/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16133763]

Surely you've read all of these, anon?

I've only read 4. (Currently on Gatsby.)

[Anonymous No.16133766]

>>16133763
No, I'm too busy reading Thomas Carlyle

[Anonymous No.16133768]

4.
Catcher in the rye
American psycho
the picture of dorian grey
lolita

[Anonymous No.16133772]

>>16133763
these are books everyone should have read by the time they were old enough to post here

[Anonymous No.16133844]

>>16133772
Y-yeah. W-what kind of loser hasn't read all these books?

[Anonymous No.16133862]

>>16133772
>>16133844

Lol no, a few of these are Fight Club tier and are pretty skippable contrasted with the higher classics and even certain contemporary fiction.
>American Psycho
>Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
>To Kill A Mockingbird
>A Clockwork Orange
What’s next? Haruki Murakami? John Green?

[Anonymous No.16133869]

>>16133763
Most of that is gay and cringe so no

[Anonymous No.16133991]

12
>>16133862
>To Kill A Mockingbird
What's a non racist / incel reason why this shouldn't be read?

[Anonymous No.16134004]

>>16133991

It’s white savior liberal pandering and there are many, much better books by black authors (Invisible Man is already listed) that convey more significant points about the black condition in America.
>t. Black anon

[Anonymous No.16134023]

I've read 14/20.


I agree with >>16133862, some of these are definitely skippable.

[Anonymous No.16134109]

>>16133763
>almost only XIXth and XXth century anglo lit

[Anonymous No.16134217]

>>16134004
Can you recommend other books similar to invisible man? I have plenty of respect towards civil rights activists such as Malcolm X and Martin Luther King but there is no way I can take the current "Black lives matter" movement seriously due to their idiotic behaviour so preferably books that focus more on actual racism and not the "alleged" racism that goes on today.

[Anonymous No.16134235]

>>16133763
I’ve read 9, but most of the others aren’t worth my time. I would probably read one or two others on this list, tops.

[Anonymous No.16134280]

0/20 I don't waste my time with anglo writers when there are so many great works outside the anglosphere

[Anonymous No.16134284]

>>16134004
Oh, I see. It's one of those books that despite being somewhat well written and appropriate for children or young adults, must be interpreted as something political, twisted or denounced by the narrow scope of tribalism because it's popular and "dishonest" (even though justice is justice no matter the color of your skin), maybe deemed a CLASSIC (imposed) by the whites, or even though you could perfectly read it along with other books. As if losing a few hours of your life, in case you found the book dreadful, was too much of an unforgivable waste.

Cool.

[Anonymous No.16134307]

From what I've read

Brave New World : 6/10
To Kill A Mockingbird : 7/10
1984 : 7/10
Slaughterhouse V : 5/10
The Catcher In The Rye : 8/10
Fahrenheit 451 : 5/10
American Psycho : 9/10
The Great Gatsby : 6/10
Of Mice and Men : 6/10
The Picture of Dorian Gray : 8/10
Lolita : 9/10
Lord of the Flies : 4/10
Do Androids Dream... : 3/10

[Anonymous No.16134312]

>>16133763
I read 7 of these just by going to public school

[Anonymous No.16134380]

>>16133763
8/20

[Anonymous No.16134412]

I‘ve only read lolita from those. Don‘t plan on expanding on that list.

[Anonymous No.16134530]

>>16134004
>more significant points about the black condition in America.
Get a job.

[Anonymous No.16134537]

>>16134412
>I‘ve only read lolita from those. Don‘t plan on expanding on that list.
Thanks for the blog post pedo

[Anonymous No.16134540]

>>16133763
Literally every book there is shit.

[Anonymous No.16134543]

>>16134537
Your welcome. For only a small fee of $69/week you can subscribe. Click below and don‘t forget to like and share.

[Anonymous No.16134630]

>>16133763
Quite a feat, to provide a list that is largely pessimistic and subversive in form but bourgeois and American-curriculum tier in substance.
This list (on a budding mind), would certainly only nurture or reinforce a suspicion that the world is broken and literary expression is merely a means to diagnose it.
I do not wish to imply that what these authors expressed were not valid, but it is such a narrow facet of what literature is capable of.
None of it is particularly life-affirming.

[Anonymous No.16134637]

>>16134630
What is good life affirming literature? Most "great literature" seems to be about depressing commentaries on the nature of man/society even if they aren't 100% hopeless.

[Anonymous No.16134638]

>>16133763
entry level core

[Anonymous No.16134648]

>>16134638
wow

[Anonymous No.16134667]

>>16133763
Whoever made this chart is a despicable mutt.

[Anonymous No.16134705]

>>16133766
>Thomas Carlyle was a British-
EVERY FUCKING TIME REEEEEE

[Anonymous No.16134706]

>>16133763
Lmao just read whatever you want.
Don't pretend /lit/ is full of classically trained intellectuals and don't trust its charts.

Read 6 books on that list.

>Brave New World:
Annoying story but great philosophical questions. Excellent. Timeless classic.
>A Clockwork Orange:
Interesting use of language but philosophical plot rather weak. Good depictions of needless violence.
>Slaughter House Five:
Premise and plot very weak. Pretentious and boring read. The characters are just random amalgamations of traits and don't serve a purpose whatsoever. Not funny. Nothing to learn from this book.
>American Psycho:
Groundbreaking. Great depictions of vanity and the disgusting. Irony is on point.
>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?:
Really mediocre. Breaks off when an interesting subplot begins.
>Siddharta:
Spiritual nonsense. No "enlightenment" in this one. Also Mango tree. Very primitive view of Buddhism even at its own time. Ridiculous.

Got some other ones on the list as well but haven't read them yet.

[Anonymous No.16134717]

>>16133763
Three, reading one:
>American Psycho
>1984
>Lord of the Flies
Reading Brave New World.
I do own a lot of those, they're just on my backlog.

[Anonymous No.16134720]

>>16133772
Can you do me a favor and give me your top 50 MUST READ books?
My childhood was 95% Harry Potter, and I went to an alternative school because I didn't behave, so I missed out on most essential reading.

[Anonymous No.16134722]

>>16133763
I'm not american so i had to read different books in highschool but ive read a handful of these when i started reading english.

[Anonymous No.16134727]

>>16134004
Hey thanks anon, don't let /pol//lit/ get you down.
What are some other books you would recommend?
I heard The Hate U Give was popular, but not much else other than it being YA.

[Anonymous No.16134881]

>>16134284
>somewhat well written and appropriate for children or young adults

[Anonymous No.16134991]

>>16134720
Start with the Greeks!

[Anonymous No.16134999]

>>16134991
sorry, but pederast literature is strictly for pleasure

[Anonymous No.16135154]

Might read the remaining, but they're not at the top of my list.

[Anonymous No.16135173]

>>16133763
Only ones I'm missing are American Psycho, Dorian Grey, and Fear and Loathing. Most of these I read in high school.

[Anonymous No.16135186]

>>16135173
those are the best ones

[Anonymous No.16135190]

>>16133763
I have only read 4 as well, but I was never going by this list in the first place.

[Anonymous No.16135200]

>>16135186
Lol sure they are. I'm probably never going to bother with American Psycho

[Anonymous No.16135209]

>>16133763
>almost only anglo-saxon """literature"""
Yikes.

[Anonymous No.16135568]

>>16135173
I can't recommend Dorian Gray enough. It's a pretty quick read and my personal favorite book of all time. So much genius expressed in relatively few pages, as poetically as it can be.
American Psycho is a good one too, but I can understand why you don't plan on reading it.

[Anonymous No.16135766]

>>16135568
What's wrong with American Psycho?

[Anonymous No.16135794]

>>16135568
Yeah, I'll get around to Dorian Grey eventually. I have the complete works of Wilde that I've been picking at over the years. I'm sure American Psycho is a fine book, but honestly I can't help but see it as a meme at this point and desu the subject matter has never interested me

[Anonymous No.16135807]

the /lit/ starter kit is all fiction. how embarrasing.

[Anonymous No.16135835]

>>16133763
Just watch the movie adaptations.

[Anonymous No.16135925]

>>16133763
I went to high school so yeah almost all of them lol

[Anonymous No.16135946]

>>16135835
yeah this is more a list of adapted blockbusters

[Anonymous No.16136212]

>>16134630
>Siddhartha, not life affirming.
You want a book about rainbows and kittens or what?

>>16134637
The /lit/ wiki has a chart of life affirming books.

>>16134706
>filtered
Siddhartha isn't about Buddhism. He just has the same name.

[Anonymous No.16136222]

I have no desire to read the rest.

[Anonymous No.16136263]

>>16136222
Cuckoo's Nest, Catch-22, and Invisible Man are the best things on this list though.

>>16134630
>reads Nietzsche once

[Anonymous No.16136331]

>>16136222
>>16136263
>>16135154
I quite liked Huck Finn.

[Anonymous No.16136361]

>>16134630
>life-affirming

[Anonymous No.16136374]

>>16133763
>Brave New World
>The Catcher in the Rye
>The Great Gatsby
>Lord of the Flies
>The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
These are the ones I've read, all as part of high school English classes.

[Anonymous No.16136497]

>>16135766
IMO? Nothing. I think it's fantastic. But I can see why someone wouldn't want to read it for the reasons in >>16135794

[Anonymous No.16136503]

>>16135835
Only the ones from Kubrick.

[Anonymous No.16136516]

>>16136503
>One flew
>to kill a mockingbird
>american psycho

No

[Anonymous No.16136529]

>>16133763
I’ve read twelve.

[Anonymous No.16136559]

>>16133763
Yes, I’d read them all by the end of sophomore year, just like every other retard with a high school diploma.

[Anonymous No.16136583]

>>16133763
Haven't read invisible man but you can skip
>to kill a mocking bird
>the catcher in the rye
>lord of the flies
>siddhartha
and maybe
>fahrenheit 451
>the great gatsby

Wasted time with these (they sucked)

[Anonymous No.16136588]

>>16136212
>Siddhartha isn't about Buddhism. He just has the same name.
... and that name doesn't exist sperate from the sociocultural sphere Hesse was referring to in the novel. The name was a conscious decision, a themed one at that and cannot be viewed as unrelated to buddhism.The novel literally takes place at the time of Buddha's teachings aka the proto stages of Buddhism

If I were to call the protag in my next novel Jesus, tell me would there be any religious connotation?
If put into context the novel is a romanticication of early Buddhist thought and one without much substance at that.

[Anonymous No.16136619]

>read (by choice)
To Kill A Mocking Bird
1984
Lolita
(I really liked all three of these btw, all are easy 10/10s for me)

>read (in school)
The Catcher in the Rye
The Great Gatsby
Of Mice and Men
Lord of the Flies
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn
(Of Mice and Men and Lord of the Flies are the only ones I sorta like from this section)

>haven't read (but plan to)
Brave New World
The Picture of Dorian Grey
Siddhartha

>no plans on reading them
Slaughter House Five
Fahrenheit 451
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas
A Clockwork Orange
Catch-22
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Invisible Man
American PSycho
Do Android Dream of Electric Sheep?

[Anonymous No.16136669]

tried reading
>to kill a mockbird
>fahrenheit
>1984
>lolita
got bored and dropped all of them.

[Anonymous No.16136734]

Jesus christ, how come so few people itt haven't read Fear And Loathing in Las Vegas? It's really good

[Anonymous No.16136744]

>>16136734
because muh serious literature

[Anonymous No.16136747]

>>16134004
retard

[Anonymous No.16137136]

F451 is so fucking boring

[Anonymous No.16137153]

>>16133763
Yikes. A bunch of high-school literature in a shitty chart. I mean, how hard is it to make the books the same size?

[Anonymous No.16137207]

>>16134307
Please go back to /mu or wherever the fuck you came from. What a useless little post full of numbers that mean absolutely nothing.

[Anonymous No.16137237]

>>16136734
Is it better than the movie?

[Anonymous No.16137251]

>>16137237
It's almost identical. Few bits here and there are taken out for the movie but for the most part it's the same.
If you like the movie you'll like the book.

[Anonymous No.16137258]

>>16137153
in mspaint? probably fairly hard

[Anonymous No.16137268]

>>16133763
Never read anything from this chart I read pynchon and joyce because i'm a fucking faggot

[Anonymous No.16137279]

>>16137237
it's much better like nearly every book

[Anonymous No.16137298]

>>16133763
i've read the picture of dorian grey and lolita
i have no interest on reading the rest

[Anonymous No.16137331]

>>16137298
well heads up gatsby & twain are the 2 best on there so

[Anonymous No.16137401]

>>16137298
siddhartha, maaaaaan.

[Anonymous No.16137561]

>>16136588
Sure the book references Buddhism directly in several ways, but is not about Buddhism or an explanation of Buddhist beliefs. It's about a Hindu who met Buddha and rejected him. Maybe it's supposed to be an alternate life of Buddha, but that still won't teach you about actual Buddhism and it wasn't supposed to. So don't act all surprised when it isn't a novelization of the Dhammapada. (Which is awful btw, just poorly designed adcopy.) Go ahead and write your Jesus book, and I'll argue it isn't Christianity. You'll thank me when you write the Mohammed one.

[Anonymous No.16137585]

>>16134284
holy shit just say what you mean you mincing bitch
>you should read this because you weren't doing anything better and it wasn't that bad
how hard is that? it isn't, it just doesn't hold up because someone can rightly go "rofl nah"

[Anonymous No.16137592]

>>16134307
guess how i know you're a sexual deviant whose favorite author is either burroughs or joyce

[Anonymous No.16138582]

I’ve read 14 of those
Mostly in high school
A few in college - invisible man, fear and loathing, catch-22
I started American Psycho after college but got bored and put it down
I think I read To Kill a Mockingbird in 7th or 8th grade if I remember right

[Anonymous No.16138619]

>>16136588
You're right that the book isn't good and doesn't delve deep into Buddhist thought but it sure doesn't look like you understood it, either. One of the crucial points in the plot is literally Siddharta meeting the Buddha and rejecting his teachings. It uses Buddhism as a backdrop for Siddharta's spiritual search, but it's ultimately a bildungsroman colored by Western gnostic concepts just like every single other of Hesse's fucking books