/lit/ - Literature

>>5916093
Slaughterhouse-Five and Sirens of Titan are the best. Breakfast of Champions is probably the worst, super-gimmicky and sloppy and he even admits it in the book. I have no idea why so many people like that one.

Start anywhere, he's pretty accessible. Sirens, Cat's Cradle, S-5 or Galapagos are all fine starting points.

>>5916123
Thought Sirens was a phenomenal book, which says a lot considering I hate most SciFi I read (Dune can go fuck itself until it somehow dematerializes from the whole of time and space). As for BoChampions, I LOVE how messy and fractured it is. I always thought that was kind of the point.

>>5916123
I read Breakfast of Champions and even did a school presentation on it.
But right now I can't remember what it was about.
Slaughterhouse Five was better.

the only time I ever read Vonnegut i got like 1/3 of the way in cats cradle and gave it back to the friend I borrowed it from

it felt like it was written for someone in 7th grade who was just starting to try to figure out the universe, who had some sense of its mystique and that there was good in it but had no way to articulate there thoughts or even a way to frame them. It was like a feel-good novel for middle-schools to read in order to feel mature and like they "get it".

>>5916143
Hahahahahahahahah that's great. But I think you're missing the point of his writing style (many call him a minimalist). However, I do agree that Cat's Cradle is severely overrated.

>>5916143
>>5916164
Who the fuck are you braindead plebs and when did you get here?

>>5916168

at least try to formulate a rebuttal in you're response son

>>5916183
No really what is this shitposting nonsense? Are you morons deliberately fucking up basic grammar rules/communicating like highschoolers? If so, this is some infuriating shitposting, I'll say that.

>>5916197
It's the Internet. Sometimes its nice to not give a shit about grammar. (And yes, I did purposely say "its" and not "it's" on purpose just to piss your middle school brain off. Get educated before you try to feel education.)

>>5916197

just because peoples grammer and writing etiquette isnt 100% doesn't mean that its shitposting.

If you really wanted to contribute to the discussion you would do so instead of complaining about minor grammer stuff, I see that as a form of shitposting.

>>5916206
MODS PLZ

>>5916219
Really? Are you serious????

>>5916123
I like Breakfast, and I didn't feel like it was more gimmicky than anything else he wrote. If you want to talk about sloppy Vonnegut then go read Player Piano. The ending of Breakfast is probably the most enigmatic, which could be seen as gimmicky, but I've still been trying to figure it out and enjoying it nonetheless.

>>5916220
I don't know if this is some meta trolling or if I 'took the bait' or if you're sincerely this inept but I'm too tired for it. I'm out.

leave the board

>>5916143
Quitting a Vonnegut book 1/3 of the way through is retarded, that's like right before things get strange and interesting in every single one of his novels.

>>5916233
I just want to know what I'm saying that's making you so upset because I'm genuinely confused.

>>5916233

if you were this poster

>>5916168
>>5916197
>>5916219

then congrats, you compained all over the thread and yet failed once to provide anything relevant to the discussion.

>>5916243

maybe so, but I had a stack of other books I knew were good that I wanted to read, I would rather read stuff that I can tell right away is really good then something where i'm not sure if I want to finish it.

>>5916231
Never read Player Piano. I assume you dislike it? Why's it sloppy?

>>5916255
Vonnegut is shit-tier pomo, don't even bother. Good for new readers but otherwise he's babbies first

>>5916249
I agree wholeheartedly, especially when it comes to some of his later works. I also agree, though, that the switch in tone and concept around that point marks the beginning of what the reader will be in for, and if the reader doesn't for some reason like what he/she's reading then that would be a good place to stop.

>>5916258
It was Vonnegut's first novel and it's filled with strange 50's slice of life imagery that you don't really see in his other works. It clashes pretty heavily with his humor and the oddities of the story.

>>5916093
>Thought Sirens was a phenomenal book, which says a lot considering I hate most SciFi I read (Dune can go fuck itself until it somehow dematerializes from the whole of time and space).

Plebs R Us

>>5916267

agreed.

>>5916129
Why didn't you like Dune?

>>5916267
>>5916293

If you enjoy Murakami, Pynchon, or DFW then you owe it to Vonnegut.

>>5916312
Well I'm not sure that's necessarily true. I have a number of friends who have never touched Vonnegut, yet love Pynchon/DFW.

That being said, he is great entry-level reading. Also a blast to discuss with others who are also beginning

I'm currently reading Slaughterhouse-Five (200 or so pages in) and honestly, while the plot is entertaining, the prose is utter garbage. It makes me want to kill a baby. So it goes.

>>5916334

lol, I felt the same after cats cradle

>>5916093
Slaughter-House 5

>>5916334
So it goes

Goddamn I fucking hated Slaughterhouse-5.

What a weak fucking novel, patronizing the readers throughout the entire fucking thing like they are braindead children. It was like Vonnegut had read an article on time and relativity and decided to try and "blow everyone's minds" by incorporating it into a shitty novel with a shitty weak protagonist in a vain attempt to be deep and thought-provoking.

It locks the reader in with promises of an exploration of the horrors of the Firebombing of Dresden, and never delivers.

"oh war is bad and absurd, so it goes" fuck you Vonnegut, you down-talking moronic asshole.

>>5917031
You shouldn't blame the book for not knowing how to read it.

>>5917031
>missing the point