/lit/ - Literature

I suggest reading pic related.

You DO know how to read a book, right Anon?

I'll start

>>20012888
read any books you want. not just shallow reading though, you have to read wide and deep too. but if you want specific meta for book reading, try pic related

>>19964012
Ashton Smith and Lovecraft are both great, but Lovecraft is the one with all the recognition. This is unfortunately usually down to luck and things like taste over the course of many decades. Shit one can't control.

Read book in pic related, it has a list of the minimum one should read among the Greeks, as well as other classics if one is so inclined. Generally you should read as much of the classics as possible, but generally Homer, Shakespeare,Quixote, and Dosty will put you far ahead of the curve of many, since they all cover concepts that are pretty much fundamental to fiction.

From book related, my understanding is you want to read a work of fiction through completely and as much as you can at a time while keeping focused (so don't burn yourself out reading more than your attention span might tolerate). Afterwards, reflect on what you've read, and go back through the text and focus in on parts you like, whether it be for their style, narrative beats, or character moments/dialogue, and study them down to the specific words and beats.

Writing is strange. >>19961679 makes a very good point. In music and art, one generally studies forms and copies masters, yet for some reason in writing this is discouraged by many modern workshops and writing advice in general. Why is it discouraged? I don't know, but I think a lot of writers suffer for it, since writing becomes for many less a craft, and more an imprecise, nebulous thing that's completely subjective, but that's just not true. An anon here once told me of the concept that language is a stand in for human sensation, and I think that makes for more solid ground, and gives a student more direction. Follow the roots of words, their history, and the sensations they historically create, build judgement by seeing masters at work, and then apply it to your own work, and you will find your work improves vastly.

This being said, I think about only a small amount of writing is actually "creative" work, diffused throughout. The creativity in writing comes in making small aesthetic judgements throughout editing, with the occasional creative bursts in writing itself. I think this is true of any artistic endeavor, and there's this toxic notion that art must be enjoyable to and relaxing to create. Writing (and painting, and music) MIGHT (I say might, I don't know for sure myself yet) be better treated as something like a trade. The practical application with this line of thinking is to prize the act of physically putting words to the page, and marking that as progress. Write every day, even if it's shit, because the physical act of writing is, regardless of creative intent, or creative worth, important, in honing ones skills and making one accustomed to what can be at times boring work.

I hope that all comes across clearly. Ultimately this is all my view/musing, and what works for me might not work for you, and I'm certainly no authority. What is your native language?

Any decent study guide for how to approach this book? Preferably something online.

Uhh guys, I bought this book so I could learn to read books - but I don't know how to read it.
What do?

>>19341072
Thanks

I've done it guys. I've finally decided to apply to study English Lit, with an emphasis on poetry.

I really want to kill this, so I want to use these last few preceding months to build up my foundational/canonical knowledge of poetry.

Where to start? As well as what should I expect from my frust year/how to prepare for that.

Is it worth it or a waste of time?
I've put off reading non-fiction for a long time because of the fear that some concepts will go over my head or that I'll easily forget others, but since I've started taking notes when reading I feel more comfortable.

>>18914731

>start reading this
>get to part where it tells me i should read a book all the way through at least once without looking up or ponder things i don't understand
sure, seems legit
>get to part where it tells me to take structural notes
>what kind of book is it?
>what's it about
>what structure does it follow
wait, but...
>specifies that this is different from conceptual notes, which tackle the concepts itself
but how can you talk about what a book's about and its structure without talking about its concepts?
>structural notes are the kind of notes you take during the superficial reading stage of inspectional reading
so I shouldn't ponder over things, but still think about how i notate its structure
>try to go on reading bc i shouldn't look up or ponder anything
>book starts explaining the rules of analytical reading, which includes "ennumerate its major parts in their order and relation, and outline these parts as you have outlined the whole"
how is that NOT structural?
>try to go on reading it whilst taking notes
>pretty much start making my own table of contents
>what is even the point?
i know i should just read it all the way through no matter if i understand it or not, but now i can't bc i don't even know how i'd do so.
taking structural notes doesn't make any fucking sense, if i could just read it first and then break it down analytically the second time around it would all make sense, but this little detail is making it all come crashing down for me
what am i missing?

Hi /lit/,

I wanted to get a little more into literature, more specificaly, into philosophy. I was looking at some /lit/ charts to start making reading lists then I remembered book in pic related. So I started reading the first pages to see where is it going and I also looked online at people's advice on this book. I wanted your opinion on the matter : is it useful or is it a meme ?

Sorry if I made errors, English isn't my native langage.

Do I have to re-read it and apply the rules of analytical reading?
Also, has the field of educational psychology progressed since then?

>People go to sleep over good books not because they are unwilling to make the effort, but because they do not know how to make it. Good books are over your head; they would not be good for you if they were not. And books that are over your head weary you unless you can reach up to them and pull yourself up to their level. It is not the stretching that tires you, but the frustration of stretching unsuccessfully because you lack the skill to stretch effectively. To keep on reading actively, you must have not only the will to do so, but also the skill-the art that enables you to elevate yourself by mastering what at first sight seems to be beyond you.
This changed my whole perspective on literature

How do I read this?

For a more in depth look at how to read books analytically, you could have a read of the book "How to Read a Book" by Mortimer Adler. The book goes over what questions you should ask when reading depending on the type of reading material, whether it be an expository work like a practical writing, or an imaginative work like a novel or poem. Just finished the book and feel like I learned a few things I can use when I read. If you read analytically you will have a better understanding of what you read and will be able to articulate your thoughts on a book much better.

>>16098405
Isn't How to Read a Book about this?

How many of the techniques in This book do you guys actually use?/ have you cone across any better ones?

How many actual editions are there and which was the best? 1940, 1972? Can't find the former on libgen

This might seem like it contains loads of trite advice, but a lot of this book was actually useful for me. The majority of it talks about analytical reading and why you WOULD want to write/underline/take notes in the book, with the final aim being that you and author are completely on the same page (even literally). The aids to reading guidelines was cool too, so were the specific sections on how to read different material and the list of great books at the end.

I think it'd be useful for anyone to wade through it and transform the way the read books hereafter. Just wanted to let this out!

>>12978479