/lit/ - Literature

>>12229336
I always recommend this to noobs. Its one of my favourite books and its quite short and easy to read while simultaneously having really great prose and a beautiful aesthetic and theme. Its also probably a good start that will have you walking away from it also with an understanding for why reading literature is actually valuable on an individual level because the the aesthetic of serious commitment to your craft that it presents will probably impact you in a positive way. All around great starter /lit/ IMO

Any good book should do that to one degree or another

This one shows the simple but deep spiritual beauty and worth of pristine perfection in commitment to your craft

>>12078147
This is a really amazing classic that is also short and easy to read if you are just getting into literature.

>>11795290
I vividly remember reading this specific edition in a single day when I was nine or ten.

>>11796277
Same.

Top tier Boomer book right here.

What else?

Books that would be glossed over if not attached to a renown author.

If I didn't like this, is there any reason to read Farewell to Arms or For Whom The Bell Tolls?

The prose was too jaunted and short. I really prefer the long, plodding sentences of Stendhal, Dostoevsky and Pushkin with their elegant language that captures full what it seeks to describe over Hemingway's style over substance approach. I can see why others like it but for the same reason I dislike modern art I disliked this.

Am I a pleb or does anyone else feel this way?

What is your favourite fictional book?

How do I develop a distinct writing style /lit/?

All throughout highschool I was praised for my poetry and short stories but whenever I try to write anything over three pages it reads like a fucking Wallgreens murder mystery.