Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 2243. page

>>8881620
she's my favorite writer but I don't really want to talk about her tbqhwyfam.

The Waves and To the Lighthouse always appear on 'favorite' lists here but the books are never discussed. I think it's more because people lie about reading them than having anything to do with her being a woman

>>8881620
I just read The Waves (my first Woolf) and I thought it was great. The first half was incredible, it felt like a dream, but the second half wasn't as ecstatic, and I wonder if it was deliberate. What do you guys think? Since the book is about coming to terms with how boring and lonely life is (among other things) does it make sense that the book gets less dreamy as it goes on? The first section especially is almost allegorical with the way the kids talk, about how they're turning into trees. But by the end of the book it totally changes, with nothing like that, Bernard just admitting to himself that he's lived a life of zero consequence.

I felt disappointed by the ending, but just last night I thought that maybe it was deliberate.

>>8881581
start with the Quran. Not the actual book because it's too vague but something that explains it

>>8881643

Can you recommend a volume?

Read "The Message of the Qur'an" by Muhammad Asad. Took him 17 years to write it. It's a translation and commentary on the Qur'an all in one. Best part is the footnotes, take note of them. They're amazing and provide such incredible insight.

neh.

It's only a different experience, very probably not better.

Scanning a page isn't mandatory.

File: 1482192887787.jpg (109KB, 640x869px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 640x869px

>>8881580
I retain more from audiobooks. If someone brings up a specific part from a book that I've listened to I can usually quote it from memory and can remember exactly where I was and what I was doing when I heard it.
I enjoy reading a book more than listening to it, though.

Audio books are good for stories or things that are meant to be read in a "flow". Trying to read a terse text like Critique of Pure Reason in audio book format is hell.

File: 12079.jpg (2MB, 3900x5525px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3900x5525px

>>8881578

>>8881578
Where is this from?

>>8881588
wrong board, maggot

>>8881552
Journey To the End of the Night

>>8881865
That s like hollebecq senpai

>>8881894
How so? Just curious about your opinion

You should slow down and think about what you're trying to say more. Here is something we can all agree on, I think: some books are better than others - more profound, better written, etc

What we can't all agree on is a metric system to quantify quality. Quality itself means different things to different individuals based on experience and personality, so that is impossible.

Also, consider what you say here: "Smart people are attracted to interesting books. Dumb people are attracted to "shallow" (uninteresting) books." Statements like these reflect poorly on you intellectually. It's a statement that serves no purpose other than to call yourself smart. Don't be so quick to judge others, especially when you are judging a whole, generalized group

>>8881544
>Usually smart people, people with more emotional depth are attracted to more interesting books with more depth, while you often see really insipid people attracted to more shallow literature, and more shallow things in general.
You sound like you're trying to use your taste in literature to justify a superiority complex. It also doesn't have anything to do with your argument.

>it's like the chaos thing in the universe, how there's not actually randomness, but just that in some things extremely small occurrences can have an extremely large impact, so it's impossible to trace back to the source
Is this really the best analogy you could come up with? This is pretty nonsensical.

>So can we agree that there is an objective standard for quality in books?
There is a quasi-objective metric for book quality and it is created out of knowledge of a shared canon. It isn't objective per se, but it is objective in relation to the canon, from which has been derived a recognizable set of rules to follow and not deviate far from.

Truly intelligent people are capable of connecting with other human beings and getting their kicks that way. The less intelligent have to resort to weird hobbies such as reading really old books to get by.

It certainly can, depending on what you read.

>>8881539
Would you rather read or hang out with friends and have a hearty bout of laughter over a few good drinks and a decent game of poker?

>>8883197
>drinks
>poker
Eww, no thanks.
>bout of laughter
It's not a disease anon.

I'd rather be alone tbqh

agreed

you mean james ellroy not joseph mcelroy

this novel has been held out of print by its author on the account of it being just that fucking awful

>>8881593

Is there even a source for that?

It's not as good, but it's pretty funny. I want her to get cracking on some more of those unpublished manuscripts, nothing irritates me more than writers who crank out one or two books and then disappear completely.

i like the part when the samurai is in the train station

>>8881561
Same. She should release a short story collection I think she would slay with it.

I speak french....

>>8881466
Of course. When a little girl sits on my lap I simply can't contain the lewd feelings that spill from my soul

>>8881466
Nope.

It's amazing it took so long for a culture of dogs to produce at least one worthwhile writer.

Congrats on barely beating abos.

>>8881460
lol they fucked up his name, wow

>>8881476
i was gonna post this

>>8881476
Don't be so butt-hurt, Radu. It's christmas afterall :*

>>8881447
wish i was there.
I'll probably read whatever my family buys me for Christmas.

>>8881447
I'm hoping to finish one, maybe two but I've been busy. The book I'm currently reading is on economics and theology. Very dry and makes me not motivated to read it except in long spurts.

As much stuff from Euripides as humanly possible, so I can finish the Greek tragedians.

1984 you could read in a day or a few if you don't have much free time.

Though Catch-22 is absolutely a better read.

Your choice, OP

1984 for sure

>>8881375
Catch 22 is a masterpiece and hilarious.
1984 is terse, gloomy and boring at times.

>>8881263
I have it in my stack and have yet to read it but 800 pages of friends going through life in NY with child abuse flashbacks that horrify the normie booktuber crowd

>>8881263
Literary fujoshit

>>8881263
I cried a couple times reading this, I think. I finished it at the beginning of this year, absolutely stormed through it.
I'm 21 and it made me think a lot about my friends, and still teaches me a lot about empathy.

It suffers from a really shit twist at the very end, for lack of a better term - you can predict it from a mile away, which was definitely intended by the author, but it's a bit of a worn trope. An unfortunate setback in what was otherwise one of my most powerful literary experiences, I'd like to return to it again.

File: 1481585417076.jpg (77KB, 960x960px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 960x960px

Both of those points are nonsensical. Apply yourself.

>>8881227
Looked up this image and apparently its just a joke about being "swamped". This kid moved all this shit out here and got algae in his pants to make a bad pun. Serious autism. I feel bad for him.

almonds and sho on