/lit/ - Literature

Google Plus :^)

>>5209291
Fuck you

/lit/ and /int/ are filled with faggots, albeit smart ones.

>>5209288
Reddit, but only in subreddits.

>>5209288
This place has been great for book titles/recommendations and *some* of the discussion.
Reddit (specifically /r/literature) posts rather relevant and interesting articles.
What would be an example of literature-related tumblr activity? Sincere question since I don't use it.

Reddit by sheer numerical advantage

>>5209288
reddit.com/r/literature
NOT
/r/books

>>5209324
You don't like circle jerking 1984 until your arms fall off?

Sites designed specifically for literature, not general forums or social networks.

>>5209288

/pol/ is less well-read than tumblr or reddit, but somehow is always right.

>>5209288
Goodreads

>>5209288
>This thread

>>5209345
>Sites designed specifically for literature, not general forums or social networks
For example?

>>5209304
>/int/
jesus christ

>>5209315
>>5209322
>/r/literature
Really? Everytime I go there the top article is invariably a poorly written SJW article about underrepresented minorities, or the chauvinism of the publishing industry or something like that.

1/10 of the link submissions are worth reading

>>5209288
How the fuck could anyone know that? I'm sure 80% of the kids that come here are on reddit anyway.

>>5209452
That subreddit still provides an article-aggregating function that /lit/ really doesn't. You can look through them and determine for yourself what's of value.

>>5209647
>an article-aggregating function that /lit/ really doesn't.

That might have something to do with the fact that the entire website is a content aggregator, but either way, are literary articles ever worth reading? Be honest. The majority of them are awful, and this is coming from someone who spent a long time on sites like that, trawling through articles like that when I should have been reading books.

>>5209681
Not that guy, but I would say so. Lesser known history on the lives of famous authors is always interesting. It's also moderately useful to keep abreast in the contemporary world of literature. Literary criticism articles are at worst a complete waste of time, but at best insightful and offer a fresh perspective

>>5209681
>>5209647
>>5209452
go back to reddit

>>5209707
>felling superior because you only use a image board focusing on cartoons

>>5209314
as far as i can tell this is the correct answer
the general redditor is a complete retard, but in subreddits there will usually be people who know a lot about whatever its subject is

>>5209742
>Getting mad over gb2/gaia
>>>/reddit/

Anyone who doesn't say Deep&Edgy is new, a fool, or both.

Reddit is not much worse than 4chan, kind of like how tripfags are not much worse than anons. There is very little room for superiority. Being an anon on 4chan alone is nothing to celebrate.

Neo-reaction threads on /pol/

I am not joking.

/lit/ > r/literature > tumblr > r/books

The question isn't what has the best discussion or articles, it's who is the most well-read. It's /lit/, not even a fucking contest.

>>5209304
/int/ is very very stupid

source: I frequent /int/

Newfags will say reddit, but it's more of being pretentious and using words with more than 4 syllables, than actually being well-read.

/lit/ #1