/lit/ - Literature

>>3326621
Are you fucking joking.

Dammit, I'm already halfway into A Picture of Dorian Gray. Fuck you guys.

>>3326693
why do you faggots start early. also hurr durr you made me read a book omg

>>3326717
fuck you kid

you don't know my pain

>Picking Stoner over Cosmic Banditos.
>Shiriously

>>3326718
maybe they read it already

Hm, I've read it before, but I could maybe go for another read. We'll see.

>>3326693
You have two weeks to read Stoner, you have more than enough time to read both. I changed my vote when I realized how average A Picture of Dorian Gray is.

Discussion is here:
http://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/1159200-week-008-stoner

>>3326847
see you in two weeks then, keep an eye for the vote on the next book

>those choices
You really haven't read them? /lit/'s even worse read than I thought

Thank god for Stoner, I thought everyone had read the rather mediocre The Picture of Dorian Gray.

I'm on the bandwagon /lit/. See you in two weeks time.

hi guys, 2nd time posting on this board. haven't read stoner yet, but it seems like a good book. will start asap.

why not kafka on the shore on the list? seems like the type of book you guys would enjoy.

>>3327030
join the group and suggest it for next week.

never heard of stoner but i've been pleased with the few books i've read from the group so far.

>>3327030
>kafka on the shore
Too long for a biweekly read, specially if you have other books to finish, but of course someone can read just the group books and read nothing else until the next week

>>3327030

>2013
>still reading Murakami unironically

>>3327529
How fucking slow do you read?

>>3327537

It's a group read Retardo.
You have to account for people with lives and troglodytes.

>>3327560
How fucking slow do you read?

>>3327778

I do alright but I was talking about the people in the group having different priorities or being mentally challenged.
I'm not even in the group but it's obvious that the retards in a herd always set the pace.

>>3327789

Not if the herd doesn't care about leaving people behind, and that's the type of herd /lit/ is.

>>3326693
dude, DG is less than 200 pages long. This should not be an issue.

>>3326896
What makes you say it's average?

>>3328431
The writing is incredibly bland, where's the excitement? Tea parties, boring scenes, boring dialogue, the ideas are nothing mind blowing and things we all thought about when we were younger. There are other things that I don't know if Wilde did because it's his views or to make the characters look bad. Which are some sexism and racism.

I not at all interested in the settings, sure some of the themes but I really don't like works that are mostly dialogue.

It's very boring and feels extremely dated. this is how I felt, everyone else is going to have felt differently. Some think it's extremely exciting, I don't know how, but they do. I don't see it as a classic that's timeless but 95% of classics I find to be un-interesting and not profound, which sucks for me.

This is also me only talking about half the book.

>>3327789
>or being mentally challenged.
That would explain a lot of the shit on this board

>>3329045
This reads like it's been copied from goodreads

>>3329054
Probably because I write a lot on goodreads. I wrote something kind of similar on goodreads but no I wrote that just then.

>>3329092
I don't think you belong here

>>3329045
it's okay to think Dorian Gray's not a good book but these aren't good reasons for thinking that

>>3329045
jesus christ

>>3329101
Because instead of writing. It sucks, I went into a little more detail on why I think that? The norm needs the un-normal.

>>3329103
What would be a good reason that's not to do with plot, style, philosophical ideas and how it makes me feel and think?

>>3329119
>plot, style, philosophical ideas and how it makes me feel and think?

Your commentary on all of that literally reduces to "i found it boring" which doesn't provide anything at all.

>>3329130
I guess I can see why people just say it sucks and leave it at that because I really cannot be bothered explaining why. I did say the prose/writing style is incredibly bland, which is very important to me, the ideas are nothing profound, which I said, when most of the half of the book is dialogue you would hope for something interesting. Lord Henry occasionally says something interesting but usually he is generalizing, talking in a way that sounds profound but it isn't and creates paradoxical sayings which don't really mean anything.

>>3329165
...wow

>>3329165
if you think wilde's prose is bland, it's clearly not important to you.

please stop talking and go to tumblr or wherever it is you tasteless fucks gather.

>>3329165
>I really cannot be bothered explaining why

Then I hope you don't take too much offense to people like me who challenge your opinions and, whenever discovering that you can't be bothered to support them, throw them out.

Wilde's prose is, like, the opposite of bland. In fact, if there's one thing that's usually said in support of Dorian Gray, it's that it's nicely written. What, in your opinion, is a well written book?

>>3329165
Wait someone seriously failed to notice the point of Henry?

>>3329169
Well of cause you're going to assume I'm the one with less experience with reading prose than you're and your opinion is right and my opinion that I said is purley how I feel is wrong. I surely couldn't have read books you haven't read that have much better prose, it's just not possible right.

>>3329184
Well like a friend was saying, critics mostly say Jane Austin has good prose, that doesn't really mean shit, her prose are bland as fuck. Did you purposely disregard what I wrote after saying I couldn't be bothered?

In my opinion books like Wild:An Elemental Journey, Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, The Famished Road, V., Slaughterhouse-Five, The Adventures of Tome Sawyer. Those are some examples of prose that I felt were really colourful(maybe not so colourful in Slaughterhouse-fives case) and exciting.

>>3329190
In my other post I wrote "There are other things that I don't know if Wilde did because it's his views or to make the characters look bad. Which are some sexism and racism" Lord Henry was doing those things, so I was trying to figure out if Wilde was using him to express his ideas or express ideas he hates, I havn't really gone on wiki or something and I haven't finished the book to find out.

>>3329214
of course

>>3329214
>of cause
Oh boy

>>3329230
>3329214
Didn't see me correcting myself, of boy.

>>3329238
Wait, the bad writing throughout that wasn't intentional?

>>3329226
>haven't finished the book
...

>>3329241
I'm learning, trying to get better all the time. I don't try to be the best writer but I at least I want to improve. I should check over my work more thoroughly for mistakes, I didn't listen too much in school, I was more focused on fitting in and fucking around like everyone else was, I now pay the price by having pretty bad grammar.

I think I may put Anna Karenina on hold for this, or maybe just read both, I dunno. Stoner seems pretty short, no?

>>3329319
Anyone can give me the relative length? Is it short, average length? Doesn't seem like it is long.

>>3329424
Looks like it will take about a week reading a few hours a day, two if you just give it a night-time hour.