/Our guy/ is reviewing Swann's Way

>>9030018
Get back to me when he's finished all seven volumes.

>>9030018
The4oyearoldemeltinggoblinfacemananonsgreatgranaugustus

>>9030018
I'd say he's too weakshit to finish it but he's probably lurking this thread and he'll finish it just to spite us

he's a hack film school grad who /admitted/ his whole book review channel was a means of finding an audiance for his feature film
i know /lit/ never really liked him but how can his youtube fanbase not feel betrayed by that?

not to mention that his videos themselves are 50% wikipedia summaries and 50% him cultivating his "bohemian" personality

eyughck

>>9030042
You think all these youtubers are just doing videos for shits and giggles? Some might, I guess, but I usually assume otherwise.

If they actually get money or an audience out of it, what's the problem anyway? TV stations are run on a larger version of the same model.

>>9030042
quit talking so much shit, I like this guy

literally one of maybe 4 decent book tubers Ive ever seen. Plus his video quality/lighting/camera/ whatever is aesthetic and nice to watch

>>9030042

People feel betrayed by this shit? Wow, just wow. It's time to die.

>>9030018
Not our guy

What is the point in watching a booktuber

>>9030018

How to spot the pseud: after mentioning Swann's Way the pseud will instantly refer to the Madeleine cake as the pseud didn't actually read a single page of the book but has just heard of the scene with the Madeleine cake and wants to look cool.

It took the goblin an entire second to do this! Bravo!

>>9030018
Goblins gonna gobble

>>9030110
The Madeleine cake thing is one of the most widely mentioned things about the book. You can't review Swann's Way without discussing the 'Proustian moment'.

Am I the only one who thinks that ISoLT is beyond "reviewable"?

"Swann's Way - Book review", I don't know... it just makes it look like its equated to the latest Netflix show or something. It disgusts me. You can discuss or perhaps reflect on a book like Swann's Way, sure - but definitely not review it.

Especially not if you are a goblin.

>>9030031
desu, this ugly fuck is 26 going on 47. He looks like B. Cooper got hit with a lighter flame and a can of Aquanet.

>>9030083
Nice try.

>>9030151
Nah it's contrived and boring and a surefire sign of the Anglo world's final victory over the antiquated francophony

>>9030083
You're just not looking hard enough or you have a life and cant find YouTube's hidden gems.

>>9030042
Betrayed? He provides small entertainment for views to rake in some extra cash. He doesnt owe anyone shit, if people stop watching they will but he puts out videos discussing books hardly anyone else on yt are discussing.

File: Screen Shot 2017-01-28 at 8.45.31 pm.png (14KB, 259x232px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 259x232px

>Being this jealous.

Our guy is Bulletdeer fuck off

He should do a follow up review for 2666 where he discusses some of its deeper themes.

>>9031084
>Not The_Bookchemist.

>>9030018
I literally can't stand this guy. He doesn't even eat the fucking cake the way it's described in the book, and he is one of the worst readers I've ever seen, with less analytic power than a child. He's definitely worse than all the YA booktubers who sincerely love what they do, because he's "elevating" himself above others in some paper-thin pseudo-intellectual veil while spitting on them, except his viewers. He's intellectually bankrupt. And how the fuck does he dare to ask so much money to from people so that he can spurt out a series pathetic statements about their work. The whole thing rests on his persona, which is so obviously a facade that it's insulting.

>>9030083
>>9030018
Hi cliff

I enjoy his reviews from time to time. He explores serious content, truly /lit/ worthy, while maintaining an air of lightness and self-deprecation. Does he meander a bit too much? Sure. But if you were having a true conservation with a bookish buddy, surrounded by your comfy library and leather armchairs, wouldn't you also tend to ramble and talk about yourself?

No one else, from what I have seen, has really reviewed obscure authors such as Jünger and Huysnans. Call it pretentious. Though I would not doubt that a majority of the denizens at /lit/ harbor the same attitudes. Us book lovers are a sorry breed. Add this board to the mix and you've got a stranger creature indeed - one who is surely a bit pretentious, just like Mr. Sergeant.

Bravo Cliff.

>>9031341
>wouldn't you also tend to ramble and talk about yourself?
Absolutely not.

>No one else, from what I have seen, has really reviewed obscure authors such as Jünger and Huysnans.
It's not his selection of books that's the problem and about which people complain, it's how he deals with, or more accurately, how he fails to deal with these books. You haven't talked about at all about his analysis, only mentioned the word "review", which I don't think is quite applicable.

I want to make a meme friendly lit channel but also have solid reviews. how to review books? what to include?

Honestly, he's not nearly as bad are you're making him out to be. There are people here accusing him of being worse than the YA booktubers, for god's sake, have some perspective. There's definitely an element of stylisation to his videos and overall "look", but I'll take what he does over the nightmare pastel-coloured Instagram hell of some identikit YA booktuber. The fact that he's even looking at the books he does is a relief when virtually everyone else on youtube reviewing books is an airbrushed twentysomething who, on the rare occasion that they read a 'classic', complains that Virginia Woolf "should show, not tell" or that they couldn't finish Mishima because they can't stomach a dead cat. Is this guy pretentious? Definitely a little bit. Does he put out reviews that ramble a bit or don't analyse the work in question in enough detail? Yeah, definitely sometimes, but at least the stuff he reviews in interesting and above the level of teenage love triangles and mysteriously good-looking social outcasts with magic powers and unconventional eye colours. Not all the oppobrium that's being levelled at him is unjustified but surely the big booktubers deserve lit's hate more?

>>9031341
>obscure authors such as Jünger and Huysnans

Both are in print, from Penguin. They're literally the exact opposite of obscure.

I like Cliff alright, but I really love The Bookchemist. He's my senpai desu.

>>9031471
Sure, in our world they are not considered obscure. However these authors are rarely explored by the general public.

>>9031474
He's a massive pleb though. I don't understand how someone like that can be a phd student in english lit. His latest video on pynchon was fucking embarassing.

why does better than food anger /lit/ so much? He's a relatively small channel with little in the way of a following, yet he's treated as a Sam Hyde-tier annoyance whenever he is brought up.

>hes ugly!
>hes a pseud and [vague, unsupported criticism about his ability to critique]
>he tries to make MONEY.. ? omg...

>>9031447
I'm guessing the fact that he cultivates a persona in the way he looks and in the direction of his videos is seen as insolent and phony.

>>9031341
>Huysmans
>obscure

Pick one. Especially after how much Huysmans was mentioned in Soumission.

His unearned sense of superiority reminds me of /lit/

>>9031691
>>9031447

How is this not obvious to you? He encapsulates everything /lit/ hates about itself. The contrived carelessness, the bourgeois attempt at bohemianism, the middlebrow pursuit of classics in favor of developing personal taste, the superficial analysis used only as a vehicle to relay a persona of being cultured, traveled and experienced.

Cliff gives /lit/ users insight by proxy. Insight into their own vanity, which they hate, and virtuously so. This is obviously the reason for the virulent response he gets here. Cliff, unlike run-of-the-mill YA booktubers, resonate on some level with /lit/ users, and we resent him for it.

>>9031691
i think he's quite handsome

>>9031768
Ah. So that's what it was.

>>9031768

There is no such thing as an earned sense of superiority. We are all of us down here in the muck of human existence. None of us is divine.

>>9031847
See what I mean

>>9030018

Why do people have to take things like this so seriously? What happened to the good old days when people would just write an article on a pop culture website for fun. Or failing that, update a Wikipedia entry.

It genuinely makes me sad.

He looks like Caputo from Oranges are the New Blackberries, or whatever it's called.

>>9031093

Bookchemist is literally the only good booktuber I've seen. Probably because he's just some dude in his dorm room making videos on a bunch of books he likes having not invested $1000 into a professional camera + microphone for the privilege of doing so.

He's earnest and informed. A rare combination.

He's a broke ass 'my irony is fkn superior' hack with no talent or charm, sage

What if I made a channel knowing full well I would get made fun of by you guys. so knowing that I would do things that would get me even more made fun of by you guys all because I l8ke to laugh at myself and it's even funnier when other people make fun of me?

>>9031806
>personal taste
personality is modern meme
personality defined by taste is a postmodern meme

>>9031932

>everyone has always liked the exact same things
>liking particular things doesn't constitute part of what you are

Stahp it.

>>9031806
I posted >>9031447 and I agree, at least partially. A lot of /lit/ users are at least somewhat pseud-y. It's easy for us to feel a sense of superiority when we look at a YA booktuber, but when we look at Cliff, we see someone with the same taste in books as /lit/, only with a fairly successful youtube channel and a goal in life (that Bataille film) that could conceivably be achieved. I think you're overly harsh on him by characterising his entire presence as an elaborate statement of intellectual superiority, though. His personality isn't nearly as contrived as the "cool best friend" image that certain vloggers or YA booktubers clearly strive to create.

>>9030151
No, Beckett did it perfectly in 60 pages.

>>9031093
>>9031915
bookchemist is shit and cant say anything about the books he reviews other than

> dude its great i liked it
> very [adjective]
> dont forget to click all my ads, (yes I do make money off that)

but all booktubers are like this, theres no reason to pay attention to any of them

>>9031081
Oh wow he makes as much as one week at a minimum wage job, I sure am jelly.

>>9031847
Sure, but ur a DYEL low-T manlet twink boi while I'm a 6'4 225 lb jacked with an 8 in cock. Sick cunt > Sad cunt

File: A Pleaseant Beer.jpg (77KB, 640x493px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 640x493px

>>9032791

I'm pretty happy with my life, desu senpai. Coming to the end of my young adulthood, and have a nice wife, nice house, plentiful garden, well paying job that I enjoy, cute trained dog, and lots of books and comfy places to read them.

I'm glad that your slightly-longer-than-average cock and your lifting makes you happy too, though.

>>9030294
What YouTube hidden gems?

What would you guys want in a YouTube channel about books?

>>9034133
memes. kinda like that bloodmeridian review but less autism.

>>9032478
Just stop writing posts

>>9034133
Please post the blood meridian review. I've been looking for it so long

>>9031949
>everyone has always liked the exact same things
No but that's different from it being part of your """personality""".
>liking particular things doesn't constitute part of what you are
It does, because we live in postmodernity.

>>9032989
God, I hope I'm not still here when I'm over 25

File: ABC_Mochizuki_Beckert.jpg (146KB, 996x560px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 996x560px

It bugs me slightly that he evidently tries to be a super cool handsome /lit/ dude. It doesn't seem authentic.
But then I look past my complain, because maybe it's jealousy and also I think it's great if people put in the work to produce something. I make youtube videos myself sometimes and it's so much work - if you try to make any point and have some red line - that I appreciate it even if the producers seem off.
Let me put it that way: I wish /lit/ anons would do literature talks and start honest interactions. Looking at /pol/ kids in front of the hewillnotdivide.us cam and how they eat pizza, drink coffee and have a good time shouting praise kek, I think a lot of good things could come from anons go beyond one-liner reactions and threads with 7 comments at most.

>>9035085
small skype calls as a book club?

>>9035864
You plan on doing that?

When I started a thread about The Woman In The Dunes by Kōbō Abe, no one replied to it. Naturally, I watched his video. /lit/ is boring.

>>9030018
NOT my guy.

>>9035020

If you don't want to be here when you're over 25, why are you here now? The sooner you start making a break, the easier it will be, if that's what you really want.

>>9032492
>confirmed for watched 2 bookchemist videos

why are you all so rude? i'm not a huge fan of the persona he attaches to his videos, but i respect anyone that runs a youtube channel because its not easy