/lit/ - Literature

>>18901822
Yes. Definitely. She's also into literature.

I would really like to read JYB's autobiography 'Live For What?'. I've read that he said the book would be translated into English, but I've not noticed any English translations on the market yet lol. Do I really have to learn Korean to read a damn autobiography?

>>18901714
Y'all good too. Welcome to the club!

>>18901771
Yo, this 100. I've read the books Claude Hopkins and David Ogilvy. They were two really famous advertisers back in the day – I believe that Claude Hopkins was the first person to look at marketing like a scientists.

Anyway, they both agreed that copywriters should write the same way as they speak in real life. So if you don't use fancy words like "equilibrium" when you speak to grandma, you should avoid using them when you sit down to write.

>>18902116
What do you need help with?

>>18902330
Bro, I've had the same issue. My grammar was really bad before, and it still is. I can spot errors in my own texts right after I've published them.

But I believe that grammar is overrated. There are many people who write great content in broken English.

>>18903023
> I would give precedence over analyzing texts that you like or are good since I assume that you're aiming at producing something good as well.

Yes. I've studied Dale Carnegie's 'How to Win Friends and Influence People' religiously. I believe it's one of the most sold books each year? But that's not the reason why I wanted to talk about him.

Rudolph Flesch, the first person to analyze text like a scientist (Flesch score), said that Dale Carnegie's book is the best written textbook ever – period.

And I have to agree with him. It's the first book that I truly enjoyed, and it got me into reading. I legit couldn't put it down. I read it in the school bus, on the lunch breaks, in the bathroom – I read it everywhere. It was like fucking magic.

I believe that Carnegie is a really underrated writer BECAUSE he is so popular. Maybe we bookish people believe that we're too good for his books. A book that's read by people who dislike reading can't be good literature, right?

I think that's wrong. But what do you think?