/lit/ - Literature

>>15238217
Just based on the chart, it's rising above /lit/'s juvenile idea of philosophy and aesthetics into something a little more mature, nuanced, complex.

>>15238217
Man without qualities and shit

>>15238222
Thank you. I figured it wasn't only based on how difficult something is to read.

I've been on the board for several years and I'm still not sure. I've even seen it mentioned with regards to suicide, that's to say exiting life, (based apparently on the melancholic nature of the works listed,) but I don't think that's the case. As another poster has said I think it has more to do with exiting the strict canon of works which /lit/ traditionally and tediously discusses, with an emphasis on exploration of less popular or more niche literature. This, of course, is stupidity because one is following a guide posted on /lit/ in any case. If one really wants to "exit" the tiresome discourse, one should start to see those fixed authors and fixed works dialoguing with other, more obscure, influencing works. I've learned that bouncing from one recommended book to another is quite a waste of time. One rarely remembers what one has read. Try, instead, to follow a natural theme. If you are reading a realist novelist, read others, both in the same language and others. If you are reading a work of Shakespeare, look at some of the source materials which may have inspired it; or read Shakespeare's contemporaries. In this way a greater dialogue will open up before you and you will deepen your reading. The same effect is not achieved by following a list.

>>15238217
Suicidal literature.

It's clearly about exiting the board culture by becoming too patrician for practically all conversations here.

Seems like suicidal lit
Can someone post the chart pls

>>15238800
Found by googling "4chan lit exit"
There are various versions. None of them matter. These titles are not connected even thematically.