/lit/ - Literature

>>6670225

the Corrections is fine, but it's not substantially better, if at all, than White Teeth.

It's not capital-S Serious literature, but I enjoyed And Then We Came to the End quite a lot.

Against the Day

Extremely witty stuff. If you like Wodehouse, you'll enjoy Adams. After the Hitchhiker books, try the Dirk Gently stuff; it's great too.

>>6652547
>is it true DFW hung himself with a kenneth cole belt from macy's? i mean shit the dude was like a millionaire best selling pop author, why not order some burberry shit off mr. porter to kill yourself with?

--Patrick Bateman, on the suicide of David Foster Wallace

>>6650123

Through clove cigarette smoke, the rehearsed 'Oh, that thing everyone thinks is so good? It isn't.'

I guess the people who couldn't make it through the book are way smarter than the ones who did.

>>6650090

Something like what?

>>6649924
>People with very limited intelligence seem to enjoy it. It's simple, trite, extremely poor prose, no aesthetic value. The "message" should have been obvious by the age of ten if you have any capacity to think.

It takes a ton of intelligence to say THAT for the 5,000th time here, though, huh?

>>6643645
>What do you think were his last thoughts after he kicked out the chair and was slowly strangled?

"It should be Billy Vollmann doing this."

>>6648935
>this chomsky thing is just the beginning and was probably an elaborate publicity stunt.

Unmistakably. He wanted to elevate himself by engaging someone who should never have to take notice of him, and he wanted it so desperately that he actually published getting pissed all over by Chomsky for all to see.

>>6648476
>Is he the most formidable intellectual of the 21st century?

No. But he would make a good Ben Stiller stunt-double.

>>6636605

I could watch the movie over and over, but I never need to read the book again.

Might be fun to take a hit of amyl nitrate every time he writes the phrase 'nameless dread,' though. As I recall it was an awful lot.

It's a capital-G Great book. It's brilliant, it's funny, it's imaginative, it's a fireworks show.

And if you give up on it after 100 pages, you can always slag it in the daily IJ/DFW hate threads. So it's win/win.

>>6630185

It's definitely one of the funniest American books ever written.

If I was going to re-read any of the three, it would be Catch-22.

>>6628991
>I have faked having read John Green, king of /lit/, to pretend I can critique him with any authenticity.

Most of DFW's critics here will be happy to give you a pass on criticizing stuff you haven't read.

>>6628902
>Once again you've revealed your peasantry my friend

I'm not going to apologize for finding it boring or for my willingness to think for myself. If it had you on the edge of your seat, I'm nothing but happy for you.

Tony Danza

>>6628775

Definitely one of the most boring books I have ever read, though. It goes 100+ pages without a word of dialogue, as I recall (might be mistaken; this was High School).

I read The Crying of Lot 49 one night on meth in college. Recommend.

>>6624688
aloha kolsti

>>6622449
who says hapa? in the derogatory, even? clearly you are kolsti or some hawaiian asian fag

Dianetics doesn't have that much to do with what Scientology became. It's basically workingman's Freudian psychology.

>>6617420
>Your earlier post says
>>"If you had used actual quotes to begin with, I wouldn't have said anything."

And I wouldn't have. What I said something about was you saying he tells college kids 'Capitalism is fascism,' which evidently I was right to question because that is not an actual Chomsky quote.

>You are obviously a liar

You are calling me a liar when I haven't lied. Show me where you mistakenly think I have, or apologize like the adult I'm sure you would like to think you are, or reveal yourself as the only liar and hypocrite in all your charges of lies and hypocrisy in this thread.

>>6616261
>>So if you pay taxes to pay for evil acts, you are evil?
>I thought you vaguely claimed to know something about Christianity?
>You're the terrible liar, aren't you?
>Mk 12:17

I'm just seeing how you react when your own logic traces this associative evil directly back to you.