[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

2022-11: Warosu is now out of maintenance. Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
View page     

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 8 KB, 200x226, bl.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
10658925 No.10658925 [Reply] [Original]

>finishes book
>googles "[book name] explained"
am I a brainlet?

>> No.10658933

Yes, categorically

>> No.10658939


What is there not to understand when you read a book? Especially if it's fiction, unless there are theories about it and was written by a philosopher... Otherwise it's just gibberish most of the time.

>> No.10659086

you certainly sound silly when you put it like that, but there is literally nothing wrong with seeking commentary/discussion on something you've read as long as you realize no theory is going to be conclusive and you don't just latch on to what critics say as gospel and then go parrot them to other people.

finishing a book period puts you in the top percentile of human intelligence

>> No.10659094

So finishing Larry the Cable Guy's autobiography or The Giving Tree necessarily means I am muy talentoso? Are you a grade school teacher?

>> No.10659097

>am I a brainlet
>sacrificing your own education and enjoyment of literature because of e/lit/ism
You're on this site for the wrong reasons.

>> No.10659103


>> No.10659109

You are suited to your chosen profession

>> No.10659111

Not a brainlet, but youre doing a disservice to your brain. Once youre finished reading a book, you need to let it sit down and accomodate inside your head and let time bring whatever natural understandings you get from it, be it actual thoughts, dreams, or indirect influence in your life.

By reading explanations by third party you fuck over that unique time window where your brain is still digesting what it read with some generic opinion by a blogger, shadowing any possibilities for the book to spontaneously flourish in your very life.

>> No.10659118

Why even read then?

>> No.10659123


>> No.10659128

sounds like youre reading over-symbolic highschoolcore books

>> No.10659150

Well if you are looking for literary critic I think you are acting more like a academic. Looking for academic papers on books is pure literary critic
Or you are just curious for other peoples opinions.

>> No.10659162

Some alternative interpretations or some symbols or details you missed are welcome.

>> No.10659163

me, but
>sits for the next half hour nodding my head and smiling because I understand the reviewer's references which I mistake for comprehension of the text

>> No.10659169

>finishes chapter
>googles [book name] (chapter number) summary sparknotes"
am i going to make it, lads?

>> No.10659174

No, I really hope you're joking

>> No.10659176

Where can I find literary critics and not goodreads reviews that are written by women who post about what a book made them feel and how much they hated a character or loved and all that shit?

>> No.10659310

Is there any merit to this?

I just finished catcher in the rye and I could not understand fuckinf anything that was going on so I googled to help me comprehend

>> No.10659345
File: 25 KB, 260x418, 9781466828254_p0_v1_s260x420.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>Plot summary is a single sentence

>> No.10659386
File: 250 KB, 1200x1800, 71FDiOr4jzL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I guess I'm a brainlet. I'm interested in politics and this is the first book I decided to read. I feel like I comprehended 1/4 of the text. His sentences are so complex it was difficult for me to follow. I may have to go back through it to see what o even read because I forgot most of it but it was pretty good

>> No.10659652

Hayek is actually pretty hard to understand. If you want some easier econ stuff i would start with either Sowell or maybe if you are particularly interested in the Austrian school then Mises should do.

>> No.10659693

Catcher in the rye is trash, there's nothing to understand other than "muh misfit teenage angst"

>> No.10659779

Nice high school freshman opinion

>> No.10659804

Like I said: if you read literary critics, you are acting like a academic.
Otherwise, maybe you are just curious.
Or you didnt feel you get it. Sometimes you need to read more calmy or re-read several times.

>> No.10659882

Depending on the book I suppose. When I finish a book, I tend to start a thread about it on /lit/ to ask other people's views and interpretations, not necessarily because the book is difficult (although if it is, no shame in asking for help) but because it's interesting to see what others got out of the book and if it's similar to your experience.

>> No.10659935

"I dont know what I should think about this book, please tell me guys."

>> No.10659940


>> No.10659965

If it's Gravity's Rainbow, Ulysses or 2666, I don't think that's particularly an unfair assumption. There's also books that are ambiguous in their meaning or subject matter like Blood Meridian - the amount of Blood Meridian threads where people have discussed the meaning behind the final image of The Judge dancing on the table has created some interesting interpretations I personally hadn't considered.

Plus, it's interesting to see what others got out of the book that you might not have: I saw a Crime & Punishment thread where an anon said they found it dryly hilarious like Kafka. I don't see anything inherently wrong with asking people about their perspectives on literature, especially if an enjoyable discussion is to be had out of it.

>> No.10659996

"please agree with me and tell me I'm right"

Hey look! I can interpret text too!! Did i get it right? Objectively, I mean? Oh wait...
So what's the fucking point, lad?

>> No.10660021

My point is that I don't entirely disagree with OP. Something's ruffled your feathers today from your confrontational posting, sorry for whatever has happened. All the best, anon. I'm out.

>> No.10660027

God bless, brother.

>> No.10660052

Well that is when I read it

>> No.10660236

Yes. You're supposed to google the book before you read it.

>> No.10660296

Nothing wrong with studying a book/its context. You should try to understand it yourself first though, before googling for answers.

>> No.10660478

You will get over that after few years. I did at least.

>> No.10660692

Read Basic Economics by Sowell. It's long but not a slog at all and has questions in the back if you want to go deeper.

>> No.10660930

Then refute them with Marx and Varoufakis.

>> No.10660971

I do that with movies and tv-shows too.
Not that I don't understand them, I just want others peoples views and see if I missed something.

>> No.10660993

First thing I do when I finish a book is go on the /lit/ archive and read about it. I don't give a fuck.

>> No.10661098

If you don't identify with or understand Holden you never had any moral standing to begin with.

Delete posts
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.