>when you reach a new level of enlightenment and you have

Ach, der Sellner

>>9446131
elaborate

>>9446131
So for every book that provides you with insight you must reread all other books?

>>9446131
There, compadre.

same with films

>>9446131
It's even worse when you re-acquaint yourself with something you previously loved but that opinion changes as you realise, in actuality, that thing is just ""ok""

>not appreciating the fact that every time you reread an amazing book you discover new nuances and can appreciate things you were unable to last time

I reread certain books every 2-3 years just because of this. That is a good sign; it means you aren't stagnating, mate.

File: young-man-sleeping-table-book-opened-weary-tired-reading-studying-49197986.jpg (119KB, 1300x957px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1300x957px

Being new to lit and having read C&P, Master & Margarita, Pynchon and some Murakami, I'm dissappointed. Could you appease a normie taste and recommend something with a heart, a coherent plot, dynamic cast and not willing to waste the reader's time with pages upon pages of fluff? No edgy overwrought genre fiction pls

>>9446265
> saying C&P, M&M and Pynchon is pages upon pages of fluff
> saying they lack heart, dynamic casts

Pynchon might not be the most coherent of narratives but C&P is very easy to follow. Sorry, anon, you're too far gone. The normie forces have you in their grasp, you're doomed forever to plebdom.

Rereading is for brainlets

The re is for retard.

>>9446265
>being new to literature
>starting with that list
What the fuck are you doing, mate? Go read the Bible, Plato, Homer, Sophocles

>>9446265
I got you, man!

Ready Player One
The Fault in Our Stars
Percy Jackson and the Olympians

yw senpai

>>9446220
Right. But this is the virtue (or the power) of misreading. I sometimes fail to find what moved me most in a book. If it's any good, I keep it.