/lit/ - Literature

I've always been intimidated by the bulk of that beast. I'm sure I'll get around to reading it some day when I've got the balls for it.

Hear, hear OP. Only GRRM somewhat satisfied me after getting through this baby. Try Kidnapped by R. L. Stevenson, similar and fun although it's not half as good.

>>1170861

I read it in about 7 days although i was doing 100-300 pages a day. I never wanted it to finish.

You should try out the Lymond chronicles if you want another Byronic hero in a historical setting.

You can read the Three Musketeers trilogy, also by Dumas.

Though it MIGHT not be as good.
The Three Musketeers is godly in just how entertaining it is...
20 Years Later is an awesome follow up
The Man in the Iron Mask is odd.
I loved it, but I never got to finishing it. It's tone is a whole lot more sober now that its main characters have gone from their 20s to their late 50s and 60s.

I will agree though: Counte of Monte Cristo is an amazing book. SOOO many amazing moments.

>>1170850

So whats the best Translation?

I'm suspicious of these hyped up Old "classics"...they never seem to be that entertaining, just well written.

>>1170967

>.they never seem to be that entertaining, just well written.


sad and true

>>1170971
The difference is that with Count it's exciting and well-written.

This book is the way good books are supposed to be.

All the way through it you wish it wouldn't end, and then when it does, it ends leaving you feeling richer and even so it doesn't terminate the story but leaves it open to more adventure.

There's always a lingering optimism, and leaves you feeling like every bad event will end well.

>>1170850

Is this better than Don Quixote or Les Mis?

I don't get why everyone faps over this book, it was pretty boring. Didn't really stand out in any aspect

>>1171811

You must have a bad taste of literature anon. for example, name some books that stand out to you, I bet they suck. I bet they are horrible books. I bet you don't read for fun.

>>1171816
0/10

>>1171816

If I didn't read for fun why would I be on /lit/

I just don't see what makes everyone loves this book

The characters are not fully realized, the prose is workmanlike at best, the book has nothing insightful to say about anything

>>1171833

Do you speak english? I said what books stand out for you? Let me know where you are coming from.

>characters are not fully realized, the prose is workmanlike

Your vague criticisms don't mean much.

>>1171838
You are a bad troll who is bad at trolling.

>>1171833

>The characters are not fully realized,

Implying troll has actually read Count.

>>1171840
>>1171821
>>1171833

samefag.

still waiting for your response bro. Name some books that stand out and are entertaining.

>>1171852
>is called a troll
>gets butthurt
>calls samefag

>>1171855

samefag again ^

Dumas is an amazing writer. This is probably his best book and I have never read anything close to it's epicness. Nothing from Tolstoy, Joyce, Tolkien, GRRM, Stendhal, Kafka, Nabokov, nothing comes close to it.

>>1171859
Still butthurt

>>1171838

The Count of Monte Cristo felt inferior to just about everything else I read in the same period of time

Crime & Punishment, War & Peace, Dorian Gray, Jude the Obscure... in comparison to the first two novels, the characters in Monte Cristo felt like dull caricatures, and the last two novels made The Count of Monte Cristo's prose seem downright ugly

>>1171867

>Crime & Punishment, War & Peace, Dorian Gray, Jude the Obscure
Thanks faggot. I read all those books except Jude.

Crime & P was tedious. The plot moved like a snail, too much predictable and irrelevant psychobabble. The writing was nothing special either, he is no Dickens or Dumas.
War & Peace, epic yawn fest. Another overrated "classic".

Dorian Gray was fine in many ways, but Count shits on it easily. Count has action, intrigue, and an entertaining plot, Dorian Gray just has aesthetics and empty calories.

I prefer Count to all of those even the one I didn't read. Ipso facto, your opinion is now irrelevant.

>>1171867


4/10

>>1171867

>Crime & Punishment, War & Peace, Dorian Gray, Jude the Obscure
>Tolstoy, Joyce, Stendhal, Kafka, Nabokov,

> Count of Monte Cristo

ITT: elitists read boring books and try to convince themselves they are fun

>>1171873
His opinion is irrelevant to you, yet you are still complaining and being a butthurt faggot on the internet. Congratulations. You have no life.

>>1171894

pic related to what this anon said.

>>1171873

>Crime & Punishment
>irrelevant psychobabble

uh huh, I think you missed the point of the book there

I can see your critical faculties are lacking, no wonder you have to stick to vacuous high adventure novels

>>1171898

Stop pretending to be other ppl samefag.

your opinion is wrong, deal with it

>>1171913
Stop calling samefag because you're butthurt.

>>1171912


Crime and Punishment might seem deep to someone not versed in Philosophy. But I find CP to be vacuous and childish in it's exposition.

It's like giving Einstein a book on basic geometry...He'll be yawning throughout, as was I.

>>1171917


Most novels are like this if you have a deep philosophical or scientific background. They can only touch the superficial subjects otherwise they alienate the general population.

>>1171933
>>1171926

100% agree. The only book that has gone deeply into a subject is Proust's in search of lost time. Everything else from Joyce to Tolstoy only explore the most obvious and simple ideas

and Proust only pulled it off because he basically copied Bergson...

authors are inherently vapid, they aren't philosophers...they can't go too deeply into one subject otherwise the plot and characters would disappear

>>1171945

>authors are inherently vapid, they aren't philosophers...they can't go too deeply into one subject otherwise the plot and characters would disappear

well that is why we read novels because there's more to them than just intellectual stimulation, we want fun characters and entertaining plots otherwise we would simply go to the fountain of ideas and bathe in philosophy

what is your point?

>>1171860
Dostoevsky would like a word with you

Pic related

>>1171963

derp derp if there is no God everything is permitted derp superficial moralistic pedantic tropes everywhere

fuck Dosto, fuck tolstoy, fuck every old book

they are all like shitty black and white movies, stop holding onto nostalgia and "cultural tradition" they sucked then and still suck today, stop forcing yourself to believe old books are good, they are all boring

and being "well written" won't save them

>>1171976
>I like young adult fiction

>>1171976

>>1171976
Boring? Are you kidding me?
When Raskolnikov brought that axe down, my heart jumped through my throat. Every second of that book affected me as powerfully as if I *were* Rodia.
You elitist fuck. That shit is *not* boring. Maybe you weren't engaged by it, but that's what the word "opinion" is for.

>>1171986

Really? I was like "who gives a fuck? Rash is gay, I dont care if cops rape him. The old lady is no body.

Essentially a pointless faggot empty character killed a nobody pawn broker old lady...and not ONE FUCK WAS GIVEN.

Sorry if the characters are empty and irrelevant, the action doesn't even matter.

>>1171986

Let me elaborate. If the character doesn't have some cool features to him like: a bad-ass personality, swordsmanship, moral righteousness, wisdom and cunning, etc....then why would I care what happens to him

Seriously...some doofus loner decided to take the easy way out and kill some old lady no one cared about...ok woopty doo and? Am I supposed to feel for any of them? No. Am I supposed to feel some existential tension about the world? WOW Hey the holocaust happened....unit 731 happened...

Why do shitty books try to pretend their fictional murders matter in themselves...they aren't significant.

What is significant in a fiction novel is a cool made up character doing cool shit.

>>1171990
>>1171996


fuck yea

stupid elitists and their old books

>>1171996
>>cool features to him like: a bad-ass personality, swordsmanship, moral righteousness, wisdom and cunning
>>cool features
>>swordsmanship

I mean, I guess that's fine if all you do is watch anime, but c'mon, really?

I think there is a slight difference between straight-up fiction and the type of fiction books like Tolstoy and Dostoevsky fall under. The latter didn't write books to show off cool things (if you want that, read Dumas and the other serialized fiction writers of the 19th centuries' heyday)- they more or less wrote books to make points, or political statements, or to extrapolate on certain philosophies taken to their logical extremes, etc etc. That they are done in an entirely well-crafted and prosaic way is a boon to their 'purpose'.

>>1171996
this is a fuckin rad post, fuck the haters

>>1171926
>like Einstein

PRETENTIOUS FAG FUCK YOU I BET YOU MOMS ARE ALL WHORES ASS ASS ASS

>>1172008


exactly, they wrote to make points. Except their points have already been overshadowed by real philosophers or scientists or historians. Thus, they dont actually make a point they just superficially repeat something Aristotle or Schopenhauer already discussed.

Ever read science magazines? The theories are watered down, simplified and packaged for the general public...I get this feeling of being cheated and robbed when I read books like C&P. Because they don't try to be entertaining, they try to be "DEEP" and they FAIL MISERABLY.

But I realize not everyone has the same background, so they may seem deep to others...

This is good trolling.

But just in case you are that ignorant,( I know how some stupid Americans can be)...

The Brothers Karamazov has been acclaimed by Hediegger,Freud,Einstein,Cormac McCarthy and Vonnegut. Doestoevsky's writing in general is also hailed by both Kafka and Nietzsche. So either the above are just old duffers who like 'old books' or your a moron.

Tl;dr - Your an idiot

Maybe its just me but you all sound like a bunch of elitist cunts.

>>1172023
well, people have to find exposure to some of those ideas SOMEWHERE, right?

True, historians, psychologists, and philosophers have all written about the big 'questions of man' etc, but those people outside of a select few really only write to their audience, which is other philosophers, psychs, etc etc. No regular person can just jump into Hegel; that's insane and they won't understand ANY of it.

I like action and I like a fast-moving plot, but sometimes I like a little bit more meat to my fiction- if it's all just cool characters and action, literature starts to get awfully pulpy, and while I don't mind pulp, variety is the spice of life.

Which is why you also need to have introspective works and 'philosophical' works (ie works with 'purposes') in order to balance everything out.

Not everything can be as 'fun' as Treasure Island.

Which by the way OP, you should read.

>>1172024

>Hediegger,Freud,Einstein,Cormac McCarthy and Vonnegut. Doestoevsky's writing in general is also hailed by both Kafka and Nietzsche. So either the above are just old duffers who like 'old books' or your a moron.

derp derp argument from authority.

I dont care about their authority. I care about the substance of their ideas, the author is irrelevant.

What matter's about Einstein is his theory of relativity, not that he preferred apples to oranges or Dostoevsky to Tolstoy.

The fact that Nietzsche liked Dostoevsky and thought he was a good "psychologist" can be overlooked, just like how his taste in Opera and cheap whores can be overlooked.

>>1172031

And if we are a bunch of elitist cunts, does that make us any less elite?

>>1172069

well it doesn't make you any less of cunt.

>>1172082

of a *

>>1172023

I understand your point of view, but you make it sound like philosophy as no place in literature, when it simply serves to enhance the narrative. I found The Count of Monte Cristo to be incredibly dull, mainly because I simply could not give a shit about the characters. Raskolnikov's psychological torment gave him texture. I could hardly care about Edmond Dantes and his morbid past when he was such a static character to read.

If you're able to be fully invested in a character simply because he has a cool character trait, then I almost envy you.

>>1172123

>but you make it sound like philosophy as no place in literature, when it simply serves to enhance the narrative

It can enhance a novel if the novel has a cool premise and fun characters to begin with.

But it can't carry the whole novel from start to finish. The characters/plot end up suffering and the philosophy will always be limited.

As a supplement it's fine. But it can't be the meat of the novel, not for me. If i want philosophy i read philosophy.

>>1172135
different conceptions of the novel

(also, the importance of "the avant" / art / 'literature' as a field)

>>1172123

Not who you're replying to but I thought that was what gave the narrative charm. it leaves you to fill in what his thoughts are and adventures after imprisonment may have been.

>>1170850
Read "Musashi" by Yoshikawa next

Despite all the trolling can we simply agree that Dune is better than any book mentioned in this thread?

>>1172159

Nope.

>>1172159

I like this ^

Count of Monte Cristo is way more exciting than all that other classic shit. while all of those classic books are meeting at some fancy men only party sipping faggy cocktails and talking about depressing shit, the Count of Monte Cristo is locked in an orgy with all of their wives.

thats the type of book Count of Monte Cristo is. it doesn't give a shit about you or being listed with shit like war and peace, it just wants to fuck chicks and take revenge

Did anyone get attached to M. Morrel (the father)? He was such a bro to Dantes. I teared up over his relentless appeals to Villefort on Dantes sake.

He was truly deserving of the Count's help.

>>1172283
>the Count of Monte Cristo is locked in an orgy with all of their wives.

>>1172159
Dune sucks. What the fuck are even talking about? You must hate literature.

>>1172283
This post has convinced me to get the book.

What's the best translation, /lit/? "Best" as in best balance of staying true to the author and being readable.

>>1172337


No one likes "literature" there's nothing to it. It's only popular because of tradition. For instance, the Mona Lisa is revered in our culture. But it's actually a really boring piece of shit that is overshadowed by simple works of art like

pic related

>>1172358
Ultimate troll is ultimate

>>1172358

i like this ^

way rather look at Frazetta Art than classic art

just like Id rather read a good book like Blood Meridian than "Brother's Karamazov" which is a typical classic literature sleeping pill

The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant the Unbeliever.

Learn Latin and read the Aenid.

>>1172358

Amazing.

Trolls everywhere and they speak the truth...

>>1172251
>>1172358
>>1172369
>>1172406

>>1172382
The Aeneid's really not that great... the first two books are worth reading, parts of 3-5, and then I guess the very end is interesting. But huge parts of it are utterly without interest.

>>1172691
IF VERGIL MAKES ONE MORE EXTENDED COMPARISON OF PEOPLE TO ANTS OR BEES I WILL FUCKING LOBOTOMIZE THE PART OF MY BRAIN THAT KNOWS LATIN SO I NEVER HAVE TO TRANSLATE ANOTHER GOD DAMN LINE EVER AGAIN

>>1172703
Was the English part of your brain already lobotomized? Do you know what an "extended comparison" is called in literature?

man now I want a monte cristo sandwich.

>>1172667

butthurt and mad

>>1172703
yeah, Latin 4AP was fucking great, wasn't it

people who like dune might as well go read the halo books since they love their space marines fighting giant worms

can you imagine these manchildren even beginning to comprehend Dostoevsky's idea of the Devil presented by Ivan???

>>1172737

Do you really have to do this? Really?

Every time someone says shit like this 5 more people cry about /lit/ being full of elitists. Just shut the fuck up.

You're comparing works with far different aims, genres, national origins and places within literary movements etc.

>>1172737
incredibly blatant troll, but i want to use this post to make the following point: there's no merit gained by the fact that the books you are reading are more credible and respected within the establishment. how you read is tremendously important, and if you're a geeky, nerdy motherfucker, or if you are the sort of pretentious, upperwards-looking, pseudo-classicist we see a lot of on here, I don't think that reading Dostoevsky, for example, is in any way meritorious. you're still a manchild.

>>1172742
>I read Star Wars books and you hurt my feelings =(

>>1172749
lol, don't even try and step to me, you fucking baby

i'm not even defending science fiction, i'm insulting everyone who reads dostoevsky or w/e terribly boring, overexposed russian author and thinks that it makes them an intellectual or well-read. fuck all yall.

>>1172753
>>1172753
OOOOH U MAD?
what are you gonna do, put your tripcode?
go read your latest star wars book, i heard boba fett gets a new grenade launcher and fights for his life on the planet of the wookies

>>1172760
go back to reading fucking bullshit entry level /lit/ and thinking it makes you superior to others

you fucking manchild, jesus fucking christ

get the fuck out of /lit/ fucking immediately

>>1172753
YOU TELL ME THAT 'THE DOUBLE' OR 'THE DREAM OF A RIDICULOUS MAN' IS BORING, BET YOU CAN'T!

>>1172766
it's boring

and liking it doesn't make you intelligent or anything like that, you're still just as much of a stupid fucker

>>1172765
did I hit a nerve? is boba fett your favorite character? are you clutching his action figure right now?

just take a minute to cool down and realize that since halo reach just came out that there will be a few books written about it for you to enjoy

>>1172775
what is with this bizarre obsession with halo and star wars. i don't even know what those things are. they are for puny babies. like you. you puny baby.

>>1172740
-here

This is exactly what I was hoping wouldn't happen.

>>1172779
Just read ONE work from Tolstoy or Dostoevsky and you'll start to grow out of your manchild love phase for phaser weapons and laser swords

>>1172786
get off a nigga's dick

seriously, stop riding dostoevsky's dick. it's embarrassing.

>>1172772
IF I READ TO APPEAR INTELLIGENT, I DOUBT THAT I'D CHOSEN TO STUDY ACCOUNTING.

YOU ENJOY YOUR SHIT, WE'LL ENJOY OURS. IT'S REALLY THAT SIMPLE.

Fate/Stay Night.

>>1172788
>>1172786

Now hold on there guyz. You're both faggots.

Dune is shit. Dostoevsky is mediocre.

>>1172786


All I read was classic lit for like 2 years, from gogol to steinbeck, from kafka to conrad

Then for no reason at all I picked up Dune and was like OMFG READING IS FUN?!

Very surprising. When I read classics I was merely "amused"...the most I ever did was raise an eye brow and say and think "sort of clever..." and then "oh that is a nice sentence" ....yawn overall.

But no, fuck reading novels to "enrich yourself." If I want to enrich myself I'll read a real philosophy text or a science book or history book...novels are entertainment like movies and music.

Fuck listening to mozart because tradition says hes good, Ima go listen to something that actually APPEALS TO ME..

hahah faggots enjoy tricking yourselves into thinking "classics" are worth something

>>1173173

i like this

>>1173173

>hahah faggots enjoy tricking yourselves into thinking "classics" are worth something

been trying for a while, not sure if it's working

fml

>>1173173

Enjoy being oppressed by your mediocrity for the rest of your life. Enjoy living at the mercy of those who read classics. Enjoy your ballad of the dispossed.

>>1173173
You're being honest.

However, do keep them around because you will eventually get to that age when junk foods are no longer appealing and you crave for something rich and wholesome with a bit of depth.

Or, maybe not.

>>1173173
Мне нравиться достоевский. Тебе гневный?
Dostoevsky appeals to me. U mad?

>>1172775
>>1172760
>>1172749
>>1172737

>tries to secure himself a role as intellectual in society, has no idea of science, doesn't understand much of the fairly simple philosophical underpinnings of the books he reads, sees his fragile role threatened by comments like those he responded to, reaction formation

Just a guess.

Hey guys, have any of you read Harry Potter?

It's fucking awesome!"

>>1173338

No. What's it about?

don quixote is most epic winner

My god, a thread full of trolls trolling trolls trolling trolls. Nice work everyone.

Follow up The Count of Monte Cristo with either:

War and Peace by Nikolai Tolstoy

Les Miserables by Victor Hugo

or

Mysteries of Udolpho by Ann Radcliffe

Those books are all super epic and have many of the same things you enjoyed about Count of Monte Cristo. Seriously, Dumas' other work pales by comparison.

>>1170850
Dune is actually better than Count.

fact.

>>1174368
Dune is pretty damn good, the earlier follow up books after it though are total weaksauce

>>1174371

you mean the newer stuff by Brian Herbert and the other guy? Or Frank Herbert's dune sequels

this. it's actually based on dumas. prob the best sci-fi story i have ever read.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnVFVdwCugU

>>1174358

Fuck off you troll. We don't need your kind here.