/lit/ - Literature

dive straight in. go to the library maybe

Don't. It's dead.

>>7284529

>inb4 start with the greeks

find a poet with a poem you like

buy a book of their poetry

carry it in your pocket

The only thing that has ever caught my attention is Lays of Ancient Rome. Am l a pleb?

>>7284529
this link was posted in last thread, pretty useful
http://pastebin.com/cBZknniE

Start with the meeks

>>7284948
>Pound
>mama's proud tier

hell naw what the fuck are you on about

I say this as a sometimes-fan of Pound who has ready many collections of his poetry but is not yet familiar with his Cantos, except the famous ones.

He had some talent, but let's not insult poetry by calling him a top poet.

>>7284948
Shit list compiled almost randomly and with no cohesive linear structure.

Whitman is on both "Entry level" and "Leveled-up". Pound is considered by almost no-one to be among the best, certainly not above Chaucer or Dante.

Please disregard this chart, OP. The Romantics are usually the best place to start with poetry if you want to develop an interest in it. Either them or Shakespeare and Donne.

I want to see an excerpt from what you consider the finest of poetry.

>>7284529
I though I disliked poetry, but it turned out I just disliked Romantic poetry (Byron, Shelly, but not, however, Pushkin and Blake). One of my friends gave me a complete poems of T.S. Elliot and I fell in love with it. From there I worked backwards and forwards. My favorites are Ashberry, Elliot, Auden and Whitman.

Buy the English Poetry Anthology compiled by Harold Bloom.

>>7285007

Pretty much the same experience here, Eliot was a real game changer for me.

>>7284529
The Wasteland hooked me pretty hard, you could check it out

>>7284616
>inb4 he or she should actually start with the Greeks.

>>7285014

And skip every word written by bloom

Norton Anthology of Poetry

>>7285085
Except what he says about Poe.

>>7284529

Don't. It's boring as hell lmfao.

>>7285007
>worked backwards
>not a single pre-19th century poet
you have a very limited appreciation of aesthetics

>>7284948
please stop posting this chart

>>7285172
You don't know that, I may just not enjoy the aesthetics of pre 19th century poets as much. Preference is a thing.

>>7284529
buy her dinner

>>7285519

>>7284972
>>7284983
>>7285172
>butthurt by chart

>>7284948
I unironicly enjoy Bukowks.

>>7285611
Bukowksi. What the fuck auto correct.

>>7285007
>My favorites are Ashberry
like every other undergrad and postgrad
Congratulations for having mediocre taste

>>7284529
http://pastebin.com/cBZknniE

don't start with the romantics, that's such an arbitrary place to start and skips 500 years of english poetry

>>7285937
>The Romantics are usually the best place to start with poetry if you want to develop an interest in it. Either them or Shakespeare and Donne.
>being retarded
yeah don't worry about the hundreds of references and allusions to other poets that the high romantics make (you do mean the high romantics by the way, your type always does. im not sure you could even name a romantic poet beyond the high romantics without googling it) and go ahead and skip literal centuries of what came before

and yes, Donne is an awesome place to start. metaphysical poetry is HELLA entry-level and easy as fuck, combine that with the fact that half of them are devotional and you have a recipe for appealing poetry!!!!

m8 since you seem a little slow I'll go ahead and spell it out for you: I'm calling you a fucking idiot

>>7285973
for >>7284983

lmao. the "le start with the greeks" has infected poetrytards as well. you could just pick an author and read them and enjoy but no, you better start at the beginning because omg you're missing out on centuries of poetry omg.

lmao. the "le don't start at the beginning meme" has infected retards as well. you could just read left to right and read them and enjoy but no, you better start at the end because omg you're too stupid to find enjoyment with the forerunners and benefit yourself