/lit/ - Literature

>>3773731
I read it quite a while ago but I enjoyed it, even more than 1984 I'd say (which is great too if you haven't read it yet).

Besides, it's quite short so yeah go for it

>>3773731
animal farm is worth reading, if only to have read it. It's a little heavy handed with its moralistic allegory...but you finished atlas shrugged so that must not bother you. If you're up for some more ayn rand, read the fountainhead, it is focused and sharp where atlas is weighty and bloated. otherwise read some wealth of nations and cut to the start of conservative laisse faire ideals.

>>3773731
>Im corrently
>enxt
>liekd it
Of all the boards I browse, I've never seen a board make typos as much as /lit/. Why the fuck is that?

>>3773770
>itt: lurker autist plebs trying to garner a few good titles and authors to namedrop around litfags irl, which they will inevitably butcher spelling and/or prononciation of.

>>3773731
>enjoying Atlas Shrugged

america, go back to bed

Sorry about my typos.
Well I appreciate the responds, I'm sure that Animal Farm is a good book. I think I am gonna order it now guys. Thanks :) And what else besides fountainhead /lit/ could recommend ?

>>3773731
I loved Animal farm i read it when i was deep into Left wing Ideology and it really woke me up
Right wing books?
I think most writers are left wing so the amount of books is small
I liked the Ideas Ayn Rand presented in the book but the story was weak and i found the characters pretty flat. i found the depiction of the Cheating husband, mistress, and wife a cliche out of a feminest mistress's fantasy.

I loved the relationship between transportation, manufacture, and raw material production. The extortion by the government and the depiction of political pull as a kind of capital are right on the nose. I think the story suffered because it wasn't very pleasant to read but the ideas inside it make me gitty

Im al up for the Animal Farm, its cheap and small. But, I come from a small socialist country (Denmark, not Northkorea) And they only got one publication of the book. Its pretty ugly, it looks like a cheap education book made for small kids, or something like that. Fucking annoying, so I guess I'd just go the the english paperback.
Also Im all about the book "Succes" by Jack Welch. Its really informing, and is really relevant, :)

>Danish

Trust a Dane, feel the pain.

>>3773876
I dont get it..

OP, I can tell you're in high school.
Don't conflate Orwell anti-authoritarianism with Anti-Communism.

May I interest you in some literature about the powers who control the Earth by hold a lot of wealth?

>>3773803
>Reads Animal Farm and thinks it is an Anti-Leftist Book.

Knowledge about Orwell and his thought would be important before reading that book.
Animal Farm is not a criticism of Leftists, but a criticism of Totalitarianism. Orwell was a Marxists who surrendered his life to the fight for a leftist Regime, even going so far as fighting for the International Brigades in Spain. He was a Marxist, a Revolutionary Socialist.

>>3773803
If Animal Farm 'woke you up' from Leftism, you were a nitwit to start with.

It didn't even wake its author up. That's not what Leftism is.

>>3774366
1984 is a criticism of totalitarianism. Animal Farm is very specifically a criticism of the Russian Revolution and Stalin.

>>3774404
It'd help for you to know that Orwell thought Stalinism was totalitarianism dressed up in pseudo-socialist rhetoric.

Snowball was supposed to be Trotsky.

>>3773731

OP, you are an utter retard. I am sorry to say it, but I was sorry I read your post. You have no proper understanding of the terms you are using and you have misinterpreted the literature you refer to.

>>3774428
>It'd help for you to know that Orwell thought Stalinism was totalitarianism dressed up in pseudo-socialist rhetoric.

Sure, and I don't think he's wrong (although I would consider totalitarianism a system of government rather than an ideology; Stalin's regime was a totalitarian government that was ideologically hard left). But in one of those works he's criticizing the system and in the other he's talking about the actual historical events. Very specifically.

>Snowball was supposed to be Trotsky.

It's not even well-hidden or hard to figure out. It's barely even subtext, it's pretty much just text.

>>3774404
Not the Russian Revolution. He criticizes both Trotsky and Stalin who fail to continue Major's (Marx and Lenin) ideals, after he prematurely dies. His image of the Horses for example, are completely idealistic and hopeful. Full of respect for such characters, the ones who really thought they were doing the best for everyone.

>>3774446
It is hardly Hard-Left when you consider what Marxism is (a Stateless and Classless Society).

>>3774432
Stop being mean to the kid. He needs to be taught how to think critically, not be yelled at.

>>3774446
>Stalin
>Hard left

Top lel. It was a centralized state.

>>3774461
a criticism of the actually existing Russian Revolution, you dumbass, not the fact that a revolution happened at all. Obviously. I am not a total idiot, of course I don't think he's criticizing the fact that there was a revolution. Jesus. This is not hard, Orwell is not a complicated writer.

>>3774470
Oh shut the fuck up.

>>3774446
Before we go on, just what are you trying to get at? Because if you're calling Stalinism both hard left and totalitarian, then I'm afraid I've lost you somewhere along the line.

I'd like to call back to 'totalitarianism (state capitalism) dressed up in pseudo-socialist rhetoric' for the moment.

>>3774482
> Your whole post.
I don't think you quite understand what's being said.

>>3774482
You need to read something about Marxism, calm yourself down and try to understand what i said, you basically said the same thing I had done. You claimed he was criticizing the Revolution and Stalin, i couldn't figure out if you knew it or not, i remind you, this is an anonymous site, where no one knows eachother.
Calm yourself down.

>>3773803

It's rather sad that right wingers are reduced to reading books they dislike just because they want something to agree with their ideals. On the left we're rather spoilt. There's so many left wing authors so if one is shit, we can ignore him no matter how close his politics are to ours. I guess they don't have that luxury.

>>3774536
I read somewhere that 2/3 of Nobel Literature Laureates were Leftists and of those, half was a openly Communist.

>>3774544
'communist' is an ambiguous buzzword by now

>>3774561
To the Right, yeah.

>>3774561
not so much back in the days most of them won their prize, but yeah, when someone calls himself a Communist, there is always a need to say to which subdivision they hold themselves (I myself always say Marxist, even though i am affiliated in a Marxist-Leninist Party).