File: natalie mars 2.jpg (141.8 KB)

141.8 KB JPG

>>25057694

>I want to discuss fantasy and reality, and their mutual relationship. If we consider the "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” story as an allegory—the struggle between Good and Evil within every man—then this allegory is tasteless and childish. To the type of mind that would see an allegory here, its shadow play would also postulate physical happenings which common sense knows to be impossible; but actually in the setting of the story, as viewed by a commonsensical mind,
nothing at first sight seems to run counter to general human experience. I want to suggest, however, that a second look shows that the setting of the story does run counter to general human experience, and that Utterson and the other men around Jekyll are, in a sense, as fantastic as Mr. Hyde. Unless we see them in a fantastic light, there is no enchantment. And if the enchanter leaves and the storyteller and the teacher remain alone together, they make poor company.
>The story of Jekyll and Hyde is beautifully constructed, but it is an old one. Its moral is preposterous since neither good nor evil is actually depicted: on the whole, they are taken for granted, and the struggle goes on between two empty outlines. The enchantment lies in the art of Stevenson's fancywork; but I want to suggest that since art and thought, manner and matter, are inseparable, there must be something of the same kind about the structure of the story, too. Let us be cautious, however. I still think that there is a flaw in the artistic realization of the story—if we consider form and content separately—a flaw which is missing in Gogol's "The Carrick” and in Kafka’s "The Metamorphosis." The fantastic side of the setting—Utterson, Enfield, Poole, Lanyon, and their London—is not of the same quality as the fantastic side of jekyll’s hydization. There is a crack in the picture, a lack of unity.

File: natalie mars 3.jpg (168.1 KB)

168.1 KB JPG

>>25057697
>"The Carrick,” "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde," and "The Metamorphosis”: all three are commonly called fantasies. From my point of view, any outstanding work of art is a fantasy insofar as it reflects the unique world of a unique individual. But when people call these three stories fantasies, they merely imply that the stories depart in their subject matter from what is commonly called reality. Let us therefore examine what reality is, in order to discover in what manner and to what extent so-called fantasies depart from so-called reality.
>Let us take three types of men walking through the same landscape. Number One is a city man on a well-deserved vacation. Number Two is a professional botanist. Number Three is a local farmer. Number One, the city man, is what is called a realistic, commonsensical, matter-of-fact type: he sees trees as trees and knows from his map that the road he is following is a nice new road leading to Newton, where there is a nice eating place recommended to him by a friend in his office. The botanist looks around and sees his environment in the very exact terms of plant life, precise biological and classified units such as specific trees and grasses, flowers and ferns, and for him this is reality; to him the world of the stolid tourist (who cannot distinguish an oak from an elm) seems a fantastic, vague, dreamy, never-never world. Finally, the world of the local farmer differs from the two others in that his world is intensely emotional and personal since he has been born and bred there, and knows every trail and individual tree, and every shadow from every tree across every trail, all in warm connection with his everyday work, and his childhood, and a thousand small things and patterns which the other two—the humdrum tourist and the botanical taxonomist—simply cannot know in the given place at the given time. Our farmer will not know the relation of the surrounding vegetation to a botanical conception of the world, and the botanist will know nothing of any importance to him about that barn or that old field or that old house under its cottonwoods, which are afloat, as it were, in a medium of personal memories for one who was born there.

File: natalie mars 4.jpg (36.1 KB)

36.1 KB JPG

>>25057701
>So here we have three different worlds—three men, ordinary men who have different realities—and, of course, we could bring in a number of other beings: a blind man with a dog, a hunter with a dog, a dog with his man, a pamter cruising in quest of a sunset, a girl out of gas-In every case it would be a world completely different from the rest since the most objective words tree, road, flower, sky, barn, thumb, rain have, in each, totally different subjective connotations. Indeed, this subjective life is so strong that it makes an empty and broken shell of the so-called objective existence. The only way back to objective reality is the following one: we can take these several individual worlds, mix them thoroughly together, scoop up a drop of that mixture, and call it objective reality. We may taste in it a particle of madness if a lunatic passed through that locality, or a particle of complete and beautiful nonsense if a man has been looking at a lovely field and imagining upon it a lovely factory producing buttons or bombs; but on the whole these mad particles would be diluted in the drop of objective reality that we hold up to the light in our test tube. Moreover, this objective reality will contain something that transcends optical illusions and laboratory tests. It will have elements of poetry, of lofty emotion, of energy and endeavor (and even here the button king may find his rightful place), of pity, pride, passion—and the craving for a thick steak at the recommended roadside eating place.
>So when we say reality, we are really thinking of all this—in one drop—an average sample of a mixture of a million individual realities. And it is in this sense (of human reality) that I use the term reality when placing it against a backdrop, such as the worlds of "The Carrick,” "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” and "The Metamorphosis," which are specific fantasies.

File: natalie mars 5.jpg (100 KB)

100 KB JPG

>>25057705
>In "The Carrick” and in "The Metamorphosis” there is a central figure endowed with a certain amount of human pathos among grotesque, heartless characters, figures of fun or figures of horror, asses parading as zebras, or hybrids between rabbits and rats. In "The Carrick” the human quality of the central figure is of a different type from Gregor in Kafka’s story, but this human pathetic quality is present in both. In "Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde" there is no such human pathos, no throb in the throat of the story, none of that intonation of *' 1 cannot get out, I cannot get out,’ said the starling” (so heartrending in Sterne’s fantasy A Sentimental Journey). True, Stevenson devotes many pages to the horror of Jekyll's plight, but the thing, after all, is only a superb Punch-and-Judy show. The beauty of Kafka’s and Gogol’s private nightmares is that their central human characters belong to the same private fantastic world as the inhuman characters around them, but the central one tries to get out of that world, to cast off the mask, to transcend the cloak or the carapace. But in Stevenson’s story there is none of that unity and none of that contrast. The Uttersons, and Pooles, and Enfields are meant to be commonplace* everyday characters; actually they are characters derived from Dickens, and thus they constitute phantasms that do not quite belong to Stevenson’s own artistic reality, just as Stevenson's fog comes from a Dickensian studio to envelop a conventional London. I suggest, in fact, that Jekyll’s magic drug is more real than Utterson’s life. The fantastic Jekyll-and-Hyde theme, on the other hand, is supposed to be in contrast to this conventional London, but it is really the difference between a Gothic medieval theme and a Dickensian one. It is not the same kind of difference as that between an absurd world and pathetically absurd Bashmachkin, or between an absurd world and tragically absurd Gregor.

File: 1710763369910699.jpg (547.5 KB)

547.5 KB JPG

>>25057694

>>25057694
Thanks for posting this, I found it insightful.

>>25057694
>>25057697
>>25057701
>>25057705
>>25057708
Sauce on the broad?

File: 1756493388205585.jpg (113.9 KB)

113.9 KB JPG

>>25058232
natalie mars, trans pornstar

>mashing your cock around to tranny porn
>still isn't enough for you
>the sheer act of knowing what you're doing is so pathetic is too much to handle so you have to turn it into a social game
"oh, i know what i should do, i'll post what my monkey brain is currently depleting its entire dopamine reserves to—as i slowly lose all emotional and physical sensitivity—so that others can be unwilling participants in my onanism! that's right, i'll reel them into it under the guise of 'literary discussion,' with a wink and a nudge as we all end up jacking off TOGETHER, because it's not enough to do it alone, i need men to do it with me, to turn the female into a pure spectacle whose use value lies in bringing me closer to other men with our shared degredation of her! hehe, THOSE WHO KNOW!"
>still believing you're intelligent
>still believing you're a good person
>still believing you know yourself well
>still believing you are worthy of any respect
>still believing you're more hetero-sexual than you are homo-social
>still believing you haven't reduced life to a series of input-output button-mashing
>still believing your conceptualization of eroticism isn't contingent on your own internalized hangups and neuroticisms any woman with a life worth living would scoff at
>still believing you haven't made a complete mockery of what it means to be a human
it's over.

>>25058232
Anon...

>>25058261
chuddy melty

>>25058261
I just hope this is a copypasta ..

Kafka didn't use the word beetle, he used the word for abomination or unclean thing. The description is beetle-like but Nabokov just can't read German and also doesn't understand what the term would have connoted to German-speaking Jews, who would at least unconsciously associate it with pigs and the like, but all bugs are also considered unclean in Judaism except for grasshopper and locusts and the like, everything is else is like a land crustacean. The entity might be a sort of beetle or a sort of crab, what it is though is not relevant at all which is why Kafka forbade its depiction. Kafka's eventual sense of alienation from Judaism is reflected in his Letter to Father, since he tried to bond with his father through Judaism but it ended up just pushing him further away from both his father and Judaism. The priest in the Trial is also based on Kafka's experience with rabbis since he had no experience with priests, that's why he tellingly makes the court dates on Sunday, the Jewish Monday. The Trial in part is about trying to find out what God is doing to him and why, through Jewish law, although if you observe the main character closely it is most likely for a sexual offense. The Coen Brothers cover a similar theme in A Serious Man. Being guilty of something without being able to be convicted or forgiven or even be quite sure what it is, and being unsure if in fact you are guilty of something at all, also plays a significant role in Curb Your Enthusiasm. The theme occurs once again in The Castle, where Klemm is meant to be symbolic of God, and it is stated that a man cannot be pardoned without first being found guilty, but he cannot plead guilty until he understands what he is guilty of. In Amerika the protagonist, here based more on Franz than the Father Kafka who is the basis for the protagonist in the Trial and the Castle, is "exiled" from his home by his father for a very strange crime (here not for being sexually predatory, but for being violated, there are several implications throughout the story of the kid being violated), and story makes an ironic reversal of America being the "promised land" to being depicted as a sort of Babylon and the character is going into the Babylonian captivity. The statue of liberty is not depicted with a torch but with a sword, the statue of captivity

>>25058464
>Kafka didn't use the word beetle, he used the word for abomination or unclean thing.
I'm pretty sure Ungeziefer just means a domestic pest, that's what "ongedierte" means in Dutch and it lines up with Wiktionary.
If it's a small animal that shows up unwanted in your home it's ongedierte. You might still call it that if you run into it outside the home, but you would only use it for an animal that you could imagine as an unpleasant surprise in the back of your cupboard and that you would call an exterminator for. Pigs are right out, wouldn't come to mind no matter how distasteful you might find them.

>>25058560
Usage was in accord with that in the early 20th Century but Kafka was very well read and was certainly aquainted with older and more formal usage. See the death scene in the Trial. If fact I have a pet theory that the reason Jews considered pigs unclean didn't just have to do with their hoofs or as a way to separate themselves from heathens, but because they considered wild pigs to be in the same category as dogs and other scavengers, which relentless sifted through through garbage and cesspits. In fact dogs were probably first domesticated by following humans and going through their cesspits and garbage

>>25057694
>>25057697
>>25057701
>>25057705
>>25057708
>>25058245
i would love nothing more than to stap her down to a bed, lock her clitty in a pink cage and go to town on that throbbing slutty ass-pussy all night long

>>25058656
Saar. Redeem the needful

>>25058261
Unironically the most coherent, rational, and normal post in this thread. Respect fren.

I thought Nabokov's thing was little girls, not drag queens.

>>25057694
she is goals

>>25057694
that's a man

>>25058671
Start with the Greeks ie. dominating lesser "males"

>25058671
>im white and triggered
>HONK HONK HONK

>>25058261
based
Op is a LOSER

>>25058261
not wrong but you could lose the mad

>>25058261
And the post of the day award goes to...

File: 4chan_I_must_destroy.png (38.4 KB)

38.4 KB PNG

NOOOOOOOOO
YOU CAN'T WRITE... not liek this. :P

>>25058261
>THOSE WHO KNOW!
based natalie mars enjoyer

>>25059077
The Greeks never advocated that though, I can't recall any depiction of taking male slaves and forcing them to dress like women. The closest is Herakles when he was enslaved by women and forced to dress like a woman when performing his duties

>>25057694
Robots in disguise.

>>25058656
>her

Man.
This is a frog/glowie thread btw. Stop falling for it.

>>25058261
bumping this thread just to say youre right

>>25059871
kys

>>25058261
Based. I kneel.

File: Ikneel.jpg (191.1 KB)

191.1 KB JPG

>>25058261

>>25058261
90% op spammed tranny porn to trigger a raped chud textwall meltdown. mission acccomplished.

test

>>25058261
That's a lot of words to say
>lust provoking images
>irrelevant, time-wasting discussion
I agree, but this reaction is what OP wanted

>>25059557
i need to nut in that ass pussy

>>25060328
/thread

>>25058261
Thank you for posting this

>>25058464
no offense bit your analysts of kafkas work is utter shit. I seriously hope you're not a literary student or something in similar vain, that's some weak shit.

>>25058245
Nice jaw.

>>25058609
Oh, that etymology checks out. I guess I don't know enough about Kafka to dispute it though my gut still doesn't think this is very likely.

>>25058245
cool hat

>>25058261
UTTERLY BASED MONSTER SLAYER
YOU SIR
ARE A HERO
THANK YOU

>>25063234
imagine getting to rebuild your identity from the ground up and then choosing that haircut to cap it off

>>25058464
>Kafka didn't use the word beetle, he used the word for abomination or unclean thing.

Khepri: dung pusher & soul-mover. He's spiritually dead and socially decomposing. Gregor cannot live, nor can he bereave his loved ones. He can disappear, though-- Despair is the next greatest sin, after pride, and Gregor has plenty of both despite his predicament.

>>25059450
>taking male slaves and forcing them to dress like women
no they do it to themselves

>>25057694
Where is Natalie now?

>>25066446
she got divorced from her domina wife because she abused her and is now soft retired.

File: PXL_20260127_002915493.PORTRAIT.jpg (294.3 KB)

294.3 KB JPG

>>25058822
same
she started acting in porn at age 31
I'm turning 31 this spring
it's my time

>>25066534
isn't the point to be abused with a wife like that

>>25058464
>Being guilty of something without being able to be convicted or forgiven or even be quite sure what it is, and being unsure if in fact you are guilty of something at all, also plays a significant role in Curb Your Enthusiasm. The theme occurs once again in The Castle, where Klemm is meant to be symbolic of God, and it is stated that a man cannot be pardoned without first being found guilty, but he cannot plead guilty until he understands what he is guilty of.
what the hell is this bs some kinda christcuck martyrdom

File: 400.jpg (29.7 KB)

29.7 KB JPG

>>25063261
>>25057705
>>25058245
same vibe