Jane Austen

>tfw no witty writer gf

>>9829195
Austen has the bantz. Stop being a retarded /r9k/-tier frogman

Y'know for ages Jane Austen was hyped up to me and I just never got around to reading her. Probably I saw it as too girly.

When I finally did I was surprised by two things:
>Austen writes in a pretty uncomplicated, accessible way. This isn't high tier prose.
>Austen's characters are often genuinely funny as fuck.

I blew through all her stuff really quickly once I got started, I enjoyed it a lot. I have to say the more active, more 'bad girl' protagonists (like Emma) are much more fun to read about than the really nice ones (I wanted Persuasion to have a bad end).

I think in terms of character dynamics and insight into the time period her books are great but not really in any other respect.

>>9829195

>never married
>died a virgin
>roastie

never change, /r9k/

>>9829218
this. she is unironically /ourgal/

>>9829195
Free indirect discourse bruh. Also she's witty and ironic af. Wanna feel like the lazy nobody you are? Read her juvenalia and tell me she wasn't an infinitely better writer as a teenager then you'll ever be

>>9829221
Emma is fucking delightful. It's also the book to separate the true Austen fans from the pseuds who only read Pride & Prejudice (mostly women, but some men too). Every time someone talks about how great Mr. Darcy is, you just ask them if they think he's better than Mr. Knightley. If they stare at you blankly, you've sunk their battleship.

>>9829195
I find reading her work a chore.

File: Screen Shot 2017-07-31 at 04.39.58.png (225KB, 1388x293px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 1388x293px

>>9829221
>Austen writes in a pretty uncomplicated, accessible way. This isn't high tier prose.

Totally wrong. Read pic related.

>>9830055
>blah blah blah why didn't you marry that guy
it's all very simple. all magnified by bullshit melodrama too. not sure why people think this is eloquent. very overwrought and repetitive.

>>9830055
I definitely think that's no way near as complicated as like, Melville or Proust.

>>9830081
That's the problem with Austen's writing; it's overly verbose. Page-long paragraphs can be easily boiled down to a couple sentences. To the surprise of nobody, it's typical women shit - giving more information than is needed, ever.

>>9830081
>>9830170
Why do you guys even read fiction, just grab your pop-science books and be done with it.

>>9830212
go masturbate to charles dickens

>>9830212
that aint it bro. it's just i don't want to read a repetitive monologue by a grumpy british nobleman bitching at some girl about how ill served her family is fhat she didn't marry duke welloffington. it's the content mingled with the style. the repetition is annoysome, it's only eloquent if you like bitchy noble brits, which i have honestly had enough of over my lifespan. it's overwrought essentially because the language itself as spoken by a bitchy brit. Jane Austen was just fucked over by culture, honestly. If it were today she'd be a bit more creative than tomes about getting married.