21061600]

>>21059471

Post if you have time, OP.

>>21061557
>>21061557
>>21061557

Cheers.

[Anonymous No.21061717]

>>21061277
That is no way to live a life. You need to submit to the impulse and follow through. Better to never begin than to turn back without finishing! If each act isn't imbued with passion and genuine feeling, if you could not say to yourself YES I CAN DIE HAPPY DOING THIS then you should not do it. The funny thing is though, that it doesn't make any fucking difference what the thing is that you do as long as you put the feeling into it. You could be sorting the lint in your pocket into piles of colours and length, and if you did it with feeling and intent and you fell into your work with deep focus and love, it would be lint worth dying for. You should really give yourself to your shitposts if you are going to shitpost. Push them as far as they can go. If you aren't willing to die on 4chan, why are you here? More feeling! Enough to die!

[Anonymous No.21061729]

>>21059471
We have a few resident effortposters. Of varying quality

[Anonymous No.21061736]

>>21059471
I've only been here for a year or so (though my knowledge of 4chan goes back to at least 2006) however my ideas get loads of pushback from evopsych types, hard determinists, "capitalist realism" types and obviously feminists so I dunno.

[Anonymous No.21061760]

Pynchon used to post here

[Anonymous No.21062344]

>>21059557
Let's go Brandom!

[Anonymous No.21062548]

>>21059486
No one intelligent would wade into the quagmire of discussing Marx online.

[Anonymous No.21062563]

When I was young, I read this thread on /lit/ >>/lit/thread/S3272727 from a moral nihilist and I found it very persuasive at that time lol (2012) I tried rereading it recently and I no longer agreed with it, but the guy has good rhetorical skills.

[Anonymous No.21062565]

The only good /lit/ post is that one about the Irish boomer Hegelian witch.

[Anonymous No.21062593]

>>21062565
That was a joke post

[Anonymous No.21062604]

>>21062593
Doesn't change what I said

[Anonymous No.21062631]

>>21059471
Honestly bro, I was thinking about this recently. I started browsing in late 2020 and from that point until summer 2021 this place was not only not so shit, it was actually pretty good. There were many anons who were very knowledgeable about any topic that came up, no bullshit. It was amazing for me because I thought this site was just an unusable shithole populated by the scum of the earth (which it is). I didn't know (at the time) why it turned to shit in the summer, but the quality effortposts remained until the end of last year. There have been literally a few this year, but 2020-2021 must have been some kind of anomaly. Probably the pandemic.

[Anonymous No.21062722]

>>21062565
Can you link it?

[Anonymous No.21062762]

>>21059471
I have OCD (unironically) so i screenshot way too much shit. I have up to 1000+ or 2000+ (I don't fucking know the exact number) of posts all over the internet including here from over the years.

[Anonymous No.21062797]

>>21062631
It's called the honeymoon period. Everything basically says this place was the best when they just started browsing and went down from there.

[Anonymous No.21062837]

>>21062563
>there are people who've been here for 10 years

[Anonymous No.21062872]

normies get out

[Anonymous No.21063135]

>>21062762
insane(ly based)
please post a mega containing choice caps

[Anonymous No.21063150]

>>21062762
This is how we have most of a lot of partially extant authors from antiquity. Definitely make a public archive somewhere.

[Anonymous No.21063409]

>some creep might have screenshotted or bookmarked your thread for their personal pleasure and perusal
gross

[Anonymous No.21063420]

>>21063409
Try and be more funny or say something intelligent in the future and you won't have to worry about these things, you'll welcome them.

[Anonymous No.21063447]

>>21062548
That's true, he should only be discussed in closed academic circlejerks where you regurgitate the same safe talking points that have been endorsed since the last few decades and build further towering abstractions of retardation on top of them.

[Anonymous No.21063479]

>>21063447
that's actually the problem with it, discussing Marx online is a massive pain in the ass, you genuinely do need moderation or else every freak and wacko with their own anarcho-bullshit tendency will show up and shit it up and it needs to a space where everyone there already has read Marx and has a fundamental understanding of him or else every discussion there will eventually just be people explaining to newfags what the fuck proletariat means and nothing of note will get discussed.

There is an established track record of what happens to this kind of openly public forum regardless of how it is moderated. If input is restricted and things are taken seriously, people just start to parrot the approved/serious users and already reached conclusions which makes the whole point of a hub of discussion redundant. If it is not moderated tightly then it turns into the cesspit that every communist online space has turned into.

It's hard and honestly i doubt it can even work on a forum like the internet

[Anonymous No.21063666]

>>21063479
Egalitarian delusions will always lead to running into these same walls and being as surprised every time, making up elaborate explanations for the obvious. People aren't equivalent, replaceable units. An educated retard is still a retard.

[Anonymous No.21063713]

>>21063479
Fair enough, good post.

[Anonymous No.21063770]

>>21061071
>>21061405
post her feet

[Anonymous No.21064882]

bump

[Anonymous No.21065172]

>>21059492
Then why are you here?

[Anonymous No.21065191]

>>21061277
especially cause you see these long ass posts and they get 2 replies max. Why write all that when no one even reads it?

[Anonymous No.21065234]

>>21059471
The only really brilliant posters on /lit/ are the schizos. I especially liked the guy who was really into Final Fantasy.

Aside from that, I've seen some pretty good poetry, and some excellent exegesis here—but most of the good non-memey posts here are more competent than genius.

[Anonymous No.21065242]

>>21062797
This is true—but it was genuinely better pre-2016.

[Anonymous No.21065597]

>>21065234
schizoposting is meretricious. It is the style that people find interesting, rarely the content.

[Anonymous No.21065601]

>>21065191
Because it makes you remember it ten times more when you have to stitch it all together into a coherent whole and show it to others. Anything you're showing to others in front of your eyes, you're showing to yourself ten times more behind your eyes. The next time your mind goes to think of any of those things, it will call up the structure you created and start modifying it.

It's one of the reasons the only remaining guaranteed rigorous fields are math and science fields, because like it or not, no matter how mediocre you are intellectually or how Indian or Chinese you are, you absolutely have to learn things in a way that constantly calls up other parts of the larger structure what you're learning is part of. Everything interconnects, at least up to a certain level. It's possible to learn everything like that, it's just rare with "soft" subjects when not forced.

[Anonymous No.21065798]

>>21059588
TLDR; Materialism cannot stand on it’s own propositions, early philosophers of science knew this and were not true materialists, materialists are ignorant.

[Anonymous No.21066020]

>>21059588
It was a synopsis already but here, I made it retardproof for you anon:
>materialism is a metaphysic
>the existence of this matter in this system is not in any way contingent to the mind thinking it
>in fact, it's the other way around; in this metaphysic minds are a subset of it
>Schopenhauer calls materialism an explanation of the world through its most primordial self-subsisting non-mental objects
>he essentially critiques it as still-born, a position "that would implode if carried out to its own conclusions"
>there are two kinds of materialism
>there is the vulgar materialism of science where it breaks up the observed domain into atomic units and uses relations between these units to explain our experience of the domain
>the second type of materialism is the attempt to justify the former type philosophically
>this includes (1) explaining why the aforementioned atomic unit is final, and (2) how the model is self-complete and generates all of reality
>the hard part here is (1), this is because these parts would have to exhibit properties no other compound of them does
>they would have to be self-subsistent
>they would have to be eternal
>they would have to be uniquely suited for the role of being the bedrock of reality
>for all of this, we would have to explain why
>but it gets weirder, at this most fundamental level the concept of a "cause" and "subsistence" stops making logical sense
>rather the only way to understand this origin is through the mind
>the ancients knew this
>this is why they didn't draw a hard line between physicalism and the conceptual mental approach
>this is part of the reason why they tried to understand nature, which we think is lifeless, through metaphors drawn from living beings
>the very concept of physicality implies a bunch of mental content we take for granted
>the founders of modern science, Galileo, Descartes, Gassendi, Locke, Newton, Kepler all understood this too
>they all subscribed to idealist, neoplatonic, pythagorean, occultic and/or other mystical positions we would consider "unscientific" now
>in fact most of their metaphysical views are incredibly misconstrued
>Newton's assertion of bodies in space was a purely conceptual tool for doing mechanics
>he believed the ultimate force holding nature together were certain hidden qualities (qualitates occultae) that can be attributed to God
>Locke, who was devoutly religious, essentially had the same view
>Descartes denied the ultimate reality of his res extensa, i.e. physical space, as opposed to res cogitans, the mind
>modern materialism was really developed by French social philosophers (who were mostly speculative materialists themselves) of the mid to late 18th century, such as Baron d'Holbach
>modern physicalists are caught between the vulgar materialism we described earlier and disdain for the "unscientific"

[Anonymous No.21066033]

>>21059588
gimme my Roerich posts now

[Anonymous No.21066360]

>>21059588
>>21066033

[Anonymous No.21066931]

>>21059471
I have seen several, several screenshots of my own posts. On /pol/ though instead of /lit/. I don't know if that counts, but people liked my posts enough to immortalize them in screenshots.

[Anonymous No.21067020]

>>21065234
>I especially liked the guy who was really into Final Fantasy.
Who?

[Anonymous No.21067027]

>>21059471
N