/lit/ - Literature

https://mega.nz/folder/KvgWTKjQ#rGWJZs0ihnviBKDM9yxwJw

>>17670533
>>/tv/
This is a literature board. Fuckhole.

Is there one for Buddhist literature too?

>>17670563
Maybe, let's wait and see.

>>17670720

>>17670729

>>17670736

>>17670556
>>17670537
Need one for works in Spanish

>>17670563

>>17671505
very nice. but i prefer continental ones like torless.

Something out of the blue, for non-English readers

>>17671505
Brideshead does contain a lot of homosexual elements, but it should be stressed that Charles and Sebastian are not in fact homosexual lovers

dumping 15

is there a postcolonial chart

>>17671573
Saved. Thanks bro.

>>17670154
link

taking requests btw

>>17672149

this is funny, the guy on the video starts with these words:
"People who claim that it is necesary to be detached and antimaterialistic to be spiritual often skips over the simple truth that everything in existence is the manifestation of consciousness, so by definition, every material thing is consciousness expressing itself, so if you detach yourself from material stuff, you would be denying your own consciousness that part of the experience which go against many spiritual values. If everything is connected as a part of the universal mind, how can we detach ourselves from the phisical aspect of concisouness if we are conciousness? " though later he changes the idea of detachment == freedom...the first idea shown as contradiction is funny...how can I develop that argument against spirituality? http://redpilltube.co.uk/video.php?WATCH=172&page=1

>>17670543
No Horse Wheel and Language?

>>17670537
baseado

>>17672222
Based and Checked

>>17670805

>>17670563

>>17672109
Read Jugie's Theologia dogmatica, complete set; it's a based Catholic dabbing on the schismatics and doing the work for them by writing the compilation they never got round to doing

Is there any for the theater of the absurd?
I read some Ionesco and Beckett works and I'm looking for some other authors.

gimme the french medieval chart

>>17672527

>>17672542
thx

Does someone have the novellas chart?

>>17670736
it should be called "introduction to pseudoscience"

>>17671553
ljubim te u čelo

>>17670154
Can someone post their more obscure history charts?

>>17672929

>>17672943

>>17672948

>>17672955

>>17672964

>>17672975

>>17672986

>>17672999

>>17673007

>>17673020

>>17673024

>>17670543
Whoa, I was watching a video that mentioned Marija Gimbutas literally as I saw her name on your chart.

>>17673034

>>17673042

Thanks

>>17672728
This is good

>>17673102
it's actually crap and has been criticised ad nauseam

>>17670154

Anyone have a history of religions/compared religions chart?

Anything on Shakespeare or Elizabethan lit?

I'll post some charts I saved

>>17673143
Read Eliade History of religious ideas

>>17673182
>The Book of Mormon
lmfao ok, it's still a pretty cool chart, even with that obvious bait in it.

>>17673258
Should be Whitman's Song of Myself in there imo but Book of Mormon is funnier

I am not an English native speaker, but I am looking for book to better my academic writing in English. Anyone has some?

Anything for cookbooks?

>>17673210
from what I've read and heard, Eliade's works on religion stopped being taken seriously academically and isn't being cited by modern researchers that much. He simplified and deformed a lot of things.

>>17673287
Eliade was a fascist so regardless of the quality of his work modern academics would say the same thing

>>17673273
Room Little Darker by June Caldwell was an interesting read by a modern Irish author. Lots of weird little short stories.

Does anyone else prefer the idea of reading books over actually reading them

I still can't there still isn't a Kierkegaard chart.

last one

>>17673316
Any other right wing charts beyond this one and the polack one?

>>17673404
it's not like you read the books in those charts anyway

>>17670537
Trataré de aprender Portugués leyendo estos libros.

>>17673330
Yes. Browsing bookshops and sites, threads, loading up my shelves with books I'll never read is my hobby.

>>17670720
any of them fiction?

anyone got a north Korea reading list

>>17673189
Why is Gilson's Medieval philosophy in Protestant/Catholic? all those dudes would have burnt the proddie scum

>>17673287
Not really, he's been much attacked by some, but he's still respected for the breadth of his perspective, although particular analysis will obviously find fault with this

>>17673293
Tom's Midnight Garden, at once!

>>17673350
Very low-IQ list there

>>17672137
should add one hundred years of solitude

>>17673715
Do you have a better one?

>>17670154
these are all available on the lit wiki. are you new?

>>17672798
Start translatin

>>17670729
are these actually comfy?

>>17671553
what is "the language"? Russian? or some other slavic language?

>>17670556
>no Gimarães Rosa:
>1946: Sagarana
>1952: Com o Vaqueiro Mariano
>1956: Corpo de Baile: Noites do Sertão
>1956: Grande Sertão: Veredas
>1962: Primeiras Estórias
>1964: Campo Geral
>1967: Tutaméia
wtf even is this chart?!

>>17673411
I do actually

Has anyone got a chart or book recommendations to do with home design? Like interior design, architecture, gardens, etc.

>>17670154
Any "vichy" charts exist?
Bout the main guys, their influences and influence

>>17672001
Thanks for saying that, pisses me off whenever a book about two male friends is automatically "homosexual literature"

>>17670154
CHARTS
https://mega.nz/folder/kj5hWI6J#0cyw0-ZdvZKOJW3fPI6RfQ
CHARTS
>>17670154

>>17672222
good post and checked

>>17673669
True. Gilson criticizes reformation and enlightenment thinkers at the end for their lack of knowledge in the Medievals. Pic related

Bump

>>17673285
Based post.

>>17672137
Please kill yourself.

>>17675760
i only care about /lit/ approved charts

>>17675594
I mean, it was debated by scholars in the Waugh newsletter or whatever (I think Wikipedia covers it), and there are some ambiguous passages, but, for the two main characters, homosexuality remains a lurking possibility, but there's no reason to think it is ever practised between them. Mrs Marchmain , for all her faults, is no fool, and she clearly sees nothing like that in it. It's actually a fascinating exploration of a now lost almost wholly male milieu, where these kinds of things could develop: they pretty much had no close experience of women outside their families, and, on leaving childhood (a real central theme of the book), formed really strong "romantic friendships" (I think that's how Waugh himself characterized it) with other men at university. But this is a phase, "I was looking for love in those days", which leads to adult, heterosexual love, in this case with Julia. At best you could say it's "homoromantic", but the problem with that nasty word is it contains "homo"... like when people say Tolkien or Lewis were "homosocial": yeah, they mostly hung around with their male friends, because they were their peers, but "homo-" is so pervaded by "homosexual" associations now as to be a dangerous prefix.
On a related note, although it was completely made-up, and unjustified, the "Tolkien" film suggested that quite well; although there's literally no reason to believe G.B. Smith was homosexual, we can be thankful there was nothing more, seeing as the director got famous for a film about a literal homosexual pornographic artist

>>17673226
Nice.

>>17673618
same

Why are so many of these charts political, or extremely surface level like "german literature"? Does the literature board really not group themes, atmospheres, styles, etc. together beyond country of origin?

>>17671430
Why is in the Buddhas words crossed out? I thought it was a great introduction.

>>17671430
why is the first book crossed out and hated so much on here? i just read it and thought it was a pretty good introduction

>>17677319
>extremely surface level like "german literature"
>group themes, atmospheres, styles,
lol the latter is more surface level and retarded than the former. sounds you're some kind of new age lefty who thinks country of origin is irrelevant and not that those charts are helping you understand a nation and its culture

>>17674248
read (past tense)

>>17671573
Saved. Thank you.

>>17677319
fucking retard

>>17673657
No, but Life and Games of Mikhail Tal is regarded as an excellent biographical/interview work.

>>17670154
Can you give some good math charts bros

>>17673657
The defense is fiction, also by Nabokov

>>17673102
It will cure you of your non-depression. We need a post-blindpill chart.

Any book charts on Freemasonry?

Does anyone have a chart on psychoanalysis, more precisely Jung and Freud?

Does any one have the NRx one

>>17670720
>373019.png (2.72 MB, 2000x4667)
So many good chess books, just started studying it seriously again and I think reading the books helps the most desu.

>>17675521
I would read Christopher Alexander, especially a pattern language but notes on synthesis of form is gold too.

>>17675594
>>17676977
People say Brideshead is gay literature because Waugh clearly used his past Oxford fuckbuddies as an inspiration for Sebastian and because it also contains rather suggestive passages like pic related, which was basically the most explict way you could handle the subject in a 1940s mainstream publication.

>>17670764
Imagine putting les fleurs du mal on a "trad lit" chart

>>17679488
Nice biographical fallacy there, m8
And that passage in no way proves your points; Waugh makes it clear Anthony Blanche is homosexual, Charles and Sebastian is another thing entirely, and although the romantic friendship Cara mentions here can indeed lead to a sexual relationship, it most certainly does not necessarily (or even usually) go there. It is stated as clearly as possible here: this is a childish love, with no actual sex element (cf. my previous statement)
Without going into vaguely explicit stuff, there was plenty of more directly homosexual-themed stuff, both in England and France, even in the 1910s; helll, even Proust was kinda late in that respect. I understand it can be put in the (utterly cringe) "gay literature" category, but so many caveats are required as to make that pointless.

>>17679435
has a single, untrained person ever gone through this (or similar) gauntlet of autistically rigorous tomes?

i honestly don't know why these are made and propagated. nobody learns math like this. 99% of math undergrads will never read any of these, 1 at the most. yet in typical "it has to be as hard and inaccessible as possible for its own sake or its reddit" 4chan style, this is whats given to newcomers wanting to learn

>>17679979
Thanks for saying this, friend; I like these threads, because they often give me ome good (or at least fun) suggestions, but I wouldn't follow them like study guides

>>17673216
have you got this but with the irish shite crossed off please

>>17671430
>>17672307
What did you guys think of pic related? Its from the sticky. Is it lacking or is it enough?

>>17675400
which is better Thucydides? Landmark or Cambridge?

updated World War I chart from /his/
>https://i.imgur.com/TMAuNyH.jpg

bump

>>17680620
bumping my Q

>>17679435
I hate math so much.

>>17679299
Missing B. F. Skinner's Beyond Freedom and Dignity.

>>17681168
bumping your bump cause I have the same question

>>17680620
Loeb, mate

Any more like this?

>>17681371
that's a joke, right? Loeb translations are abysmal and footnotes and maps nonexistent

>>17680620
Hobbes translation is the patrician choice I don't care what plebs use

>>17682122
neither of the ones I posted is hobbes

>>17682244
Yeah I know you're a plebe

>>17682264
did you ever consider that there might be a reason I asked about those two editions in particular?

>>17680620
No idea, I haven't read Cambridge but Landmark felt like a textbook so if you are into that then go for Landmark.