What are the worst books on this list? Please be honest.
That guy is absolute utter pseudo-intellectual bullshit.
Literally the only reason he was so succsessfull is that what he made was weird as fuck, nothing insightful, nothing interesting.
Actually I would say Fahrenheit 451 and American Psycho have such a large power gap on everything else in that even the worst books are obviously works of art, where as these two are just shit.
You must be upset that Fight Club and 120 Days of Sodom isnt represented.
American Psycho is SHIT that may have once had some meaning to a small elite in NYC, but is now read for shock by edge-lords
>IJ, Bible… are worst because we don't understand those. Also, we are casuals, redditors, 9gagers, /b/s and /pol/tards who are too lazy to read lengthy shit and love to puke on /lit/ with our frivolous faggotry.
>hasn't read Vor dem Gesetz
>hasn't read Beschreibung eines Kampfes
>hasn't read Poseidon
>hasn't read any of his diaries
>hasn't read Letter to the Father
>hasn't read The Trial multiple times
they just dislike the meme. there's just like 5 people who hate the meme and are very vocal and no one else cares that much to change 5 recluses minds about one of the richer contemporary novels
They're all very good or important to read. The worst would probably be Catcher, Gatsby, and Stirner. Catcher I've liked, but in comparison to other works and omissions from the list (the Greek playwrights, for one) it pales. Gatsby can go for the same reason. Even though I like his philosophy, Stirner's book doesn't have a very good aesthetic since by his own admission he doesn't care about profound or correct ideas but his own self interest.
Why does /lit/ hate Pessoa so much? Some of the books on here are loved because of the depiction of solitude and loneliness (Underground, SteppenWolf, Osamu), so why does the book that portrays it most accurately and emphatically get shoved?
here's my take. I've read about half of these
red means shit
green means great
no mark means meh or haven't read (so can't recommend)
Oh trust me, my contempt for the average c/lit/ poster could not be more genuine. I've set my browser to automatically redirect me to /his/ whenever I accidentally click on this awful board through force of habit
>all these sensitive souls who cant take the fact that American Psycho is a bloated piece of schlock shock garbage
>"You missed it man he is commenting on society"
0 nuance, shit prose, shit story, Fight Club tier audience. This board has become so garbage recently.
oh spare me you clown. you probably haven't read 10 books on this list to begin with. you just go along with the meme authors like everyone else on this pisshole board. I bet you've never even heard of Tristram Shandy or Noli Me Tangere. get the fuck out of my sight you slave
As you can see I've read a decent portion of the list.
Blue- Decent, but didn't do much for me
Red X - Bad/skip
The only bad/skippable ones IMO are-
Siresn of Titan
Kafka on the Shore
Of Mice and Men
People need to stop finding reasons to hate books and more reasons to like books. If you hate like half the books you've read on a top 100 list of renowned classics (albeit a bit memed) maybe you're the problem.
>you just go along with the meme authors like everyone else on this pisshole board
I feel like the board was getting better right before hypersphere and /his/ came out. There were some nice non-fic and contemporary fiction generals and my backlog exploded.
I havent found a fucking new book suggestion in a week here.
I've tended to dislike American narratives of WW2 since I feel they are from a very parochial viewpoint that failed to properly engage with the majority of the participants for these two books in particular I've found the humor and absurdism to be too in your face without much subtlety. In addition they lean too much on the subject matter without much artistry and aesthetics for me.
Though to be fair I read catch 22 many years ago when I was quite young and had very little exposure to and appreciation of literature. If I read it again my judgment might change. I stand by my dismissal of slaughterhouse 5 however.
What do you think? Why do people here hate Blood Meridian, F451, CitR, Book of the New Sun, Mason & Dixon but not War and Peace, Anna Karenina, Les Miserable, Brother Karamozov and so on… Are people being racist about American Lit? What are the chances that the same people won't call the later books I mentioned shitty in coming years?
I don't believe The Great Gatsby or American Psycho should be on there, personally. "Worst" is a little harsh because it's such a negative word. Neither book was bad. They're just not Top-100-Tier.
That's not what I said at all. I just said I think it's a good book but not as good as the other entries on this list, and certainly not one I'd list in the top 100 books of all time.
Why is that stupid?
I don't have one, it'd take me a long while to make it. Seems like it'd be a pointless exercise anyway, considering your attitude - you'd call it awful no matter what.
Is that why I'm a retard? Because I wouldn't have American Psycho on it?
Fair enough. Bit harsh, but at least I know what you're arguing now.
stop posting the wrong list
1984, Steppenwolf, Old man and the sea, The Odyssey, Notes from underground, Of mice and men, Hamlet, Lolita was middling and I enjoyed The Iliad and Catcher in the rye.
I gave up partway through Meditations, Watership down, The Trial, The ego and its own and Do androids dream...
The Picture of Dorian Grey. Seriously though, the book is terrible. First half or maybe two thirds are kinda good, but then it delves into a big clusterfuck of stupidity and it's all over the place
agreed completely, anon. Its not fucking good. People in this thread are edgy, pseudo-intellectual high-schoolers, ignore their elementary opinions on "literature" no that you can call American Psycho literature.
Definitive answer here
>not bad literature but still middlebrow high-school tier or genre fiction
BNW (other Huxley is better)
PK Dick Castles in the high ass
Book of the New Sun
>pleb trash/ lower quality genre-fiction
>hurr he called one of my favorite authors middlebrow and I got offended so I'll tell him to go back to /mu/, that'll show him!
>dosn't even try to defend the author you like that was insulted because you subconsciously know they are middlebrow
Anyway, humor aside:
>What are the worst books on this list?
Tough call. None of the books on the list are bad. The best one can do with this question is state what one dislikes. With that:
Either read each and mostly hated the experience, or gave up no more than a third of the way through.
Aside from that there are fifteen others on the list I've not read. I'm not planning reading those any time soon, but I can't just say they're bad.
I've only read a little more than half of that chart, but my choices for worst books are:
The old man and the sea
No longer human
Kafka on the shore
Not trolling, sorry if you liked these.
I haven't read Steinbeck but I want to know why do you consider him middlebrow? Other than the fact that high-schoolers are forced to read him, I've heard only great thins of his novels.
Not him, but probably just because he's really accessible, and often read in high school, and therefore has a lot of reddit popularity. He really is great though, East of Eden and Grapes of Wrath are both dope af
Paradise lost is horribly tedious and pretentious. Its a great story, but it would be much better if it used the same sort of economy you see in HOD instead of the verse Milton insists on. Blows my mind that it beat out The Great Gatsby.
I didn't like it. It took far too many words and meandering around several broad themes to get to its core message. It also features 100 of pages of meaningless exposition. Moby-Dick and Blood Meridian did this, but those books were beautifully written. With IJ I felt like I was reading words written by an unemotional, cold and calculating serial killer attempting to ape stoner culture and college literary student terminology in order to attempt basic human relativity.
451 is pretty meh except for that moment when the guy talks about how literature is shit by using literature. That was nice. 451 reads like some fanfic tier story with an interesting concept and nothing else.
I'm 19 years old.
I am handsome, smart, athletic and virile.
I have a novel that is in it's final editing stage, and a creative writing professor at my college has read the first draft and thinks it's saleable.
I have a girlfriend who is confident, articulate, playful and spontaneous.
I have a small group of interesting friends from different social and academic backgrounds, and I also have many other acquaintances who see me as a reliable source of humour and good company.
Both my parents are alive and in good health.
I have no regrets.
I have already experienced three existential crises, the latter of which was described as having the depth and profundity of a man twice my age.
I am a passionate lover, a sharp thinker, and a trader of witty repartee.
I am not self-pitying, meek or needlessly humble.
I will live a good life at your expense.
>I'm 19 years old.
You died before 20
>I am handsome, smart, athletic and virile.
You met with horrible accident.
>I have a novel that is in it's final editing stage, and a creative writing professor at my college has read the first draft and thinks it's saleable.
Rated gabage on 4chan.
>I have a girlfriend who is confident, articulate, playful and spontaneous.
>I have a small group of interesting friends from different social and academic backgrounds, and I also have many other acquaintances who see me as a reliable source of humour and good company.
Morons in disgues
>Both my parents are alive and in good health.
One's commited from Schizophrenia the other died of cancer.
>I have no regrets.
Regrets doesn't give a fuck about you.
>I have already experienced three existential crises, the latter of which was described as having the depth and profundity of a man twice my age.
The person suffered from ADHD
>I am a passionate lover, a sharp thinker, and a trader of witty repartee.
Only with fucknuts
>I am not self-pitying, meek or needlessly humble.
You have nothing to pity, meek or being humble.
>I will live a good life at your expense.
See first reply.
The one science fiction novel that dates break the mold of "computers! Space travel that's simple to explain because it's similar to ours! Look, it's 'science fiction' but there's magic too!"
Herbert actually did something original, and managed to throw some actual political intrigue in there at the same time.
Bible, Pynchon, Borges, Delillo, Heller, Orwell, Wolfe, Vonnegut, Faulkner, Hugo, Hemmingway, Steinbeck, Hesse, Calvino, Gaddis, Conrad, Tolkien, Huxley, Adams and I am getting too lazy to list the rest. A lot of shit.
Madame Bovary, because it's just someone's agony dragging on page after page
The Hobbit, because it's almost kiddy-tier reading
Lolita, because the only reason it's on this list is its controversy
Wuthering Heights, because how could one ever enjoy reading such petty characters. Seriously, instead of reading this I could visit an elderly retirement home and witness the same conversations
But who am I? I haven't even read half of these books.
This is a good post, but I have noticed this sentiment showing up a great deal lately, which is a good thing. Even Gaddis posting is a reaction towards constant IJ and Pynchon posting