[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 15 KB, 183x275, 20180728_06_27_14.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796664 No.11796664 [Reply] [Original]

Let's get a list together of the best books of the last 50 years.

>> No.11796667

>>11796664
You first.

>> No.11796693

>>11796664
Hate this book with a passion.

>> No.11796706

>>11796664
nice try, Franzen ;)

>> No.11796718

>>11796664
I haven't read this yet but all the Franzen hate both on /lit/ and outside of it makes me want to read it.

>> No.11796722

>>11796706
Fagzen*

>> No.11796728

>>11796718
have fun

>> No.11796732
File: 46 KB, 324x499, blood.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796732

>>11796664
Move aside, ladies.

>> No.11796734

>>11796718
It's good and Franzen is a great writer. It is yuppie-feed and the characters are all annoying idiots though, so ymv depending on your tolerance for such things.

>> No.11796741

>>11796734
I'm into the whole "muh Murica" thing, will I enjoy it?

>> No.11796746

Second-rate, ephemeral, puffed-up.
God, I want to beat up Johnathan Franzen. This is the guy who is touted as the Great White Male writer of our times? He's writes whitebread sleepy tales about middle class tedium and frivolous little trifles. A bottle full of sleeping pills would have a harder time knocking me out than one of his plodding, fluffy, stuffy little novels.

>> No.11796750
File: 28 KB, 243x375, 2666.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796750

>>11796664
And Gravity's Rainbow

>> No.11796753
File: 6 KB, 166x304, carrots.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796753

>>11796734
>Franzen is a great writer

>> No.11796755

>>11796732
He said best, not worst you corncobbing fagtyeya.

>> No.11796756

>>11796746
I mean, unless the prose is godlike, which I doubt, I don't see the point in reading his novels about "muh amerifag family"

>> No.11796763

>>11796755
then why did he post Franzen?

>> No.11796768

>>11796755
Then he should've started with an example himself, not this sleeping pill in bookform known as The Corrections.

>> No.11796770

>>11796734
Franzen is a pseud hack who couldn't write his way out of wet paper bag.

>> No.11796774

>>11796756
his style is not great

>> No.11796777
File: 6 KB, 225x225, 34567890.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796777

>>11796755
>Blood Meridian
>worst anything

>> No.11796779

>>11796777
but the memes!

>> No.11796784

>>11796756
It's nothing to write home about. It's perfectly serviceable, maybe a step or two above average. But it won't blow your mind.

>> No.11796788

>>11796763
>>11796768
Because he's retarded.

>> No.11796789

>>11796664
>20 replies, 7 posters
hi mr franzen's pr team

>> No.11796792

>>11796741
Not sure what that means.

>>11796753
Franzen is a great writer, without a doubt. He has that gen x megairony thing going on a la Wallace but he is more surgical in wielding it. He has is downsides, the muh fucked up white middle class family BS and lack of any big picture stuff to name a couple. Strong Motion is good as well.

>> No.11796798

>>11796777
Retarded frogposter.
>>11796779
Him being thought of as a good writer is the real meme.

>> No.11796801
File: 126 KB, 1200x1200, 1535672348513.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796801

>>11796792
>Franzen is a great writer,

>> No.11796805
File: 152 KB, 579x1358, 1535839793254.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796805

>>11796798
shut up you stupid idiot

>> No.11796809

>>11796792
>Not sure what that means.
Maybe because you're from there and all the fiction you read is about that. But it's annoying to read, for the umpteenth time, about Murifag family issues. Franzen in particular seems like the most obnoxious living writer alive.

>> No.11796813

>>11796805
>he likes Hackrris
Those grayons sure taste gud don't they, tard fren?

>> No.11796816

>>11796798
He is among the greatest writers alive. He's part of the canon, you colossal faggot.

>> No.11796832

>>11796816
Appealing to authority, eh? As expected of a corncobbing pseud defending his favorite faux-redneck's hokey Cowboys & Indians drivel as a literary masterpiece.

>> No.11796836

>>11796801
But it's true. Put an hour into Strong Motion (or the Corrections) and you'll agree (secretly or not).

>>11796809
Yes, I get it. That is one of his downsides, the muh stupid Midwestern bourgeois family. But if you can accept this as what it is and reflective of his generation you will get beyond it. Himself and Wallace were very similar in these ways, it's a generational thing.

>> No.11796843

Franzen's character writing is great, his story writing is shit.

>> No.11796854

Does anyone here actually LIKE books or is it just like /v/ with video games?

>> No.11796861

>>11796809
Do you only read postwar American novels? I'm American, have read many American novels, and can't think of many that are about family issues (excluding those dull and depressing books from the 50s and 60s which don't interest me). Maybe I'm taking certain aspects of American life for granted, or have deliberately avoided the novels you're alluding to.

>> No.11796862

>>11796854
It's not very /lit/ to appreciate books, you can only hate books here.

>> No.11796864

>>11796832
Have you even read Blood Meridian? What kind of faggot, who equivocally call himself a heterosexual man, can refer to this book as such after having read it? Jesus, /lit/.

>> No.11796866

>>11796854
I love books. Most of my time on /lit/ is spent defending authors and books.

>> No.11796869

>>11796866
you are part of the good guys

>> No.11796875

>>11796864
>he thinks his corn-cobbled tortyeyashit is manly
Well memed fren. I too spit and say ye and use the word and excessively out of an autistic hatred for punctuation.

Yes I read it. I wouldn't call it shit if I hadn't.

>> No.11796877

>>11796854
I write, so I just lurk for people seeking specific writing advice. I'm no poet, I'm rarely in critique threads (majority poetry). I should read more desu

>> No.11796883
File: 1.04 MB, 3264x2448, 774B8B94-FCA8-47A5-A6BF-B2A8F66B8ABB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
11796883

>> No.11796889

>>11796875
>Yes I read it. I wouldn't call it shit if I hadn't.
yeah, you would. this is what most of /lit/ does, and it wouldn't be surprising.

>he hates McCarthy for the punctuation
okay, pseud confirmed, no further replies.

>> No.11796947

>>11796889
YeCarthy and his fans are the actual pseuds for thinking edgy cowboys and indians stories are somehow deep if they involve stylistic quirks like cheeseball faux-biblical prose and overwrought descriptions of the scenery. Corncob is literal Oprah's book club fare. You have the tastes of a middle-aged housewife if you're defending him as a serious author.

>> No.11796958

>>11796947
So who do you consider good?

>> No.11796985

>>11796947
>YeCarthy and his fans are the actual pseuds for thinking edgy cowboys and indians stories are somehow deep if they involve stylistic quirks like cheeseball faux-biblical prose and overwrought descriptions of the scenery.
"No subject is terrible if the story is true, if the prose is clean and honest, and if it affirms courage and grace under pressure."

>Corncob is literal Oprah's book club fare. You have the tastes of a middle-aged housewife if you're defending him as a serious author.
Even books by Tolstoy, Dickens and Faulkner have been read by Oprah's Club, the fact that you think a work of art's virtues are lesser because some popular show happens to engage into discussion about it proves what a thunderpseud faggot you truly are. Yea, Blood Meridian, No Country for Old Men, and Outer Dark are what every modern housewife reads nowadays. Fuck off.

>> No.11796990

>>11796958
rupi kaur

>> No.11797011

>>11796958
Faulkner, Joyce, Kafka, Pynchon, Nabokov, Gass, Gaddis, Hawkes, Bernhard, Melville, Dostoevsky, and Eco, just to name some authors.

YeCarthy is practically the only one I've read who I have a contrarian opinion on by typical /lit/ standards.

>> No.11797027

>>11796985
You were the one who brought up the idea of a canon mattering in the first place. He's part of the middle-aged housewife "canon" whether you like it or not. And he's a massive pseud who only likes books about "life and death" or some shit so get out of here with that "all subjects are valid" quote.

>> No.11797028

>>11797011
>who I have a contrarian opinion on
Whom you have a contrarian opinion of, faggot.

Since you named Faulkner first you outed yourself as one of the "muh McCarthy is a Faulkner hack" posters.

BTW, I actually don't like McCarthy that much myself, but you're just being pedantic.

>> No.11797042

>>11797028
>BTW, I actually don't like McCarthy that much myself, but you're just being pedantic.
Ebin faggotry, queer fren.

>> No.11797054

Great thread, guys. Keep it up.

>> No.11797055

>>11796990

yea rupi and dfw, probably the most relevant two. the most well accomplished female author and male author

>> No.11797058

books bad

>> No.11797062

>>11797027
Are you seriously equating the Western canon to Oprah's Book Club? Nice.

>And he's a massive pseud who only likes books about "life and death" or some shit so get out of here with that "all subjects are valid" quote.
What the fuck does this even mean? McCarthy belongs to the tradition of writers who write about life and death, yes. Nothing we can do about it.

>> No.11797088

>>11797062
If you're referring to Bloom's idea of the Western Canon then yes, they're not all that different in scope for the audiences they're targeting.

The life and death thing was a reference to something specific he said where he dismissed certain books, even saying he didn't "get" them on account of that.

>> No.11797119

>>11797088
>McCarthy's style owes much to Faulkner's -- in its recondite vocabulary, punctuation, portentous rhetoric, use of dialect and concrete sense of the world -- a debt McCarthy doesn't dispute. "The ugly fact is books are made out of books," he says. "The novel depends for its life on the novels that have been written." His list of those whom he calls the "good writers" -- Melville, Dostoyevsky, Faulkner -- precludes anyone who doesn't "deal with issues of life and death." Proust and Henry James don't make the cut. "I don't understand them," he says. "To me, that's not literature. A lot of writers who are considered good I consider strange."

Didn't Nabokov dismiss Dostoyesvky and Faulkner? What's wrong with writers having preferences?