[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 1.75 MB, 1439x1623, introducton political theory.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17723381 No.17723381 [Reply] [Original]

Okay guys, I'm mainly into philosophical, historical and biographical books. I've never had much time for fiction but I really want to give it a go, being on this board makes me feel as though I'm missing out. Can you give me your recommendations? Should I start with "classics" (eg. Great Gatsby, Shakespeare, etc.?) Any guidance is appreciated, pic unrelated

>> No.17723388

Call of the Crocodile.

>> No.17723399

>>17723381
>great gatsby
>shakespeare
>classics
FUCKING KEK

>> No.17723467

>>17723399
That's why I put classics in air quotes..

>> No.17723480
File: 2.43 MB, 1752x3800, American Literature.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17723480

>>17723381

>> No.17723485
File: 2.30 MB, 1525x3800, British Literature.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17723485

>>17723480

>> No.17723491

>>17723399
>Great Gatsby is not a classic because some faggot on /lit/ doesn't think so

I too live in my own world

>> No.17723541

>>17723399
>>17723491
Classic is a categorization pretty much determined by how often the work is referenced by other writers, meaning it's an objective measure. The 'modern classic' is a different story, it's often just a speculation on longevity.

>> No.17723572

>>17723485
This is really appreciated, thank you! If you've got any more charts that would be great

>> No.17723582

>>17723381
OP if you want to get a good introduction to contemporary literature i fully recommend you start with the collected works of F. Gardner

>> No.17723586

>>17723541
>quantifying art

>>17723491
>Shakespeare is a classic because some faggot on /lit/ doesn't think so

HOLY SHIT LOOK AT THESE FUCKING IDIOTS HAHAHAHA BRO GO BACK TO MUH /R/BOOKS

>> No.17723589
File: 1.15 MB, 1697x2599, Surreal.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17723589

>>17723572
Posting these I noticed that I really don't have a lot of novel charts, mostly got a lot of non-fiction charts going on, but have this one.

>> No.17723597

>>17723586
>couldn't even adapt the "doesn't" to "does"
>d-d-d-d-don't objectively qualify arts guise...
>Shakespeare isn't objectively a classic author guise....

>> No.17723614

>>17723541
>it's often just a speculation on longevity.
>novel was written in 1925 and endlessly referenced ever since

>> No.17723615

>>17723399
The majority of brother spear's works are early modern classics anon and you know it.

>> No.17723641

>>17723586
It's only a qualitative measure insofar as that context goes. The point is that you need to rank art in some way in order to find anything of quality. Do you have a better general measure than continued inspiration, admiration and relevance? It's not an accident that there are so many great books in the canon while 99.99% of published works are dogshit.

>> No.17723671
File: 445 KB, 1280x1200, comfy fiction.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17723671

>>17723589
>>17723572

And this one as well

>> No.17723674

>>17723614
That's what I mean by 'often just'. It's used in two ways, one to describe I would say proper classics that are older than maybe 80 years and in another to give a compliment to a contemporary author who only recently wrote a successful book that could just be fashionable and not speak to future generations.