Proust Appreciation Thread

I'll bite.

1. Reading Swann's Way right now aswell but I'm not quite sold yet. I think the sentimental nature of Proust's prose can easily get a bit frustrating and over-the-top and I find myself overloaded with information when I've read for a longer while. It is very much possible that I'm not quite literary mature enough for a work of this magnitude but I'm intending to finish this one before deciding whether to continue or let Proust wait for a while.

2. Don't really care if it isn't reflected in his writing. It hopefully makes for a broader view if he actually was gay

3. I guess he's not very discussed here because it's a big task to read all of the volumes of In Search Of A Lost Time. I guess only that is a bit off-putting and his rambling, sentimental style of writing may also turn people away

>>8315551
Because /lit/ has moved on from the le 3000 pages gay Lacan man.

Read Beckett instead.

>>8315551
>I feel like he and In Search of Lost Time are not discussed nearly enough on this board
Ya. three threads a day is entirely too few.

>>8315551
check the archive, mate. We were shitposting in at least 2 Proust threads in the past two days.

>>8315551
1. I did read it. It is easily the best fiction of all time. I've read all of the Greeks essentials but with all due respect to them Proust's In Search of Lost Time is simply the best fiction in human history so far.

2. No.

3. Because his work requires effort to read, and the prose are the real gem so you have to actually read the entire magnum opus to truly appreciate its greatness. Most people on /lit/ do not do this.

Source: Princeton PhD

>>8315551
I've read excerpts and they were some of the most beautiful sentences I've ever read, but reading it seems like a huge commitment.

>>8317024
>>8317024
>Proust's In Search of Lost Time is simply the best fiction in human history so far.

Cringe. No it's not. 3000 pages of a guy impressing his neuroses on you.

> Because his work requires effort to read, and the prose are the real gem so you have to actually read the entire magnum opus to truly appreciate its greatness.

Not really, only patience. The prose is great but not as perfect as Flaubert. You don't need to read the entire series to 'appreciate' him. Even Nabokov could admit this.

I'm slowly but surely teaching myself french. Is it worth it to wait till I'm solid enough to read it in it's original language or should i just go for it now and read the English translation?

>>8319783
Less is lost with Proust in translation than Flaubert.

The prose is definitely beautiful but I still find it beautiful translated in English (read the Moncrieff translation)

>>8319882
Thanks. I guess Flaubert will be my final boss in french then.

>>8315551
1) no. it's beyond the "doorstop" thing, you could probably tie a chain to it, throw it overboard and anchor a ship with it. I'd like to cut through my reading list first.

2) nobody actually cares about that. Bloom is a jew, Kafka was a jew, the Greeks were gay, so was Mishima. nobody cares.

3) the Proust phase ended a while ago and it's hard to turn newcomers on to him when his works look like a set of encyclopedias