/lit/ - Literature

I got a top 100 list for him

>>18825374
kek

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
Genuinely bad taste. Comes off as try-hard. Lack of poetry and drama is telling. You can tell he is fat as fuck just from this list.

>>18825405
Poetry is for women

>This list is indeed bad. And illustrates an overall impoverished understanding of literature as grand tomes and epic novels disconnected from the historical contexts that produced them. Notice Faust, yet no Egmont or Tasso, no Meister or Elective Affinities, no Schiller or Herder

>It’s not that the books are “bad,” it’s that the underlying conception of literature is ahistorical and hermeneutically barren. Reading books from this list won’t add up to a synthetic critical perspective capable of meaningfully contextualizing each book’s relative significance

>>18825421
he's a fucking retard and so are you for posting this Twitter grifter's garbage

xo

>>18825358
I wish Guenon was still alive so I could see him retroactively refute Kantbot's entire philosophy in person

>>18825407
Incorrect. The novel is the most feminine literary form (long-winded and meandering, pointless babbling, chaotic in terms of form). The novel is two to three old bitches gathered together to gossip after Sunday church. Then there is drama: androgynous and beautiful. Certainly more masculine than the novel. Able to be succinct, to tell a story shortly but with embellishment. But poetry with its deep attention to form, its willingness to grapple with the chaos of language and sculpt it rhythmically. This is the work of the body-builder applied to language. Succinct jewels of finely chiseled language. There is a reason you go to epic poetry for the most heroic and masculine tales of humanity. Anyways, you didn't deserve this effort post. KYS.

>>18825441
you can just refute it by asking him where his novel is or how much he weighs

>>18825358
>obese person giving an opinion on aesthetics
Into the trash it goes. If you ignore the canvas of your own body, you should simply keep quiet about art.

>>18825358
Who cares about this shit

>>18825405
This. Where the fuck are the epic poems, or even just the poetry in general? Does Kantbot not like poetry?

>>18825358
>can't even read any foreign language
>deigns to give out translation advice

fuck you OP YOU FUCKING FAGGOT FOR POSTING THIS GARBAGE

hth

>>18825358
>he didn't put the Oresteia in the first post
Dint read the rest

Kantbot is a perpetually seething libtard, most famous for appearing in a documentary about men who can't get laid, but his list is far better than the lit one.

>>18825477
awesome, i guess it is because you say so you monumental faggot. go suck a cock.

>>18825461
But Anon what if I am serious about sculpting my own body into fit perfection, but I also have a lust for fat girls?

>>18825486
Yes, that's literally what sharing an opinion is.

>>18825491
well, i think you're wrong, so there.

>>18825489
that's better than being a fatass pseud who sits on twitter all day

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
As someone who has actually read most of those books I'd take /lit/'s list over his. What kind of pleb actually recommends Clarissa?

>>18825502
And somehow I can accept that without throwing a hissy fit, amazing isn't it.

>>18825515
literally saying an opinion without reasoning is pretty useless. but i get where you're coming from

>>18825421
It's just a list of popular books on /lit/. Why do all these idiots on Twitter and reddit insist on treating it as though we carefully curated it?

>>18825514
it's literally a "let me sperg about my knowledge of 18th century lit."

and hilariously it is literally "disconnected from the historical contexts that produced them."

No Holy Bible, major Greek or Latin playwrights for the English, no Plutarch, Dante, or books of chivalry for Cervantes, not even the literal original namesake and predecessor of Fenelon's book would be found in this dogshit list

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
>>18825421
I mean his critique is obviously fucking retarded. This list wasn't compiled by a singular user looking to impose a good introduction for people surrounding a literary movement/era this is literally a poll conducted on this board for people's favorite books of course its going to have a lot of "mountain-top" books but by no metric was this made to be general guide to reading thats why theirs literally 100 fucking author flow charts in the wiki. Usually what happens is people pick up one of these tombs and then fall in love with the book and continue to read the author's bibliography or go back/forward in the current literary movement's time to get feel for similar books. There is literally 5 fucking retards who make threads obsessing over one author's bibliography and retards obsessed with greeks/modernism/etc.

Kantbot is not a retard he's just a fat fuck who cannot miss any opportunities to self insert himself in situations where he can display himself as an intellectual. I mean just look at the situation at present, who the fuck asked this fat faggot to make a top 100? Himself.

>>18825541
Woah, Artie Lange is looking good!

>>18825541

his list is literally much worse than going by /lit/'s list chronologically.

see >>18825421

>>18825518
you see, the purpose of my post was to insult kantbot and annoy lit users at the same time.

The reasoning for my preference would simply be his list is more interesting, the product of the development of individual taste, someone who discovers books from books, not books from charts and lists, so you get lesser known gems in there like Godwin's St Leon and Fanny Burney's Cecilia which no one reads anymore... lit users tend to read only the CLASSICS and never bother with a writer's or an era's lesser known works, but you'd have to be an absolute automaton to invariably agree with the canon every time.

>>18825548
that makes sense. his actual critique is that the lit list "disconnected from the historical contexts that produced them," which is accurate for his entire list, including the british parts, simply because he's trying to be contrarian and can't include their actual antecedents, or doesn't even realize it himself, as pointed out in >>18825533

>>18825358
Great stuff, love Kantbot's recs. Here's his seondary /lit/ recs on Weimar Classicism, Herder, the Romantics, and Kant:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1020738195758157831.html

You might have to click the image to see the actual book covers, they weren't loading within the page for me.

>>18825541
This. What kind of fucking autist is upset that a top 100 compilation over 6 years of random peoples opinions doesn't include 4 separate works 'magisterial' Henry Fielding.

>>18825571
>>18825358
No thanks Kantbot, or should I say, William Thomas clark?

>>18825358
I didn't find The Adventures of Simplicissimus to be that good desu, but I guess it is important for Germanistics because it captures the spirit of an age (peasant simpleton-bandits fighting a civil war) in German history.

>>18825359
Still got Tristram Shandy on there. Peak reddit.

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
Desperate

>>18825541
He looks like the type of guy who you would be nice to at a house party. He starts hanging off of you a bit but you play nice. Then later you end up with a girl and he, for some reason, just sits beside you on a couch while you're fucking around--looking toward you occasionally.

>>18825421
Is there anything more pathetic than people who are condescending of the community they a parasitical off?

>>18825715
I really don't like it. I don't like these people who come up in a community and then get famous, and then spend all their time pissing all over that community and denigrating it. Sure, maybe you've grown and changed as a person since your time in that community. Maybe you're not the same person that you were years ago. But that's no reason to mock and belittle where you came from. Respect your roots, you know? Respect what helped to make you what you are today.

This isn't just about Kantbot. I notice a ton of people who come from poor or middle-class backgrounds who suddenly get thrust into high-level, elite attention, and they seem to love nothing more than mocking and belittling the poor or middle-class background that they came from. You can FEEL the insecurity in these sorts of people, and Kantbot is one of them.

>>18825715
It's how he gets followers. Making people angry is the best way to gain followers.

based Kantbot... He will lead us all out of this darkness.. make sure to donate and subscribe, those snacks dont pay for themselves!

>>18825358
What kind of absolute moron woyld include the Atheiopica over Sophocles, Homer or Eurpides?
He tries way too hard to appear culture and well read, but in reality a well done top 100 list cannot have room for such changes.
To be fair lit actually does the same when including things like the book of the new sun.

>>18825374
Kantbot eternally BTFO

>>18825801
Experts agree, The Iliad is the better book.

>>18825706
>at a house party
>you end up with a girl
wait, what?

>>18825421
Does he think the list was made with some specific objective in mind? It's just the books that are liked on this board.

>>18825801
>list of greatest novels
https://twitter.com/KBULTRA0/status/1425326409640255490

It's a list of great novels, not lit in general.

This nigga is trying way too hard, should redirect some of that energy to jogging around the block

>>18825358
He's right. His list is not that good either though, extreme anglo bugmanism is present. I thought he was one of those """leftie""" progressives that insist on forced diversity, but I guess he is more like /lit/ in that he is not as well-read as he thinks he is.
The morons ehre though are embarassing. iT wAs nOt mAdE bY a sInGlE PeRsoN. How the fuck does that matter? Community vote list represents the reading habits of people here. And it is awful. Fucking illiterate zoomers completely ignorant of 3000 years of literary tradition, the extreme hipsters of the modern world.

>>18826460
Forgot to add: Kantbot recommends Edith Grossman translation of Cervantes which automatically renders everything he says useless.

>>18825515
drive sideways faggot

>>18826460
It matters because a list that is created by combining the results of multiple polls that have zero barrier to entry is obviously going to come across as basic and generic. Any somewhat well read person should be able to personally curate a better list of books. Any Twitter faggot who feels the need to “counter” the /lit/ list is just trying to get attention or praise for having better taste than a fucking anonymous poll. It’s not an achievement.

It's not a bad list. It's not really fair to compare the two list, one being an aggregate the other being handpicked.

To be honest, it looks like a list Harold Bloom would have composed if he was writing a book titled "The History of the Novel Before Melville"

any list that is made by only one well-read dude will be more interesting than the lit ones

>>18825358
It’s pretty embarrassing that he’s flexing while still being fucking monolingual

>>18826539
Nice cope, faggot
The list is not "generic". Its outright bad. It includes bad books. The reason good books aren't included is because faggots here don't read books that aren't marketed by penguin.

>>18825374
kek

Why does anyone care about our list to begin with?

why do normiers suddenly care so much about the /lit/ top 100?

What changed?

>>18825374
Lmao

>>18827179
Recently got posted on reddit

Don't care plus he's fat

>>18825358
Didn't read but our top10 IS shit
>b-but it's just an aggregate
Not an excuse

>>18827239
>10
100*

>>18827217
I gets posted on Reddit each time we do a list and each time, a few more redditors migrate here and it's painful.

Imagine putting Journey to the End of the Night on the top 100 list and not Death on Credit instead. That's how you know the posers here aren't blackpilled.

>>18825374
Remember bros, if someone's fat, they always lose

>>18827265
Yeah but this time a redditor combined the last 6 years into a megalist and it seems to have taken off more than it has in the past

>>18825461
/thread

>>18825407
Correct
>>18825443
Cringe, long-winded and meanderingpilled

>>18825358
I doubt it's even possible for one person to compile a "top 100" of books, since it takes at least a year to even read 100, let alone enough others to select from. This list in particular contains many inferior works, and omits many excellent ones. This guy is 100% a pseud and a faker.

>>18825443
would lift with

>>18825358
oh my GOD an e-celeb talked about us in a negative way!

>>18827450
As in lift another Twinkie up to your mouth? Put your fucking fat belly away, jfc

>>18825443
baste and poetrypilled

>>18827429
He reads secondary literature to know what to recommend. Honestly surprised more dont do this, it's the easiest way to appear to have read swathes of material. You can tell Frater does this

>>18825405
>>18825466
I'm pretty sure this list is explicitly for novels.

>>18827179
zoomers
>>18827217
zoomers posted it on reddit

Kantbot is a mong, I once discussed occultism with him and he thought it was 100% all Bruno style memory palace stuff, we actually got into an argument over me shilling primary sources and him shilling his favorite femoid scholars.

>>18827550
Honestly? Not really, I’m not widely read I’m just fixated on world religion, esotericism, certain strands of poetry and philosophy. You ask me about a lot of analytical philosophy or like, literature from 1950s onward and I’m fully ignorant, the only secondary lit I go to is usually dictionaries of terminology before reading a philosopher, but with something like occultism you don’t really have a choice but to read primary texts if you want any accuracy, and in general I am against people not going to primary texts (which is why I am so against the guenon, rocks and so forth fixation.) and this is also why I am often able to post screenshots of philosophy or esoteric lit or why I often post the poems of the dudes I’m interested in, I think it isn’t that I’m well read, I think I just have a highly specific taste and like to shill my taste. I’m basically oblivious to the contemporary landscape when it isn’t in my area of taste.

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
What a terrible list.
Also, is he a monolingual? Because he sure looks like it. His knowledge of Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French etc. literature is terribly poor.

Dont care Didnt read fat fuck lol

>>18827664
How do I into occultism, Frater?

>>18827732
Depends on the type of occultism you want to get into, I’ll link the lists I gave others so as not to mess up the archive. It gets into different traditions progressively.

>>/lit/thread/S18108991#p18109089

>>18825358
https://www.scaruffi.com/fiction/best100.html

Btfos lit and fatbot

Kantbot should have stuck with the TekWar podcast, interviewing Delicious Taco, School shooter and Sam Hyde. Once he started taking himself seriously he's become embarassing. Yep, you did it kantboob, you're the only one who figured out the true spirit of marxism, good job.

>>18825541

>>18825358
>No Emile
NGMI. Can't believe he calls himself Kantbot while neglecting Roussau

>>18827550
You can tell he doesn't, brainlet

>>18825358
I will never forget the moment Moldbug btfod him for larping as a German idealist scholar when he can't even read German

>>18829471
Silence, simp.

>>18829521
Cope low iq moron

>>18825521
There has never been any progress since the first normalfag asked on TV:
>Who is this 4chan person?

>>18829530
Hope he reads this bro. He will, he namesearches himself.

>>18825358
>no Justine or Juliette
pleb

>>18825358
>Our Top 100 books list
It's not "ours".
1) I assume Kantbot is "countering" not any one of the /lit/ top 100 lists but rather the blended list created and posted by someone on reddit (I assume this because that is the list that's been getting attention from pseud niggers recently).
2) These lists are amalgamated from the input of many people so any idiosyncratic picks that a person might submit are averaged out (thus all the "duh duh these are all so dull and generic" complaints made by foambrains on twitter/reddit). Since this list is an amalgam it's silly to treat it as a reasoned thing and "counter" it with your personal sperglist (as Kantbot has done).
3) Even if we went by the individual year lists (2020 for example) I would bet that the more particular posters on /lit/ (or let's say the ones who actually read) don't bother filling out that google form because it's tedious and why would they?
4) Even if every type of user was proportionally represented in a given list it would still be meaningless because:
A) voting does not actually render an intelligible judgement from a given voting body (see the relevant article in Gaddafi's Green Book; alternatively see the relevant section in Schumpeter's Capitalism Socialism and Democracy)
B) this is doubly true when you are not voting for one thing but rather collecting votes and then assembling those votes into a "top x" list.
So to reiterate: any analysis or criticism of the reddit list with the understanding that it represents /lit/ (or indeed anyone) is totally meaningless. Everyone on reddit and twitter are retarded and most people on /lit/ are retarded too.
>x book came before y book??
>no x author???
>bro there's no women!

Why the focus on Samuel Richardson, but no mention of Fielding's Shamela or de Sade's Justine? Dude's a pseud.

>4chan the top racism website and cultural center of the entire internet posts about books organically
>some redditor polls a self-selected (probably reddit) minority of 4chan users willing to fill out a poll about books they've read
>posts it to reddit
>twitter faggots find it
>every validation seeking woman on twitter starts pontificating like "Ah, good old 4chan.. For you see, I outgrew 4chan in 2018.. My dear followers, if you want my opinion on this list, it's blah blah blah blah"
>nobody cares
>not even 4chan

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GibiNy4d4gc

>>18825374
Based

>>18829971
Kek the people who "outgrew" 4chan when it turned more fascist

>>18825421

That would be right if the list was presented as a chart (which is unfortunately often the case). But the list is just an aggregation of the votes of many people with disparate interests

>>18825443
Homosexual spotted, thinks only masculinity and androgyny are beautiful, can't understand the last chapter of Ulysses

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
The clear problem with this list, outside of some other anons have already mentioned, is it's clearly made with the intention of showing how smart he is. It's not a genuine list of favorite books.

>>18825358
I'd be willing to bet that he hasn't read more than five of the books on that list. There's a conspicuous avoidance of canon books that make it to pretty much every lit list, and there's an infatuation with B-side lit of authors who have more famous works, and this avoidance and infatuation pull the fervent anti-pseud back into the pseud tides. One must remember the ways of the Tao.

>>18825358
He's right though, we can nitpick his list but it is much more erudite and interesting than /lit/'s 20th century heavy Infinite Jest high schooler Vonnegut paperbacks list. "It was just a poll" etc is cope

>>18830048
you're a moron. it doesn't even make logical sense. there's not even fucking Dante on the list which is INSANELY RETARDED as Cervantes and all of Romantic literature is fundamentally based on his influence

read a fucking book nigger

xo

>>18830048
His list has a hefty amount of propriety tales and moral fiction interspersed with classics. I wouldn't call Samuel Richardson and William Godwin interesting or imply that their works were of comparable quality to Cervantes or Swift. For example, he doesn't list the responses to Richardson's Pamela (Fielding and de Sade, specifically) or point toward Godwin's Memoirs (of Mary Wollstonecraft). He recommends Lessing, but omits Burke (or even Coleridge). His list is mostly contrarian and doesn't signify quality.

>>18830059
Sorry but I think you're the moron. You're doing one of the copes in this thread I see a lot. "He didn't include Dante, Homer, Milton, etc" well it was supposed to be focused on novels, not poetry. I don't even really like KB but he's correct. /lit/'s list is quite juvenile, entry-level and Goodreads-tier. 1984, Catch-22, the Lord of the Rings, Slaughterhouse-Five, Brave New World, Les Mis, Great Gatsby, American Psycho, Dune, The Hobbit, Alice in Wonderland, The Pale King, The Tunnel, A Clockwork Orange, Kafka on the Shore, Jerusalem, Harry Potter, none of those should be on there. Then you have the ones that are good books but are generally what people just starting to read begin with. That's the bulk of them. It's like a list of favorite albums that was all Beatles and Pink Floyd. /lit/ seems to have very teenage taste. And that's especially given away by the fact that the list is mostly from the twentieth century. 64/100 of em. And then most of the others are from the nineteenth century or else just the bare, first few essentials from the entirety of Antiquity to the Enlightenment. Sorry, it's a plebby list

>>18830048
If you're too dumb to grasp why a poll is composed of lowest common denominator there is truly no hope for you

>>18830179
I thought /lit/ was supposed to be elitist. And I want it to be elitist. You've got a list that appeals to the lowest common denominator versus a list that appeals to the seriously dedicated. Idk guys. What would Novalisposter say if he saw this?

>>18830161
This is a much more fair argument against KB's choices, everyone else is just whining

>>18825477
What is the documentary?

>>18830195
>a list that appeals to the lcd
Do you genuinely not understand why a poll is LCD? If you submitted this guy's entire list his picks wouldn't show up on the poll unless 20 other people had identical picks, the ones that will show up are those that are very widely read and appreciated.

>>18830166
YOU FUCKING BRAINLET THE ORIGINAL LIT POST HAS POETRY IN IT

WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU MAKE A COMPETING LIST THAT ISN'T EVEN THE SAME KIND OF LIST, AND IS SHITTIER AND LESS COHERENT BECAUSE OF THAT

FUCK YOU QUEER, SUCK MY COCK

>>18825358
Yes I can’t believe a democratically assembled list of books is incoherent and only reflects public opinion albeit with some elitist chan culture bias. KB is a fat yid.

>>18830195
>I thought /lit/ was supposed to be elitist. And I want it to be elitist.
Most posters on /lit/ don't even read you fucking tard.

>>18830247
the lit list is nonironically more coherent than Fatbot's retarded novel list, it's just not ordered chronologically

>>18827578
>>18825358
the /lit/ post is literally drama, novels, and fiction, and Fatbot decides to make a competing list made up of only novels. It'd be like if /mu/ made a list of only solo arrangements. What a fucking tard.

The fat nigga definitely didn't do well on the Reading Comprehension part of the SAT

>>18830238
NIGGA, KB'S LIST IS THE MORE COHERENT ONE BECAUSE IT HONES IN ON ONE AREA OF LITERATURE INSTEAD OF JUST HAPHAZARDLY MIXING NOVELS IN WITH POETRY AND A SMALL SMATTERING OF PHILOSOPHY / RELIGIOUS TEXTS

>>18830229
I understand why it's LCD, but an LCD list is just going to be by nature less coherent and erudite, and therefore it's obviously plebbier and not as useful as KB's list

He’s quite possibly the most pretentious person I’ve ever seen

>>18830299
WOW THAT"S FUCKING RETARDED CONSIDERING MOST OF THOSE NOVELS TOOK INFLUENCE FROM EPIC POETRY YOU TARDED FAGGOT, WHICH IS LITERALLY "MEANINGFULLY CONTEXTUALIZING EACH BOOKS SIGNIFICANCE" IN THE WORDS OF THE FAT RETARD

GO TO LIT 101 AT A COMMUNITY COLLEGE, CAUSE YOU SURE ARE A FUCKING STUPID QUEER

hth

>>18830206
it was quite literally an incel documentary called TFW NO GF. you could say it had a profound effect on him since he went on to lose his virginity to a tranny, pivot from a magatard trumptrain faggot to a seething lib pseud, and alienate everyone he knew with his aggressively autistic posturing

>>18825374
Lmao

Something funny about all this is that Logo loves dearly most of the books on /lit/'s Top 100 and was originally defending it passionately, before sighing and bending the knee to toss out Likes to his fat friend KB's contrarian shitposting

my nigga put down the books and pick up the weights lmao

>>18825421
This guy is dumb. What was he expecting, a syllabus for the Romantics?

/lit/tards SEETHING. Liking entry level novels does not make you an intellectuals nor remotely interesting.

>>18827550
>it's the easiest way to appear to have read swathes of material.
why

>>18830780
rent free

>>18830892
I'm fucking better than you.

>>18825358
It's Moll Flanders, not "Moll Flander". What a pseud.

>>18825443
holy mother of BASED

>>18830901
are you trying to come on to me you fucking faggot? Suck my cock

>>18825358
>>18825359
>>18825364
>>18825372
>almost all picks are from the 1700s or thereabouts

>>18825421
After a brief lookover his twitter I didn't find these tweets and I don't care to go trawling for what's in essence meaningless drama that will be forgotten in days. Especially not through the thousands of people who somehow fall for his grifting podcast and paywalling. Assuming it is his, however:

>reading books from this list won't add up to a synthetic critical perspective capable of meaningfully contextualizing each book's relative significance
I'm not just throwing his own critique back at him for this, because frankly he's almost right. Also far more well read than I am, despite acting like an absolute pseud very often. There's such an obvious flaw in expecting someone to list all of the works of literature which are relevant to understand the significance of each of the picks relatively though. Despite picking up coding recently Kantbot clearly needs a better understanding of constraints. Yes, /lit/'s top 100 fails to put across the context of each books significance. So does his though, because you simply can't fucking cram the context of the most significant works of human literary culture into a mere 100 books. His is, arguably, more lopsided based on his own criticism.

>>18830780
>>18830901
Lose weight

>>18825374
lmao

>>18825651
>t. Humourless fag