/lit/ - Literature

It's bad enough if you quite liked the work (when you wrote it), but worst still if you really liked it, and have high hopes for it, both artistically and commercially. You put it off for as long as you can, getting stressed and uncertain, then read it. Sometimes it's as good as you thought, sometimes quite a lot worst. This is horrible, the waiting. No good at all!

It's a great book, really is. Lots of interesting sections, dense, slightly non-linear, and very cool characters. Best of all, is the whimsical, light-footed tone.

Why does nobody read this book? Panoz Karnesiz is the author, although his other books aren't anything special, in my opinion.

In order of preference...

1. In the garden, in my niche
2. Landing
3. Down the park, on the waterfall area
4. In bed
5. Random other places

A lot of his books are worth reading, and a few are really good: The Easter Parade, RR, and Cold Spring Harbor. He was like the original Franzen...he didn't peak as high, though, but was more consistent. Why can't we have more zeitgeist writers? We need a LOT more.

I know very little of it, except that it has the devil in it. What should I expect? Is it good, or just one of those fairly old "important" books?

Electric Retard. It's nothing but violence, sex, sexual violence, and violent sex. I read it for the first time years ago, but I remembered it today, and it's horrible. And funny. People should read it.

A book written in the first person, or third person? Not neccesarily better, or your personal favourite, but which is more commercial?

I'd say first. A lot of books are written like that these days, and it seems impossible for a girl or woman to read a book without it being written in the first person.

>getting /lit/ to read The Birthday Party, by Panoz Karnesiz
>getting this board to read a great book
>this board liking brilliant prose and a great style of unfolding a story
>making this board like subtle and interesting magical realism

I've recommended this book on many occasions, and nobody will read it. Damn. Why don't you want to read a great book?

I sometimes wonder this about /lit/. I do. They seem to hate everything, and don't actually seem to read many books in a month, or year. I miss the days of ALL CAPS GUY, and telling us about the 300 or 400 books a year.

And what was your opinion of them?

Philip Roth - good
Cormac McCarthy - very average
Maquis de Sade - slightly bad

>>3954853

Yeah, but you've read more than GR.

I'm glad I reread GR, though. It's the kind of book that's only decent on its second reading (although why people champion this, I don't know). I wonder what REALLY happened to Tyrone Slothrop.

Is there no limit to my Junot Diaz fanboyism?

But let's face facts. He's probably the greatest living author today. There are some other writers who are close, but that's not enough. Having said that, I wish he'd quit teaching creative writing at MIT and fucking work more on his new novel, Monstro.

>>3877003

What's the prose left? Minimalist like all his other books?

>>3818361

Even as I wrote it, I thought it might be wrong. Well, are they good are aren't they? I can't imagine they're better than Starmix though (yet the marshmellow sweets drag down the overall quality of Starmix).

People on this board are rude.

Okay. Short story collections. Sometimes, collections from the same author re-use material. Maybe there's a collection with 70% new material, and 30% old material from a previous collection. Often, a collection is entirely new, except for stuff from magazines or whatever.

My question is this: is re-using material okay with you, to any extent? I personally think that there should never be repeaties. I mean, Asimov did quite a lot of reprints, and Borges is fucking terrible for it: maybe 50% of Ficciones and Labyrinths crossover.

Thoughts on this? I can't recall ever seeing a discussion about this on /lit/.

OMG, new book day! I don't even know what to buy, but I can basically buy anything they might stock in a mainstream bookstore, i.e. Waterstones. I'm probably gonna spend 30 or 60 minutes browsing. Sweetness, huh?

This is How You Lose Her - Junot Diaz
Freedom - Jonathan Franzen
The Pale King - DFW
The Year of the Flood - Margaret Atwood
Ender in Exile - Orson Scott Card
The Rules of Civility - Amor Towles

I lol at all the people on this board (read: elitists on this board) who say that all the good writers are dead. I mean, come on. There are some great contemporary writers.

What do people think of this? Read it in late 2011, enjoyed it a lot. Having said that, there are lots of missed opportunities with the reverse chronological, plus there are quite a few weak (and extended) sections. I honestly still don't understand why The Triumph of Death / Pakfo at the Wall is 'genius'.

Thoughts on him? Didn't like The Stranger's Child much, just started reading The Line of Beauty and am not enjoying it much...yet. At least he's a solid mid-brow writer. I admit, I did sometimes get lost in TSC.

A second-hand (used) bookstore in my town closed, a good one, too. Dirt cheap, even if it was mostly mainstream books. It was only open 4 months, and now it's dead. Where's your god now?

Margaret Atwood - about 18 - no
Isaac Asimov - 25 - no
Stephen King - about 15 - probably not

What quality writers. Even if one is sci-fi, one is pulp, and one is a manic depressive. Don't dwell on those things, friends. I suppose all 3 are some of my favourite writers.

I'd say Freedom by Jonathan Franzen. Also a great diatribe on what it means to be lower / upper-middle class.

Here's another one.