/lit/ - Literature

i vote :~)

It will fail as always because nobody is willing to take the responsibility to do the regular work.

>>5935654

But that's why we make it our New Year's Resolution not to fail this time. Foolproof plan.

>>5935654
I think we should at least give it a try. If we make the OP interesting, and chose books that have a lot of discussion potential it might actually work out.

>>5935681
What would you say is a book that has discussion potential ?

lol such a useless ass vote. Make a thread to vote on the book for the book club. Nigger.

>>5935654
Then why don't we have a standard format for the initial post saved somewhere?

It will allow for many people to start the daily thread, and that means we don't necessarily need someone to do the regular work.

If we had dates for when things happen and had enough time to get a book ordered and delivered I would definitely participate. A sticky with an increased bump limit I feel would also help a lot.

>>5935686
I'm the one who mentioned Michael Ende in the other thread. The Neverending Story especially is heavy on metaphores, allegories, metafictional elements, and allusions to other works of fiction, all of which have a reason for being in the story and contribute to its overall structure.

We've tried this a million times before and it never works.

>>5935729
信じたい

>>5935736
信じない

>>5935701
>to get a book ordered and delivered
Download the book.

>>5935755
I don't have an ereader nor do I want one.

>>5935647

It really just depends on the quality of the books chose, so I put "maybe"

>>5935701
Library maybe?

>>5935765
>>5935793

>>5935751
信じない

>>5935765
You have a computer.

>>5935765
Being a Luddite isn't cool any more.

>>5935793
or pick a book that's public domain for the 1st one at least

We already have 50+ votes, should probably start a discussion about the book.

Does this work?

<iframe src="http://strawpoll.me/embed_1/3309711/r" style="width: 600px; height: 390px; border: 0;">Loading poll...</iframe>

>>5935834
The selection should be determined by 'get's like doubles, and then the final selection should be strawpolled. That would be the most effective and equitable way methinks.

>>5935793
>>5935802
>>5935806
>>5935819
>>5935823

I like to own a physical copy of the book. I just didn't want books to be decided on at the last minute, I didn't expect this to turn into a discussion about why I shouldn't buy the books we plan to read.

>>5935862
No idea what you tried to accomplish.

>>5935647
Maybe participate

>>5935874
>I like to own a physical copy of the book.
>muh magical artifacts

just like one of my west african fetish puppet shows

>>5935890
I like having them because I prefer reading a book to any other alternative and then owning a copy to keep not because they are some special artifact. I didn't realise /lit/ was so vehemently against actually buying books.

>>5935890
If you're not willing to settle by a compromise, there isn't going to be a book club.

People really need to learn that if we're going to have a group, you can't be an elitist.

What are we going to read first?

I vote for some Conrad.

>>5935940
I could go for that, I want to get Heart of Darkness read and it's short so would be good to get the ball rolling.

I've drawn up some rules that should help get it started.

>http://pastebin.com/Y6m4U1qF

Waddaya think?

>>5935958
I have a copy of heart of Darkness lying around as well, so I'm with you on this one.

When are you going to learn that no one on here reads. It is just a bunch of college freshmen that want to talk about philosophy because their minds where blown in a 100 class.

>>5935958
>>5935978
I'm down. I still have the thrift edition my highschool English teach gave me lying around.

>>5935979
How many times per week do you figure you post that first sentence of yours?

>>5935983
I just got here first. Some other anon would of done it for me.

>>5935983
also I forgot how many times /lit/ has tried to start a book club. They fall apart in about a month or less because people don't read.

>>5935979
It hasn't been that long since the 'pseudo-science vs pseudo-phillosophy' threads took over this board, you know. We really did talk about literature once, and it may be that one day we shall again.

>>5935991
>tfw brownbear is dead

>>5935994
I read . . . 4chan.

>>5935987
Oh I know that I'm not speaking in terms of OP just your shitpost there

>>5935999
Not shitposting when it is an observation of what happens on this board on a cyclical basis.

>>5936004
>Tfw if I post an analysis of the book I finished later today it will get five responses and die

Okay conceded

>>5935987
Heart of Darkness is literally under a hundred pages. Even if half the people posting here are middleschoolers, we can still have a book club.

>>5936016
Then good luck.

>>5936016
You know, I don't think it's that simple. Sure, if we want to read a book together it shouldn't scare people off because of its sheer size, but it also needs to have enough content to make for a monthlong topic of discussion.

By the way, /tg/ has a method for making threads of this nature work, even when the number of people who participate is relatively small: Someone makes a Twitter account and announces when threads are going to happen. That way people don't have to refresh the catalogue all day, but they get notified when something is going down. It really does make a world of difference.

>>5936050
Okay so heart of darkness, who's making the twitter account and what day do we start?

I don't think we should just decide on Heart of Darkness without a vote, just because 5 of the 50+ people who said they might participate agreed on it.

>>5936062
The person in question would have to be reliable. Making threads and announcing them (preferably one or two hours beforehand so people have time to notice) on a regular basis isn't difficult, but keeping it up would become annoying sooner or later. So, whoever feels that they're up for the task should keep that in mind.

>>5936086
>>5936050
/lit/ isn't that fast. How about we just let everyone make threads?

>>5936050
Discussion should take place at a certain time towards the end of the month to avoid spoiling things for other and to concentrate the discussion into fewer larger threads.

>>5936095
If we went with the 'make threads whenever'- approach it'd be necessary, since not everyone checks /lit/s catalogue that on a daily basis. I come home around 7pm during the week, and I only find time to look for interesting threads on weekends.

>>5936103
This seems reasonable. If we condense the discussion into the last 7 days of the month, and also decide on what book to read next during that week things should be a lot more fun.

>>5936082
We should wait for more nominations first then make a strawpoll

I just did y'all a favor and started the official thread here >>5936154

Let the discussion begin!

for the love of god
Heart of Darkness Y/N poll
http://strawpoll.me/3310727

>>5935862

Guess it doesn't.

>>5935986

>would of

/lit/

>>5937147
twitter is up

OYTIE's bookclubs resume this Sunday....

>>5937184
People are afraid to merge.

>>5937201

>>5935793
Eww

>>5935647
I feel like they generally fail because people try to be as obscure and edgy as possible, and force untenable timelines.
200-400 page book in a month is reasonable.

>>5935672
holy fuck someone give this guy an award

I won't participate but I checked off that option anyway to give you false hope.

I was supposed to read Heart of Darkness my senior year of high school and I never did, still have the copy, so I'm up for it

It's preferable to have a book club with real life friends than to seriously discuss Tipping the Velvet with online pedophiles.

>>5935647
One one hand i would like to have the freedom to choose what i read.

On the other hand i really want some people to discuss what i read with.

Make polls so we can pick what we read.

>>5937222
Nice.

option E: i would read the thread and make le funny comments in it whether i read the book or not. (i'm reasonably sure i won't read the book.)

I would participate depending on how the selection books worked. Would any one agree to having the /lit/ 100 list with all the >400 page books removed. Than have a roll for the book.

>>5940086
With a re-roll on the chance it lands on a removed or repeated book.

>>5940086

Check out >>5937147 since this months book is already decided upon. How we choose the next book is up for discussion I'm sure.

>>5935910
>>5935910
>People really need to learn that if we're going to have a group, you can't be an elitist.
It's settled then. The book club has failed.

I wouldn't participate in a book club because I read things as I fancy to read them. I think most people are that way.

That is why most book clubs tend to read stuff that is very middle of the road. You have to remember that your taste is not everyone else. Also if you are just seeking interaction with other people on /lit/, it's better that you only talk to them via /lit/ most people here don't even have the social skills to talk to someone outside of this board.

I never really knew how many people really frequented /lit/, but I guess this poll is a good way to see. More than I thought. I figured all of the shit posting was just a few dedicated sperglords, but it's just a lot of people occasionally being faggots.

>>5940730
Sometimes you say and do shit on this board just because you want to provoke a reaction. Nothing is really done with any sort of sincerity,

>>5940696
Ditto.

And I'm sure a /lit/ book club would pick something stupid to read, like high school required reading or YA fiction.

And even if /lit/ did manage to pick a good book, I know you retards can't discuss books worth shit. There's no way /lit/ would ever be able to identify a theme on their own. The discussion would be "this character really rustles muh jimmies lol," "I'm on page 23 and what am I reading?" and "this passage reminds me of nonbinary existentialism let me explain this philosophical concept I cooked up on my own using misreadings of Nietzsche as a foundation..."

>>5940771

HEY GUIZE LESS ALL REED CATCHER INNA RYE

>>5940771
It will be either of both extremes.

>>5935647
You forgot to add 'shitpost ruthlessly' as an option.

>>5940771
How dismissive and inflammatory as well as being entirely wrong

>>5940802

Are you enjoying your first day on /lit/? I guess it's part of some new year's resolution that you're here?

>>5940805
How dismissive and inflammatory as well as being entirely wrong

First Book: The Bible.

>>5940771
>I'm better than everybody else
Well it is /lit/ after all.

>>5940832
>having an opinion makes you an elitist.

>>5940850
You forgot to type elitist twice. Pro Tip: It goes after "an".

>>5938336
>preferable
There's your problem.
It's preferable to be rich as well.
It's preferable to have a model as a gf.
It's preferable to be a social butterfly.
It's preferable to be in very good physical condition.

Do you have or are you any of those things? No.

I am actually hoping the /lit/ book club books are easy readers, my current reading stack consists of fairly demanding material which I probably couldn't articulate worthwhile views of. The book club book should be a side reader not your main book.

>>5935647

most people probably have other shit they want to read so if the chosen book is something they're not interested in then they wont participate, so i bet you'll get a lot of maybes

>>5935903

you're not alone, anon, i only do physical copies

>>5935974

>don't be jerks

lel why even write that one

>>5936113

>If we went with the 'make threads whenever'- approach it'd be necessary, since not everyone checks /lit/s catalogue that on a daily basis. I come home around 7pm during the week, and I only find time to look for interesting threads on weekends.

i'm not sure i see the problem, i thought this would be a casual thing where you just check the catalog whenever you'd normally browse /lit/ and find the thread and read it and respond, not that everyone would get on /lit/ and discuss it at the same time

>>5935978
aye.

>>5935647

Can we just do this on reddit?