/lit/ - Literature

>>16574454
read theory instead

All of them except the dirty *nglo.

>>16574464
>reading mentally ill coping midwits instead of the greatest minds in history

>>16574454
I am afraid to say: neither in totality. But I plan to read Homer and the Greek Tragedies by New Years, the Bible Virgil, Dante and Goethe by summer.

>>16574454
Most of them; I need to finish Euripides.
If you can't read Latin, get your Ovid from Golding and your Virgil from Douglas. Obviously read the KJV; Alter's OT & Hart's NT are good too.
None of the English translations of Homer and Dante are satisfactory. Still, I recommend Logue's War Music.

>>16574614
What's the most literal translation of the bible? I heard KJV used a weird source material and misses a bunch of stuff

>>16574454
Only read Shakespeare out of those lot. And even then it's only a few histories and sonnets. Do think he's very, very good though so I'll keep slowly going through his stuff. And have read one Greek tragedy, Antigone. Liked that a lot too. I'm thinking next year I will focus more on reading the proper old stuff, not just 19th and 20th century lit.

>>16574619
>What's the most literal translation of the bible?
If that's really what you're looking for, it's the New American Standard Bible. The KJV is maybe the most beautiful book in English.

>>16574657
I guess I should read both in parallel then

>>16574670
That sounds pretty boring. The KJV, as far as I know, is highly accurate in what it does translate; maybe just read another translation of whatever parts are supposed to be sketchy.

>>16574689
>The KJV, as far as I know, is highly accurate in what it does translate
Yes, but it's from a script that omits certain things

All of them, except a couple ones from Shakespeare

>>16574454
>Yes
>Boring, never read them
>Boring, never read it
>Some of it
>Boring, read some of it
>Some of it
Does /lit/ literally ever read actual proper interesting books?

>>16574894
epic win reddit

>bible

>>16574500
Yes

>Iliad and parts of Odyssey
>only Medea
>no
>no
>parts
>no
>several

>>16575970
>parts of Odyssey

none

>>16574454
>read parts of
All
>read fully
none

>>16574454
All of them

>>16574454
>>Homer - check
>>Greek tragedies - 40%
>>Ovid - 70%
>>Virgil - 20%
>>Bible - 85%
>>Dante (la divina commedia) - 100%
>>Shakespeare - 20%

Seams like a pretty normie list, the majority of non retards should have read them at least partially till the end of high school.

>>16577299
reading partially counts as not reading, brainlet

>>16577599
Why should I read all greek tragedies or everything from Shakespeare at once? To show off to anonymous children on a belarussian amber exchange forum?

>>16577646
you didn't even read virgil and ovid you dumb retard. did you read the sections they made you read at school?

None, because I'm not a massive fucking pseud

>>16574454
I've read homer, Virgil and the most famous works of Euripides, Sophocles, Aeschylus and Aristophanes.

>>16577695
Imagine getting butthurt about people not reading within an autistic shedule to check off the big brain books.

>>16577725
Ok brainlet

>>16574454
I read the Odyssey and Romeo & Juliet in school. I didn’t like them.

>>16577934
Oh, and I’ve read some of Shakespeare’s sonnets. Those were alright. There was one I particularly liked but I don’t remember which one it was.

>>16574454
All except Virgil who I want to read soon

>>16577979
>reading dante before virgil
:-O