According to Alan Moore, reading terrible books is a good tool for writers so therefore everyone, please recommend terrible books
According to Alan Moore, reading terrible books is a good tool for writers so therefore everyone, please recommend terrible books
Everything Alan moore has written
comics are not books
he’s written novels too dipshit
Except the Alice in Wonderland porn. That was alright.
>Watchmen
>From Hell
>Providence
He isn't wrong, there was this dude who couldn't even point out what he loved about good books. Those frickers are so spoiled that they can't even conceive shit. They take good stuff for granted.
*blocks your path*
writer?
Arthur Schopenhauer
why are you penciling books moron, are you still in middle school?
It's my book so I do whatever the frick I want.
what was Wiggerstein's deal, didn't he reenact that scene from Story Of The Eye with Russel's wife?
I know Russell was the biggest cuck in England but wasn’t Witty a homosexual?
it was some other guy, it's the memoirs
No, that's the biggest lie people say about Wittgenstein for some reason. He wasn't a homosexual, in fact he despised homosexuality both in his youth and in his later years. People say Pinsent was his boyfriend, that couldn't but further from the truth, nothing in Pinsent's or Wittgenstein's diaries suggests their relationship was romantic, they were really good friends, so much so that Wittgenstein got into a deep depression after Pinsent died, but there isn't a single bit of evidence pointing to them being a couple. When he went back to England after failing as a teacher in the countryside, Wittgenstein even has a romantic relationship with a girl much younger than him. He wanted to marry her but didn't want children so she rejected him. Lastly, every single person close to him refuted the claims of him being a homosexual, all of his close friends and students said he would never engage in homosexual acts.
>He wasn't a homosexual, in fact he despised homosexuality both in his youth and in his later years.
These are not at all incompatible.
I don't know if it's plausible given the full evidence but you could easily use the facts in your post to draw a picture of a repressed homosexual who only considered heterosexuality as a means to have kids.
Sure, but there isn't even a tiny bit of evidence pointing to him being a homosexual, just conjectures. He never wrote anything in his diaries about finding other men attractive, he never suggested anything in his diaries that he had a relationship with his best friend. The only mention of that subject in his private writings was saying some bad things about some homosexuals he saw during his college days.
Do you know if there is evidence in his diaries of healthy heterosexuality?
He was an Oxbridge academic. None of them were or ever will have a healthy sex life regardless of orientation
You should just use a trip at this point, gay denialism schizo
Which scene? I glanced over the wikipedia summary and didn't see anything that could be recreated in good faith by Wittgenstein.
the milk thing
MILK IS FOR THE PUSSY
>doesn't look at filename
Lurk more, newbie.
an unmarked book is sign of an unremarkable brain
No, it's a sign of someone with hygiene
>the king of the pseuds meets the king of the midwits.
Who will win in this irrelevant battle of opinions?
it will be
>battle of irrelevant opinions
The Schopmeister
basedhauer, but you have to read some bad ones to know what is bad
Cuck level: Someone reenacts a scene from Story of the Eye with my wife.
funniest shit i've ever heard
>Someone reenacts a scene from Story of the Eye with my wife.
I did this in high school
The Bible.
Alright I'll bite: how does one measure the quality of a book? What makes a book terrible? Is there a definitive list where the entries are universally agree upon? Perhaps some sort of scientific method but for art.
>t. bugman
You just know.
You just know bro
I would but people work hard on that stuff so I'll only reccomend ones of authors I think are douchebags as well. Empress Theresa
Shadow of the Conqueror by Shad M Brooks was complete dog shit polished to a shine by editors and still terrible. Quite educational actually.