/lit/ I'm not a learned man, I don't reads too good,

>>9238490
>I've struggled with books including The Divine Comedy and The Scarlet Letter to give you some gauge of my skill

Ho boy. I'll be nice since you seem sincere.

Start with Les Mis or Count of Monte Cristo. Then move onto War and Peace and The Brothers Karamazov. Save Infinite Jest for later and Moby-Dick is final boss. By then you should have become a significantly better reader by having gone through these texts alone and shouldn't have too many issues with the big Dick.

>>9238490
Count of Monte Cristo is probably the easiest to read

>>9238505

Also, you should probably cut your teeth on more digestible works first, like short stories or novellas. I'd recommend giving Flannery O'Connor a try. She wrote plenty of amazing short stories you can finish in a small amount of time. The language will also be more familiar to you as she was a 20th century writer from the South as opposed to the other works you listed which are all 19th century works besides Infinite Jest.

>>9238521
Plus, then you get to read stories with the word nigger in them.

>>9238490
not that you should read any of those long ass books if you're not used to reading, but I would honestly say Infinite Jest is a decent shout for first on that list.

The prose is so colloquial, I find it really difficult to believe when I see people saying IJ is a difficult book to read. The footnotes are quite annoying at first, and he will throw in some real obscure words from time to time, but I barely ever had to re-read a passage to understand it. Very funny book that has a real conversationalist flow to it.

>>9238505
thank you, this was very helpful. I did not know Moby DIck would be the most challenging

>>9238521
I've read most of the shorter classics, and I really enjoyed books some people consider difficult (Sound & Fury, Lolita, Heart of Darkness, Blood Meridian). I think it might just be a boredom issue or I just don't get a certain style.

>>9238598
that's what I thought about Infinite Jest and why I have it on the list in the first place. do you think it takes the same amount of time to read as the others? or does it flow quicker?

>>9238674
What the fuck lad, if you've read and understood the sound and the fury, heart of darkness and blood meridian then you should have no problems at all with that list. You did understand them right?

>>9238674
>I did not know Moby DIck would be the most challenging

It's not the most "challenging". You shouldn't look at literature as a challenge (ironic since i called Moby-Dick the final boss). Great literature should be engrossing, edifying, and expand your desire to read more of it.

Moby-Dick isn't challenging in the sense that it's hard to get through. It's just so full of everything which makes literature great that you will literally reflect on chapters, pages, and passages which are simply awe-inspiring. If you enjoyed Faulkner and McCarthy then you'll love Melville, as he is both of their spiritual literary fathers and they have admitted as such.

>>9238674
>do you think it takes the same amount of time to read as the others? or does it flow quicker?

the thing is a bit over 1000 pages including the footnotes, it takes some time to read. I read it in a little over 2 months with a month's break in the middle, making sure I at least read a few pages on every week day but often reading a lot more than that, and by the final 200-or-so pages pretty much having to stop myself from rushing to the end.

If you've read those other books then I don't see why you'd struggle with anything you inquired about though.

Either Count of Monte Cristo or Les Misérables are probably the easiest ones on that list. Dumas is very easy in general, his themes are not obscure and his prose is as straightforward as it gets. If you really want to read a long book from that list, I'd say Count of Monte Cristo. But it seems to me you're just looking for a nice read, in which case I'd tell you to read some shorter books and build up your reading muscles. Mustering the strength to plough through a 1000 pages novel without trashing it halfway through is no easy task.

>>9238696
yes but I was motivated with those books so actually tried pretty hard to get something from them. normally though, if I don't like a book I accept it and I trudge through anyways just so I can put it behind me. I won't be motivated to trudge 800 pages though which is why I'm trying to figure out which of these are pretty simple and nonpolarizing

>>9238713
the Faulkner and McCarthy comparison just gave me a burst of motivation. my fear is that it's going to be some ship and fish encyclopedia that bores me and likewise cause me to quit. when I talk about difficulty, I think I'm mainly concerned about slow and antiquated writing style

>>9238870

The Cetology chapter is only one chapter in the novel. There are also a few that deal with whaling history, technique, and terminology but they are by no means the bulk of the work. This is a bad meme made by people who are plebs to trash what is as close to a perfect novel as you can get.

Also, when Melville does write about cetology and whaling he does so with a specific purpose and all of these things tie into his overall vision, so it's not like he's just writing about whales for the fuck of it. He's too talented of a genius to do that.

Like I said, if you like Faulkner and McCarthy, you'll love Melville. McCarthy is essentially Melville in the desert.

>>9238490

Les Mis is pretty easy to read from all of those that you've listed.

>>9238870
>slow and antiquated writing style
Triggered
Read Harry Potter instead