[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:

View post   
>> No.18921385 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18921385

>>18921380
YES.
YES.

>> No.14911905 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, lit top100 2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14911905

>>14910877
here's '15
read Cannery Row because of this one
for that i am grateful

>> No.14016571 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
14016571

>>14016479
It all depends on how many people vote for each book, so books that more people have read are more likely to be near the top. Pic related survey results from 2015 included how many votes each book got, and by the time you're in the latter part of the list you've got books with just 2 or 3 votes.

>> No.13021899 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, temp04.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13021899

this has to be a joke right?
these arent seriously your favorite books right?

>> No.12739423 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, 1459217245654.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12739423

>> No.12608946 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, lit top100 2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12608946

>>12603990
>>12604665
since 2015 wasn't posted

>> No.11611670 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11611670

>>11611660

>> No.11242526 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11242526

>> No.10392879 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, C__Data_Users_DefApps_AppData_INTERNETEXPLORER_Temp_Saved Images_Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10392879

So, when are we going to make this list again?
If the answer is never. Just answer me a question.
How much this list changed since the year related?

>> No.10110499 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, 2016top100.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10110499

>>10110155
>>10110494
#87

>> No.9573091 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, 1476140550291.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9573091

have to assume these results have been tampered with if infinite jest is 42nd

no way this board made that list

>> No.8664285 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8664285

IMHO:

Any author in the previous years' top 25 (or however far you want to go) can't be included. So, none of Pynchon's works would be allowed; none of DFW's works; and so on. But whichever author had a book at #26 or lower (and who didn't have any entries at #1-25) could have all of their works included in the list.

>> No.8605014 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8605014

>>8604998

>not posting the newest version

>> No.8267735 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8267735

How does /lit/ feel about "the" list?

Too heavy on Faulkner, in my opinion.

>> No.8066425 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, 1457926583723.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8066425

Recently I started to read some books that are on the lit charts but I was wondering if I need some philosophy / history background to fully understang authors like Orwell, Kafka, Camus, Sartre ...

What do you think?

>> No.7991793 [View]
File: 3.06 MB, 1820x4348, Lit's Top 100 Books (2015).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7991793

I actually am the Polling Anon, and I made the 2016 version of this poll. Although I know you'll never believe me...

>> No.7862693 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7862693

Template for the lazy.

>> No.7809468 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, top100lit2015.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7809468

>>7809439
The Melancholy of Resistance
>>7809451
Why'd you post the old, inferior one?

>> No.7494443 [View]
File: 3.06 MB, 1820x4348, Lit's Top 100 Books (2015).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7494443

>>7491987
>Posting the 2014 version, when 2016 is just around the corner

>> No.7452166 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Top 100(2015).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7452166

>>7452160
44

>> No.7386125 [View]
File: 3.38 MB, 1820x4348, Lit's Top 100 Books (2015).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7386125

>> No.7317981 [View]
File: 3.06 MB, 1820x4348, Lit's Top 100 Books (2015).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7317981

>>7314827
That isn't very compelling evidence
>>7314853
Nice was thinking of doing something like this. Thanks for that
>>7314904
>>7315962
Why can't you do it? It's not that hard.
>>7316321
Fixed it
>>7316493
What do you mean?
>>7316899
>>7316914
Isn't the book a lot more brutal/edgier or something?

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]