Does literature need to be challenging to be good? Does good

>>8456602
In what sense of challenging? Stylistically it needn't be. Conceptually, in the most limited sense of the word, it needn't be. But it has to articulate truth. And the truth is damn hard to wrap your head around.

http://adilegian.com/FranzenGaddis.htm

>>8456657
*tips fedora*

>>8456872
kinda makes you think that he never finished moby dick or don quixote...

>Does literature need to be challenging to be good?

No

>Does good literature tend to be more challenging?

No

>Can something easy and simple be magnificent?

Yes

>>8456899
Examples?

>>8456907
Of what in particular?

Non-difficult good books?

>>8456921
Yeah.

L'Étranger may want to have a word with you, OP

>>8456937
There's plenty of examples

The Cossacks - Leo Tolstoy
The Aenied - Virgil
The Saga of the Volsungs

>>8457098
Also Moby Dick

>>8457098
I hope you're not being serious.

>>8456872
dat ressentiment

>>8456944
In the name of word-fuckery I think L'Étranger is a challenging book in that it challenges the average persons world-view and wouldn't readily be acquiesced by said persons.

>>8456937
Well, Stoner

>>8456602
only if you're as pretentious as the rest of us

>>8456907
Read anything by Hemingway. Very easy to read. But absolutely beautiful.

>>8457106
They are non-difficult good books.

I do not understand the purpose of your post.

If you have an objection, post it. If you want to pat yourself on the back and feel smug, then do it on another board.