/lit/ - Literature

>>21400647
>What the fuck, /lit/? Have I really just wasted 10 years of my life?
Yes. Not too late though to change course if you can at least appreciate pride & prejudice lol.

If you truly love literature, you should read as little as possible.

is this right? should you read as little books as possible? only sticking to the acclaimed and canon?

>>18904072
You know what? I do accept this faggy homework assignment. I would save my friends hundreds if not thousands of hours by sparing them the trouble of not reading time wasting garbage. An essay is on the way. I will give few examples of the epitome of how dumb books are poison. I will go deep into the semiotics or retard (((font)))

Is he right? If so, how do you justify your reading list?

>>18362414
>if you truly considered it beneath you, you wouldn't do that or care at all.

Retarded take, bad art has no right to exist whatsoever in a healthy intellectual milieu and should be tirelessly fought against with all of one's might.

What are some books you stopped reading when you realized the author was shit?

Has anyone ever elaborated on the line of thinking that bad media does not deserve to exist and should actively be combated and purged due to them appealing to the lowest common denominator, therefore suffocating better works under their popularity?

>>17022592
>What's the appeal to this?
Past-time for midwits.

>>16810789
None of them. What even is there? Fallout: New Vegas? Planescape: Torment? Dark Souls? Silent Hill? Deus Ex? All of these are genre fiction kitsch, built upon tired tropes and conventions for the sole purpose of making the player feel "apart" of their favorite entertainment media. Video Games are by their very nature superficial imitations of the "real" thing they attempt to emulate, and not a single one of them holds up on their own aesthetically.

>>16742366
Take this quote to heart. All that time spent mocking and sneering at something is irrelevant and wasteful.

>>16334129
>Just read the book bro
Retroactively refuted by Schopenhauer.

>>16239078
My reading time is very limited
If you constantly find yourself having the time to read such unimportant, flavor of the month garbage, something is off about your daily routine

>>11232548

>>11167339

STOP READING BAD BOOKS

>>10470855

No.

>>10382971

>>10307640

>>9515319
>This is a very silly viewpoint to me. We are stepping into the edge of lifespan extension, and I bet my ass if we lived 200 years he would still be rambling about "you can only read THESE" because muh aesthetics, even if such a thing is as subjective as it gets.

Even with a 200 years lifespan (assuming that your brain won't deteriorate at the 100yo mark) you would still have not enough time to read and study analitically everything that deserves to be read, meaning that YA trash would still be disparaged by Bloom.
Your example is sillier than his.

Pic related: you know he is right.

>>8637385

How do you identify whether a book is good or bad?

fuck off