How old is too old to start the path of /lit/? Is 22 too old?

>>9998295
no age is too old

but the fact that you're asking this on a mongolian throat singing imageboard probably means you're a dilettante looking for the next transient interest. you'll probably dabble in literature for like a year before moving on to the next pastime

>>9998295
>path of /lit/?
>/pol/

what is the path of/lit/?

>>9998295
No such thing as too old to start enjoying quality literature.

>>9998301
>a year before moving on to the next pastime

You think anyone else in the world is any different?

>Is >X< too old to do <Y>

This is only asked when concerning the kickstart of a career. The "path of /lit/" I assume is just reading and acquainting yourself with literature.

In that case - just open a book and start reading. Read 25-50 books a year. Read, read, read. Here's a quality link, however beware the Marxist bias:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/mobilebasic?pli=1

>>9998295
You're never too old to read the Culture of Critique, by Kevin MacDonald. Read up on the white genocide.

>>9998295
If you haven't read your first 500+ page non-fiction by 12 years old, there's literally no point in still existing.

tl;dr

Fuck off, 22 isn't too old for anything but pedophiles.

9 < too old (go home)

>>9998359
>Read 25-50 books a year.
I'm pretty inexperienced but that seems too fast to properly read and understand the "greats." You would be reading a book about every week or two. And this is assuming you only ever read a book once. Might be possible if you're a NEET and you don't want to do anything else with your time but otherwise responsibilities and hobbies will get in the way.

>>9998295
If you set your mind to it you can be more well read than 99% of the people on earth within a year.

>>9998378
>people with jobs can't get an hour of reading in each day

just top watching tits and dragons

>>9998378
if you read for an hour or two per day it's feasible. I read ~40 books last year, and that was with school (for half the year) and nearly full time work (the other half).

>>9998378
>on a board for literature
>someone says reading 25-50 books a year is too much of a task

wew

>>9998391
I can imagine that being feasible. I just doubt that someone who reads at that pace is properly understanding what they're reading. Quality over quantity and all that.

>>9998301
Where is the mongolian throat singing discussion?

It's never too late anon. Especially in this era where everything is topsy-turvy and we haven't had proper classical educations for generations now.

Reading is something you make a part of yourself, for life, not something you do because you because you need 5 years in it to be satisfied and the sooner you get started the better. In ten years when you're a much richer person for starting today, you'll be thankful.

>>9998443
/mu/

File: Screenshot from 2017-09-08 17-16-06.png (34KB, 1297x56px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 1297x56px

>>9998458
I see none

>>9998467
Dude... It's a joke.

>>9998467
maybe not at the moment. try making one you dirty linux faggot

>>9998404
>I just doubt that someone who reads at that pace is properly understanding what they're reading
I think the literary analysis meme has maybe gone a bit too far. Don't get me wrong. If it appeals to you then take notes, read critical essays etc. In fact, there are some cases where you SHOULD do those things. But for the most part, a few famously difficult texts aside, you're reading fiction, not deciphering an ancient language. You can read at a rate of 30-50 pages per hour and still get the gist of what the author is trying to say.

>>9998477
>you're reading fiction
What if you're reading non-fiction?

>>9998477
>If it appeals to you then take notes, read critical essays etc
Oh, and unironically: use this board to discuss literature to advance your understanding.

>>9998469
>>9998472
Come and join us in our mongolian throat singing discussion

>>>/mu/75041740
>>>/mu/75041740

>>9998479
Most non-fiction is easier to digest than fiction. Philosophy not so much. But, then again, lots of important philosophical works are comparably short. inb4 Critique of Pure Reason. Most of the important books by Nietzsche, for example, are under 200 pages. Das Kapital volume 1 is about 200 pages iirc. The Republic, which is pretty long for a philosophical work, is like 350. My copy of Philosophical Investigations is 181. So even with philosophy, which admittedly requires more attention and will take longer, one book per week is still feasible.

>>9998507
>Das Kapital volume 1 is about 200 pages iirc
Okay, i was very wrong about this

>>9998295
Fill your empty head with books and the alchemy will take care of itself with time and patience. That's the true /lit/ way.

>>9998295

It's never too late to do anything, if you're worried about doing something then do it.

>>9998295
It's just the right age.
It's a waste to read with a young mind. Without some experience, some deep cuts to the ego and ideals, without some heavy disappointments most reading will be just technique and meaninglessness. 22 is barely old enough to start reading real books.

>>9998507
It's feasible but not many people have that kind of time. I'm lucky enough to get paid while I read for 56 hours a week and read a lot at home too but obviously not everyone can do it.

>>9998370
though you're trolling/baiting, anyone who earnestly believes this should read Schopenhauer's essays, specifically On Education, the Ages of Life, and General Rules

Also: Primum vivere, deinde philosophari.

>>9998337
Christ, you scare me. Of course there are people capable of holding an interest throughout their lives, honing it, expanding and refining and not never stopping, because there's always something more to learn. They are the only truly worthy people in the world

>>9998398
I think that. It's about how thoroughly you're reading the book, how much you analyse and ponder. Speed has nothing to do with it.

>>9998389
> before it was just tits
> now it's just dragons

around 23-25.

It is when your brains stop growing and start detoriorating

>>9998295
The day after you die is too old to start.

File: 1405616666596.jpg (18KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 200x200px

>>9998337
>You think anyone else in the world is any different?

>>9998378
I have a full time job and I've read 58 books this year, I have no social life and my only other hobby is playing the guitar but the point is that anybody can easily achieve 20 books if they don't waste their time on watching shit tv series and whatnot.

>>10000177

actually it's around 30 for both mind and body

and it's a breathtakingly slow process

>>9998494
It is archived. Can someone please start a new one again and then link it?

>>9998579
>It's never too late to do anything
yes it is. even if youre in your 20s, there are many things that its to late to do

>>9998295
Rabbi Akiva, one of the greatest Tannaim, started learning Torah at the age of 40.

It's never too late to start the path of wisdom.

>>9998295
It actually is "never too late" when it comes to literature. Reading is a skill that you can teach yourself very easily, and one that requires a low investment to pick up.

Forget just reading, a lot of people thought of as great writers were known to only seriously dig into it in their later years.

>>10000953
>>10000151
Use your parents for example. I bet you can think of some things they have gotten into and out of throughout their lives.

File: AmericanGothic.jpg (123KB, 700x523px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 700x523px

Was about to start my own thread.

>be me
>20
>haven't finished a book in 7 years
>I really want to get into reading but I can't focus on the words without forgetting them the next sentence
>this is very degrading to my already low confidence

Am I just reading boring books? Should I look into ADD medication?

What's some good starter books for noobs? I remember liking the adventures of Odysseus as a kid. And the Cirque du Freak series.

>>10002515
Just read whatever looks interesting to you. You're going to have to build your own taste and discover what you like.

>>10002724
Thanks. But the issue is that nothing is interesting me.

Maybe reading just isn't for me.

Early 20's is a good age to start reading. You're more mature and your brain is better developed compared to when you were a teenager. You can process and understand things better.

>>10002774
It could be the case (that reading isn't for you). You shouldn't force yourself to read if you don't enjoy it.
However, if you do think you might enjoy it you can just try reading it in short periods, and extend those periods as you progress.
You can also tried reading books intended for younger people, such as YA, or just short books intended for adults (100 pages or less), and you might enjoy it and keep reading it or it might cause you to want to read more advanced stuff.

>>10002933
Thanks anon.

Everyone else here is in there early 20's or under so you should fit in well

>>9998815

How did you not manage to pick up on the sarcasm there >>9998370

>>10002976
Congratulations, you won the not-retarded award.

>>9998815
You did not.

>>10000953
Girl in anon's pic was runner-up but didn't quite make it.

>>10002515
If you don't focus, just keep reading

>>10002957
Wrong. Everyone seems to forget this site is almost 14 years old now.

>>10003433
>>10002976
fuck, my bad bros. I'm officially a victim of not reading an entire post.

>>9998295
Probably too late desu. I'm 22 and i was literally addicted to books from the ages 11-17. Since then i've been addicted to heroin but that's whatever. That grounding in the craft of reading really helped me through college.

>>9998536
Right here.

>>9998295

No. I read compulsively between 21 - 25 but then I had a crisis of confidence and stopped caring. It's nice to have hobbies and interests and doubly so if you consider them a challenge to overcome. But don't be surprised if don't last. Variety is the spice of life after all.

>>9998295
Never too late. I started at18 and am already the pretentious bullshit-spouting pseud in my group of friends!

>>9998378
what the fuck, think about how much time you waste on 4chan, reading a book a week is easy, it's just we all suffer from shit attention spans.

File: Rimbaud.png (430KB, 664x874px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 664x874px

everything past 17 is too old.

nevermind unless you plan on offing yourself early or joining some crazy niche it's never too late.

>>9998378
Nigga I've committed to reading a 1000 page doorstopper each month this year and I've still managed to read 50 books by now, and I go to school and work and have a social life and exercise and occasionally play vidya. If you manage your time and dedicate chunks of your time to reading you can get a lot done. I don't rush myself at all, just do what I can do. Also quit watching normieflix or Chinese cartoons outside of social stuff, or spending 80 hrs a week playing normiewatch and league of normies.

>>9998378
>he can't read 66 pages a day and complete a 300-400 page book comfortably in a week
I mean, maybe if you don't have any free time on your hands, then I get it. Else, acquire discipline.

>>10000151
Jack of all trades is a better deal than being an autist about one specific thing.

>>10005435
How many pages do you read a day

>>9998295
it's too old for you cus that is a dumb question

>>10002774
>nothing is interesting me.
Don't read fiction, read something useful.
Fiction is for girls

>>9998311
not joining /pol/

>>10005493
Generally 80, sometimes more, sometimes less, depends on the book. Roughly 2 hours of reading. 250 days have passed, times 80 is 20,000 pages as average. Though there's also to consider the odd days where I'm out the whole day and can only get a few in before going to bed.

No, in fact is the right age to start

>>10005484
Thing is you retards act like this is a dichotomy. You can still be an expert at something and be well-rounded. No need to be a professional dilettante.

>>10005516
This lol. Be a man! grrrrrr!

>>9998295
>the path of /lit/

You don't even read and you're already a pseudo-intellectual.

>>9998295
The year of your death.

If you're not bed ridden, you really are wasting time reading.

>>10006153
For that matter, youre wasting time breathing. Then.

>>10005516
you'd best be posting this ironically