/lit/ - Literature

>classics are no fun
One thing you gotta consider is the period the novel was written. Before television and mass enterteinment the only media people had to experience stories was books. There was music too, but that's a different conversation. In Amusing Ourselves to Death the author give examples of how people could just sit and listen for 8+ hours of political debates in the middle of the square. And it wasn't like a carnival or aything, just two people talking. People today are addicted to entertainment, and if they don't feel rewarded during the first page, they'll skip the book and go back to instagram. Some books, specially classic ones, are long-term investments - and I'd also argue that people who live like Bukowski will end up burning all their dopamine receptors with drinking and drugs, never being able to enjoy something without immediate rewards. Well, there's always the possibility that he wanted to be seeing as a counter culture figure too.

>>15670733
This, I was going to make this argument but they only listen to snappy retorts and this has to be explained.

>Infinite Jest
>Portrait of the artist
>Crime and Punishment
>hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy
>Tender is the Night
>Extension of the domain of struggle
>Epitaph of a small winner
>Thus spoke Zarathustra
>The sun also rises
>Madame Bovary

>>15107128
chill homie, I've got it covered