/lit/ btfo

[Anonymous No.18833031]

Is this post right about the /lit/ top 100 books?

[Anonymous No.18833033]

tldr

[Anonymous No.18833037]

>>18833031
that is a lot of words for "women pls sleep with me, I am very smart unlike these guys"

[Anonymous No.18833041]

>>18833031
>popular bad

[Anonymous No.18833045]

>>18833033
just some random tranny seething over wasting time and money on an arts degree

[Anonymous No.18833047]

>>18833031
Damn he's seething. Is Ulysses really as difficult as FW? I just assumed FW was some one off thing and Ulysses was more normal. I have never read Joyce but have skimmed FW.

[Anonymous No.18833051]

>>18833031
kind of true but they place way too much value to it. it's just a list of the top 100 most popular books here, and this place is full of shitposters not academics

[Anonymous No.18833055]

>>18833031
yes

[Anonymous No.18833065]

>>18833051
>shitposters not academics
Those books get shilled here way too much to be ironic. What's the quote? If you pretend to be stupid, stupid people will gather because they think they're in good company

[Anonymous No.18833072]

>dollars to donuts

[Anonymous No.18833074]

>>18833031
The strange thing is that they didn’t realize the biggest reason the list is terrible: The Enneads aren’t on it.

[Anonymous No.18833075]

>>18833031
>seething this hard because you got filtered by ulysess
pathetic

[Anonymous No.18833077]

>>18833072
don't dunk on a good turn of phrase because you don't have any taste

[Anonymous No.18833085]

>>18833077

[Anonymous No.18833087]

>>18833031
Can't say I disagree, but where's his list?

[Anonymous No.18833088]

>>18833031
They’re partially right. I don’t believe that even a fraction of the people who voted for books like Finnegan’s Wake read it, let alone loved it enough to name it one of their top 100 books. And there are a lot of books that should be there that are missing. However, fuck smug Redditors.

[Anonymous No.18833089]

Jesus Christ that's a ton of projection
She does have a point about the age thing though, but then again its fairly excusable when its a list of 18-35 year old male favorites, so its going to be drawn from what's most relevant to that group.

[Anonymous No.18833090]

>>18833085
gross

[Anonymous No.18833097]

>>18833047
Ulysses is legit easy if you just pay attention

[Anonymous No.18833100]

>>18833097

[Anonymous No.18833101]

>>18833100
it is though

[Anonymous No.18833103]

>>18833100
>t. no attention span retard

[Anonymous No.18833111]

>Anarchessist
Butterfly?

[Anonymous No.18833112]

>>18833101
>>18833103
Go be pseuds on leddit

[Anonymous No.18833122]

There people are always so intimidated by Dostoevsky.

[Anonymous No.18833124]

>>18833112
>frogposting on your phone for (you)'s
wew

[Anonymous No.18833129]

>>18833031

[Anonymous No.18833131]

It's just a list of the most popular books on lit lmao

[Anonymous No.18833132]

>>18833065
I just meant its going to be a list of the books that get the most threads here, which in turn gets more people to read it, which leads to it getting on the top 100 if enough anons enjoyed it. More challenging or unheard of books will get less threads, less replies, less spread, so will not make the top 100 regardless of their importance or literary influence.

[Anonymous No.18833136]

>>18833122
Really? Dosto was a rather pleasant and easy read from the beginning to me.

[Anonymous No.18833139]

>>18833031
Nail on the head. Extreme cope to argue otherwise.

[Anonymous No.18833142]

>>18833031
no he’s wrong, a pedantic pseud. the best anyone can do is critique the idea of a “top 100 books list” because ALL lists of this sort are necessarily totally false in a variety of ways. Obviously this list is a popularity contest, and it matters very much who is doing the voting - white adult males. Why would there be more women on this list? I necessarily don’t care to the same degree many things women care about, or minorities, it’s my “privilege”. why is he so butthurt about Plato being on there and not Aristotle? The Republic is actually a good norm or read anyone can pick up that I’ve seen at the front of bookstores many of times (unlike any other philosophical text) so it’s not surprising. Why is he so butthurt about no poetry? Nobody reads poetry anymore. Why would there be more Shakespeare? So that half of the top 50 can be Shakespeare? People would just complain more

There is no winning here. As long as dumbfucks like in OP’s Reddit image don’t take “top 100” literally, and understand it’s purely popularity among a certain demographic, then it’s just like any other list of this kind

[Anonymous No.18833143]

>>18833136
same, wtf is difficult to read about Dosto? Are /lit/ and redit realy to retarded to understand simple books?

[Anonymous No.18833144]

>>18833122
It is very obvious why he only talks about Ulysses and Finnegan's wake when saying that /lit/izens don't read, just pose. He probably havent read Dosto at all.

[Anonymous No.18833155]

>>18833132
yeah, that's valid, but that list is mostly "which books get spammed the most" instead of a legitimate bias.

[Anonymous No.18833162]

>>18833031
>leftist memes

[Anonymous No.18833170]

>>18833031
the whole argument is that the books on the list aren't objectively the "greatest literature ever." like no shit, nobody needed a fucking essay outlining how subjectivity exists. just like how nobody needed this thread.
like have this guy make a top 100, it doesn't matter, just read books and enjoy them

[Anonymous No.18833220]

>even when they examine 20th century authors, their list is incomplete because lesser-known but equally heady and difficult books...wouldn't suit their purpose

They're acting so snarky and condescending just because unpopular and hardly-known books haven't been included on a list that's mostly based on popularity

[Anonymous No.18833228]

>>18833031
Imagine writing so much. It was created by redditors anyway lol

[Anonymous No.18833469]

>>18833031
>they're immediately recognizable indicators of intellectual difficulty
outed himself as a pseud in line 1
why bother with the rest

[Anonymous No.18833483]

>>18833031
hipsters lol. this nonexistent bogeyman leftover from 2002

[Anonymous No.18833512]

>>18833143
The average leftists needs to make some serious mental gymnastic to appreciate Dosto. If he were worse it would be easy for them to discard them, but since he's so good and knows them so well (Ivan is just like me!!!), it's hard for their universalist mind to come with terms with the fact that someone can be so insightful yet so critical of their worldview.

[Anonymous No.18833522]

>>18833097
>t. Irishman

[Anonymous No.18833718]

>>18833512
>Dosto
Wh can't go just say Dostoevsky?

[Anonymous No.18833741]

>>18833031
I've learned from this debacle that a very large number of people dont understand what a poll is and why it produces popular results. I thought they were just being dishonest but it appears they genuinely cant grasp the concept at all

[Anonymous No.18833746]

>>18833512
>The average leftists
Do you guys literally just imagine that whoever you dislike is some kind of leftist?

[Anonymous No.18833748]

>>18833718
Why can't you just say Дocтoeвcкий, you fokin anglo?

[Anonymous No.18833833]

He's got a point, but in reality it is more like sampling bias. Most of the people on /lit/ haven't read much Shakespeare, many histories (Herodotus is the goat, but Plutarchs Lives is also amazing), or much poetry. /lit/ reads what it wants, and it typically goes for stuff on the list. No one here is gonna shill Tale of Genji, because "dude gets cucked what a fucking waste he cant even be emperor" or smth

[Anonymous No.18833848]

>>18833045
Sounds about right.

[Anonymous No.18833862]

>>18833087
His list adds muh lesbian women writers and niggerinos from le harlem renaissance.

[Anonymous No.18834475]

>>18833031
I immediately disregard the anybody who holds the opinion that people only like Infinite Jest because it's difficult. It isn't difficult, and it's easy to see the real reason it's so popular: because it's funny, profound, and charming. If you disagree fair enough, but failing (or refusing) to acknowledge its appeal is retarded.

[Anonymous No.18834518]

>>18834475
This always drives me bonkers. The idea that no one could actually like something that's too hard for me is puerile. And using IJ as an example is hilarious. It's basically advanced YA.

[Anonymous No.18834547]

>>18833088
old lit had fw threads every day

[Anonymous No.18834551]

damn the list was so basic it got literally every bugperson on the internet to write entire paragraphs about it

[Anonymous No.18834562]

>>18833031
Oh god, he thinks translated works belong on the GOAT list.

[Anonymous No.18834563]

>>18833088
There are a whole lot of levels to 'reading finnegans wake'. Just going through the book once is not very hard, it mostly registers as singsong memery and you see occasional patterns or suggested meanings. Atually analyzing it seems to require you take a course or something

[Anonymous No.18834565]

Why are we under attack?

We are a peaceful community of literature lovers.

We do not deserve to be mocked like this.

[Anonymous No.18834620]

>>18833031
>reading all that shit
>by reddit

[Anonymous No.18834881]

>>18833741
What do you mean?

[Anonymous No.18835586]

He's kind of right, but then name-drops a bunch himself and that POC/women comment in the begininng was retarded. My top 100 would be very different than /lit/

[Anonymous No.18835777]

>>18833031
Imagine seething this much and taking the time to write that post over a top 100 books list by a little internet community

[Anonymous No.18835991]

>>18833031
we literally have harry potter in our top 100 though...

[Anonymous No.18836002]

>>18833031
this commenter just told on themselves as sucking at reading, if they had any self awareness at all they'd be acutely embarrassed.

[Anonymous No.18836041]

>>18833741
Their minds have been poisoned by the proliferation of /sp/-esque power rankings in every facet of press such that any list in which things are numbered must be making a claim about their superiority in respect to one another.

[Anonymous No.18836110]

“Hipster” is a term co-opted for use as a meaningless pejorative in order to vaguely call someone else’s authenticity into question and, by extension, claim authenticity for yourself.
It serves no conversational function and imparts no information, save for indicating the opinions and preferences of the speaker.
Meanwhile, a market myth has sprung up around the term, as well as a cultural bogeyman consisting of elusive white 20-somethings who wear certain clothes (but no one will agree on what), listen to certain music (no one can agree on this either), and act a certain way (you’ve probably sensed the pattern on your own).
You can’t define what “that kind of behavior or fashion or lifestyle” actually is, nor will you ever be able to. That’s because you don’t use “hipster” to describe an actual group of people, but to describe a fictional stereotype that is an outlet for literally anything that annoys you.
The twist, of course, is that if it weren’t for your own insecurities, nothing that a “hipster” could do or wear would ever affect you emotionally. But you are insecure about your own authenticity - “Do I wear what I wear because I want to? Do I listen to my music because I truly like it? I’m certainly not like those filthy hipsters!” - so you project those feelings.
Suffice it to say, no one self-identifies as a hipster; the term is always applied to an Other, to separate the authentic Us from the inauthentic, “ironic” Them.
tl;dr: if you believe hipsters exist, you are a plebeian.

[Anonymous No.18836224]

>>18836110
On the other hand, people with brown curly hair who smoke and wear doc martens does deserve death.

[Anonymous No.18836465]

>>18836224
This is 4chan, you can say Jews.

[Anonymous No.18836530]

>>18833031
They're right about the majority of posters never reading Joyce and other such tomes. They are also right about the ancients and the pseudo-hipster circle-jerk that goes on around here.

[Anonymous No.18836585]

>>18833031
>they just care that they be recognized for being highbrows
It's a shame that such an articulate, thoughtful person can lack so much self-awareness.
>That's because these works are too little-known among the lay public and their fellow hipsters
Eh, a defining trait of a literary hipster, much like a music hipster, is the studious seeking out of little-known/forgotten works for social credit. It makes no sense to associate hipsters with the lay public and popular literature. If anything, Anarchessist is the hipster.

[Anonymous No.18836665]

>dollars to donuts

[Anonymous No.18836683]

>>18833031
>recognized
>anonymous board

[Anonymous No.18836730]

>>18833031

This tranny doesn't seem to understand how the list was compiled. They also don't understand how chans work, but that's to be expected.

[Anonymous No.18836821]

>>18833746
Yes. I fucking hate leftists.

[Anonymous No.18837002]

>>18833031
I don't get why that list made redditors and Twitter pseuds work themselves in such a seethe, and why they have such a superiority complex when all they do is recycle memes from 4chan

[Anonymous No.18837057]

>>18833031
I think this is a somewhat uncharitable view, but the books on the list are divorced from their context and such. It's just the nature of the voting process.
Really just highlights the lack of literature critics

[Anonymous No.18837168]

>>18833031
This is a Classics major punching and kicking at imagined /lit/ shitposters. I pray to God nobody was retarded enough to think this list is supposed to measure up to Harold Bloom's work or something. It does make a point: I only ranked books I've actually read, you're a huge pseud if you listed books you haven't actually read on an anonymous Taiwanese scuba diving forum

[Anonymous No.18837204]

>>18836821
kek

[Anonymous No.18837599]

>>18833031
Did the tranny delete their account?

[Anonymous No.18837613]

>>18836110
Whatever pseud.

[Anonymous No.18837622]

>>18833031
This guy is so insufferable that I'm certain he also posts here.

[Anonymous No.18837638]

Lol what's with these people screeching the "I bet they don't even read these" cope, most of them are pretty regularly discussed and dissected here, hence why they made it onto the most popular list.

[Anonymous No.18837645]

All this because some literal who posted one of the dozens of top 100 book lists from /lit/?

[Anonymous No.18837879]

>>18833031
>Look at those faux-intellectual hipsters, pretending to be well-read
>All of their favorite books are *scoffs* English and *chuckles* novels
>A real intellectual would know that that the greatest literature is found in ancient Greek fake-history, Old English poems, and a classical Japanese proto-novel whose original no longer exists
Obviously taste is subjective, but the way this person attacks the list is just ridiculously hipster and faux-intellectual. He should have just been honest and said "the list includes too many really famous English books by white men".

[Anonymous No.18837924]

>>18837879
Also, I'll add this, in case anyone thinks that classical Chinese novels must be some amazing works of literature just because they're old and unreadable:
http://pinyin.info/readings/texts/moser.html
>Whereas modern Mandarin is merely perversely hard, classical Chinese is deliberately impossible. Here's a secret that sinologists won't tell you: A passage in classical Chinese can be understood only if you already know what the passage says in the first place. This is because classical Chinese really consists of several centuries of esoteric anecdotes and in-jokes written in a kind of terse, miserly code for dissemination among a small, elite group of intellectually-inbred bookworms who already knew the whole literature backwards and forwards, anyway. An uninitiated westerner can no more be expected to understand such writing than Confucius himself, if transported to the present, could understand the entries in the "personal" section of the classified ads that say things like: "Hndsm. SWGM, 24, 160, sks BGM or WGM for gentle S&M, mod. bndg., some lthr., twosm or threesm ok, have own equip., wheels, 988-8752 lv. mssg. on ans. mach., no weirdos please."

[Anonymous No.18838003]

Reddit's top 100 is virtually the same, and if people on here read Jane Austen they would be the same.

Goodreads' top-100 is significantly better than either.
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/13086.Goodreads_Top_100_Literary_Novels_of_All_Time

[Anonymous No.18838149]

>>18833031
A lot of words to say "the list of the most popular books only had the most popular and best known books on it".
Honestly partially true about people treating "difficult" novels as an intellectual status symbol, but that's just as true of going on about obscure novels also...

[Anonymous No.18838182]

>>18833031
Most of those lists were advertised and intended to be top 100 novels. That's why, big surprise, it's it's list of novels.

[Anonymous No.18838334]

I had to laugh because they were complaining there's no jane austen and charlotte bronte and shit

those books have zero value. zero.

[Anonymous No.18838384]

>>18833031
seems like he couldnt figure out actual criticisms of the books so he had to project some weird esteem hierarchy onto the books and criticize that instead

[Anonymous No.18838421]

>>18833031
>List of most popular books has... the most popular books on it!?!?
>What about my niche book written by literally who? Why don't they all know about it??
Redditors have spent too long in their echo chamber

[Anonymous No.18838589]

>>18833746
He's right in this case though. Leftists have no clue how to approach Dostoyevsky.
Watch this shit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMmSdxZpseY
The guy spends the whole video talking about how Dostoyevsky is actually a liberal thinker who thinks living up to Christian ideals is too hard, so we should be secular people instead.
In the comments some people call him out for it, but most seem to agree. No clue how they could come up with that reading, but from what I've seen, both online and in person, for some reason Dostoyevsky makes leftists' brains to short circuit.

[Anonymous No.18838599]

>>18833031
I have read Ulysses cover to cover. God it was boring.

[Anonymous No.18838603]

kek they deleted their account

[Anonymous No.18838641]

>>18838589
Not gonna watch a school of life video.
>The guy spends the whole video talking about how Dostoyevsky is actually a liberal thinker who thinks living up to Christian ideals is too hard, so we should be secular people instead.
What does that have to do with leftism?

[Anonymous No.18838648]

>>18838641
>What does that have to do with leftism?
So you're one of those, "liberals aren't real leftists, only communists/socialists/anarchists are"?

[Anonymous No.18838650]

>lets post reddit screenshots on 4chan so we can discuss them as if we were on reddit

holy cancer you should all go back

[Anonymous No.18838658]

>>18833031
Why would a list include Plato and not Aristotle? Maybe because Aristotle writes like an autist who forgot his meds and Plato's dialogues are actually artistic and enjoyable.

[Anonymous No.18838662]

>>18838648
>So you're one of those,
Yes, because I've read about political theory, leftism and liberalism are diametrical opposites, even liberals in America are diametrically opposed to anyone on the left, but that's a topic for another board.

[Anonymous No.18838696]

>>18833031
lol so much seething just for a casual list put together of a site's favourite books, he in one instance claims we're hipsters while in the next that we're just doing what's popular ignoring women and "poc" authors. Seems more like he doesn't like the list because he is intimidated by it and he thinks /lit/ is racist

[Anonymous No.18838703]

>>18838662
If you sent a current liberal back to the time when the concepts of right and left wing were first emerging, when being right wing meant wanting to bring monarchy back, if you sent a current liberal there, with their ideas about gay marriage, the european union, atheism, universal suffrage, etc., in which side you think they would fit, you fucking retard? If anything they would be considered so leftists that they would be considered insane. There's no liberal (either by American or European standards) idea that hasn't been considered leftist at some point in history. To keep changing the definition of what is leftist, depending on the current standards, is ahistorical and stupid. By that metric, everyone alive today is a reactionary nazi because that's how people will see us 100 years in the future, if things keep going the same way.

[Anonymous No.18838733]

>>18838703
You're wrong for two reasons:
First: If you sent ANYONE back in time, even the right-wingers, their opinions and thoughts would seem bizarre and leftist/suffragette-like, yes, even right-wingers sent back to these times would have opinions about economic and social theory that would be unheard of and absurd for the so-called right-wingers of ages past.
Seconly: Liberalism and leftism in their economic and political theories are diametrically opposed and can not coexist as such, a communist will in theory always support collectivism and be against free-market capitalism, class society and labor exploitation and a liberal will always support free-markets and indiviudualism.
Thus the only areas where your scenario actually works is in the topic of equality, freedom and such where both political ideologies overlap in their goal, but that doesn't mean that they can be equated as the same thing.
Read Hegel.

[Anonymous No.18838807]

Maybe you mfs should've made a chart with obscure (read: 1000 ratings or less on Goodreads) works instead, that would be more interesting and what little personality the board has left would shine through easier than with the Lit 101 books you ended up picking. The board culture, which is what you want to show to other people by making this chart in the first place, is defined by what is memed and what contemporary books people actually want to discuss, so that would also be preferable, not this Harold Bloom canon shit.

[Anonymous No.18838834]

>>18833031
God what a pretentious faggot

[Anonymous No.18838858]

>>18833031
I read half of it and i realised that my sides were fucking gone. Why is this tranny so mad?
>wanna be hipsters yadyaydya wuah wauh illiterates pretending
>they dont read lesser known writers
>they hate women and nigger wuah wauh
This fucking redditor acts out of hatred, projecting her insecurities on a whole board which:
1) doesn't read
2) doesn't care for being hipster with the same passion as she does
3)takes this list as our manifesto with the only books worth reading, ignoring the fact that most of us have read 20 or even less from the 100, and probably dont plan to read any others from there.
I am trying so fucking hard not to hate normies, zoomers, consumers the whole fucking humanity but at times like i swear i need a priest because if that retard was in front of me i would have placed a pavement between his jaws.