/lit/ - Literature

Start with the Greeks. Always start with the Greeks.

>>4878127
hue

Read Junkie, then Queer.

>>4878126
probably. Don't start with Junk. I started reading that, got bored, and have had no desire to read anything else by him.

>>4878147
Will do, thanks.

>>4878126
You start by buying his books.
Then you throw them in the trash.
Congrats, you just gained +100 Good Karma

fuck the Beat's.
seriously
On the Road is the only have decent piece of shit worth reading and I say that only because I'm partial to travel books and jazz.

Burroughs is shit though.
I'd rather never read another book again in my life than have to re-read Naked fucking Lunch.

>>4878180
>fuck the Beat's.
>Beat's
>'s

>>4878180
>Congrats, you just gained +100 Good Karma

Someone has been reading Kerouac!

Naked Lunch is the only good Beat book.

>>4878195

MFW

>>4878126
Junkie is a really interesting book. After that I would read the follow up. It takes place mostly in South America...I think it's called Queer. I read all his books so many years ago so it's hard to remember.

I also liked the one where he goes to S.A. and looks for some elusive psychedelic drug. I forget what that one is called too.

Naked Lunch and his cut up trilogy are annoying and difficult. Some of his later shit I remember being pretty good though.

>>4878126
Read Cities of the Red Night.

>>4878180
>Bill Burroughs
>beat's
>t's

>mfw some faggot near me puts bill below kerouhack

>>4878231
Queer, the second novel ends with the search for yage, its the same book. There is a collection of letters between him and ginsberg about that search, which they both undertook seperately.
But yeah, queer and junky will be the most straighforward books you can get by him

>>4878126
>"Naked Lunch is a non-linear narrative that is difficult to describe in terms of plot." - wiki

Dropped. It's one of "those" books.

>>4878292
>reading for plot

>>4878292
you should be proud of yourself

>>4878316
>>reading for plot

Not reading for plot/characters means you are reading superficially like gamers who play games simply for their graphics/special effects.
Not the plot and mechanics.

>>4878323
And books can be read for their "mechanics". Furthermore, just because a book lacks definite plot doesn't mean it can't have meaning and intriguing concepts.

>>4878337
>just because a book lacks definite plot doesn't mean it can't have meaning and intriguing concepts.

Books that lack plot tend to lack redeeming features as well. Not always, just a general rule of thumb that any wise reader will heed.

Has anyone here read the Red Night Trilogy? Those books are superb.

>>4878365
>Red Night Trilogy
>superb

sci fi genre

>>4878372
>has never hung himself