[ 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: 18 KB, 455x290, boti68_detail_250811102446.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR] No.2042941 [Reply] [Original]

REQUESTING VALID WORKS OF FICTIONAL LITERATURE THAT HAVE NON-FICTION ELEMENTS THROUGHOUT IT

THINKING:
WAR AND PEACE
VICTOR HUGO'S WORKS
VASILY GROSSMAN'S 'EVERYTHING FLOWS'
BALZAC (READING 'THE BLACK SHEEP' AT THE MOMENT)

PLEASE DON'T MENTION MOBY-DICK

>> No.2042945

Atlas Shrugged. Real world problems with very plausible solution.

>> No.2042944

MOBY DICK

>> No.2042946

Wouldn't a good sum of what Jules Verne wrote fall into that category?

>> No.2042954

>>2042945
>IMPLYING IT ISN'T SOME REACTIONARY'S WET DREAM

>> No.2042955

>>2042946
One could make the same argument for much of H.G. Wells' works, I think.

>> No.2042959

>>2042955
Well, if you're going to say H.G. Wells, couldn't we also say Issac Asimov?

>> No.2042961

I feel obliged to mention The Way of All Flesh by Samuel Butler and Caleb Williams by William Godwin.

>> No.2042963

>>2042959
If we're including Asimov, then we have to include L. Ron Hubbard.

>> No.2042964

>>2042959
We could. I wouldn't. But we could.

>> No.2042968

I, Claudius

Awesome historical fiction if you like Roman history.

>> No.2042969

Keep going guys I am reading.

>> No.2042974

I DON'T MEAN FICTION THAT REFLECTS REALITY, BUT FICTION THAT IS STRUCTURED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT IS RIDDLED WITH INTERMISSIONS ACCOUNTING ON NON-FICTIONAL FACTS THAT IS NOT TOTALLY NECESSARY TO READ/UNDERSTAND THE STORY ITSELF

>> No.2042977

JOHNNY TREMAIN

>> No.2042982

>>2042974
Again, I feel obliged to mention The Way of All Flesh by Samuel Butler and Caleb Williams by William Godwin.

>> No.2042983

TOM CLANCY

>> No.2042986

>>2042974
>>2042974

I still stand on my foot with Verne - he will literally take up a chapter just to tell you about people who scoured Africa before his characters, or how an engine works.

I mean, right? I'm not out of my mind here, right?

>> No.2042987

>>2042986
I agree. I mean, Around the World in Eighty Days--let's be honest, it wasn't a novel so much a travelogue.

>> No.2042988

>>2042987
AWESOME. AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS WAS ALREADY ON MY CURRENTLY READING LIST, WILL BE MY FIRST VERNE.

DIDN'T CHOOSE HIM FOR THAT REASON THOUGH, JUST WORKING THROUGH FRENCH LITERATURE AT THE MOMENT.

>> No.2042989

Flaubert would be obvious tier choice for you Cappy, but I gather you've read a fair bit of him from your Goodreads.

Otherwise, give George Eliot or Dickens a go (less so Dickens, because he's slightly inferior to Eliot and his historical stuff tends to be kinda obvious a la Tale of Two Cities, or the diametric opposite a la Barnaby Rudge). I can tell you'd also be the sort to enjoy some Scott, search through his back catalogue and find something there.

>> No.2042990

MICHAEL CRICHTON

>> No.2042996

>>2042989
GEORGE ELIOT?

http://www.goodreads.com/recommendations/2471738?type=recommendation#comment_35016603

THIS IS WHAT I THINK OF YOUR GEORGE ELIOT

PERFECT CATCHA

REDUNDANCY LLYTIC

>> No.2042999

>>2042988
>>2042988

Oh god, Capsguy - I thought you read everything. I am surprised you haven't gotten to anything by Verne...

I'm sure you'll like him; 80 Days is always a good read because Phineas Fogg is such a dashing main character.

>> No.2043001

>>2042989
I'm slightly offended by your notion that Dickens is inferior to Eliot. Strictly because they are two different beasts. His historical fiction is weak though, but he wasn't writing anything like what Eliot was writing. I mean, Dickens just is a completely different type of writer, and to say he is inferior--or even superior--to Eliot is essentially apples and oranges. I prefer Dickens, but I also love Eliot. Just saying, I find comparing them to be ridiculous.
Also, Capsguy doesn't read anything by a woman, else I would've recommend some Eliot as well.

>> No.2043008

>>2042999
TAKES TIME, ONLY STARTED READING LITERATURE AROUND A YEAR AGO.

INSTEAD OF READING THE BEST 1 OR 2 WORKS OF EACH 'ESSENTIAL' AUTHOR I TEND TO FIND AN AUTHOR I LIKE AND END UP READING MOST OF HIS WORKS AND THEN MOVE ON. USUALLY DO THIS WITH A SELECT HANDFUL AT A TIME, AT THE MOMENT:
DUMAS
FLAUBERT
ZOLA
BALZAC
MOLIERE
CONRAD

AND I ALWAYS PUT IN A FEW RANDOM STUFF HERE AND THERE TO SPICE THINGS UP.

>> No.2043059
File: 32 KB, 400x346, 1311455458422.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
[ERROR]

>>2043001
>Offended?
Come on dood, we're bandying opinions here. No one should get offended.

I feel like justifying my tastes in British Victorian literature, please read on and respond as appropriate, anon. It's all too easy to get all cynical about Dicken's prose, the-whole-writing-to-maximise-word-count-and-thus-writing-fee thing etc., but I also think it's legitimate: the long sentences flow pretty nicely, sure, but they can only do a good job with that hearty good humour he's known for and a certain mawkishness taints all his pathic language. Some sentences are plain ugly, in places and ways that they don't need to have been. This is small fry for criticism, I'll admit, but distinguishing among top tier authors like Eliot and Dickens.

What really makes the difference is Dickens' plain freaking commercialism. Little Nell in Old Curiosity Shop is just this sickeningly bloated object of pathos, souped up and meated out to such an extent that, to a discerning mind, she's become an absurdity. Moralism in general is plain poor in Dickens. In the end, it's pretty uninnovative, unintellectual stuff, fine for some but maybe not for me.

Dickens does have consistency on his side, and strong characterization as well, I'll give you that.

>> No.2043065

>>2043008

Do you purchase your books or do you frequent a library of your choice?

Do you maintain capslock because of bad eyesight?