Just finished this. Is it good?

You tell me

lolsorandumb

>>9256837
Wtf you've got it backwards. Or are you one if those people who always needs someone else telling them what they think is good?

>>9256837
KILL YOURSELF

Is this board literally /tv/ now?
I've been away a few months

>>9256862
>thinking your own opinions are correct on the virtue of being your own

>>9256837
You need to marathon that beast to get the full effect.

>>9256837
yep

File: IMG_4146.jpg (133KB, 424x600px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 424x600px

Yes. In my opinion, it was one of the most brilliant novels ever written. Every line is essential. The way he weaves his knowledge of history, religion, and the occult into a captivating love story is like nothing I've ever experienced. I know people reduce it to a criticism of Stalinist Russia, but it is far, FAR deeper than that.

Can we not do this /tv/ shit, please?

>>9256837
It's very good. Now go to YouTube and watch the Russian television version of it. Margarita has a hot body.

>>9256886
>thinking other people need to tell you how you interpret a book

>>9257000
>thinking your born with the ability to interpret a book written in a language you weren't born with the ability to understand

Anyone seen this? I think you'll like :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GmlWd15L0oQ

File: IMG_4151.jpg (48KB, 655x527px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 655x527px

>>9257000
I don't trust my own interpretation of literature. In fact, I just read a book in which one of the main characters kills himself, and it took me until reading an essay on the novel to realize he did it by drowning.

Nothing wrong with needing others to show you how and what to think about a thing. It's greater perspective.

>>9256983
Good stuff

>>9257037
You can at least say if you liked it or not and then ask for opinions.

>>9257022
>>9257037
>taking my words out of context

You skipped over the basic point and filled in your own. You don't need to read a book you don't understand to read another work by someone who either wanted to understand it or did understand it. Or, in my intention to say, you read some other person's post on 4Chan. What I'm saying is don't get caught up in this loop of needing to understand complicated imagery and metaphors to come to something you'd realize on your own if you hung around good people and made an effort in your life. What insight did >>9257037 you gain from reading of that suicide that you probably already didn't somewhat agree or disagree with? All I'm saying is there are other simpler arts to appreciate immediately than to dig in for the truths and answers. And if you aren't willing to do that digging on your own, then you aren't doing it for yourself. You're forcing it, and suffering to fit into this mold you've given yourself that you don't even belong in. If you wanted to know what it really meant to say, you'd go study the language, study the mechanics of writing and the authors method of writing, you'd put all the pieces of the puzzle together yourself to stare at what you were supposed to see, not what someone else got from it. You're skirting your passions onto others and speeding yourself through your life because of it.

There's my rant of the day, I'm getting lunch then getting drunk.

>>9257207
>to come to something you'd realize on your own if you hung around good people and made an effort in your life
So when literary critics disagree it's because at least one of them didn't hang around good people and made an effort in their life?
>I'm getting lunch then getting drunk
#plebLife

>>9257216
You're arguing in favor of my point with your example and you don't even realize it.

>>9257389
No I'm not and you're avoiding my question.

>>9257398
There are only literary critiques because they looked for the meaning themselves.
>you'd put all the pieces of the puzzle together yourself to stare at what you were supposed to see
Does not imply that it will always be the same thing seen.

>>9257429
Oh, so you actually think that your own opinions are correct on the virtue of being your own. Sad.

>>9257459
You're now detracting from the point.

>>9257461
What did he mean by this?

>>9257468
Oh, so you actually believe your opinions are correct based upon the virtue of some grander scheme. Sad.

>>9257492
How did you even make that inference.

>Pontius Pilate literally did nothing wrong

>>9257501
Holy shit you are actually just clueless.

>>9257512
no u