Samuel Beckett

>>8696278
Start with the Greeks

Read Ulysses by Joyce as a pre-requisite for Waiting for Godot. Then Unnamable. If you like him, read through the rest of his corpus in any order, either way finish with Endgame.

>>8696290
Don't listen to this retard. You can't just read the Unnamable before the rest of the Trilogy

>>8696294
>wasting time on Beckett
I'm sorry, who's the retard?

>>8696298
You are, retard.

>>8696298
Well there's our answer

>>8696278
Start with Godot. If you like it, go for Murphy, More Pricks than Kicks, and Watt for narrative, and Endgame, Happy Days, Not I, and Krapp's Last Tape for the major plays. If you still want more, go with the minor plays (Footfalls, That Time, Rockaby, Ohio Impromptu, Act Without Words I and II), the radio plays, and his late experiments in drama.

To finish, read the Trilogy in order.

There are no real prerequisites for Beckett, alhotugh an understanding of Descartes, Schopenhauer, Dante's Commedia, Berkeley, and Joyce would come very, very handy to fully understand him. If you don't want to get through all that, just consider Joyce's influence on Beckett and a general understanding of Modernism.

What's the 'worm'?

Just read him for fuck's sake.
The point of such a board is to talk about books, not around them. No. Actually, we can talk around them if we want, but... Jesus. Do you people even read?

I haven't had a proper discussion on here for at least 2 years. It's sad. We used to have fun on this website, now /lit/ is mere cheap lobster aquarium filled with plastic contrefaçons.

>>8696550
Ok, you wanna talk about Beckett? Let's talk Beckett.

What do you think is the significance of the "Child" in Waiting for Godot? Why do you think Pozzo "lost" his sight and Lucky his speech in Act II?

>>8696325
the penis &/or his jar-born self

The first two pages of the trilogy were incredible and fell asleep from boredom after that. How'd he fuck it up /lit/?

>>8696324
This is a very good post
t. Irish Beckett student

>>8696550
>What are you doing wasting so much time making an internet thread for a few minutes??
>You should spend your time wisely and just jump into a forty hour commitment blindly

Started Mercier and Camier and really liking it so far. Who else into it?

>>8696550
But please start discussion threads!
I agree with you to some extent but there's no use complaining about it rather than creating threads to discuss literature. You whiny bitch

>>8696570
You just shat a post you could have just farted, kid. In conversation, the trick is not to summon your own wit, you just proved my point deliciously.
Sit back your ego now, I feel its ache.

>>8696619
>pssh nothin personnel kid

Anyone care to share their opinions on these questions? >>8696570


Since this other idiot can't start a discussion on his own.

>>8696278
Start by learning French

>>8696590
The vast majority of writers do not need any sort of chart to read, this board just has some weird preoccupation with it. Start anywhere with Beckett, it does not matter.

>>8696693
He translated most of his own stuff. Not imperative.

>>8696701
Starting with the Unnameable would be a bad idea. Starting with his late short prose might be as well.

re: everyone moaning just read, it doesn't matter, etc., etc: have you ever actually read Beckett and/or are you aware there is a very particular trajectory to his body of work and certain things absolutely should not be read before others?

>where do I start with Joyce
>oh god anon just fucking read a book, start with Ulysses, it doesn't matter

>>8696707
Why? It's where I started and I went on from there. It's wonderful.

>>8696718
>start with Ulysses, it doesn't matter
But you can. Dubliners won't prepare you for it at all and Portrait can be a nice addition but is hardly necessary.

>>8696728
>Why? It's where I started and I went on from there. It's wonderful.

Because its part of a trilogy you fucking idiot. Even though there's no clear continuity the significance of the developement and progress of the novels is hugely important.

>>8696768
Unnameable is the name of the final book and the trilogy as a whole. It's pretty obvious you are going to start with the first book, you don't need a flowchart for that. Thanks for being a huge cock for no reason btw.

>>8696792
I apologise, I've always heard people call it simply The Trilogy

>>8696728

Ulysses is literally a sequel to Portrait, though.

>>8696792
The "trilogy" might be the only way you've ever seen it published in English, but it's not obvious if someone picks up the individual book without researching it first (imagine that!).

>>8696728
And some of the short stuff is nearly impenetrable prose-poetry which would put off those looking for more Godot before they even know what they're getting into.

delillo's mao II

Opie here again.

>>8696948
On my shortlist, but how does it relate to Beckett?

>>8696324
Thanks a bunch, friendyo

Would you read him in english or french?

>>8696959
You may also want to check his poetry. I personally am not very fond of it, but he did write some great poems (Cascando, for example).

If you can also read him in French, do so. Even if Beckett was his own "translator", there are differences between his works depending on the language, and it is also very interesting to see how Beckett interpreted Beckett through translation.

>>8696278
He claimed that Infinite Jest was a huge influence on him

>>8696849
And The Lord of the Rings is a sequel to The Hobbit. You don't need to read either before those works. It can be helpful but it is not necessary. And that's the whole point I am making. Most of the charts can be nice, emphasis on the can, but most authors don't need them at all (for Christ's sake I've seen charts like this for Hemingway, Lovecraft and Camus) and even for most of the ones where it could be nice they are usually far from necessary.

>>8696932
>looking for more Godot before they even know what they're getting into
And if they want that complex prose instead of Godot are you not putting them off all the same? I'm glad I started with the trilogy preciously because I probably would have dropped Beckett if my first experience was through that play.

>The "trilogy" might be the only way you've ever seen it published in English
If you are stupid enough to pay for a book without reading the dust jacket or a quick look through the introduction you deserve what you get. Only an idiot would start with that specific book not knowing it was not part of a larger work. It's a piece of information so basic I wasn't even thinking of anything like it when I talked of lits preoccupation with charts. Wanting a chart =/= not knowing that The Unnameable is part of a trilogy.

>>8697909
>If you are stupid enough to pay for a book without reading the dust jacket or a quick look through the introduction you deserve what you get. Only an idiot would start with that specific book not knowing it was not part of a larger work.
Off the horse, you're no expert. The Unnameable HAS been printed without a "dust jacket", introduction, or indication that Molloy and Malone were somewhat supposed to be read before it (save inclusion in the usual "From the same author" list).
Bloody millenials...

File: Eugène_Ferdinand_Victor_Delacroix_018.jpg (574KB, 2024x2523px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 2024x2523px

As each art deteriorates and degenerates due to the gradual abandonment of laboriously invented and refined conventions (which, contrary to popular belief, do not restrict an art but on the contrary create, refine, and help it flourish — the reason bunglers find conventions "restrictive" is because they lack the training and discipline required to adhere to them and the talent and creativity to add to (i.e. further complexify) and/or modify them), we find in every field the same movement: a regression to previous, in many cases even primitive critical standards. Moreover, at the same time as standards collapse the number of aspiring artists increases (indeed, as we have seen, it is this very increase that leads to the collapse, the two movements unfolding simultaneously once the masses have been "emancipated" and the means of artistic creation become widely available), whilst the resulting artworks come to increasingly resemble a repulsive junk- and rubbish-soup that no one in their right mind would want to have anything to do with.

>>8696959
>>8696985
Hoenstly, just read all his poetry. There's not too much of it, you might as well get an idea of what he did.

>>8696278
>How do I get started with Samuel Beckett?
Start and end with the trash.