/lit/ - Literature

>>12451542
That’s epic!

a novella is actually the best form of literature. it can be taken in comfortably in one sitting, and is easy to reread and analyze. It's usually better to just but out multiple small books than one big one. Your attempts at worldbuilding and dozens of subplots just distract from everything. If it takes you weeks to read a book you aren't going to remember anything but the general plot and specific lines of prose that stood out to you, even if you take notes. The only exception is if the book is intended to be read in particular sections like an encyclopedia and not holistically.

Even all the books in the bible are about novella length.

>>12451594
I unironically agree even though I rarely have the concentration/ability to read a novella in one go.

>post contains an anime picture
Same question.

>>12451645
Remember to do this for frogposters do bas d anon.

For one thing, 150 pages is kind of limiting in terms of scope and character and plot development. I'm fine with books being under 400 pages, but after that point it had better be written by a genius or someone of near-genius capabilities

>>12451960
150 pages amounts to 3-6 hours of reading depending on the text complexity. How come movies comfortably express themselves in half that time, while books, a supposedly superior medium, can't?

>>12451976
Movies can never express as much as literature in the first place.

>>12452000
a picture is worth a thousand words

>>12451976
best movies ever made, takes time,
eg. Satantango (7 hours)

>>12451960
>denying the truth of the 150 page count
>reading fiction
we're reaching stratos of pleb that shouldn't even be possible.

>>12451960
200 pages is the sweet spot, but there is infinite jest wich manages to be entretaining for a long time and you can almot read it like a long running tv show

>>12451542
they don’t give a shit if you read it or not

>>12451542
Give me a list of great philosopher who never published a book longer than 150 pages


Protip : you cant

>>12451976
I read like 10 pages an hour

>>12451594
>Even all the books in the bibble are about novella length.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Not true at all. Why do you even mention this false trivia? The longest book (Jeremiah) is around 33,000 words, which is just barely there. Most are between 5-20k
https://overviewbible.com/word-counts-books-of-bible/

Depends on the author. Most of the crap you guys read you don't want more than 150 pages for a good reason.

>>12453560
Heraclitus

>>12452410
Useless. Who's pegging the exchange rate?

A word is worth a billion pictures.

>>12451542
>take 1 regular book
>divide into six pamphlets of 150 pages each
>CHRONICLES OF THE SWORD SINGERS, VOLUMES 1 - 6
>charge 6 x the price
>profit

>>12453562
>>12451976
is this b8? how has our educational system failed so? is english even your mother tongue?

>>12454402
Unironically good advice

>>12453795
Bullshit, that's mostly because most of his work is lost

>>12451960
I actually unironically think stories are best when condensed to the essentials. You should never have filler, a short story is better than a shit story.

>>12454437
>fuck engaging in the argument, better call em brainlets and lament the state of mankind, putting myself above it
>fucking showed them, the plebs

>>12451976
Because movies can create emotional cues with music etc whereas books need to establish why the reader should care to get a similar effect

>>12454437
how many do you read and what books do you read?

>150 pages
TOO LONG

>>12455770
Literature can pack an emotional punch in a single sentence, or even a word, what do you think poetry is for? The greatest poems of all time take 5 minutes to read.

>>12455861
Except the three best poets of all times wrote epic-length poetry. (Dante, Goethe, Milton)

>>12453998
it's a figure of speech

>>12451594
>Reading a book for the Bible in-between each of the novellas I finish

>>12453562
This. It takes me like 5min to read a standard page.

Guys how to read faster??? I read slow, I don't think I am a buddy retard but I need to read MORE AND FASTER
But if I go too fast I miss details, and then what's the point right

>>12451542
This is part of the reason why film is unironically superior to literature. Where the book seeks to fill you with as much information as possible, regardless of importance, the film only tells you what's absolutely necessary for understanding of the plot, and allows your imagination to fill in the gaps.

>>12456753
Fast reading is a meme. You should read as slowly as you wish, absorbing each and every tiny detail as you can.
A friend of mine reads fast as hell and I really believe it's because he played too many video games as a kid and grew into quickly skimming texts for valuable information.

>>12456748
that's. like. a. word. a. second.

>>12456897
Pls no bulli

>>12456766
You have much to learn.

>>12456934
>"A literary work can only be received through symbols, through concepts — for that is what words are; but cinema, like music, allows for utterly direct, emotional, sensuous perception of the work."

>>12457305
>A film can only be received through pictures, through concepts — for that is what pictures are; but literature, like music, allows for utterly direct, emotional, sensuous perception of the work.

>>12457406
Provably incorrect. You can play a song in a film. Not in a book.

>>12457935
Lyrical music is just poetry desu.

>>12457945
But a song can exist without lyrics. In fact, melody plays a much greater role in songs than lyrics do. Just look at how many pop stars sing inane crap but get away with it because their melodies are catchy.

>>12457969
The lyrics are the least repetitive parts of pop "music". Their melodies are trash and endlessly repeat four chords that should be used to encapsulate a whole journey. They're not catchy, they just dull the mind and stupefy people into a trance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M33cRNx3ohI

>>12457406
You can't just reverse things like that. Pictures are ideal but not abstract: a work of literature is entirely abstract and symbolic.

>>12456728
Its a fig

>>12458766
>pictures are ideal but not abstract

I thought people like Bresson got rid of this idea years ago. If you think visual cues can't symbolic or abstract you need to watch more film.

>>12458746
You're either a liar or a fool if you claim this melody isn't catchy
https://youtu.be/dsUXAEzaC3Q

>>12458800
If you're talking about "symbolism" in visual art, I have to say that's fucking retarded and has no place there. A "symbol" in that sense is nothing but the duplicitous oversimplification of an object to "make a point." Symbols ought to be the exclusive province of written art. Unfortunately most directors don't think enough about the nature of their medium and so think they should have objects "symbolize" emotions, ideas, or whatever. Take the example of that idiotic dagger scene in Cosmatos' "Mandy": it never reappears in the film, serves no purpose as a real object in the film-world. All it does is let the director say: "Oh, look, now Linus Roache's character is afflicting Nick Cage's character with a desire for revenge. The dagger symbolizes revenge." It does not show anything the audience couldn't otherwise have gathered on its own, does not add to totality of the film. It "irrupts as something alien" (Tarkovsky) from the work as a whole.

I unironically believe that 150 pages is a perfect length for a book.

>>12457969
>>12457935
Music is a meme. It's not art, because there's no intellectual content in music, just instinctual responses. Music works on the same primitive plane of attraction as porn, it appeals to your lowest beastly desires, makes you happy and elevated in the most simple, direct way. Art is supposed to be the antidote to the beastly nature of humans, therefore music isn't art.

>>12451542
>See the P&V translation of Notes from Underground at Barnes & Noble
>Look at the MSRP
Who the hell will pay $18 for a novella?

>>12460349
The kind of decadent consumerist faggot who pays money for public domain literature.

>>12460151
>because there's no intellectual content in music

>"The allotted function of art is not, as is often assumed, to put acrossideas, to propagatethoughts, to serve as an example. The aim of art is to prepare a person for death, to plough and harrow his soul, rendering it capable of turning to good."

>"Music is a moral law. It gives a soul to the universe, wings to the mind, flight to the imagination, a charm to sadness, gaiety and life to everything. It is the essence of order, and leads to all that is good, just, and beautiful, of which it is the invisible, but nevertheless dazzling, passionate, and eternal form."

>>12460520
>Paying for a physical copy of a book, which took materials and labor to print, and created jobs in doing so, is "decadent consumerism"
Goddamn commie

>>12461089
What a pompous way of putting
>catchy song maek me feel gud :D

>>12453508
also ebolusyon ng Isang pamilyang pilipino

>>12457305
>that pic
hahahahahahahaha

>>12460151
>Music works on the same primitive plane of attraction as porn, it appeals to your lowest beastly desires, makes you happy and elevated in the most simple, direct way.
maybe pop music but there's other types of music you know