How is it that the longest novel in English isn't even a /lit/ meme?
Have you pseuds even read it?
>>8332007
no because it's shit
>>8332007
lord no. not every brit was a brit worth reading.
>>8332025
>No he hasn't read it.
>"because it's shit"
>Hasn't read it
/lit/, the most intelligent board everyone.
Sell it to me, OP.
I've noticed /lit/ doesn't often have threads about 18th century literature except like Goethe and Voltaire
>>8332007
It's not po-mo. It's not even mo. What's the point?
>>8332050
It's a 1500 page epistolary novel.
By the end of it you'll be so adept at letter-writing that you'll be able to obtain anything you desire with nothing more than your pen.
I read it for a university course. It's okay, but because of its ridiculous length I don't think it's worth it
>>8332045
I read the reviews. that's what reviews are for. so you don't waste your time.
It is now.
Thanks OP.
>>8332074
fuck this, read humphry clinker instead.
>>8332067
Frogs sperg out about Jane Austen being a roastie often enough
>>8332067
18th century lit was gawky and misshapen and hardly anyone could write for shit. There were Sterne and Swift and some good poets but that's about it.
>>8332007
there are countless 18th century English novels published by penguin that form so much of the literary trash heap of history. when I see a penguin spine at the thrift store I assume I'll recognize the book, or at least the author, but I live in the rural south and this is a frequent occurrence. why is this? did everyone think they could write well and had things worth passin on?
>>8332189
Samuel Richardson's a highly esteemed and important author. Just because an image board doesn't meme about it doesn't mean he's obscure.
>>8332189
I'm unfamiliar with this situation
can you remember any titles?
>>8332007
Shouldn't a dance with the music of time be about twicw as long?
>>8332067
>no-one ever wants to talk about Rochester
>tfw