/lit/ - Literature

>>82
words words words words is literature.

VNs are pictures vidya pictures vidya then words. Not literature.

>>83
VNs are hardly vidya. That being said, I don't think it's quite literature yet. It's more like a picture book that's sometimes not linear

>>84
VNs will never be literature. They aren't really meant to be. Just because something has words doesn't mean it's literature. That's not how it works. And since they're barely a video game as well, then they're barely literature. VNs are their own thing. They're more like a digital manga you can choose your own path/story.

>>82
Does that make scribbles on a bathroom stall lit?

>>85
I can kinda understand not wanting them to be literature. The last thing I wanna see are VNs being reviewed by the literature snobs who write for the New Yorker or other high flautin elite papers. Everything those people touch turns to dust. I like the idea VNs are their own thing though.

>>86
Aren't those types the ones that will ultimately decide what constitutes as literature? And now we also have youtube video essays, which are just one step under that, and much more likely to take in what traditionally would be disregarded by the cultural elite. We probably just need one VN to trend into the mainstream.

>>87
There's a sociological theory that literature is arbitrary. It only becomes literature when a community of people label it as such and it becomes a staple within their group. Since the literary establishment doesn't consider them lit, then they aren't lit if we follow this theory. But the VN fan subculture does use phrases like "read" and "I am reading" when talking about VNs. So maybe, they are lit if VN fans consider them lit? But they would be lit in a very different sense to the NYT best seller list's idea of literature.

This makes me think a lot about cultures of appreciation and the power disparities between them. There was a time when gaming was for geeks and freaks, then the mainstream media and academic cultural establishment starting writing about gaming. They quickly established themselves as the authority on games, imposed their own cultural tastes and standards. Then, AAA gaming completely shifts to suit those tastes and a game only has a good story if it mimics a novel or the plot of a Hollywood blockbuster. There's a lot of elitism involved. In the West, light novels and manga are not seen as literature but graphic novels are. In Japan, otaku media is treated as literature, although a lot of it is looked down on, but otaku related is enough for something to be disqualified as lit in the West. Art schools discriminate against artists who draw in Japanese styles too because its "not real art."

>>89
This touches on how I feel about VNs. They're in the same position as comics are. The point of them is to be read. The point of them is to indulge in a story, ponder on its themes, see what makes it tick. I would consider VNs literature because of this. I would not consider VNs a /lit/ topic, just like how I would not consider manga or other comics a /lit/ topic. I think the thing that differs VNs and comics (aside from the video aspect of VNs) is that comic artists very desperately want to be considered "high class" and "true literature," and VN artists are apathetic about it or very much do not want to be seen as "true literature."

>>91
>The point of them is to be read. The point of them is to indulge in a story, ponder on its themes, see what makes it tick
Anime is literature when I have the subtitles on.

>>91
Probably the biggest difference between VNs and Western style novels is that the latter is entirely passive while in a VN the player usually has to make choices that shape the story and the ending. Its sort of a hybrid between those old text based adventure games and old Japanese print books. So I'd say its more a /vnt/ topic because they are still games at the end of the day even if they are hybrids.

>>91
Again, just because something has words or a paragraph in it doesn't mean it's literature. Are signs and advertisements literature? They're also created to be read, to ponder on, and to make you tick and buy a certain product. See how easy it is to break down that view? Not everything can be considered literature. VNs are simply intractable comics/manga. Nothing more, nothing less.

Just like this anon said >>86, are scribbles on a bathroom stall lit?

>>87
>>89
You don't need a cultural elite to understand what literature is and what isn't. One can simply see how racially different those mediums are.

>>92
You're basically reading a moving comic, not a novel.

If I can weigh in on this...
I view VNs as something that belongs more in /vnt/ than /lit/. The exception is novelizations, but even then they could probably fit in either board.
However this is just semantics - I'm not going to really care either way unless someone goes rouge and starts spamming threads (this is not an invitation to do so).
Perhaps we can restructure the boards so delineations are more clear.

>>94
Is Arthur Conan Doyle's The Adventure of the Dancing Men literature? Is Alice in Wonderland literature? Are Dr. Seuss works literature? What degree of image is acceptable for it to be regarded as literature?

What about theater? Are Shakespeare's plays literature? Are Brecht's plays literature? Are Boal's plays literature? What degree of interactivity is acceptable for it to be regarded as literature?

>You don't need a cultural elite to understand what literature is and what isn't. One can simply see how racially different those mediums are.
Can one really?

>>94
If you can show me an advertisement that has a plot, themes, setting, point of view and conflict, then I will show you what is literature. Most advertisements do not do this. Not everything with words is literature. Everything with dynamics and story is literature.
>>96
Hey, Dr. Suess books can be pretty good. :P I think a comic with images alone could possibly be considered literature. There are stories out there with no dialogue, only descriptions. The case we are talking about is just that told through images. I think I would lean towards something like that being moreso the drawn or painted type of art, but one could make a solid enough argument for otherwise.
The point about scripts is fantastic. It is technically a visual medium, just the instructions for its execution. Every literature textbook I know that is trying to be comprehensive has a dedicated section to plays, so I suppose they are considered literature in the wider census, but I find it difficult to say that scripts are literature, even if on the face of it they meet the requirements.
>>95
As far as Wapchan goes, I think the posting etiquette is pretty obvious. Novels, short stories, and poems go in /lit/, plays go in /media/, Japanese comics go in /cel/ or /digi/, and visual novels go in /vnt/. Like you said, this is a semantics exercise. I guess if someone really couldn't stop themselves from posting Western comics here, that could go in /media/ or something. Will any of that matter once the site changes?

>>86
>Does that make scribbles on a bathroom stall lit?
There are some theorists of literature who ask that question and some say we have no right to objectively say it isn't lit. Usually, gatekeepers decide what gets counted as lit and so bathroom stall scribbles get excluded. Gatekeeping isn't inherently a bad thing, its necessary to some extent, but it would be interesting to see what would happen if you started treating bathroom stall scribbles and shitposts as literature. In Japan there was a trend where people would type out short stories and poems on flip phones or write stories modeled on 2channel threads and there are some places where you have entire archived threads that detail some weird paranormal thing that happened to OP. Can you consider that lit?

>>94
>You don't need a cultural elite to understand what literature is and what isn't.
The sociologists aren't saying you need some Leninist vanguard to decide what lit is but that the definition of literature is arbitrary. Stuff only gets labelled as lit when enough people in literary circles begin slapping that label on it. Otaku related stuff only becomes otaku associated when enough people from that culture adopt it and it becomes a staple within their in group.

>Perhaps we can restructure the boards so delineations are more clear.
I don't think that's really necessary. I guess renaming /lit/ to /book/ might be better but its not like there's a real need to do this. I don't think most people even disagree on this question. Its just interesting to ask the perennial question of "what even is lit anyway?" which nobody will be able to definitively answer. I don't think that's such a bad thing though.

Personally, when I think lit I think of books and oral stories. VNs don't fit that. The user experience is more like a game. You get the software and run it on a machine. You don't do that with a book, unless your using a digital copy I guess. Because we think of physical books when we think lit, its different enough from reading a book that it can be considered distinct. Although, you could probably apply some literary critical methods to VNs. The real question is, where do we put light novels?