Six signs that you are reading a bad book: 1) you are on page

Lol pleb

I'm at page 50 of catcher in the rye and I wonder why the fuck did I go into a book store with the /lit starter kit and showed it to someone working there.
Bought How to kill a mocking bird with it.

What have I done...

Why the fuck is the catcher in the rye in the lit starter kit?

>>7558910
Bait
>>7558922
Not bait. Actually Reddit.

>>7558910
maybe if you'd quit skimming pages you'd know what the book was about, care about the characters, and know who's narrating. just an idea...

>>7558910
>1) you are on page 500, and you only have a slight idea what the book is about
If you have no idea what the Savage Detectives is about you must barely be reading it.
>2) you find yourself skimming several pages

oh lmao. go back to watching TV anon its more your speed

>>7558931
Was that an insult or not?

I never went into books seriously, I thought that list would be a good starting point and that lit in general would have decent taste compared to other boards about movies/shows/anime/games

>>7558955
b8

You people are too stupid for literature. Something like Breaking Bad is more your speed.

>>7558910
>2016
>reading memecore

>>7558966
what bait? you clearly see im a newfag

>>7558981
Since when is The Savage Detectives "memecore"? I thought that was reserved for Joyce, DFW, and Pinecone.

>>7558955
If something as accessible as The Catcher in the Rye went over your head, maybe literature isn't the right hobby for you.

>>7559002
What exactly went over my head? did I say I didn't get the book anywhere?

File: f.jpg (1MB, 1820x4348px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1820x4348px

>>7559001
that is the trinty, Boreano is memecore. Around 50% of these books are memecore

>>7559008
>Around 50% of these books are memecore

Says who? You?

>>7559024
He does.

>you will never do drugs and engage in orgies with the visceral realists

why live?

>>7558922
The starterkit is solid. Also if you went to highschool you should have read most of it.

>>7558922
>>7558955
>>7558989
>>7559006
I'm cringing pretty hard at you for actually taking that list to a bookstore. Anyway, I wouldn't consider TKAM or Catcher to be great novels, but they are still acceptable novels, and everyone reads them in high school. If you haven't then you are culturally behind.

That being said, you seem to have formed your own opinion that those novels are bad, stylistically or otherwise. In that case, what do you consider good literature? If your tastes align with anything that is considered "good" then you may be forgiven for forgoing the beginner novels. If not--that is, if you have read a few great novels and consider them trash, or if you have read plebian literature (Stephen King, Terry Pratchett, GRRM, etc.) and find that to your liking, then /lit/ is really not the place for you, since /lit/ unironically despises such literature and only reads "elitist" (but, in my opinion, "good") literature.

>>7559069
I'm cringing pretty hard at myself for doing that, as well. I actually liked TKAM and I think it's pretty good (just said I bought them together, I'm just mad about Catcher).
I'm still in the middle of it,

We only learned Of Mice and Men in highschool (I don't live in an english speaking country), So yeah, I would say the school are culturally behind.

I read 'plebian' books when I was younger (hunger games, harlan coben books, etc.) and looking back at them (After taking other mediums a bit more seriously) I realized how bad they were, so I can't really tell you which one I consider better.
I did read Sherlock Holmes and liked it a lot though.
I don't remember much about other books I read

>>7559060
>>7559069
>everyone reads the same that amerilards

CUNTS

>>7558910
>1) you are on page 500, and you only have a slight idea what the book is about
check
>2) you find yourself skimming several pages, because you know the whole point of a passage is contained in the last line, which is simply a rephrased version of the sentence that ended the previous three passages
double check
>3) you don't care about any of the characters
erhm, not entirely, I only don't care about some of the characters
>4) you don't know who the hell the narrator of a particular section is (you may have come across him or her before, but (see #3) you didn't care about him or her, so you don't even remember
doesn't really apply a lot of the time
>5) you find yourself in a bad mood, because you're on page 500, you still have about 500 pages to go, and you feel like you've gone too far to give up now
oh yeah
>6) you keep discovering more signs that you are reading a bad book while you are writing your review after (FINALLY) finishing David Foster Wallace's INFINITE JEST.

pretty spot on senpai

>>7558910
This is a phenomenal book.
You have a child's brain, and penis.

>>7558955
>>7559089
>>7559069
One thing I forgot to add. You said you "never went into books seriously." You didn't read the beginner literature in high school, or even children's literature, and now you cannot appreciate any serious literature at all. That is to say, you will be unable to read any serious book to completion because it doesn't hold your attention or excite your sensibilities. In that case, you have 3 options. 1) start at the beginning--not at the greeks, but at easy literature. I'm talking about Alice in Wonderland or the Phantom Tollbooth. You should have read these things as a child, but now you have to make up for it. 2) read a wide variety of serious literature until you find something that you like. A library will help in this regard. Look at any of the /lit/ favorite book memes and pick randomly. 3) decide that reading is too much effort at this point, and quit literature for good. This is a sad option indeed, I don't recommend.

>>7559094
>Europoors still jealous of our capitalism
Stay mad.

>>7559089
I'm assuming English is not your first language, in that case it will be more difficult to get into English literature, not just because of the unusual idioms and linguistic connections that most English-speakers are familiar with, but also because of the difference in culture. Still, I think good writers often transcend these differences. I enjoy great authors of different languages despite reading a translation, though of course it doesn't compare to the original.

File: 1446912945404.jpg (3MB, 1820x4348px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1820x4348px

>>7559008
>still posting the old chart
I wish that fucker never posted this chart on reddit's (un)official image host.

Here you go newfags, this is our 2015 chart.

>>7559114
I didn't mean I did not read. I've read a decent amount of books, and I know to read and appreciate something. but I never thought seriously about what I read, how it was from a critical standpoint, etc.
That's what I meant by 'seriously'.

Just wondering about Catcher in the Rye

>>7559094
not really. most people don't read after high school, so there's no sense in which "everyone reads the same." I'd consider these novels to be more like textbooks than serious literature. so yeah, multiple aspects of our system suck, but I'd rather have a standard curriculum than no curriculum at all.

>>7559134
It's still shit.

The vote counts are pathetic.

/lit/ doesn't read.

>>7559135
if you simply don't like it then that's your opinion and there's no need to bash /lit/ for having an opinion that differs from yours

>>7559134
>>7559135
Reading from top 100 is imo pretty good. Just look the book up before and read if it isn't pomo

>>7558910
swap page 500 with page 700 and this could literally be gravity's rainbow desu

>>7559151
Yeah I don't care that much, I guess being mad at the book made me type like Holden

>>7559094
I'm European and we had to read 5 books from the starter kit

(1) is more a problem with the reader, not the book
(2) is more a problem with the reader, not the book
(3) is immaterial and doesn't suggest one way or the other about the quality of the book
(4) more of a problem with the reader than the book
(5) definitely a problem with the reader and not the book

Literature just might not be for you.

>>7558910
>you only have a slight idea what the book is about
You just identified your problem; why are you reading a book to find out what it's about?

>you find yourself skimming several pages, because you know the whole point of a passage is contained in the last line
Again, why are you reading to find points? Were you signed The Savage Detectives for a class?

>you don't care about any of the characters
Reading requires not only the willing suspension of disbelief but also the capacity for human empathy. If you lack that, stick to experimental fiction only.

>you don't know who the hell the narrator of a particular section is
You've been trained all your life to read books with the understanding that you'll only have to know a single character as the narrator. In other words, you've had it easy. Quit being lazy and make the effort to take notes, flip back and forth, and realize who's saying what. Reading isn't purely for leisure, at least not literary fiction.

>you find yourself in a bad mood, because you're on page 500, you still have about 150 pages to go, and you feel like you've gone too far to give up now
A sign of immaturity. A mature reader can set down a book they don't like and leave it be. You can be assured plenty of others will have read it, so it's not your responsibility to when you could read so many books.

>you keep discovering more signs that you are reading a bad book while you are writing your review
Your 'review' contains no references to the actual text of The Savage Detectives, so you might as well not have read it.

By the way, it took me longer to read The Savage Detectives than any other book in my life. Partly because I was at a point in my life where I would only read while on the bus commuting to and from university. I then took a trip to California and got through a bunch on the plane rides and at the beach, finishing it by the time I got home. I had started in August 2013 and finished in May 2014. And I loved it.

If I had exactly enough money to buy the rights to and produce one feature film adaptation of a book, it would be The Savage Detectives. Not because it hasn't already accomplished everything it needed to, but because it would be an even better, literary, pomo Y Tu Mamá También.

Didn't this guy die with the book unpublished?
Is it possible that it's a long bore with rambling factoids in lieu of strong characters because he never really finished it?

>>7558910
Six signs that you are retarded: 1) you are on page 500, and you only have a slight idea what the book is about; 2) you find yourself skimming several pages, because you know the whole point of a passage is contained in the last line, which is simply a rephrased version of the sentence that ended the previous three passages; 3) you don't care about any of the characters; 4) you don't know who the hell the narrator of a particular section is (you may have come across him or her before, but (see #3) you didn't care about him or her, so you don't even remember; 5) you find yourself in a bad mood, because you're on page 500, you still have about 150 pages to go, and you feel like you've gone too far to give up now; 6) you keep discovering more signs that you are reading a bad book while you are writing your review after (FINALLY) finishing Roberto Belano's THE SAVAGE DETECTIVES.

>>7559236
that's 2666 you fucking dip

stop commenting on shit you haven't even read to preemptively justify your own retardation and lack of critical faculties

>>7559242
>no, that's his other long boring book with rambling factoids in lieu of strong characters

lel

>>7559248
"other" was neither stated nor implied in that guy's post. learn how to greentext, newfag

>>7559255
Learn to read subtext you pinhead.

>>7559228
They are making a movie adaptation already.
>diego luna
is gonna be shit.

>>7559248
>lel
bro...end your life

>>7559255
anon, it's time to stop posting here and go back to reddit

>>7559258
Welp. There goes one of my dreams.

>>7559267
There's still 2666.

>>7559228
>it would be an even better, literary, pomo Y Tu Mamá También.
I don't think the second part of the book would lend itself to a good cinematographic adaptation. The charm of the book is that you only get to know about the protagonists tangentially, from second hand accounts. I would still be down for that as long as Maribel Verdú plays Auxilio Lacouture.

>>7559257
>>7559261
there is no subtext you flaming faggot. you're literally assuming that he called 2666 the "other long boring book". You're assuming that he said what you originally said, that Savage Detectives was the original "long boring book." This is either projection or begging the question, or a retarded combination of both, shielded by a wall of irony and childish tantrums.

>>7559260
>bro
go eat a turd.

>>7559102
I feel bad for you if you dont know what infinite jest is about on page 500. The book will have failed you by the end almost assuredly.

>>7559274
>go eat a turd.
bro...seriously?

>>7559270
>saying "he", desperately pretending you're not samefagging
>still obviously samefagging

>you're literally assuming that he called 2666 the "other long boring book".

the guy clearly thought savage detectives was unfinished, and >>7559242 correctly pointed out he was thinking of 2666. >>7559248 (you) proceeds to sperg out

fuck off back to reddit

>>7559269
Imagine the film adaptation as a documentary sandwiched by a road-trip, if you want to distill it to its most recognizable genres. We follow Garcia Madero through the first part, then enter the second part, consisting of interviews as voiceovers or actual scenes, depending on the chapter, then we return to Garcia Madero et al. in the third part.

I think a nontraditional film like that would be great. Definitely not a summer blockbuster, but something that could feature on the festival circuit.

>>7559270
You are just not paying attention. You're having a hard time tonight. You must try and keep up because /lit/ is basically the kid's table and I don't have much hope for you elsewhere if you don't put in the effort here.

File: 11.png (17KB, 1116x202px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 1116x202px

>>7559284
I've posted exactly one of those things you quoted
>unable to discern if samefag
>even mentioning reddit

that being said, >>7559248 is indeed a sperg, and >>7559242 is right, so i don't see the disagreement here

this thread went to shit real fast

oh wait, what am i talking about, it started off shit

>>7559228
Banter aside, I think this is the only actual response in this thread. I was in the camp of disliking this book but I think this anon's call to compassion and examination of why we read as well as his own personal experience reading the text is all very poignant and a compelling argument. He also does not resort to name-calling like the other literary goons in the thread.

>>7559320
>goons
I didn't see the "no bully" sign

File: boooom-boom-pah-pah-pah-tu-h-pah internally.jpg (129KB, 640x467px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 640x467px

>>7558922
>I go into a book store with the /lit starter kit and showed it to someone working there

File: tumblr_mfr172igis1r31hr4o1_500.jpg (95KB, 500x693px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 500x693px

Who made and wrote down the interviews for each character during the second part?
García Madero?
Lupe?
The police?