/lit/ - Literature

>>5958299
I think you should start with going back to /r9k/.
>>>/r9k/
Bye.

>>5958306
eh, at least it's actually /lit/ related and not another thinly disguised (if at all) /pol/ thread

>>5958306
This.
Go back to /r9k/, OP.

>>5958310
They're stand-alone books, not part of a series. You read them, one at a fucking time. If you don't like what you're reading, you put it away or read it anyway.

The Double would be excellent choice as it is one of the first works by Dostoyevsky and implements stream of conciousness like NFTU. If you like him, read everything you can get, not everything as good as NTFU, but its still great
you gonna love white nights, as you come from r9k,

>>5958306
>>5958315
I'm lurking at /lit/ for some months, by what I saw I was able to tell you guys weren't part of that boards war and were actually trying to help people to get the goodness lit was able to give you.

>>5958299
>/r9k/

Please go away.

By the way, be aware that Dosty does not agree with the Underground Man. If you read his other works you'll notice that Dostoyevsky strongly dislikes /r9k/ type stuff.

You could read some Michel Houellebecq.

The Double is fantastic. I actually enjoyed it more than Notes.

>>5958367
>Michel Houellebecq
à la poubelle

OP, don't try to relate to literature or you're going to mostly read YA (= shit).
Be curious (not too much though, stick to the /lit/ wiki for example), if something interests you just try it.

start with the greeks

>>5958365
I've no idea what you just tried to say.

The Idiot.

It is not so complex like his main works, but has the roots of his develop as writer.

Netochka Nezvanova is a good call too, but is a little heavy in his production.

White Nights I love. It's a short history, but very rich and deep with the russian feeling and have some communication with his main works.

The Idiot still the best for you start;

>>5958367
>Michel Houellebecq
fucking disgusting

OP don't listen to this guy

I would go for The Double. It is a surprisingly funny read clearly inspired by Gogol's short stories, which makes it good. White Nights has always struck me as excessively sentimental, but it isn't a bad book by any means.
You should really get your hands on Crime and Punishment, The Idiot and The Demons, then read them in that order.
Keep the Brothers Karamazov for last.

>>5958299
>>5958386
>OP, don't try to relate to literature or you're going to mostly read YA (= shit).

This, basically. Angsty r9k faggots only exist in crappy YA. Writers basically write about themselves (the main character's ideals might not match those of the author, but the altogether meaning of the book will be the soul of the person who wrote it), and writers generally aren't like those /r9k/ people, and generally disagree with /r9k/ and /pol/ regarding social issues.

Also writers fuck a lot. Even someone who pretended to be awkward and a little bit autistic such as David Foster Wallace tore it up. True sperglords can't write.

>>5958386
>>5958399
I recommend Houellebecq because he complains about not getting laid. Since OP is from /r9k/ I figured he would like such a thing.

>>5958365
YOU WANT SOME GOODNESS, SONNY JIM?

The Brothers Karamazov is usually considered his best work, though I haven't read it. I don't think you'll find the bitterness you found in Notes though (I'm only assuming this is what enticed you since you're from /r9k/). The Underground Man isn't representative if Dostoevsky's philosophy at all, he's actually quite a religious writer and that's largely the point of Bros. Karamazov from what I gather.

>>5958422
>he's actually quite a religious writer and that's largely the point of Bros. Karamazov from what I gather.
Eeeeeh... Religion plays a very large role in Karamazov, but it's not just Dosty saying "believe in god or ur a faget". Karamazov is about the entirety of the human experience; religion plays a large role in that.

>>5958413
This isn't true at all. /r9k/ types (that is to say socially maladjusted people with women issues and existential malaise) are very common in 19th century and early 20th century literature.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter if the writer "fucks a lot". What matters is his work.

Aliocha is the main hero of Dostoy.
He's fantastic, and the own Fiodor said it probably he's the main character of Karamazov Brothers.

I think the kiddo is a great example as person, and his pure thoughts and ideas can change our own thoughts, also the idea which the large majority has about religion.

I'm not the religious type - to be honest very far from that, but the Aliocha view of catholicism, God, and make the good is impressive.

>>5958439
>Furthermore, it doesn't matter if the writer "fucks a lot". What matters is his work.
Their work is a mirror of their selves. You can't exist, and therefore you can't write outside of your own experiences.

>>5958422
The Underground Man is on the contrary very representative of Dostoevsky's philosophy at an early stage in that he rejects the "crystal palace" of reason and determinism in favour of free will and faith in God (this is the step the Underground Man couldn't make : the leap of faith that would have made him a better man).
The Underground Man returns in many other works : Hippolite in the Idiot, Kirilov in the Demons, etc.

>>5958457
>>Furthermore, it doesn't matter if the writer "fucks a lot". What matters is his work.
>Their work is a mirror of their selves. You can't exist, and therefore you can't write outside of your own experiences.

>u cant kno my pain

>>5958439
Those authors do exist, but their issues are of a completely different nature, and usually don't fit in with the pop culture and modern sensibilities that are so intrinsically related to the whole r9k neckbeard thing.

The closest thing you'll find to /r9k/ is the intense misogyny in the works of a lot of philosophers, but that is where the connection ends. Aside from the legendary manifesto by the greatest philosopher of all time, Elliot Rodger

>Furthermore, it doesn't matter if the writer "fucks a lot". What matters is his work.
Every single aspect of an author's mind and life is reflected in his or her work -- consciously or not. Sex -- and the personal connection to a romantic partner that (ideally and usually) is related to the act -- is such a big part of the human experience that it will feature extensively in what someone writes, regardless of whether or not the writer actually describes or references sex. /r9k/ is a board where the lack of sex is constantly discussed (and basically the source and instigator of all it's other subjects), so in my opinion it would be important to one of it's users -- such as OP -- to know in what kind of state the author's sex life is in.

>>5958365
Why the fuck do you mention you are from a universally hated board? You'd be better off not telling any board. Even /a/ hates you faggot. Alteast indentify with /pol/ or some shit, since the passive-agressive people on /lit/ will help you. I am pretty sure that while lurking you saw mostly help being offered to people who don't state they are from some board.

>>5958413
>and /pol/ regarding social issues.
Romantics are basically the students of Edmund Burke. They are /pol/ to the max. Russian literature worth reading is almost always from the romantic school.

>>5958457
This is the most stupid thing I've read all day.

Tourgueniev was quite popular amongst literary circles and led a normal social life, yet he wrote The Diary of a Superfluous Man, which is about the most pathetic, inept man you could think of. Tourgueniev's contemporaries were shocked when he published this book (it isn't like you at all, they said).

As a writer, you can use anyone you meet as a model for your main character.

>>5958299
OP did notes from the Underground make you feel bad? What with the Underground man being such an r9k loser.

>>5958457
Günter Grass wrote The Tin Drum from the POV of a dwarf. Therefore, Günter Grass is a midget.

>>5958489
Not that guy you replied to, but:
>misunderstanding that post so hard

This anon explains it too: >>5958413
>the main character's ideals might not match those of the author, but the altogether meaning of the book will be the soul of the person who wrote it

>>5958483
>Tolstoy was /pol/ to the max
Top fucking kek m8

>>5958498
>>5958489
>>5958472
Are you guys legitimately autistic?

>>5958509
we are all autists here

>>5958457
time to read some shakespeare kiddo

>>5958489
Of course you can, I'm not the first poster and I was not stating there are no good, socially inept characters. I just think that stating that an author's personal life is not relevant and does not influence their work is naïve.

And I also agree with other posters before, if you're a fedora-tipping socially inept person you're very unlikely to find what you look for in literature, that is, a romanticized, glorified view of your own shit conditions and personality. Authors have written about shitty, socially inept people, but it takes a sperglord to portray sperglords and their ideologies in a positive light.

>>5958472
I... have no idea what you mean by this.

>>5958501
>meaning of the book will be the soul of the person who wrote it

You don't expect me to take this seriously, do you?

>>5958524
I don't mean like a supernatural soul trapped inside paper.

What I mean is that everything one creates is "but" a prodcut of themselves; their skill, their experiences, their ideas, their perspective, etc.

>>5958524
He's absolutely right though

>>5958518
Sure, but everything you know about this author's life is itself a literary construction (biography, autobiography, quotes).

It is best to disregard the life of an author and focus solely on his work as it is. It doesn't matter in the least that Mishima was a patriotic midget or that Kierkegaard was madly in love with Regina Olsen.

>>5958549
It's unimportant whether you actually know anything about the author; their personal lives are visible on every page. Mishima being a patriotic midget is something his work breathes.

>>5958569
>tfw can't publish, terrified of everyone knowing my personal life

>>5958518
I can only talk about my own experience, but I once was a hateful little /r9k/ faggot and it didn't matter to me if my "ideology" or my social ineptness were portrayed in a positive light or not. I was just happy that people like me were at least acknowledged in literature.

>>5958501
>5958501
Tolstoy is a cosmopolitan though. He ain't part of the romantic movement. He's a devout christian on the other hand and is a fan of de Masitre, so he is /pol/ to some lesser extend if you want to be picky.

>>5958574
If you don't want people to know what you are all about, don't publish. You can write, but it doesn't really have a point.

Gravity's Rainbow tells us a lot more private things about Pynchon than any interview every would.

What's the best English translation of The Double?

>>5958586
(probably) P and V

>>5958580
Groundless speculation.
You can only guess about the psychology and the personal life on an author while analyzing his work. It is, in my opinion, the absolute worst approach you can take while reading a text.

>>5958580
Like what?

Back then: Death of the author
Now thanks to /lit/: Dick of the author

>>5958598
Where is Barthes when you need him. He would tear shit up in this thread.

>>5958596
>>5958593
I'm not referring to specific events. A work shows what makes the author tick. It might not outright state it, but everything someone produces is a product of who they are.

Jesus christ, I can't believe I have to explain this on a board dedicated to literature.

Serious question: do you guys have autism?

>>5958367
>Dosty does not agree with the Underground Man

What do you mean by this? Care to elaborate a bit?

>>5958651
IIRC, it even has a disclaimer at the start or end, in which Dostoevsky says something along the lines of: "The opinions expressed by the main character of this book are not my own, but people that have those opinions do exist."

>>5958639
>>5958639
I find that a psychoanalytic approach to literature is a complete waste of time, that's all
Who the hell cares about the author anyway

Now go read some Alain Robbe Grillet and tell me what makes him tick, go on

>>5958665
This, in itself, is highly suspicious, don't you think?

>>5958688
Considering that all his other works showcase a completely different ideology, no.

>>5958591
>1989 + the age of that girl who made the album titled '1989', + 1 probably since she likely hasn't had her 2015 birthday yet
>still b8ing with the P&V recommendations

>>5959350
Dude, that was just too much.