Share your edgiest, most contrarian literary opinions

>while simplistic
well at least you got one thing right

Dogs have the potential of being on the level of humans.

There is such a thing as a good translation.

I have to agree with this. Good writing often improves gaming experience but writing alone a good game does not make. Even games like PS:T have good gameplay elements

>I-I-I have street smarts bro! Not your worthless "book smarts"!

No, Tyrone. Just no.

Hitler was a good writer.

Fanfics have literary merit.

GIMME YO MONEY NIGHAH!

I-I-I don't want t-trouble.

Alright Shelton settle down.

reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

No, Dante, no they don't.

Readers who acclaim Joyce are the sycophants in the emperor's new clothes

Maybe, but no one has even gotten close

except for milo

NPR had 3 shows on that this week, and all were laughable trash.

youtube.com/watch?v=41qC3w3UUkU

Infinite Jest is extremely bad, though parts of it are funny.

Not an edgy opinion, because the key word is potential. My demented grandmother has the potential to write the next great American novel.

Is that potential ever going to be realized? I don't think so, Tim.

Stream of consciousness is fucking dreadful.

You should read some Chekhov maybe Proust if you want to see portraits of people who are living in high social society but are unable to escape the cycle of their lives because they have no higher vision.

Books (or Art in general) is merely condensed life information. It is a guide for life - a gift - although it is not a replacement. Trying to get through life without tapping into the history of those who came before you and have passed down knowledge for ages is like trying to play chess without learning the openings.

Why the hell are these things mutually exclusive in your head?

You're fucking dreadful. It'd be pretty bad to overdo it in the post-modern era, but it definitely makes for some masterful writing.

Fuck off, prosefaggot.

>It'd be pretty bad to overdo it in the post-modern era

Harry potter promotes a sort of crypto fascism. It's essentially a love of authority diguised as contempt for authority. Harry essentially defines himself as a person through his love for his school which is an extension of the sprawling beurocracy that is the ministry of magic.

Anime has more literary value than modern literature (2005 - present).

>modern literature
>(2005 - present)

The word you're thinking of is "contemporary", you fucking pseud.

>the word "modern" means things from 2005 onward

Wew. I wonder why I still visit this pseudo-board.

Ethical arguments and theories are dead, and Stirner killed them.

Only to resurrect them as p(roperty)-zombies.

"Proper" grammar isn't really that important, at least not nearly as important as the style of the prose

You can place precedence on how a word "feels" over its dictionary definition

Books that paint vivid pictures of disjointed scenes and convey vague meaning are better than drab plot heavy books that drag on and on about how every character relates to one another, what their goals are in life, where they live, who they like, who they don't like, as if you're reading a biography.

not the person you were responding to, but games are literary. i'd agree that setting out to create a game with the purpose of making it 'literary' is misguided, but to suggest that doing so would 'bastardize' games is a bit much.

there are great games with lackluster gameplay that are carried by their writing.

there are games with perfect gameplay and shit writing (or none at all) which are absolutely fantastic.

Plot is basically the worst thing in literature

Most of the great books are boring and not worth your time.

e-readers are better than physical copies in every conceivable way and people only prefer physical copies to show off what they're reading/read.

It's okay to end a sentence with a preposition.

Textbooks are the absolute best way of learning about a subject.

The person the person you replied to was replying to here, appreciate your comments. I kind of threw that idea out there on the spur of the moment, glad to see some actual careful thought on the subject.
I will take all of your posts into consideration when I create my masterpiece.

pseuds

lol

Visual Novels > Contemporary Fiction

>every conceivable way

the ease of annotations beyond highlighting/underling.

I like my Kindle, but if you prefer every book you own to be on your e-reader, I can't help wondering what you're reading.

examples...

>actually reading Harry Potter
now that's some edgy shit m9.

So you're saying patriotism is a spook?

Actually good choice, I'd also recommend checking out Eyedea and maybe Atmosphere but that's a stretch.

This statement is false.

prosefags are cancer

hi hofstadter

>e-readers are better than physical copies in every conceivable way and people only prefer physical copies to show off what they're reading/read.
>Textbooks are the absolute best way of learning about a subject

These two things aren't compatible. Ever tried reading a textbook on a Kindle? I thought so. Are there good e-Readers that aren't Kindles/don't have e-ink? No.

The nineteenth and twentieth century novel is the peak of artistic accomplishment in literature. The novelists during these centuries are better than Shakespeare's plays and the entirety of poetry.

The best contemporary book about a vampire is Kizumonogatari

vndb.org/v2016

>Textbooks are the absolute best way of learning about a subject.
Are there actually people who think this is an edgy or contrarian opinion?

Not an unpopular opinion.

I'm so tired of hearing the emperor's new clothes analogy. It's a red flag for a pseud to me now. If you go to good reads and look at 1-2 star reviews on classics, at least a third of them use this analogy on any given book.

> It's essentially a love of authority disguised as contempt for authority.

Fitting for a novel written by a British woman.

yeah, eating is pretty good. drinking is definitely better.

but breathing? breathing is the peak of human accomplishment as it relates to things entering and exiting the body.

Most of pre-Modern Literature is full of simple ideas, stereotypes and cliches. Only a few authors might be good enough go deeper, but most lack psychological complexity. Even though they 'started' these ideas, later authors have already taken them to farther heights. Literature would be a lot better off if people stopped wanking over long dead authors.

So you can anonymously berate pseuds to feel superior.

> Textbooks are the absolute best way of learning about a subject.
Wow, so contrarian, that's literally what they're designed and sold by the millions for.

William Faulkner's writing is illegible garbage.

youtube.com/watch?v=xSnraJOeOyM

>a few authors might be good
which ones?

>most lack psychological complexity
please specify or give examples for texts that meet your "psychological complexity" quota.

How about deep puddle dynamic and a lot of the other guys on anticon?

have you read anything that isn't the first few chapters of The Sound and the Fury?

Don't worry. Puberty will come.

Try comparing most love sonnets of Shakespeare to the later Wallace Stevens, who would turn over those ideas into greater abstract themes. Or compare the Ennui of Chekhov's characters with people who tried to do Ennui before that, and did it with more self-pity and less subtlety.

You just can't read.

I feel sad that you won't be able to see the revival of Meiji Era Japanese prose done in a contemporary style pulled off by works like: vndb.org/v3883

You're just actually retarded.

Even The Sound and The Fury is perfectly understandable if you're not a mongoloid pseud.

Veeky Forums is actually horrible and anyone who takes literature seriously shouldn't come here. I started coming here like 2.5 years ago and even since then this place has devolved into utter dogmatic trash. Anyone who is somewhat new here and unironically listens to anything anyone says about literature with respect to its value, meaning, history, potential, etc. please for my sake stop. All this place does is steal time from you and sap your creativity and help you believe that culture and fiction are dead or blah blah blah. These topics carry a vast history with them and the people on this board speculate what's wrong with the world when they haven't even read a book regarding the subject they're talking about, let alone go out into the world.

The fact that you came here to post this tells me that you can't fight the urge and its making you guilty so you have to come here to take a moral high ground in order to justify to yourself that you have the capacity to change when you probably don't.

What a beta faggot.

Are you saying lit sapped your imagination?

>mfw I don't know the openings

If you don't believe that culture and fiction are dying very rapidly, it's already too late for you. It doesn't take more than an hour outside your house to realize how fucked everything is.

Also, if a Japanese whaling imageboard steals your time and creativity, then you were most likely not going to get anything done in the first place.

Agreed

Although you probably shouldn't be taking Veeky Forums seriously anyway.

assuming this is your response to both questions, you're suggesting:

>Stevens + Chekhov = good and sufficiently psychologically complex.

By all means, please elaborate on how this process of "turning over" ideas yields "greater abstract themes." Bonus points if you can specify which themes you're referring to and the poems to find them in.

As for ennui (is there a reason you've capitalized the 'e'?) and Chekhov, see Goethe or Hardy.

Got no time to beef with you in deep analysis, but all you have to do is to compare this

spreadophilia.com/issues/cream/big-red/

3 part poem on Malcolm X that uses varied styles, inversions of cliches, doubling and tripling of meanings through enjambment, and deft use of epigraph to simultaneous criticize and yet hagiographize the historical figure in a more condensed mode of communication than other poems of the same idea. The cosmic style of language at the end, while existing in poetry prior, is given more impact from the grit of the beginning. Such leaps and connections would be lacking in the mind of previous poets who viewed poetry as being more lyricism than meaning, and would not break their meter to allow for such deeper connections to be made.

Some might say that lyricism IS the meaning of poetry, or at least the point of it.

>Plot is basically the worst thing in literature
>Color is basically the worst thing in painting