/lit/ - Literature

>>1660891

THAT DOES NOT AFFIRM OR DENY MY INDIRECT REMARK ABOUT OP'S WHINING AT TAO LIN'S "ODD WRITING".

>>1660882
Objectivist faggotry? Objectivist faggotry? Objectivist faggotry?

>>1660871

>came to me that tao lin just threw together a bunch of crap from gmail along with an awful 'story line' [if you can even call it that] and decided to leave everything up to interpretation, hoping people would try to find some meaning or deeper message in it. he did all this as a stupid money making scheme

AFTER "ULYSSES", "FINNEGANS WAKE", GRAVITY'S RAINBOW", "INFINITE JEST", "NAKED LUNCH", "ON THE ROAD", ETCETERA ETCETERA, PEOPLE STILL COMPLAIN AND GETS INDIGNATED BY UNCONVENTIONAL OR "ODD WRITING".

>MY FACE.

>>1660801

AND THOSE DOUCHBAGS ARE "A THOUSAND TIMES" BETTER THAN YOU.

HE IS SOMEBODY WHO WRITES MEDIOCRE/BAD BOOKS THAT UNCULTURED AND SHALLOW TWEENS CONSIDER DEEP AND "THOUGH" TO READ.

>so excuse me if I'm trolling

>>

>>1660458
>PEOPLE

IMAGINE THERE IS NO "THEY" IN THERE.

ITT: IMAGINED WORLD(S) OR WORD(S) THAT YOU INVENTED OR CREATED INDEPENDENTLY BUT LATER YOU FOUND OUT IT ALREADY EXISTED OR SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR ALREADY EXISTED.

I CAME UP WITH THE WORDS "COONIGGER", THE ACRONYM "N.O.Y.B.", "TWATFAG", "MAKLI" AND OTHERS I CANNOT REMEMBER NOW.

I CAME UP WITH THE CONCEPT OF A VIRTUALWORLD BEYOND SPACETIME THAT THEY COULD ACCESS VIA A PSYCHOACTIVE DRUG AND THAT IT WAS WHAT WITH SOME PERSONS SYNCHRONIZED WHILE SLEEPING; BUT THAT IDEA ALREADY EXISTS IN MANY WORKS BY DIFFERENT AUTHORS.

>1. How much books do you aproximately read a year?

RANGING BETWEEN TEN AND TWELVE.

>2. What genre of literature is your favourite?

I DO NOT BELIEVE IN "GENRES" SO I DO NOT BASE MY TASTE IN TERMS OF "GENRE".

>3. Is it common for you to get books as a present?

NO.

>4. Do you prefer shorter or longer literature?

IF YOU MEAN THAT AS THE LENGHT OF A NOVEL, THEN I DO NOT CARE FOR THAT AS LONG AS THE PLOT REMAINS SOLID, CONSISTENT AND INTENSE.

>5. Do you consider blogs, website articles, etc. as being literature?

NO.

>6. Do you try to read all the books written by your favourite author?

YES, BUT I DO NOT FORCE MYSELF TO READ ONE BOOK BY ONE OF MY FAVORITE AUTHORS IF I DO NOT LIKE IT.

>>1660397

>7. How long are your reading sessions?

RANGING BETWEEN FORTY MINUTES AND ONE HOUR AND A HALF.

>8. Do you have trouble concentrating?

IF THE CONDITIONS ARE IDEAL, NO.

>9. Do you have a special reading area?

NO.

>10. Do you prefer to read one book at a time, or several at once?

I USUALLY READ TWO BOOKS AT THE TIME, NO MORE (BUT IT CAN BE LESS).

>11. Do you stop reading a book without finshing it if you don't like it/someone tells you it's not worth reading?

IF I AM FAR INTO IT BECAUSE IT STARTED AND DEVELOPED GOOD, NO.

>12. After you've read a book do you often feel like you didn't fully understand, appreciate it?

NO.

>13. Is it common for you to reread books?

YES, BUT ONLY AFTER A LONG TIME HAS PASSED SINCE THE LAST READ BECAUSE I WANT TO HAVE THE FEELING A GOOD READ LEAVES AND NOT SPOIL THAT FEELING IN ANY MANNER OR DEGREE.

>14. Do you read popular literature?

WHAT DO YOU MEAN WITH "POPULAR LITERATURE"?

>15. When you read, do you imagine you are part of the story or do you visualize it like watching a movie?

I VISUALIZE WHAT HAPPENS AND EMPATHIZE WITH THE CHARACTERS I FEEL IDENTIFIED OR THAT HAVE CHARACTERISTICS THAT I FEEL IDENTIFIED WITH. WHEN THE IDENTIFICATION WITH A CHARACTER IS TOO INTENSE, I JUST EXPRIENCE IT LIKE IF THE CHARACTER WAS A VERSION OF A PART OF MY PSYCHE; A VERSION OF MYSELF.

>>1660184

THE THREAD SHOULD HAVE ENDED HERE.

AND YOU TOO ARE AN IMBECILE.

>>1657220

HE DIED SIMILARLY TO THE PROTAGONIST OF HIS SHORT STORY "GOOD OLD NEON".

>>1656615

NOT IF YOU PULVERIZE IT COMPLETLY TO DUST AND THROW IT INTO LAVA.

>>1656560


GREAT OBJECTIVIST IRRATIONAL WAY OF THINKING.

EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE; OBJECTIVITY IS RELATIVE; RELATIVITY IS OBJECTIVE.

>>1656543
>the word "nigger" wouldn't be the most offensive word in the English language

BUT THE WORD "NIGGER" IS NOT THE MOST "OFFENSIVE WORD" IN THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE (IF THAT EXISTS).

>>1656498

YES, BUT THOSE ARE MEANINGS THAT WERE ADDED TO THE WORD OVERTIME, OVER CENTURIES (MAYBE) OF BEING AROUND IN THE SEMANTIC OCEAN BUT THE ORIGINAL SIGNIFICANCE WAS/IS THAT OF "LIFTING/TAKING SOMETHING" FROM A "SHOP".

IF YOU ARE GOING TO PLAY WITH WORDS, DO IT PROPERLY.

>>1656442

I LITERALLY LAUGHED AT THAT QUOTE.

>>1656415

IT DOES NOT IF YOU TAKE "BIG READER" AS A LITERAL TERM; A PHYSICALLY BIG PERSON WHO READS.

>>1656052

YES, I AM KOZ.

>>1656054

WHY DO YOU ADD QUESTION MARKS TO YOUR STATEMENTS.

AND TOO BAD YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF THE WORD "SHOPLIFTING"?

I AM JUST POSTING BY TO WRITE THAT THAT MACRO IN OP's POST WAS MADE BY A SUBHUMAN.

R.I.P.

>>1655598

WHOEVER MADE THAT COMIC IS AN INBRED SUBHUMAN WHO DOES NOT GET RAND'S PHILOSOPHY.

I DO NOT LIKE AYN RAND, BTW.