/lit/ - Literature

>>4037080

The picture is of Hemingway as a young man. The fold in the image appears exactly where he would shoot himself, decades later.

>>4037080

hello newtripfaggot

A great novel takes you places, makes you feel things, and then spits you out with the change.

>>4037098

I'm down with that definition.

Hello, anon.

I'd appreciate more definitions. Here's my own, tentative definition.

A great novel makes you think and makes you feel, both of these. It gives you the intuition that you're on to something, but you can't be quite sure what it is, and you assume the author himself wasn't sure what it is, but he's looking for it too.

>>4037132
I'm not feelin it. The whole thing about the author still looking for something sounds like romanticized bullshit. Something you'd say during a television interview.

>>4037140

I see what you mean, but wasn't thinking of that.

Fancy, instead, an author who knows exactly what he wants to do, and does it, and does nothing more.

You end up with Chuck Palahniuk. Dude has a homosexual's grasp on his novels something violent: grab the ass and never let go. And then you're done. And nothing more was achieved.

I guess every great novel deals, to a degree, with these great existential questions. That's what I meant with "being on something".

A glimpse to a better world? Socrates would say it makes you remember Heaven. Something like that.

>>4037140

I'd love to hear your definition, though.

a great novel makes your dick rise, throb with excitement, then explode with life as you go limp until your next serving of great literature.

>>4037172

Think it's time to put down the rand m8.

Heh. A bunch of teenagers trying to define "great art".

Cute.

>>4037174
>reading /lit/ that does not give magnificent boners
>2013

why would you do this?

>>4037178

Give us your adult definition then. We can all learn from you.

>>4037178

the meek shall inherit the earth

>>4037183
Any definition given would need at least 10 pages of further definitions following it. This is not the place. Also, 4chan isn't the audience.

>>4037187

I don't appreciate that you'd insult everyone here and then dodge sharing your definition; are you afraid that formatting your definition to this board would make it sound like a teenager's definition?

It is the place, it is the time, it is the audience.

You know nothing of anyone on 4chan and we don't know you. You get the standards that you ask for, here as anywhere else.

Condense your 10 pages to a paragraph. Believe me, I can take it.

>>4037187
wow you must be some fancy shit.

>>4037190
First of all, you're tripfagging on /lit/--so, right away it's evident that you make bad decisions and probably masturbate in public.

Second of all, asking for 10 pages to be condensed down into a paragraph is one of the hallmarks of your generation. Because none of you need to like, learn, like, a book, dude. You can just skim the Wikipedia article and come out just as edified and learned. Or so you think.

It's reflected in this entire thread. None of you are actually doing anything worth a shit because your "definitions" generate more questions than they solve. I'll take a random case-in-point:

>A great novel takes you places, makes you feel things, and then spits you out with the change.

>takes you places
Which places? Physically, mentally, spiritually, psychologically? Far away places? Near places? Places very much the same, only with a tinge of altering perspective or slight change?

>makes you feel things
"You" being who? All the readers who ever read the book? One reader? Half the readers? A majority of the readers? What things do we feel? If the book makes someone feel like it's a waste of time and should be chucked in the trash, wouldn't that fit the criteria of "feeling things"? How is "feeling things" measured? How much someone's facial reaction changes while reading? How does one know when they've felt something small, without tears, without laughter? How can we be sure the book actually did this, and not the reader doing it to themselves?

>and then spits you out with the change
Spits is a hard word--is the book supposed to "spit", like leave you abandoned or destitute and flung out whichever way? If so, how can we be sure the book did this and the reader didn't do it to themselves? How do you measure change? Just because someone says a book "changed them", how do we know it's true or accurate? By what criteria do we measure that a book has changed anyone at all?

This is me handing you your ass. Now, do us all a favor: drop trip and get smart.

>>4037208
>First of all, you're tripfagging on /lit/--so, right away it's evident that you make bad decisions and probably masturbate in public.

Touché.

>Second of all, asking for 10 pages to be condensed down into a paragraph is one of the hallmarks of your generation. Because none of you need to like, learn, like, a book, dude. You can just skim the Wikipedia article and come out just as edified and learned. Or so you think.

My generation? You don't know my age. I doubt you have those 10 pages handy and I doubt you'd want to type them out for us, so I ask what's reasonable. You can summarise an argument even if it's rather complicated. Develop your summarising skills.

>>4037208
>This is me handing you your ass

You wish. All you do is deconstruct what others say. Simply because nothing is simple doesn't mean that simplified things are worth nothing. It's certainly worth more than the nothing you amaze us with.

Still waiting for a simple definition, from you, of what makes a great novel great.

Saying it would take forever to do so is a cop-out.

>>4037208
if a simple definition is too difficult, you can surely offer some relevant reference material or books
or did you think "owning" a stranger on the internet would be more productive

>>4037234

#reckt

>>4037234
Believe it or not, I already responded to about 50 threads like this in the past year. Type out the same "reference material or books" over and over again in threads where just the OP picture changes for a while and see how you jump for joy confronted with a "challenge" like this.

>>4037227
I'd bet anything you're not yet 20, just because of the general lack of education and experience that comes through in everything you say.

Nor can you understand a rather simple concept: that defining something like "great literature" takes a lot of time, space, and resources. Any glib, self-sucking line on 4chan won't amount to anything.

>>4037273
>I'd bet anything you're not yet 20, just because of the general lack of education and experience that comes through in everything you say.

Wrong on all counts. You're pretty mediocre when it comes to analysing who you're talking to, hence the arrogance you put on display.

Even great criticism can be summarised in a single line, it's even a requirement for many theses and such. If you can't do that, chances are you're bluffing.

I love asking "naive" questions instead of playing the Emperor's Clothes game. If you can't answer the question, you can always go ad hominem, and uneducated, unintelligent people tend to fall for it, as you have.

Others with substance can actually form an answer, they don't need to rely on the person who asked the question: they can just share their knowledge without fearing the shattering of their self image. You seem too insecure to ever do such a thing.

If you can't define a great novel in a post, you can't call yourself knowledgeable on the issue.

I believe you're everything that's wrong with literary criticism. (Thankfully, any noteworthy critic could answer that question in a few sentences.)

Bump for more anons' definitions.

Personal definitions are most welcome; nobody's asking you to write an essay about it.

>>4037084
>exactly where
All that precision with a 12ga shotgun at point blank range.

>>4037355

He shot himself immediately under the eye ridges.

>>4037208
>This is me making an ass of myself

>>4037273
>Any glib, self-sucking line on 4chan won't amount to anything.

Which, of course, since that is all you do, explains why you are incapable of adding anything to the thread or board in general.

>>4037381

This.

>>4037080
My God you are such a faggot. It's painfully obvious how hard you're trying to get people's approval, and how badly you want to be considered intelligent. Please stop.

>>4037402

Not at all. I don't know you, how can I care what you think of me...

Self-projecting, bro. I care for answers to my questions.

>>4037410
Aaaand you just revealed you have been samefagging, since you dropped your trip and forgot to put it back on.

Explains things like this

>>4037234
>>4037235

and

>>4037381
>>4037384


Please fuck off

>>4037415

Dropped the trip because I was on other boards. If I had truly been samefagging, I'd have been more careful about that, but I know the anons who posted these know they're not me.

None of these were me samefagging.

>you're so angry, sir

Chill, man.