/lit/ - Literature

>>6048510
There's a shock. Just because 4chan is known for obscenity doesn't mean it doesn't know a thing or two.

I get plenty of good recommendations from 4chan, its just discussing it here is almost impossible.

>>6048524
>discussing it here is almost impossible.
the people who spend all day on /lit/ aren't reading

>tfw you created a good percentage of the rec charts on that page

shining moment :3

>>6048510
every post is calling out OP saying 4chan's better than reddit for actual discussion.

Meanwhile you bring up reddit here and everyone shits themselves.

Don't attract the plebs

>Yep, they pulled a 180 with Pynchon and David Foster Wallace recently too.
lol this is so fucking wrong

>>6048524
You're wrong

so since this is very popular at the moment

Do any of you have any criticism of the wiki, or areas you'd want to see in it that aren't already there? What would make it a more useful resource?

Please don't risk inviting the fucking Reddit retards here. 90% of those comments are just people who can't understand or tolerate half-jesting elitism as an antidote to echo chambers and hugboxes.

Reddit is for women. Leave them there.

>>6048510
>/r/books
the people in that subreddit are literally worse than people who don't read at all

>/lit/ is so fucking shitty right now, let's make it shittier
>let's invite the redditors haha

>>6048671
that thread is fucking horrible. seriously why would that even get posted? the OP has to be like 12 and literally never been to this site until today

>>6048682
The OP of it is a Spanish woman majoring in Russian lit.

How protected is the wiki? Is it safe from redditors editing it? I don't want our wiki to be like /v/'s recommended games wiki

>I don't really give a shit for the recommended reading that they'd suggest in school, which is basically what this list is. Reading for me, is an escape. A chance to just indulge in stories of heroics that I can live vicariously through. Mystery helps, but overall 90% of this list is shit that I would never give a chance. People who care about this stuff can downvote all they want, I'm definitely front paging the wrong subreddit.

>A week or two ago I read something called the Trysmoon saga, it was basically fodder as far as books go. Very superficial, almost no depth. But it had a bomb ass hero, and was very straight forward. I love it, it's one of my favorite series now. I really feel for all you people who can't step back and appreciate stuff or what it is. At the same time, maybe you feel the same way towards people like myself who don't care enough to spend time analyzing books.

>>6048688
It's not, but I doubt anyone's going to care to.

It's been a very small handful of people working on it for the last four years, despite being the stickied post on /lit/ for most of that time.

>>6048691
yeah I'm going to send him a kind message

Whoever thinks surrealism and erotica are dry and boring is kind of silly.

>an escape
>to just indulge
>vicariously
>saga
>bomb ass hero
>one of my favourite series
>step back
>what it is
>analyzing books

Holy mother of god

>bringing people from /r/books here

Jesus Christ

>>6048691
I want to correctively rape this person. I don't care about their gender.

>>6048705
kek
i need to go to sleep

>>6048691

Someone posted this on /r/badphilosophy once

>>6048691

>>6048716

post to the topic? I like seeing normie reactions to 4chan stuff

But if you think r/books is bad, go and check out r/bookshelf.

>>6048726
http://www.reddit.com/r/badphilosophy/comments/2pmusi/le_logical_analytic_and_idiot_continental/

>>6048734
>hardbacks
Gross
>King
>Martin
Really gross.

>>6048694
>caring enough to send them a message because they like different types of books than you for different reasons

Aspergers syndrome

>>6048742

>Should I feel offended as a gay continental?
>Isn't that the default state of a continental??
>Offended or gay?
>I meant offended but my intention has no weight when it comes to readings of the text.

I guess reddit isn't all bad

Wow, that thread is fucking shitty.

Why would you even think of linking it?

>>6048744
It's not out of dislike; I already said I was sending him a kind message.

I read for some same reasons, and I let him know that I put a lot of my favorites into those. Gave a few synopsis of more fun books that, if he's willing, might interest him.

but yeah I'm an aspie too, good spot

>>6048734
> edgy looking hardbacks

>>6048750
Could you share those synopses on here as well?

>>6048734
>the complete Eragon series

Into the dumpster.

>>6048752
I'm looking for the right word to describe whats so wrong with those types of hardbacks...

Tacky?
Gaudy?
Kitsch?

>>6048764
Dumb stupid fucking Reddit bitch book

As if there's not enough of you leddit faggots here already.

>>6048742
>>6048716
I love r/badphilosophy
Its like a more alcoholic, better informed /lit/

>>6048768

>>6048768
why don't you just stay there if you love it so much?

>>6048764
You're close, I think. Thing is, someone that's read that many YA and King novels doesn't seem like they'd be the sort to read Dickens, let alone Dumas or Homer. Most likely, he bought those books in a batch because they look nice together and make his library look more worldly. He probably hasn't read them at all. A shallow gasconade is what it is.

>>6048764
Tacky and gaudy. Kitsch has some positive connotations to it and is more of a folk thing.

>>6048734
>Barnes and Nobles Leatherbounds

nigger rich/10, who the fuck would ever buy those giant, tacky shits

>>6048770
>taking the time out of your day to fake a conversation like this

>>6048745
shit, i laughed out loud

>>6048746
to make you react

>>6048780
>caring enough to take time out of your day to care about posting this carepost

>>6048780
>no true continental

>>6048764
Any book with annoying large print is tacky. Any book that looks like it's trying to be sold is tacky. Any book that shines is tacky.

Basically, 90% of the shit at Barnes and Noble looks tacky

>>6048785
Since when /lit/ hates hardcover books?

>>6048764
Ostentatious sounds almost right, but it kinda misses out on saying that the display is also in complete poor taste.

>>6048789
I don't hate hardcovers, I hate books that look like shit

>>6048786
Why would someone take a picture of this? To show that they are a stupid retard?

>>6048743
Is there a general hardback dislike that I am not aware of? Or is it just these shitty looking ones (because I fucking love my hardback versions of Ulysses and Grapes of Wrath)?

>>6048789
ebooks > paperbacks > hardbacks

It's about practicality.

>>6048786
>having trinkets on your bookshelves
>eragon
>harry potter
>stephen king
>the few decent books shoved in the corner so they won't be too visible

PIG DISGUSTING

>>6048793
They're only for showing off, like a pretentious hipster.

>>6048789
I like hardbacks, especially of doorstoppers. Other than that, I like my Pléiade editions, those are amazing, most of /lit/ will tell you there's hardly a better way of reading French novels

>>6048791
what do you think of the CanCanterbury Classics edition? Are they tacky too?

>>6048794
>reading outside your home

>>6048786
War And Peace and a Magic: The Gathering novel in the same shelf.

>>6048793
I personally don't hate hardbacks in general, I hate hardbacks that look like they were sold in Barnes and Nobles, that's all

>>6048800
>he doesn't go to university

>>6048798
Well I both of them belonged to my parents and are fairly old, so yeah they are hip as fuck.

>>6048806
They're better as ebooks, though.

>>6048798
I get what you're saying though, just trying to be a cunt.

>>6048804
I do, but i don't take my hardcover books with me.
And i don't have a Kindle.

>>6048510
r/literature is reddit's actual literary crowd, not r/books
>>6048691
i think we've actually found the lowest common denominator
>>6048776
>Kitsch has some positive connotations
in the same way that tacky has some positive connotations

>>6048793
I mean it's all about personal preference I just dislike sitting with a hardback.

>>6048814
Fair enough.

>Before the game of throne series became a hit on HBO a song of ice and fire was the most recommended fantasy series on there, but now is a constantly derided target. It basically is a dick measuring contest. the opposite problem of this sub.
Why do retards actually believe this shit

>>6048800
>Canterbury Classics
They aren't as bad as Barnes and Noble, but they're still pretty bad.

If the colors, fonts and design of the cover are purposefully to designed to reflect the motifs or themes of the book, like you would see on a movie, then it's tacky. It's not as tacky on paperbooks when they do this, because paperbacks are justifiably cheap.

You have to understand what hardbacks are "better" for. Hardbacks have always been seen as superior because they hold up better. Leatherbounds goes back to the 19th century.

Having, say, "On the Origin of Species" as an early leatherbound print makes it look like you were born and raised in an intellectually elite environment. It affects the sense that you are of a rare, elite breed. They were effectively modest, with very few having any "flash" besides gold leafing, but generally they were boring, drab colors.

The Canterbury and Barnes and Noble leatherbounds try to affect this "higher" culture, while also having "lower" culture elements like motifs expressed through color and font

Many hardcovers that look really flashy are just as bad. Generally, really cultured, smart people aren't walking into Barnes and Noble and buying a flashy autobiography of a pop artist for 35$. They buy books of timeless classics and other books of higher-minded things, which are generally more drab

>>6048813
r/lit is pretty dead most of the time, and when active is a full on echo chamber.

The fact htat such retarded comments can get so many +votes is why reddit is worthless

>>6048821
E.G., an intellectual doesn't need "clues" like a UFO on the spine of the HG Wells book to remember what he wrote. It's literally an aesthetic I'm used to seeing on children's books, not books for adults.

As well, the ridging on the spine is entirely hyperreal, it's completely unnecessary. We can bind books without ridging that last for decades longer than 19th century leatherbounds. It's just another detail that's meaningless, and exists merely to affect intellectualism on a tacky product marketed toward ignorant, middle class white americans

these books are on the same tier as coach bags. only middle class people consider them "nice", the actual elite don't touch garbage like that

>>6048691
>>6048699
>>6048705
>>6048712
>>6048718
whats wrong with reading as an escape? i need to know :(

>>6048834
You will never escape from your plebbery

>>6048834
escape from what, exactly? if your life sucks and you read to "escape" it, then you're clearly a sucky person who nobody wants to emulate.

>>6048836
then why do YOU read? elitism is one thing but come on man

>>6048839
my life doesnt suck. its just that i need a change in pace, scenery at times, be it in reality (travelling) or otherwise (reading).
is that considered being a sucky person?

>>6048841
I read philosophy because I find it interesting, I read poetry because I find it moving, and I read literature because I find it engaging. None of the experience is about "leaving" who I am in the present moment, it's about experiencing with myself.

You'll notice that most "escapist" literature is also intense in amazing, smart and capable protags, whom the escapee relates to

>>6048834
Have you tried opiates? You can just spend your days in a cloudlike cocoon totally cut off from reality.
You might also like television.
Or junk food.

>>6048844
if your life doesn't suck, what are you escaping from?

>>6048822
is my statement wrong though
>>6048834
there's nothing really wrong with it, just like there's nothing really wrong with watching das cabinet just to jack off to lil dagover. but read that fucking post and tell me you don't want to spit at its author

>>6048832
What's wrong with the argument "I like looking at/ owning pretty things."?
Is it inherent plebestrian?
I know that I stopped caring as I grew up, but isn't it rather something related to vanity or a lack of self confidence than a lack of education?
Aren't there vain "intellectuals"?

Note: I'm not talking about ugly and tacky shit.

>>6048546
Doubtful. I created just about all of it.

>>6048846
Did you start with Frege or Russell?

>>6048856
No, I'm in agreement r/lit is certainly better than r/books for actual discussion. However if you want to watch people complain about high school English courses r/books is the place to be.

>>6048734
All fucking entry level sci-fi shite. Occasionally some Dune and Asimov. Then an untouched £50 hardcover edition of Jane Eyre. Fuck.

>>6048869
Which ones?

Croaker or Miyamoto?

>>6048861
>I like looking at/ owning pretty things
That's the thing, though. "They look pretty" is the pinnacle of a subjective statement, and the subjectivity of that statement has roots in the type of subject. There's a clear delineation on who finds that type of crap "pretty", and it sure as hell isn't intelligent people in my experience.

In other words, the high brow individual isn't walking into Barnes and Noble. They aren't buying HG Wells compilations. They aren't concerned with the shiny cover of the book. Their mind focuses on higher things than that.

>Is it inherent plebestrian?
Inherent, as in the thing in itself? No. Phenomenologically, yes.

>I know that I stopped caring as I grew up, but isn't it rather something related to vanity or a lack of self confidence than a lack of education?
No, it's a testament to class. Showing off your 25$ Barnes and Noble purchase is patently a low-class phenomenon. A person of class or wealth is not going to buy items that draw on themselves attention, when that item is of low value.

>Aren't there vain "intellectuals"?
Yes, absolutely, but vanity is different as delineated by class. Vain low class people show off their tattoos, vain high class people wear expensive suits.

>>6048870
The first philosopher I read was Friedrich Nietzsche

>>6048885
He wasn't a philosopher, he never studied mathematics or did any work in mathematical logic.

>>6048888

>escapism is so pleby, you read that because your life sucks!
>traveling is so pleby, you move out because your city sucks!

>>6048846
i see. i think i might have misunderstood this urge of "escaping" of mine.

>>6048888
The continentals may give you shit for that comment, but I want you to know, you are right.

>>6048883
Thanks for the in depth answer.

>>6048897
>>traveling is so pleby, you move out because your city sucks!

That is exactly why people go on vacation, retard

is reading murakami like too wannabe hipster for /lit/? i really like how he mixes the surreal aspect of his stories with reality.

>>6048911
It's called magical realism.

>>6048910
so why you just don't move out?

are you too weak to change where you live?

>>6048510
>Hence why the /pol/ situation was so catastrophic. Got little neo-Nazi kiddies coming to my board, talking shit about Jews and calling people cucks.
Kill yourself you faggot. This isn't your board.

>>6048920
I am moving, actually, in a few months, bro, because I hate where i live

>>6048911
murakami is a hacker though

>>6048916
ah. sorry i didnt use the proper term, im only starting to get into this kind of literature.
i was referring to hard boiled wonderland and the end of the world though

>>6048925
hacker? what do you mean?

>>6048897
sometimes u cant move out whether you like it or not. its not as easy here as compared to where you live man

>>6048932
I think he means a hack

hey guys just head about U from reddit hope U don't mind me saying this location is a blast U guys really know you're books a nd i just wanted to say i'll be reading all the books in the list so i can

>I honestly recommend people read Mein Kampf. I believe it to be one of the most important books ever written in the 20th century.
>Not for the reasons it directly states, though. Rather, in the context of the history of the first half of the 20th century, and what true evil can come from sweet words.
>You can truly feel, from the arguments as presented, that this is the one, obvious course to take, the best course to take, and it will bring greatness to this world! Then you stop and realize what you just thought, what you just felt, and you recoil in abject terror and disgust.
Afterwords, you don't trust flowery words and pretty rhetoric. You realize how easy it is to sway the average person, and why you must never, ever let your guard down around such talk.
>Joke all your want about the Holocaust. Part of preventing such a thing happening again is awareness. Reading Mein Kampf increases that awareness.

you irl

>>6048925
>>6048948
well i just read the library. but then again his other books are really good IMO. he couldnt have won awards by being a hack right?
>>6048961
gr8 b8 m8

>>6048966
who the hell are you talking to?

>Just a bunch of snotty, pretentious shit that people don't actually enjoy reading.

damn /lit/ just got bodied

>>6048967
Well, I just answered a question.
I don't care much for his works, but I see the appeal.

>>6048883
Thank you for your response. I was thinking about buying one or two hardcover books but now I see they're tacky and would look out of place since I have only paperbacks.

>>6048734
Got damn, I don't understand how anyone can read that much fantasy.I grew up thinking I was a fantasy "fan" and believing my goal in life was to be a fantasy author, but every time I tried to branch outside of Tolkien, Lewis and Le Guin, I felt like my mind was being polluted.

I think the farthest I got was the first Wheel of Time book and some Shannara novel. Shit's just trite.

I get Harry Potter, though. Children's literature content with being children's literature still has its charms.

>>6049098
>Tolkien, Lewis and Le Guin

Confirmed for fantasy plebeian.

>tolkein

Loving
Every
Laugh

>>6049124
I'm talking about stuff I read as a child, m8.

I know better than to read any fantasy now.

>>6049140
>I know better than to read any fantasy now.

Confirmed for wannabe intellectual with a high school education.

What else you got?

>>6049197
0/10

>>6049197
arguing for the sake of arguing

>>6049235
>>6049228

People who refuse to read books sight unseen because they fit into some "inferior" genre are plastic intellectuals who don't actually think, they just do as they think they should.

I'm not trolling, and just because you don't like the things I'm saying, that won't change. If you're the kind of person who says "I don't read fantasy/sci-fi/watch TV/play video games" then you're almost certainly insecure in your education and not as intelligent as you think you are.

Truly intelligent people embrace the world, they don't sit dividing it into sections of acceptability and derision.

You are fools.

>>6048801

What are the odds he read War & Peace?

>>6049271
What are the odds he could understand it even if he tried? :/

>>6049246
What if I don't enjoy any of those

>>6050066
>What if I don't enjoy any of those

On /lit/: you filthy casual
In the adult world: who cares

>>6049098
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Belyaev

>>6048786
This makes me legit sad. It's the reddit mindset which created this monstrous bookshelf

>my friends will give me le upvotes when they see these Xd
I wonder if he has a secret bookshelf filled with dog eared paperbacks that he's too ashamed to display

>>6048699
BOMB ASS MEMES

>>6048734
>using shelf space to store non-books

Do people actually do this?

>>6048786

>>6049246
>truly intelligent people do x
>i do x and i consider myself intelligent so intelligent people do x
>my superiority is an empirical fact

Thanks, this post will help me immensely with my essay in praise of arrogance

>Yeah, these guys are basically the sort of kids who did well in school, or wanted to feel like they did, so they just basically pretend to like any book they feel is intellectual or that their high school lit teachers/college lit teachers liked.

>Never mind that books are just another subjective entertainment field like movies. Could you imagine being forced to like movies for a class because the instructors did? It's ridiculous.

>>6048883
Let me get this straight: you're condemning certain practices because they imply vanity and desire to appear intellectual at the same time that you are setting rules (or rather, guidelines) on what actual intellectual people would/should do?

Delightful. This thanks goes for you too:
>>6050190

Btw this is the owner of the bookshelf with the chainmail. Suprised?

>>6049246
>If you're the kind of person who says "I don't read fantasy/sci-fi/watch TV/play video games" then you're almost certainly insecure in your education and not as intelligent as you think you are.
>Truly intelligent people embrace the world, they don't sit dividing it into sections of acceptability and derision.

>tfw you're too busy actually working and traveling and spending time with friends/family to waste time with watching tv
It sounds like you just have a lot more free time to contemplate how superior you are.

>>6049246
>Truly intelligent people embrace the world

pure ideology

>>6048743
>>6048752
>>6048758
>>6048778
>>6048876
>>6049098
>>6050167
>someone else is having fun

>>6048742
jesus christ, can we not have lit invading the only good reddit sub.

i came from reddit

Well, how lovely. The flouncing faggots and bitter, fat sows of r/books are no doubt inbound.

Wonderful.

>>6049098
What about Hugh Cook?

>>6050609
Please leave and go read your Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy

Hey evry1 I came here from the reddit thread and I just wanted to know what are some short concise philosophy books (like sophies world which I read in highschool!) that I can read to get smarter? I have already read slaughterhouse 5 and I liked it even though I didn't really get it. maybe you can help explain some of these books to me as I go XD.Also whom are some good authors to impress my proffesors? thanks in advance. I'll be seeing alot of you!

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/2fhg09/george_orwell_was_not_a_language_fascist_why_we/

They can't handle Will Self

>>6050964
g8 b8 m8

>>6050964
if u lieked slatterhaus 5 you would probebly like 1984, lol its not about the 80s, its about this oppressive governemtn and its a tough read but its really really good, took me like 2 months to get through but boy was it worth it

>>6050964
>>6050609
shit-tier trolling

>>6050997
upboated

Reddit on 4chan:
>4chan is actually pretty great!
>There's more to 4chan than /pol/ and /b/!
>Reddit is no better than 4chan!
>Those 4chan guys are so cool!

4chan on Reddit:
>Fucking plebs/cucks/SJWs

>>6051104
That's because 4chan speaks the truth.

>>6051104
And we're both right.

>>6051104
We are shit and they are shitter. They should keep their boundless optimism and generic positivity to themselves.

>>6051104
>>Fucking plebs/cucks/SJWs
A "discussion" site with points will always be shit as shit can be

>>6051104
A "discussion" site with points will always be shit as shit can be

>>6050264
It has nothing with the vanity or affect, you retard, it's the vanity and affect on something that produces the opposite affect to the people you want to impress

if you dont want redditors on the board, downvote the post on r/books

>>6051239
Too late. Damage is done

>>6048670
I think the Sci-Fi chart's could use updating. Better pictures, better connections for books that ought to be read together.

Hello ^^, i am just visiting from reddit, i still have a hardtime figuring out this place, but it looks really fun!! May we have lotsa discussions

>we fat nerds who waste our lives in front of computer screens are so different from those fat nerds who waste their lives in front of computer screens

>>6051239
I would actually prefer some of the more eloquent ones come because this place has dropped in quality here. The YA defenders will not be able to handle the discourse

>>6051275
yeah I would prefer new blood from /r/literature over the trash that drifts here from /pol/ and /tv/

>>6051266
yes we go on 4chan they go on reddit PLEB

>http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/2tk1vk/4chans_recommended_readings_are_surprisingly_good/
>4chan
>Any depth of conversation
>/b/ being any different from any other image board
Are those faggots being serious? The only conclusion that might be derived from this assumption is that they have opened /b/, saw gore thread on first page and chickened out.
Generally speaking, any imageboard in this toilet is entirely unable to produce any worthy context(there are shining stars but I am struggling more than a handful of them and I am swimming in this sewer for about three years); this website is the perfect demonstration of what one might call "average intelligence" - no capacity of critical though, no ability of originality, no depth of discussion. Every imageboard simply discusses their limited fields of interests(usually most popular works in their sphere or ones that were widely acclaimed by "memetic" reviewers, those works rarely exceed 200-300 titles), every board has a specific, limited amount of memes, specifics of language and culture, unlimited mobbing and intolerance, general/daily/unique threads - add in a couple of occasional winrars and gets that occur once a couple of months, the overwhelming evercoming amount of constant newfaggotry that makes any attempt of turning out this website good, blend this vile substance with an eggbeater, and voila - you get a perfect archetype of 99% of what 4chan has to offer.
No board is different, they all simply bear a slightly different shade - slightly different memes, slightly different point of discussion, slightly different herd mentality, slightly different specifics of mobbing, and so forth. If /b/ been a SFW no-raid board for it's entire history it would not have gathered such a notoriety. Seriously, had leddiotors bothered to actually see how shitty the other boards are fairing and browse them for at least 1 year they would realize how wrong they were.
And about "good content" and "deep discussion"? Yes, of course, who could forget the day some friend hacked Moot simply so he can defame FWG, or the 400M /b/ get, or the day /lit/ has written an entire fucking postmodern novel - but it's definitely not worth it to dig in tons of seaside algae in hopes of finding a message in a bottle.

>>6051266
that's a stupid analogy. you can do that with anything

>this book with words in it is better than that book with words in it
yet we all know some books are better than others.

>>6051284

There are actually a number of decent reddit boards and lit is one of them.

no other site talks about alt lit enough for me aside from vice but that's not a forum / imageboard

What the fuck is up with reddit.

>Thread about /lit/'s rec list
>4chan is more than /b/
>people start bringing up /mu/ and other boards
>This fucking thread is about the /lit/ rec list and they're not discussing it, just 4chan in general
>people make comments about game of thrones and how 4chan only likes things to look good when we already make fun of ourselves for doing this
>people using the word hipster in a sincere manner
>This is about /lit/'s rec list
>The thing about imageboards is that-
>He means 4chan

How the fuck are they so unaware.

>>6051696
>I would respectfully counter-argue that...

Jesus Christ shut the fuck up you sissy boi. You're on the internet, not in a court.

>6051696
>people make comments about game of thrones and how 4chan only likes things to look good when we already make fun of ourselves for doing this

how exactly does that negate the point?

>>6051696
Well, do you want to discuss it?

What do you think of the lists?

>>6051752
Maybe you don't understand what I'm saying.

If someone at a party is making fun of himself and everyone is laughing along with him, and then you point out in a very sincere and serious manner how he is wrong, you're just being an unaware douche.

So if we're doing it as a farce then it makes no sense to point it out. It's a joke.

The other option is that we're being serious about it which we aren't since we already make fun of ourselves. We're just aware that some on this board only care about appearances, which we then berate them for.

To be honest though I rarely see people talk about Song of Ice and Fire in the way that reddit guy was talking about. They're used to be more threads about it way back when, but that's because there was something to talk about because it was new. Now people are tired of talking about the same old points over and over, which is completely normal. The reddit guy is just unaware and ignorant of what he is talking about.

>>6051790
That's not what this thread is about (on 4chan)

This thread is about the reddit thread, its not about the rec list. How did you not gather that?

>>6051790

>"When you post often, you start recognizing certain anonymous users by what they say and the ideas they push. oftentimes it's one or maybe a couple users pushing an idea very hard, /lit/ is slow enough for that to happen"

do people actually do this? people think they can accurately spot various anonymous users consistently?

>>6051696
I wonder what they would think of that booktuber fiasco

>>6051815
They would probably say in a very safe and qualified manner that we are insensitive and should apologize.

>>6051798

They are actively discussing this board so it would make no sense if they skipped over that point, especially considering as the point in question is one of the worst things about all interest boards on 4chan. Its not just a joke at all, a layer of irony does not make it all one big farce.

Why is there such a big pro-4chan circlejerk on reddit?

I'd honestly rather they straight up shit on us than this slavish dick-sucking that seems to happen whenever 4chan gets brought up.

Also if you posted in that thread you should think about killing yourself.

>>6051815
what booktuber fiasco?

>>6051696
Nobody on reddit reads whatever is linked, they just dump their hot opinions right away.

>>6051832
A couple shitposters made some creepy comments on a girl's book review youtube channel and now people say the board is apparently dead because of it

>>6051827
I didn't say it doesn't make sense, I said they were being unaware. When /lit/ was excoted for soiaf it was because there was something to talk about. Now there isn't and people are tired of talking about it, especially when people who don't know that come on the board and ask innocently about soiaf. It gets tiresome, which is understandable. Only someone unaware of the board wouldn't get that. Just because we say fuck off while trying to be funny doesn't make it "ironic", it means we are at least trying to get a laugh out of telling someone to fuck off.

>>6051828
There are just so many people on that site. There are probably way more anti-4chan people on there than pro. We're just seeing one side of things.

>>6051843
I don't think people think of us as "the internet hate machine" any longer, unless they're SJWs. Reddit is full of fucked up people too.

>>6051840

yes except none of this invalidates "4chan only likes things to look good" from being somewhat accurate. i dont even like r/books but youve indicted them on some pretty stupid things. of course theyre going to discuss other parts of 4chan, /lit/ is bound to 4chan and it shares a lot of similar qualities with other boards

>>6051849
I wouldn't know honestly, I went on there a few times a year ago and it was just so boring and, I don't know, not creative or insightful. Never went back.

>>6048691
>it was basically fodder as far as books go. Very superficial, almost no depth. But it had a bomb ass hero, and was very straight forward. I love it

I seriously think this person has some form of autism. This sentence adds up with that.

>>6048793
I used to get "cool", "artistic" looking hardbacks because I thought they looked, well, cool and artistic.

I don't mind hardbacks, and I actually prefer them as long as they aren't made to look pretentious.

I regret getting the B&N hardback edition of Crime and Punishment because it clashes with a lot of the books on my shelf, but it doesn't really bother me that much.

>>6051853
>yes except none of this invalidates "4chan only likes things to look good" from being somewhat accurate.

W-what? Yes it does. That is exactly what it does. That is seriously what I just spelled out to you.

4chan used to like soiaf
Now 4chan doesn't
They do this because they want to be contrary and look good

No

They talked about it back then because it was new and there were things to wonder and ponder about

Now it is not, and they have figured out the things they used to wonder about

So they don't now

How do you not get that?

>>6048764
Pretentious
Tacky

>>6051870
>soiaf

Is there a reason you only know one set of books? Maybe consider that the point goes beyond the one example you're capable of spewing. By the way, not sure if you've noticed but possibly every single one of your posts has some sort of reference to other people not understanding and you being enlightened. Holy shit man, cool your fucking ego down.

>>6051843
There's actually a lot of 4chan users also on lelddit. I use both but i don't argue about the two like some pretentious faggot acting smart.

>>6050280
>brony

Yeah, not surprised.

Also, what's with the bottle of bleach/detergent just sitting in the middle of the room?

Get some pictures on those walls too. Shit's too bare.

>>6051176
Fucking this.

The absolute worse thing to have in a discussion format is a vote system that hides the unpopular posts.

>>6051892
>projecting

>>6051889
Dude how are you this stupid.

The original poster from reddit was the one who brought up Game of Thrones and that was HIS example of 4chan trying to act cool or whatever. I went with that example because it was HIS example.

And quit with this shit of singling me out against "everyone else" as if I think im superior.

I am talking to you and you alone. You are the one who hasn't been able to follow a single argument that has been spelled out to you. Of course when you make stupid claims I'm going to point out to you why they don't make sense or how annoying it is that I have to explain to you a separate time how xyz makes sense. Me claiming your wrong doesn't mean I think im superior to "everyone else"

>>6051910
>And quit with this shit of singling me out against "everyone else" as if I think im superior.

I am talking to you and you alone.

lel nope check again you did it to other people


>"I went with that example because it was HIS example."

nope,

>people make comments about game of thrones and how 4chan only likes things to look good when we already make fun of ourselves for doing this

this was the point i answered, referring to multiple people and so, not just the one retarded example of yours.

there you again with the "y-you just don't get the argument!"

>>6051828
It's not like the two communities are mutually exclusive. People can browse reddit when they want their content curated and then browse 4chan when they just want to shitpost.

>>6051927
>lel nope check again you did it to other people
No I didn't
Go ahead and point it out
>lel

You're from reddit aren't you?

>this was the point i answered, referring to multiple people and so, not just the one retarded example of yours.

What are you even saying here. Yes there are multiple people in that entire thread who had a conversation about 4chan and it's possible image problems regarding game of thrones. I was picking out the first one who brought up that point, and then going with his example.

This is completely normal. Why would I not do that?

You are really not fooling anyone at this point.

>>6051927
And just to be sure you understand, i'll spell it out for you even further
>>6051947

this is from the first mention of game of thrones on the reddit thread which is in the 4chan OP
bigtallguy: Generally correct, but /lit/ is annoying if anything good becomes really popular. Before the game of throne series became a hit on HBO a song of ice and fire was the most recommended fantasy series on there, but now is a constantly derided target. It basically is a dick measuring contest. the opposite problem of this sub.

This is what I was referring to. If you look, there are multiple people who then begin a conversation with him. They have different points of view from him, but they are all still talking about the same subject. That is why I said multiple people, but stuck with one example. The reason being is that what he said is wrong, which I have spelled out to you, but now you are just disregarding that part of our conversation and diving into this ego bullshit to try and get away from it.

>>6048691
Tearing into people like this is what got me banned from /r/books

>>6051947
>>6051696

>"How the fuck are they so unaware."
>>6051803
"How did you not gather that?"

You seem like the sort of supercilious bag of smug that would just instantly repel conversation irl. Btw, le reddit boogeyman, and a cartoon laughing reaction image to mask your rising anger are great ways to stop anybody from taking your posts seriously.

Let me try one last time

>people make comments about game of thrones and how 4chan only likes things to look good when we already make fun of ourselves for doing this
>4chan only likes things to look good when we already make fun of ourselves for doing this

this a broad statement. this does not specifically refer to a single example. this is a wide-ranging point which you've squeezed into your tunnel vision to try and grasp at the straws of a cohesive argument. your point is not one single example. your point is not one single example. now sit in the corner, stop trying to bite your elbow and use that brain for something other than memeing or complaining about reddit, and you might understand eventually (fuck who am i kidding)

>>6051902
>The absolute worse thing to have in a discussion format is a vote system that hides the unpopular posts.

This whole thread would be better if these were hidden: >>6048657 >>6048758 >>6048766 >>6048767 >>6048804 >>6050997 to encourage the posters to make better posts.

>>6051803
I do understand that. I still wish a thread about discussing the wiki could get a tenth as many posts as this.

One thing I honestly don't understand about leddit is that, in general, the opinions and jokes are so much lower quality than on 4chan.

Why is it that retards attach a name to their shit teir pleb opinions and posts, attempting to accrue up-votes for no real purpose.

Do these people believe, in some sort of delusional retardation that their views are so interesting that they cant give them away for free?

Don't tell me that reddit and 4chan attract the same crowd, nobody actually believes that unless you're are fucking retarded or browse some specific shit that leddit offers.

Are there people who really just read game of thrones and shit and think anything more literary than this is hipster?

>>6052139

Reddit and 4chan attract the same crowd

>>6052174
I don't really think so

but reddit and 4chan have very different attitudes, the circlejerk is disgusting there, half of the time nothing good can be found on the comments, all being about an epig joke

i mean, making shity joke is fine, 4chan has even more shitposting, but at least on 4chan it doesn't create a barrier beteween who wants to have srsly discussion and who wants lewd xd

>>6048742
>zimbabwe

Goddamnit why won't they stop appropriating our jokes

>>6052047
There's a difference between shitposts and unpopular opinions. Both of which go hidden on reddit.

>>6052139
>One thing I honestly don't understand about leddit is that, in general, the opinions and jokes are so much lower quality than on 4chan.
Probably the most untrue thing I have read this year.
>Why is it that retards attach a name to their shit teir pleb opinions and posts, attempting to accrue up-votes for no real purpose.
They need to create an account to post.
>Do these people believe, in some sort of delusional retardation that their views are so interesting that they cant give them away for free?
We don't get paid to post on reddit, we give away our views for free.
>Don't tell me that reddit and 4chan attract the same crowd, nobody actually believes that unless you're are fucking retarded or browse some specific shit that leddit offers.
Yes, lot's of people post on both. You forgot to change the 'r' to 'l' in your first mention of reddit here.
>Are there people who really just read game of thrones and shit and think anything more literary than this is hipster?
I'm sure there are are, both on reddit, 4chan, and other websites.

>retards; shit teir pleb opinions; delusional retardation; fucking retardeded
Repeated use of the word 'retard' doesn't add any weight to your argument.

>>6048786
Why do people do this?

>>6048834
There's nothing wrong with it but it is clear that the author of that comment is attempting to feel superior through their stupidity.

>>6052047
Then click the hide button fucktard. Individual choice, not blanket moderation, this is what defines the difference between reddit and 4chan.
It is possible to not demand everyone adhere to your ideal and completely rework an entire website because you are butthurt over inconsequential posts.

>>6052917
>We don't get paid to post on reddit, we give away our views for free.
>We

Go away.

>>6048734
this is the fedora of bookshelves

>>6052917
The fact that the most recommended books on r/nooks are The Martian, Ready Player One, Count of Monte Cristo, says something about the readers of r/books. I mean i like r/books because there are quite good articles linked there, but "your" opinions are usually pretty rubbish and always condense to if you enjoy a book then don't let anyone tell you it's bad.

>>6048734

>>6048811
Hoo boy. Don't know who Terry Brooks is but I can guess at the quality based on the chainmail gas mask and cheap beer steins.

>>6048786
>total money makeover

>>6048670
more nonfiction!

>>6051927

>we only talk about things that are new!

>proceeds to talk about books written by ancient dinosaurs written aeons ago

>>6048916
Oh thx for clarifying edge-lord.

>>6048832
God you are true autists. Dont judge a book by its cover you mongloid idiots. Who cares about the cover, its about the ideas in the book...
It's tacky is it? Hipster poseur trash.

>>6050997
1984 is a hard read? defaq..I read that shit so fast..For me it was one of the easiest books to read.

>>6053252
Always want to, but what relatively narrow categories would be good? It's silly to try and make general "history" charts. I made the non-fic Books About Books recently for that interest subset.

Any ideas for others that would be useful to /lit/?

>>6051481
Do you actually expect some top notch academia discussion? WHY??
You want interesting discussions go talk to people who actually write philosophy or high literature..
I dont get it..
This board is like an anonymous book club..
It is still above 90% of humanity in the quality and topics of discussions..
You think some hotshot philosophers have no egos or they overcame them? come on, most of them will be just as outrageous and pigheaded as most of the posters here.

If you think you reached some sort of intellectual peak than maybe its time to go do orgies

>>6053190
So wholesome.

>>6053190
>Top threads on r/literature right now:
-Cervantes
-DFW
-Yukio Mishima
-Marlon James
-Chimamanda Adichie
-Bulgakov
-Shakespeare

>Top threads on r/philosophy right now
-Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss phenomenology
-Christin Korsgaard on Treating People Like Animals
-Semantic Information and the Veridicality Thesis
-Mind and being: the primacy of panpsychism
-Intuitive Ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues.
-Bialek on the computationally optimal physics of biology
-Aristotle's Classical Rhetoric

>Top threads on /lit/ right now
-/theo/ - theology general
-How do I get gud at writing?
-How do I get into western philosophy
-ITT rate the best and worst artists (as in visual artists ever)
-Does It Ever Depress You to Know That You Can't Know Everything?
-Why does everyone hate Analytic philosophy?
-Too many women read 50 Shades Of Grey and don’t understand that
-Can we have a serious discussion about privilege?
-not babby's first existential crisis

>>6053519

>>6053519
just stay there.

>>6053519
Sounds like reddit is the perfect place for you my friend :^)

>>6053519
Come on man , r/philosophy is only good due to r/badphilosophy and r/literature is dead and doesn't offer anything more than ELI5 sparknotes.

>>6048670
>>6051261
The Fantasy chart is also pretty shit, and horror

the whole genre section needs updating really

>>6053658
>/lit/
>caring about genre fiction
you're gunna have to update those yourself, budinski

>>6053478
Wasn't there an italian guy on just yesterday talking about how there could be a better Italian chart.

Personally i had been thinking about making a general western Renaissance list, like Anatomy of Melancholy, Faire Queen, Don Quixote, Paradise Lost, Gargantua and Pantagruel, Montaigne essays etc.

>>6053658
either post an updated version or gtfo

>reddit's opinion
>valid ever

>>6052174
Reddit pretty much gentrified 4chan and now it's all the same milquetoast pleb shit.

>>6053485
Perhaps you're right.

>>6051506
There is no analogy in that post. Your analogy doesn't work (art can't be compared with losers wasting their lives) and fails to miss the point: there is no superiority when the subject is sitting around posting on a message board all day.

>>6054453
>Not enough necrophiliacs on 4chan anymore
So migrate, young ghoul.

>>6054462
>there is no superiority when the subject is sitting around posting on a message board all day.
what about innate differences n the subjects?

>>6048786
ew

>>6054429
>2000 upboats

Hahahahaha oh WOW.

>>6052139
Reddit is for dumb people who think they're smart.

>>6055012
well, authors such as Margaret Atwood and Chuck Palahniuk never do AMAs in /lit/, so...

i'm just saying...

why is reddit so self-hating?

>>6055023
>well, authors such as Margaret Atwood and Chuck Palahniuk never do AMAs in /lit/, so...

tao lin is literally better than them

>>6053478
Autobiography:
Stop Time, Conroy
Family, Frazier
Goodbye to All That, Graves
Autobiography of a Face, Grealy
An Unfinished Woman, Hellman
Woman Warrior, Kingston
Apprentinceship, Gorky (plus his other two which I haven't read but really want to)
Malcolm X

Personal Essay (slightly different than autobiography, slightly more loose subgenre)
Nobody Knows My Name, Baldwin
The Crack Up, Fitzgerald
E. B. White
The Purple Decadence, Wolfe
Slouching Towards Bethlehem, Didion

Also travel, nature, reportage, and criticism (need more tea, but happy to make suggestions for those as well). That should do it for subgenres

>>6053519
To be fair, I've never seen Adichie discussed here (or Khakpour, or Ward, or really even Erdrich, except for one dude). Every Baldwin thread also drowns in > muh racism.

Apparently becoming a SJW broadens your horizons when it comes to contemporary lit.

>>6055028
They know they're a bunch of plebs.

And I'm not talking just literature, it goes for anything. Reddit is always into the most mainstream plebby stuff.

>tfw every time they have a "DAE not like a popular book???" thread, your favourite book is posted

>>6052047
>http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/2tk1vk/4chans_recommended_readings_are_surprisingly_good/
Cool! What a great bait. My great-great grandfather had a bait that was greater than this, though.

/lit/ please stop bullying people who don't have patrician taste, or care about deep meaning in literature and stuff. It's not nice and makes us feel bad.

>>6055023
>Palahniuk
>Atwood

As he said, dumb people who think they're smart.

r/books doesn't even understand the language they read in. I had some fag try and tell me that hyphens weren't a matter of style, but a prescriptive quality of the language. But oh no, this was no troll. He had at least 17 people agreeing with him.

Then you have the litfic fags who think The Road is Literature's crowning achievement. They get lots of le upboats too :^)

I'm not making this up.

>>6055717
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YhkNLHictW8

>>6056001
I think you need to take a break.

For weeks now your posts have been caustic and useless.

>>6051481
What the fuck are you talking about? How many fucking boards have you been to? This 'slight variations' thing is utter bullshit. I've been on /tg/ and somehow managed to discuss how slave economys function. On /lit/ I debated someone on the problems of stirner given through an orthodox marxist lens. On /int/, I found out the history of women in computing and ICT (there where many pre-70's), had discussion on kensyian, neo-lib and marxists economics on /biz/ among other things. Boards and their cultures are dynamic. Look at how /v/'s opinions on bioshock infinite and the last of us dramatically changed over time. /lit/ has seemed to have had an influx of people since the cuck stunt at /pol/.

> but it's definitely not worth it to dig in tons of seaside algae in hopes of finding a message in a bottle.

Oh please. The reason 4chan works as a platform is because it's inefficent as fuck. As soon as you start filtering opinions and information, the sooner dogmatism arises. You can't have your cake and eat it in regards to information. Hume had elements of kant's transendental, Adam smith believed in genuine alturism. Malthus did understand that technology would increase and crop production would go up. I would not have known this if I didn't read the people themselves. Hegel warns that this knowledge of the genral should be avoided if you want actual knowledge. It's unhelpful as fuck. If you want something, your going to have to labour at it. No shortcuts.

Even if 4chan is prone to hivemind mentality, it's much more liquid compared to other sights because you don't have to worry about keeping face.

This is utter bullshit.

>>6056073
You could say that that's just Butters but the lack of trip sort of make it look like a Butters ß (2 or B can also be used)

>>6048691
>Here we get into the question of definitions, and motivations.

>I believe that writing, like all other art is first and foremost a means of communication. I have an idea, I want you to understand the idea, I tell you a story about the idea so that you can have the idea in your mind too.

>If the author is so hung up on his own cleverness that the reader doesn't get what he's trying to say, the author needs to try harder.

>It can't work as art until it works as communication. I dare say that Dostoevsky's million-word-long depressing bug-squisher, phone-book novels about neurotic, depressed, self-hating Russians doing horrible things to one another have caused more readers to quit them unfinished than to finish them, and of those who have finished his works, I suspect but cannot prove that more of them did so because they were forced to for a college class than because they enjoyed them.

heh

>>6055035
...have you ever actually looked at the wiki? There are already sections for Autobiography and Memoir, Essay, both literary and film criticism, and Travel literature.

What do you mean by "need more tea"? I love tea, but I dunno that /lit/ would be all that into a chart about tea. Maybe we could do culinary/beverage and break it down within an image. Might get /ck/'s input.

>>6048778
Not that guy, but I love tacky or gaudy things. And the weird thing is that I am very aware that what I like is tacky, but I can't help that I like it.

>>6056293
> Adam smith believed in genuine alturism
Now I don't say this often, but this is bullshit. Adam Smith was not an altruist, he just saw the systems of exchange as being the most beneficial when they were unrestricted. But even Adam Smith understood something negative about the policies of exporting too many of a country's home crops. Anyone who rationalized the free market the way Smith did was not an altruist, because Smith posited human behavior under mercantilism/capitalism as searching for profit, essentially. This profit driven behavior is never exactly beneficial to all mankind, but one of Smith's theories- the Invisible Hand- utilized the division of labor to explain the trickle down effects of placing more money in the hands of those in leading industries, which at the time were he factory owners. The invisible hand should not be conflated with Altruism. And then you go on to say Malthus predicted technological expansion ameliorating the crop growth problem, which is still a problem. First of all, props for reading Malthus, second of all, you're incorrect. Malthus asserted one final axiomatic point for all his philosophy thusly: there is a finality in the expansion of human population and this is actually somewhat supported by the continually declining growth rate of our population, meaning that not only is there a problem with food supply but it is still increasing over time. Malthus would assert however that this finality never really reaches fruition because human population is controlled by misery and vice. Smith and Malthus were not even close to being altruists, you might even call Malthus a pessimist, based on his stance of reality.

But kudos man. Kudos for reading those guys, that final point I had to make about Malthus is extremely important.

Why is leddit obsessed with semicolon? I've seen them use semicolon where colon, comma or dash would be more appropriate.

>>6052917 is clearly a ledditor and used 3/5 semicolons in this thread. All of them are frivolous.

>>6056951

Are you the same guy mad because he got BTFO? Let the thread die you massive faggot.