/lit/ - Literature

>>4505315
The list and genre are nonsensical, so nothing. You should delete the image and stop making threads about it, too.

You forgot Gravity's Rainbow and Ulysses.

>>4505318
Criticism is often the primary means of validation. If someone is upset you're doing something it means that it has relevance.

>>4505323
No, it does not, you idiot.

>>4505322
And because of Ulysses, you have to put in Homer's Odyssey. Do it faggot.

>>4505322
>>4505330
Neither of those books are memes though, they're just complicated to read, however, they do say something and have a real point to them.

Invest in some intelligence, or wait a few years and try again.

>>4505315
The Penis Was
Discipline and Punish
Thousand Plateaus

why your own epic maymay, of course

>>4505335
I implore you to tell me why 2666 is meme fiction. I want a fucking essay, cunt.

>>4505342
An essay would be the ultimate antithesis to a strong critique of that novel, simply put: sprawling nonsense.

>>4505348
>sprawling nonsense.
unsubstantiated claim, faggot.
>antithesis
Holy shit you are a faggot.

Define meme fiction first.

>>/lit/thread/S4498717

You deleted your definition, let me reprint it for you:

>Fiction which has the singular purpose of ironically satirizing modern culture in an obvious way, albeit intended as 'meaningful', in a similar sense to a comedy sketch on TV.
>Commonly confused to have actual purpose beyond surface-scraping for 'irony', and a parody of themselves.

Now let me also repost my issues with this definition:

-Terms not defined. What is an "actual purpose"? How do these books fail in this regard? Do they aim for an "actual purpose" and fail, or do they fail to aim at such purposes in the first place?
-In what sense are you using "irony"? Are you familiar with the use of "irony" as a literary term and as a particular facet of postmodern literature? If so, do you think the postmodern use of irony is in some way illigitimate? If so, why? Or do you merely think these books make inappropriate use of irony? If so, how?
-What is "obvious" about the ways in which these books satirize culture? What is a non-obvious satire? Can you rigorously define that? Can you give counter-examples of books that go beyond "surface scraping"?
-How do these books qualify as "[parodies] of themselves"?
-What makes you say these books have the "singular purpose of satirizing modern culture?" How do you respond to the criticism one might raise, for instance, the Infinite Jest concerns itself with universal themes of addiction and broken families, or that Fight Club concerns itself with universal themes of identity and masculinity, and so forth? Though these issues may be filtered through a lens of the culture they depict, can you truly say their singular purpose is a criticism of that culture? Is Moby-Dick's "singular purpose" a critique of whaling culture in the early 1800s?

Please stop trying to promulgate this concept until you can answer these questions. Thank you.

I only know the menes from a few of these books

>>4505348
>An essay would be the ultimate antithesis to a strong critique of that novel
That was such a deplorable proposition, you need to kill yourself.

>>4505354
That's not nice you should say your sorry

>>4505323
>If someone is upset you're doing something it means that it has relevance.

>>4505361
You're essentially claiming that words have no singular meaning, which is even more disgusting. Do you not understand words or art?

>>4505358
That's incorrect, it was suggested that instead of myself defining the term that it would be better for the reader or subject to grasp it on their own so that the subtlety was not destroyed.

Don't be so brutalist, this is art, not mathematics.

>>4505372
You are such a fool.

>>4505372
My wiener is a fucking faggo tretard

>>4505315
>meme fiction
Let's not. Go fuck yourself.

This thread is shit.

>>4505367
You certainly don't get upset about everything do you?

>>4505380
>>4505382
>>4505387

Your claims are unsubstantiated! Write an essay!

Haha, just kidding, I recognize that you have the subjective ability to make these claims and hope that your views are cogent.

Cheers m8y.

>>4505372
>brutalist

You literally don't know what words mean. So for your sake you should hope words have no "singular meaning."

>>4505395
Are you really on a /lit/ board arguing against the fluidity of language?

Your post is absurd.

>>4505390
ur a fkin crackhead

>>4505404
>>4505402
>>4505382
>>4505387
>>4505380
>>4505342
>>4505326
>provide a reasonable albeit differing opinion
>receive this

/lit/ your quality is showing.

Die

Scum

>>4505322
>>4505330
If OP won't do it, I will.

Anything else? Why isn't the Bible on here? Let me fix that real quick.

>>4505410
wtf opinion are you talkin about nerd you haven't sed shit but mene fikshin is this som punk'd or some thsit

>>4505410
>provide a reasonable albeit differing opinion
Your opinion is stupid; that is why are you receiving "this"

>>4505415
Add the Norton Shakespeare too.

>>4505420
>opinions
>ever stupid
>not simply against our liking

I didn't know this board was for plebs, my apologies.

support your spurious claims

>>4505430
There

>>4505372
>it was suggested that instead of myself defining the term that it would be better for the reader or subject to grasp it on their own so that the subtlety was not destroyed.

If you won't engage in discussion on these ideas, you can't expect us to do it for you.

There's literally nothing here to discuss besides how stupid and silly you're being. Without your commentary attached to the image, it's nothing but a random assortment of contemporary novels, which a computer could have just as easily generated. If your true aim is to foster discussion and analysis of literature, you've roundly failed. But of course that's not the case, you just want to draw attention to yourself with minimal effort.

The idea that we should center our discussion around your ideas, without you even needing to elaborate on them in any way -- that you should be allowed to curate and arbitrate our collective discussion without even trying to say anything substantive yourself -- is obscenely narcissistic. Which is to be expected of a tripfag.

>implying White Noise gets enough discussion around here to be meme fiction

>>4505415
>>4505442
You completely misunderstand. It is not that which functions as a meme, but rather that only functions as a meme.

That's okay, only plebs get upset about this stuff so I'll let you have your tantrum.

>>4505443
Are you certain it is not you who aims to draw attention to me?

Are you?

Couple more
I think we're making good progress

>>4505456

I would be 100% willing to trample over all reasonable ideas of free speech and personal liberty if it meant you were barred from ever expressing an opinion on anything ever again.

Here's a kitten.

We're almost there

>>4505481
I was making a few additions too. Maybe merge them?

>>4505481
don't forget lolita, chicken soup for the soul, blood meridian, and twilight

>>4505471
Nicht eure Sünde - eure Genügsamkeit schreit gen Himmel, euer Geiz selbst in eurer Sünde schreit gen Himmel!

Wo ist doch der Blitz, der euch mit seiner Zunge lecke? Wo ist der
Wahnsinn, mit dem ihr geimpft werden müsstet?

Seht, ich lehre euch den Übermenschen: der ist dieser Blitz, der ist dieser Wahnsinn! -

Als Zarathustra so gesprochen hatte, schrie Einer aus dem Volke: "Wir hörten nun genug von dem Seiltänzer; nun lasst uns ihn auch sehen!" Und alles Volk lachte über Zarathustra. Der Seiltänzer aber, welcher glaubte, dass das Wort ihm gälte, machte sich an sein Werk.

That's it. I'm out of here.

>>4505491

>>4505484
no problem

>>4505487
on it

How does it feel to be the cancer that's killing /lit/?

>>4505515
and of course I forget

assuming you're serious, i don't think the label meme fiction is very fitting. while memes are taken as satire here on 4chan--our entire culture being kind of sardonic--in the greater sphere of the internet/the world, memes are more just popular ideas and, although still being seen kind of childish and low-quality, they're not treated in the same negative light.

so when i hear the term 'meme fiction,' ignoring 4chan, i think it better suits literature that's popular because it's popular. in a sense, that's almost every book you'll see (especially the classics), but i more so mean fiction which develop cultures and popularity well well beyond the quality of the works themselves, so like: 50 shades, lotr, twilight, star wars, etc.

as for the idea you're trying to convey, even if i disagree with your judgement of the books individually, i would say either onanistic or masturbatory fiction would be better summarize your sentiment. that is assuming the purpose is to actually convey an idea. 'meme fiction' is still probably more effective if you just want to be inflammatory/get replies, since in being only correct when you use a very limited perspective, it leads to the most misunderstanding. (and nothing makes for better internet arguments than people misinterpreting each other).

>>4505516
I've been looking for this fucking picture, man

>>4505521
We're all going to hell, which reminds me, maybe Paradise Lost is a good addition.

>>4505323
that's an idiot line of reasoning. You could use that to justify anything as long as you're irritating enough about it.

>>4505516
I'm saving /lit/ and you simply cannot understand.

>>4505352
look at the image. it is the definition, which is tautological.

Okay, how's that? Looking good?
I declare this experiment to be over

>>4505358
additionally given this definition what's the reasoning behind the label "meme?

>>4505540

>>4505552
Good thing no one's gonna save it.

gg, op. Have a nice day.

>>4505552
You've got to be kidding me with the Twilight on there. Otherwise, it's perfect.

>>4505552
One final edit for maximum maemae

>>4505556
Well my thought was that all of the value is placed upon the referencing of the work or the work tangentially to what is real, instead of the work itself having any implicit value, it only has value in culture-relation. What is the value of the work outside of the memetic culture it creates? To me, those works which retain no importance without the memetic culture of influence behind them are 'meme fiction'.

Certainly this thread shows the effects, even as one simply denotes books that are given 'memefiction' status one is attacked because of the nature of these memes. The meme here is that 'X is valuable. X is good. X has purpose and if you enjoy X, you are far better than the rest. If someone doesn't enjoy X, they simply didn't get it.'

Dangerous reasoning as it precludes (essentially) all criticism.

That's (somewhat) my reasoning, I've never been aces at completely explaining the sense in which I hold something, I feel much like Heidegger in this sense, after new words constantly to say things others could have more easily. A personal failing I suppose.

Anyway there you have it in somewhat preliminary form, although I admit not even I am happy with the definition as exists but it suffices for the extent of the language to which is spoken here.

Now back to me being called a poopyhead.

>>4505595
jesus christ, your prose is terrible

>>4505595
How does a work create influence without having any intrinsic value?

>>4505602
This is an imageboard not a book.

>>4505604
By being a cultural highlighter.

>>4505610
Doesn't that indicate intrinsic value? The ability "speak for a generation" is considered to be rather good in a work

>>4505614
One would think, but it's extrinsic by nature if you think about it.

This idea of "speaks for a generation", what does it mean?