Archived threads in /lit/ - Literature - 3913. page

you dont actually like reading stop pretending you like reading

History is fucking weird because it's accessed on so many levels (pop stuff in general, non-scholarly/retail books, decently accessible scholarship, really hardcore scholarly stuff), it's hard to know where to start. I'm also biased because I'm a History guy who veered into Philosophy.

It depends what you're interested in. If you're ultimately interested in having a good feel for history in general, at some distant later date, I would recommend that you start by "learning how to learn" history, so you can then re-apply that at your own pace. Broad reading is fine, but really broad surveys tend to be ineffective for actually learning broad history. If I were you, I'd start by picking a period that interests me, like the French Rev (though that's a particularly tricky one), and then reading a reasonably "exhaustive" syllabus within that era or area. What I mean by "reasonable" is somewhere between an undergraduate syllabus worth of readings on that topic (which these days means little more than a topical, interest-based surface skim) and an overly dense mastery of the topic.

So for example, I'd take an undergrad syllabus for a "Greek history" class, follow it, but then on top of the course I'd also read 2-3 old, magisterial history books on top of the class readings, plus some topical ones. This is a few thousand pages probably. On top of that, I'd inundate myself in Wikipedia, documentaries, a few books chosen just for sheer interest, etc. An example regimen might look like
>An online lecture series
>The primary sources used by the lectures (Herodotus, Thucycides, maybe one other)
>The secondary material used by the lectures (maybe one textbook and several articles)
>Another, more serious, but still enjoyable (literary or significant) general history of Greece
>Some more specific interest-driven stuff that caught my eye
>Some more primary sources that caught my eye (say, the major Athenian plays)

By the end of this, probably several thousand pages of reading and months of work, you'll have a good feel for Ancient Greece (e.g.). Now you'll know how it feels to have a feel for a period, for its scholarship, for how scholars construct that scholarship, for how modern books tend to be dumbed-down and topical, for how pop books tend to be even worse. Now you can reapply that knowledge to another era, which may be totally different - Renaissance Italy, let's say. But now you'll be more efficient, and it'll go much faster. And after few of these, concepts and facts will start to interconnect and interlace, and you'll find yourself already knowing half of what you read - suddenly you find that doing Roman history is a lot easier and a LOT deeper after having done Greek history, e.g.

That moment in learning about history, when you reach critical mass and it becomes exponentially easier, is the hardest thing to convey. But this is how I'd try to force it to come about in a younger version of myself.

i was once like you; i shared your concerns about the deficit of history of philosophy that many of the world's universities had adopted over time; but you must understand that you have no point of reference to judge what's good and bad philosophy, especially if you've only "started studying it the past year or two". seriously, the "history of philosophy is paramount" and "why are the contemporary academics of analytic philosophy neglecting muh irrelevant schelling and hegel?" will at some point wear off. as it is with physics, there's a reason why one's undergrad education shouldn't dwell too much on history of philosophy: you don't expect young physicists to spend semesters on newton's principia, do you? it's been extended and corrected by hamilton and lagrange; the principia is now read by historians only. by and large, the purpose of an university is to get you up to speed with the contemporary knowledge, techniques, etc. etc.

here's a better alternative: learn what your contemporaries have to say, go back to history of philosophy if you have to, and realize that much of the < 20th century thinkers were confused beyond repair.

>>7991851
>there's a reason why one's undergrad education shouldn't dwell too much on history of science
typo. fix'd

Fearful Symmetry by Northrop Frye.

Although it's more a creative work of criticism than a pernickety historical recreation of what Blakes intent might have been.

start with the greeks

>>7991720
GR and Ulysses are masterpieces. IJ is great but doesn't reach sublime status as the others do.

>Have you actually read the entire meme trilogy, /lit/?
yes, though not with any intention of reading the 'meme trilogy', they are just three important books in english lit
>Did you like it?
yes, all very worthwhile.
Which one stood out to you the most?
gravity's rainbow is a personal favorite, ulysses is a high standard of what literature can be. infinite jest is good contemporary americna lit, but easily the worst of the three, if i had to pick one. well rounded and good but not a standout work intellectually, aesthetically, or technically

File: 1444184030381.jpg (342KB, 1378x1438px) Image search: [Google]

342KB, 1378x1438px

Dumping mine first. Only got, like, 6.

An author that has been shit for so long and finally created a masterpiece?

Have no fucking clue

>>7991665
Don Quixote

give us some context OP, did they win something?

>>7991599
Whole book is just b8 for liberals, don't pay it any mind.

morrison is awful

Morrison is secretly redpilled. She hates "black culture" just like Aaron McGruder, and just like a long line of black thinkers have ever since the days of W.E.B. DuBois.

GO

>>7991592
this book still sits on the shelf of bmv in Toronto (biggest used book store in the city). it's been about 5 months now. same copy, same price. $7 is too much for torontonians to pay for tao lins shit book lol. I smile every time I see it there.

>>7991630
Odd. I'd expect Torontonians to be exactly the kind of faggots that would read this hot trash.

I got lucky and went into academia, so I get paid to do the research that would be necessary for my writing even if I were an independent scholar

i'm writer

>>7991578
I really don't like that term even though it is accurate of me. Even if I am an amateur I would still be an "amateur writer". Writer just sounds sort of pretentious unless that's literally what you're getting paid to do.

>28
>Been working my current job since Oct '15
>Since maybe 2013
>Yes, in my free time which I have a lot of I feel

File: 1462226722323.jpg (24KB, 239x90px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 239x90px

˙dlɐH ˙ɹǝʇʇɐl ǝɥʇ spɹɐʍoʇ ƃuiuɐǝl puɐ ǝsioN ǝʇiɥM ɹo ʍoquiɐɹ s,ʎʇiʌɐɹפ ɹǝɥʇiǝ ʎllɐɔiɟiɔǝds ƃuiʞuiɥʇ sɐʍ I ˙ʞooq MℲp ɹǝɥʇouɐ oʇui ʎlǝʇɐipǝɯɯi dɯnɾ oʇ ɥƃnouǝ ʇou ɥƃnoɥʇlɐ ʇi pǝʞil puɐ ɹǝɯɯns ʇsɐl ʇsǝſ ǝʇiuiɟuI pɐǝɹ I ˙ɹǝɯɯns siɥʇ pɐǝɹ oʇ lǝʌou ǝɯǝɯ uɹǝpoɯʇsod ɐ ʇuɐʍ I

W O M E N A N D M E N

>>7991565
Not as good as GameQuoter/10

I also have strong glasses (5+), and had the same thing. Just keep at it and it'll pass, or become unnoticeable.

>>7991528
I wonder why my phone doesn't have it.

Probably the flat display, sans serif fonts and agressive antialiasing or some shit like that

made me laugh here's a (You)

http://emojidick.com/

Is somebody working on a Ulysses?

>>7991463
You're on the wrong board friend *pushes up glasses and gives a devilish smile*
I'd recommend leaving before you get yourself hurt

File: where am i oh god.jpg (47KB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 480x270px

>>7991456
4chan, and then don't actually sleep at all because there's a great NEET vs Wageslave thread going on.

>>7991461
I need to sleep, I'm a wageslave, hence the need to escape the drudgery that the real world has become.

>>7991456

I've been reading Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series as my bedtime reading lately.