/lit/ - Literature

>>21661673
>women

bitches ain't been bussin' like they used to, dawg.

>>21661673
They just ran out of ink.

>>21661673
average /lit/izen

>>21661673
>Rapists
>Child molesters
>Murderers
>CEO's
>Politicians

>>21661713
Objectively false.

>>21661693
No. They stopped reading the book.
These types do it with every book. They think they are going to learn a ton and then stop literally 30 pages in after ruining the book with retarded underlines.
Bracketing is the patrician choice for markup.

Kids back in school who would be selected to read out loud and who would always pause at the end of the lines instead of at the full-stops.

>>21661713
Why did you write the same thing five times?

people who read the classics of others

>>21661944
Think you may have missed the point. They aren't the worst because of what they read or how. They are the worst in spite of the fact that they read well. Which I think is more damning than just having bad reading habits.

>>21661991
woops. Silly me.

poeple actually underline into books?

>>21662999
I do. Why souldn't I? Bonus points if your answer doesn't involve commodity fetishism!

>>21662999
Nice trips. I usually underline textbooks, when I want to make keywords and important definitions more noticeable. I guess it works the same for literature, if someone wants to return to an important passage easier.

>>21662999
have you ever taken a book from a library?

>>21661713
Stop being so anti-semetic.

>>21663031
yes and I never saw that happen. Just stick papers and inserted paper-sheets with notes, max notes on side. never any markings in actual text (with exception of school/uni textbooks ofc)
maybe cultural difference?

>>21661673
People who don't take notes

My mother has been reading books her entire life. I have never seen someone read stories in such a retarded manner
>gets book from library
>flips to the last chapter and reads it to find out how it ends
>starts reading from the beginning
>if there is any suspense, or action, she will skip the entire chapter because it's too exciting for her
>will immediately put down a book if there is a character she doesn't like in it
>when she does finish a book she will do it in one sitting and she will speedread it for 8 hours straight

>>21663039
No

>>21661673
I truly hate the idea that characters have to be likeable to be considered well-written characters and the amount of times I’ve seen ‘cartoon villain’ criticism used wrongly…

These are the type of brainlet readers I would like to avoid which why I mostly stay within classic literature discussion circles though I am not a classic literature only reader.

Ngl I think classic literature readers are higher IQ and you have actual productive discussions with them without resorting to brainlet meme takes.

Listen, I disagree with some of the takes in classic lit circles but I feel like they argue their points well while whenever I try to have discussions outside of this circle, I feel my IQ dropping.

>>21663029
They literally do this for you

>>21663537
This. Normies have the irrepressible power to turn anything into a soap opera or melodrama.

>>21661673
Idiots who stop reading and post threads on /lit/ about the books they read and ask when does it get good.

>>21661673
Like Stanley Kubrick, I don't subvocalize.
Fuck taking notes.
Fuck making marks.
Fuck taking some shit test to prove I know the material.
Oh, and I never re-read a book.

>>21663557
Modern textbooks maybe, most of the stuff I used in school looked like any other book, with some pictures here and there.