ITT: Books so far up their own ass they can't see daylight

>I don't like what I don't understand!

I think I saw this exact thread about a year and a half ago

File: rr.jpg (32KB, 434x648px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 434x648px

I wanted to like this book and a part of me actually does but I couldn't move past her inability to avoid falling back into cliche college girl sentimentality while pretending to be aware of it. I understand that it is ostensibly a memoir and she is trying to convey the devastation that comes with suffering from a horrifying disease as a young adult, but I honestly would have preferred she focus more on her catastrophic confrontation with the metaphors that inevitably accompany illness. It passes itself off as a subversive deconstruction that it isn't

>>9364622
I thought it was fine until about the middle.

>>9364622
are you that Anon that said it was overrated? lmao you're still wrong.

>>9364630
This is what /lit/ is comprised of. You can hardly discuss books that you like unless they are pseudo-intellectual and if you don't like a specific pseudo-intellectual book then you're just stupid. These people just like to think they're above others.

>>9367159
Fuck off with your mediocre mentality. You may not like it, you are entitled to decide your own taste and prferences, but if you don't provide arguments to defend your position and just shitpost and bait with ignorant contrarian posts like "hehe so pretentious amirite xD do I fit in yet?", you should expect everyone to throw shit at you.

People like you are the reason why this site is so shit.