/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10082651]

ITT we nominate books we haven't read that we should all pretend are really good to trick newfags into reading them

I'll start.

[Anonymous No.10082663]

Would be funnier if we did that with actually bad books.

[Anonymous No.10082670]

>>10082663
Old Boots, New Dirt: The Novel

[Anonymous No.10083690]

Pretty much the definition of the advertising industry, is what you have here.

[Anonymous No.10083695]

>>10082663
120 days is terribly written. Stephan King is a better writer

[Anonymous No.10083697]

Samuel R. Delany's Hogg

[Anonymous No.10083706]

>>10083695

>It tells the story of four wealthy male libertines who resolve to experience the ultimate sexual gratification in orgies.
>To do this, they seal themselves away for four months in an inaccessible castle in the heart of the Black Forest[5], with a harem of 36 victims, mostly male and female teenagers, and engage four female brothel keepers to tell the stories of their lives and adventures.
>The women's narratives form an inspiration for the sexual abuse and torture of the victims, which gradually mounts in intensity and ends in their slaughter.

I haven't read 120 Days of Sodom OR It, but this sounds better than the underage gangbang.

[Anonymous No.10083817]

>>10083706
>>and ends in their slaughter
wtf now I want to read this

[Anonymous No.10083823]

>>10083706
I'm not talking about the actual story but the prose. Its like something a high school student wrote.

[Anonymous No.10083827]

>>10082651
marquis de sade isn't fap material because there's homosexual shit inside.

HETEROSEXUALS ONLY

[Anonymous No.10084317]

>>10083823
Ah yes, the prose. The prooooooose. the PROOOOOOOSE. There's a reason why the pseuds on this website are always so willing to talk about "the prose" of a book when discussing its merits or flaws. Why attempt to analyze the merits and effects of the literary devices used to add to the development of characters, why attempt to understand the interplay of the perspectives of different characters and the emphasis this places on different themes, the spectrum of ironies used throughout the novel, the historical significance of the novel and the influence it has spawned in literary tradition or the influences seen throughout the work, the specific structure and literary underpinnings of the novel and the way it influences the tone, the author's relationship to the characters and the theme, the presentation of the novel itself to the audience and thus the relationship between reader and text --- why do any of this, when you could talk about "the prose?" You know that you have such a deep understanding of the book, don't you, when you talk about "the prose," the "musicality of it," the "sparseness." What a great artistic touch you have, don't you! Such a highly refined poetic sense! And you feel like such a true reader of literature when you are able to compare these styles: "I am partial to the lyricism of Joyce's prose, as well as the clean and scientific prose of Borges," you might say. What a deep understanding you show! Because the "prose" of a work is such an accessible topic, something that is felt immediately in the body and senses, a nice little sensation and flutter of the heart. Art obviously has nothing else to it, nothing other than the little sensations that I experience, because why should i attempt to understand it on a deeper level than this, when I have such a "refined" sense of the "prose?" Why even attempt to analyze the prose and the poetic and rhythmical underpinnings of it, when I could use a pretty little metaphor for it? It matters little that virtually every reader of literature has access to the music of the words and so my understanding is not quite so advanced as I would think, that form is something that goes hand in hand with theme, that I missed all the deep relationships between characters and between text and reader that existed in the work and that comprise a large part of the literary merit of the text, for my understanding of "the prose" shows such a mastery of language, a fine-tuned sense of the magical flow of the words! Having understood this work, I may as well move onto the next, the next bundle of pretty sensations to experience, the next bagful of fun linguistic treats!

[Anonymous No.10084365]

>>10084317
this

[Anonymous No.10084414]

>>10083817
Don't bother. It's unfinished

[Anonymous No.10084929]

>>10082651
120 days of sodom is great dude you should actually read it

[Anonymous No.10084939]

>plebs can't into sade

[Anonymous No.10085007]

>>10084929
The last few chapters are basically just lists about who shits on whom and so forth.
It is terrible.

[Anonymous No.10085113]

>>10082651

[Anonymous No.10085122]

I thought we did this with the bible

[Anonymous No.10085152]

>>10082651
Aren't Justine or Juliette better introductions to Sade? I've heard that you should leave Sodom for last and only if you're really into him.

[Anonymous No.10085433]

>>10085152
La Philosophie dans leboudoir is an good introduction imo