why doesnt /lit/ have a book of the month like /r/books?

It takes me far more than a month to read any book

>>8716926
lmao

Give yourself ten minutes to think about it. Then you won't have to post.

>>8716920
Because we can never agree on anything

>>8716993
Pfft, yes we can, you pleb.

>>8716920
Because I don't think wikipedia pages count.

File: 1340190075404.png (51KB, 339x298px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 339x298px

Eww

>>8716920
thanks for your daily bait thread

>>8716920
because this community isn't homogeneous

File: 1399471192763.jpg (277KB, 1180x1204px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1180x1204px

/lit/ has tried a book club many times, they fail because people here either don't read, have already read the boring classic that everyone decides on ages ago, or just doesn't care to be in a book club

Some mad man even tried to get /lit/ to go through the Western Canon in chronological order and it didn't even make it past the Greeks

The majority of /lit/ doesn't read and the few that do are far to pretentious to read anything that would be selected for a book club.

Why the fuck would I stop reading what I'm currently reading and instead pick up something that you fags suggest? You can all go to hell as far as I care.

Ididnfidfn

>>8717232
Thats my post, sorry.
We should have a book of the Monte but who should be in charge?

idk I read Gravity's Rainbow with the reading group last year and it went... fine. The only problem was I think only a few other people actually kept up with the reading schedule, and if the discussion thread went up when those few people weren't on /lit/, they wouldn't go anywhere, which discouraged the people still trying to keep up and make it worth it, which lead to fewer and fewer participating, and so on.

>>8717001
Kek

>>8717230
Wait people don't read here? What's the fucking point?