/lit/ - Literature

ITT: entertaining sounding teasers from the back pages of other novels

>The Puppet Masters: A race of strange slug-like invaders from another planet bring with them the threat of mass hypnosis in its most diabolical form. Humanity must fight for its very existence.

He's okay.

Murakami approved all edits to TWUBC.

And the translations, at least Rubin's, are excellent.

>Iv'e already read the original "Cyberpunk" series.

What exactly IS that?

Prepare to be underwhelmed.

Needs more Early Modern history.

ta-da!

Biased UK'er here, but I find very few examples of superior American cover art (be it books or games too).

Times Literary Supplement - books
Sight & Sound - films
Territory - art and design

I occasionally pick up Monocle if an issue looks interesting and I feel I want to be uber-trendy. Sometimes read current affairs magazines (Economist, Newsweek, New Statesman) if I feel behind with the news or there's a particularly interesting cover story.

He's okay. Need to read his Italian Folktales next.

>>816902

Well I have and I think it's very good. Best thing he's written.

>>816810

Slight thematic and stylistic differences. For instance, a lot of the "contemporary" authors write micro shorts (Eggers, Davis, Hemple, DFW). Not all of them do that and even those I've mentioned there don't do it all the time. But, to me, there is an obvious difference, when reading, between the "modern" and contemporary".

But it was a pretty arbitrary distinction I made. In the original thread I asked if people thought the categorizing was okay but no objections were made.

Should Ellis be in contemporary then? I haven't read Informers. I'm all for making further improvements.

Updated since yesterday with anon's suggestions and put on the Wiki.

I think most the base's are covered now. Anything that still needs changing?

Couple of very good novels, a few mid-tier ones and a few bad ones too. Average short story writer.

Turgenev does it for me, sadly.

The last quote I noted down was:

>"We pay for our illusions, Jack. They're only sent to drag us deeper into the mud."

>>799062

Hmm, pretty much all Turgenev stories?

>>798585

Part 1 is basically a good, complex but still sorta straight forward play.

Part 2 is just all about obscure allusions and not much else.

That's how I remember it anyway.

Not really, OP. If it's good enough it tends to lose the genre tag and become literary fiction (like Pynchon, for example).

Part 1 - good

Part 2 - bullshit

Gibson can write well (The Winter Market short is a great early example) but to say he's on the same literary level as Pynchon is a little too much.

Read "Life After God" as it's much better.

No, but it IS sitting on my shelf (and I've read the Gibson stories in Burning Chrome anyway).