/lit/ - Literature

>>1719786
I normally try to keep the posts i put effort into with my name (no trip), and then when I have to post in a fit of fartbrains, I remove it.

Of course there are exceptions...

Tripfags are the worst, I agree.

uncontrollable fate isn't necessarily "LOL FUCK YOU" by a god because lol rocks fall.

Besides, the important parts of a greek myth would be the way of telling it - hubris, nemesis, katharsis. It doesn't sound like there's any hubris or nemesis OR katharsis in your story, it just sounds like "rocks fall".

Other than that, get the pantheon right, refer to it throughout the story, even if there is no direct interaction.

If you're real bad ass you write it in dactylic hexameter.

Also I would assume he dies a the hands of >Mortality<

There used to be no TV or radio, the only way to get entertainment was through storytelling. Books was the progression of this as literacy rates went up.

Books, or written language, is a media for transferring thoughts. Whether those are for entertainment or for academical purposes or whatever. Fiction I suppose you could call entertainment, but that doesn't mean it can't be thought-provoking or change the way people think, it is probably more likely to than an academic text on the same topic.

strictly separating from a "hedonistic" activity any other qualities is silly, and implies to some extent that only things that are not enjoyable can be virtuous.

In other words, you are missing a lot.

She was apparently popular in USA at some point in time. I haven't read any of her books and probably won't, going by excerpts and reviews. Based on what I've read (mostly on wikipedia) about her philosophy, it is retarded - something else that doesn't make me particularly interested in spending my time reading her books.

*shrug*

>>1707856
depends on whether or not it is relevant.

Is it a red Jaguar, a red Ferrari, a red Fiat, a red Mustang, or a red Volvo?

You could go with red stationwagon or red sportscar, unless there's something about a specific brand you want to confer.

>>1707729
Holy Batman a disjointed post.

My points stand but please disregard the retarded structure.

Studies on piracy show that the most pirated items are the most popular ones. The top 100 pirated music list corresponds pretty much to the top 100 chart.

There's still plenty of music to go around, lots of albums being produced, bands creating music, music videos, doing gigs, I don't know what the numbers are, but I would wager the number of active bands haven't gone down in the last 10 years even though the volume of piracy has gone up.

There's not much evidence for the whole "Piracy makes music more available so non-chart stuff will become popular!" thing some people as an "excuse" for piracy.

Anecdotally, however, a lot of people I know have pirated music, sure, but they also buy CDs, DVDs, etc. Only very few solely pirate things, and generally the amount they buy depends on their disposable income. If they couldn't pirate things, they wouldn't spend a larger amount of disposable income on books/music.

Take a historical example. What did music fans do before digital music? They had tape recorders and recorded poor quality mix tapes off the radio. Then CDs came and you started getting copied CDs or even mix-CDs. Nowadays the physical medium is gone, but you still have the "illegal" trading of music amongst people who like more music than they can afford.

If anything, piracy allows a large amount of people who wouldn't be able to afford, for an example, music, to enjoy it anyway - and at no cost to the producer because they wouldn't have bought it otherwise.

Anyway, drawing experience from the music industry, the film industry, or any other creative industry, I very much doubt piracy will kill or harm the book industry, especially not considering the decline the book industry has been in since the advent of... TV. Anything that makes people read more should make them happy.

because the rights of the minorities represents the rights of those with the smallest voice (in theory), using a democratic majority to trample on the rights of others sets a tyrannic precedence, and if (when) the power shifts, the precedence will be the reference upon which the majority will measure their actions.

Other than that, disallowing minorities to exert their religion/culture is a hotbed for civil unrest and decreases the national stability, which is bad for business.

>>1703946
what is your attention drifting towards? do that instead. Take a reading break for a week. Possibly start writing your own stuff instead of reading, I find that most often when my thoughts drift from reading something it's because I think up ideas of my own based on what I've read, and if I don't get them down on paper I have a hard time reading on because I keep pulling my thought back to whatever it was I thought of.

>>1705764
not at all, but good luck changing the opinion of someone else by displaying the invalidity of that opinion to them. Add a pinch of sophistry and you can invalidate most opinions in one way or another, whether your invalidation is valid is up to the opinion-holder to decide, and he can dismiss your invalidation with an equally valid or invalid invalidation. In the end, unless someone is open to changing their opinion, it is unlikely to happen, especially if holding that opinion is beneficial to them.

I use a pentel document pen, love the way it feels on the paper, doesn't smudge, doesn't smear, isn't too expensive.

picture related.

>>1705756
"Why won't they cooperate, /lit/? It seems pretty obvious to me that my worldview is a correct one."

So do they about their world views. Welcome to the game of opinions.

birds have very thin, light weight and delicate skeletons, this is what is referred to with a bird wrist. Obviously.

Product Details
Hardcover: 288 pages

Man, 288 pages, you can blaze through that in a day if you just don't do anything else.
Even if your class is tomorrow, you could still start now, finish it, and get a couple of hours of sleep.

I don't like how everything is told to me, it's like I'm reading a textbook and I had to force myself to go back and read it all instead of just skimming it after the first post and a half. It reads like a bullet-point list. This might have been intentional, but not my cup of tea.

don't particularly like the way that a lot of things are very specified, but then some things are referred to that we aren't told about. Nathan's wife's death and the murder that frank committed particularly.

the story is okay but unsurprising, saw it coming.

However:

Some of the descriptions nice, not gaudy or excessive.

In general the language feels compelling, some of the sentences would be really good, if only they weren't spoon-fed to me.

Just my 2 cents.

from the beginning.

They're comfy reads, and I suppose you could read them independently, but start with the first one. They get better as it goes on though, the first two are the least good.

>>1697932
It depends on your theme and on the story you want to tell, what kind of drama it is. Try to have a think about it yourself, answer all the how/why/what/when's and make some mindmaps or something.

>>1697890
That doesn't explore any of the themes of a post-apocalyptic world, it might as well be set in a frozen wasteland of today's date, or a 19th century arctic explorer, or something else like that.

I suppose you could write 2000 words of internal dialogue about how the world has gone to waste and now it's all just frozen wasteland before the guy dies, but tbh that sounds a little tripe.

easy to be a critic tho', if you feel like you have a good idea for something that would work well, go fo rit.

a) Choose reason for apocalypse (disease, war, natural resources running out, zombies, nuclear war, civil war, aliens, meteor strike, whatever)

b) Choose genre of story.

c) write some shit.

classics are: "there are no more natural resources, scavenge for oil and water", think mad max; "disease kills 99% of people, abundance of leftover materials, no social structure", think british 80's show Survivors, 12 monkeys; "Nuclear explosions everywhere, mutations and giant beasts roam", think fallout.

a classic theme in these post-apocalyptic worlds are how people cope when the structure of society breaks down for one reason or another, how they reorganize themselves and in what way. You could go with a snapshot of some thought up world that represented this.

I used to go to /new/ a lot because I like politics and economics. The board was 95% shit, with occasional interesting threads, the occasional interesting threads you can get on here or /int/ (which is also 95% shit but slightly less racist shit). Mostly /new/ was just hurp durp lolbertarian gold standard, "I don't like <ethnicity>", an occasional funny comic thread, and very rarely discussion on news. There were a lot of finance and business related threads on there which I honestly miss, I suggested a finance/business board but I guess it would be too narrow.

Generally though, good riddance.

Sherlock Holmes, he is the man.

I would argue that the concrete example was reflected in OP's normative attitude to produce a self-enforcing anecdote which was then generalized to further reinforce OP's normative attitude.

I am not saying OP should not reflect upon experiences, but rather that OP's reflection is assumptive, lacks nuance, and depth. That I disagree with the generalization he makes, but also that that the grounds he makes it on are flawed. Not a discouragement of reflection but advice to not draw conclusions from reflections on anecdotes that are severely lacking in their main arguments.

>>1690145
Your criticism of anon's response hinges on your statement that the defense of the grand theory ignores the "concrete" anecdote and that this is a loss of information which can be a seen as a methodological cock-up.

I am trying to explain to you that the anecdote does not contain any information worth keeping for any kind of positive or negative evaluation of any theory one might have of society, because of its lack of concreteness. Is it a methodological blunder to not include empirical non-facts in your thesis?

If I'm really so thick and simply don't understand anything, please, explain it to me.