>start reading more, searching authors and books on the archives

>most good authors
seeing as how almost every book from the entire western canon was discussed here at some point in time I'd love to hear about these "good authors" that are somehow still unknown

>>9255440
>expecting anything good from 4chan
kekky

File: 1431605792087.png (177KB, 443x682px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 443x682px

>>9255440
this is nice karen

>>9255440
boy, if you want to read good books, you just have to start one by one, what are looking for here?

>most good authors and books
Such as?

>>9255440
wow dude, you're sooo patrician
i wish we could all be patrician like you

File: 1478957167739.jpg (102KB, 654x720px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 654x720px

>>9255695
Animal farm.

>>9255440
Most people here are more interested in pushing each other around, feigning intellect and trying to be unique than actually reading books.

>>9255460
>>9255695
Swanwick's Stations of the Tide is almost never mentioned despite it resembling Wolfe's The Fifth Head of Cerberus in both style and quality.

Nobody seems to have read any Haldor Laxness aside from Independent People.

Willem Elsschot is practically unknown here.

Of the handful of posts about Par Lagerkvist, nobody seems to be even aware that he wrote anything aside from The Dwarf.

The recent thread about The Trial was a pretty clear indication that despite superficially reading the book almost nobody took the time to think about it more deeply, read academic commentary, and develop an understanding deeper than the surface level "it was an allegory for bureaucracy! he just gives up at the end because his will was exhausted!"

>>9257102

>almost nobody took the time to...read academic commentary

good

>>9257102
lol
basically spammed here
who cares
it garbage
that's nice, honey

Make threads for these people if you want them, don't be a faggot.

>>9255440
How did finding out that there are few mentions of good books lead you to believe than nobody reads? Logically your conclusion should have been that everybody here has bad taste?

>>9257367
*that

>>9257102
how do you find out about authors like this anon? I'd like to be more adventurous with my reading, but I have no friends so I have to rely on sites like /lit/ for recommendations

>>9257410
What is it like to be this stupid? Take book you like. Type it on goodreads or google or anywhere. Look at recommendations for that book, keep clicking on recommendations until you find something you want to read.
Look around at lists. Pick number #14 on Lithuanian surrealism. The anon you're responding to is a fucking idiot, I've seen all of those things here.

>>9255440
I will dismiss everything you have to say because you have an anime avatar.

>>9257441
>being this transparent about how little you've read

angry plebs are so easy to spot

>>9257102
>nobody read these few random books nobody actually fucking reads out there
HOW MUCH FREE TIME DO YOU THINK WE HAVE CUNT?

>>9257410
>Pick up Bloom's the Western Canon
>Go through the whole thing
>Pick up country exclusive literature books
>Go through them
>See nice things to read from them
But honestly anon probably just randomly stumbled across these people.

>>9257410
Bloom's list of canonical works can be found online. I also used Scaruffi's list.

For genre fiction, try finding good blogs with critical perspectives. I like speculiction dot blogspot dot com.

>>9257441
Obviously they're mentioned. But in proportion to their worth? How many threads do people go through each day rehashing the cosmological argument over and over again alone?

>pleb anon wants to be praised for less than obscure work
>thinks it's obscure
>thinks the repetitive entry level pleb threads are representative of how well read /lit/ is
>fails to realise we're constantly dealing with new plebs like him who can't even come up with authors never mentioned on /lit/
so you're upset you haven't found an author /lit/ hasn't touched yet, even though the first thing you'd do with anyone even moderately obscure is post them to /lit/
don't worry babby, you'll be the first instance one day, but it'll take a few of those before you're able to do it without wailing the sirens and capping NEW AND OBSCURE
try some camus

>>9257642
>thinks the repetitive entry level pleb threads are representative of how well read /lit/ is
>"searching authors and books on the archives ... almost no mentions over half a decade of posts"

work on your reading comprehension

>>9257102
So, a recent lesser science fiction guy, a guy who wrote in Icelandic, a guy who write in Belgian, and a guy who wrote in Swedish aren't being discussed on a literature board where virtually all discussion is in English. So from this you conclude that "most good authors and books" are being ignored, and even more hilariously, that this also means nobody here reads with any regularity.
Are you demented?

>>9257678
No, he's right in the sense that OP was just looking for an excuse to say "look how patrician I am guys lol!" when really he doesn't understand he's only just above pleb standard