/lit/ Writes a (new) Novel, Part One: The Beginning
179 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
It has been a while since we, as a board, collaborated on a major project together.
The last /lit/ novel (tLoTiaT) is generally agreed upon as a success and, above all else, was incredibly fun to do.
Our next novel is going to have a decidedly more focused, plot-driven structure (which still is not saying much. It's still gonna be post-pomo af, don't worry)
It begins with a lone protagonist who is brought before a Pantheon of gods to be judged at the apocalypse. The basic structure will be built around the questions asked by the gods and the main protagonist's lengthy answers. In between chapters will be intermissions filled with poetry from anons, and at the end will be an appendices filled with additional stories that did not make into the main chapters.
The attached image is part 1/2 of everything you need to know so far.
The first order of discussion should probably be the Pantheon itself, as the main thematic content of the novel will come largely from these characters. We are currently working with 7 as the number of Gods in the pantheon, but this can be changed with sufficient reasoning.
27 more posts in this thread. [Missing image file: ]
How much of an autist do you have to be to agree with Marx
No one becomes a marxist. You are born a marxist. Not one single neutral nonbiased person in our days reads Marx and agrees with him. Everyone that reads this:
>Abolition of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the Communists. On what foundation is the present family, the bourgeois family, based? On capital, on private gain. In its completely developed form this family exists only among the bourgeoisie. But this state of things finds its complement in the practical absence of the family among the proletarians, and in public prostitution. The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter of course when its complement vanishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of capital.
Agrees with it but marxists. No one. Back in high school I despised marxists, but I never spoke a word against marxism because I still hadn't read Marx. But as soon as I read two of his books I realized how retarded and wishful it is. All fucking marxists blame all the problems in the entire world on capitalism. Even here I saw someone saying that people only worry about existential problems because they don't do communal work, and in communism we wouldn't have those problems. Admit that it is absolutely ridiculous and wishful.
When I read Marx, I thought that maybe I had misunderstood him. Maybe in that speech about the family he didn't mean that family shouldn't exist, maybe he meant that the family forces the man into capitalism because he needs to work to sustain his family. Although that's still pretty retarded, it would be more acceptable. But no, he and all marxists I asked meant that the family shouldn't exist.