/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18906372]

Why does lit never talk about this one?

[Anonymous No.18906411]

>>18906372
It’s turgid and slowly paced

[Anonymous No.18906423]

>>18906372
It filters plebs, as you can see.

[Anonymous No.18906435]

>>18906372
good book but lost weekend is superior, DESU

[Anonymous No.18906477]

It's exhausting to read so retards just pretend they read it like they do with In Search of Lost Time

[Anonymous No.18906535]

>>18906411
>>18906477
Celine and Henry Miller were way worse for this (with less substance to boot) but get more attention here.

[Anonymous No.18906600]

>>18906372

/lit/ is one or two reading levels below it

[Anonymous No.18906611]

>>18906535
I’ve rarely seen Henry Miller mentioned here. IMO Celine is popular here for political beliefs. Under The Volcano was a slog

[Anonymous No.18906636]

>>18906411
>>18906477
>>18906600
>>18906611

[Anonymous No.18906644]

>>18906611
>>18906535
>>18906477
>>18906372
Check the archive

[Anonymous No.18906649]

>>18906372
The book isn't wildly complicated and it is unrelatable for most lit ppl.

>>18906411
The start is a bit slow. Definitely not turgid.

>>18906423
It filters most people for sure.

>>18906600
It seems so... but why?

[Anonymous No.18906657]

one of my faves desu

[Anonymous No.18906806]

>>18906477
jeeeeeeesus

[Anonymous No.18907372]

>>18906435
Absolutely not! Harry Potter to Tolkein

[Anonymous No.18907465]

>>18906372
if you drink it's painful to think about or discuss after reading

[Anonymous No.18907535]

>>18906372
Because /lit/ doesn't have the attention span to actually read good books, yet they'll larp that Ulysses is a masterpiece without reading it.
as this retard pointed out >>18906411
Funny that talentless hacks like Pound, Gaddis, Pynchon, Joyce, Hemingway, DFW, Proust get praised, but actual good writers like Lowry or Ford Madox Ford are never discussed.

>>18906535
People only read Journey to the End of the Night because it's basically Robinson Crusoe for retards. The main appeal to Celine is his persona, unless you meet the rare person who sees what he aims to do in Death on Credit then actually does in his later works. He's an interesting figure, and highly enjoyable that's for sure.

[Anonymous No.18907562]

I'm developing into an alcoholic, should I read it?

[Anonymous No.18907757]

>>18907562
this

[Anonymous No.18907774]

>>18907562
>>18907757
no, wait until youve failed to quit drinking first and itll hit much harder.

[Anonymous No.18908023]

>>18907535
Whats the aiming of death on credit?

[Anonymous No.18908149]

>>18908023
There's no narrative in it, and just whatever Celine felt like writing. The problem is parts of it are just very boring and since the prose isn't conventionally good or expands on established traditions there's nothing to be gained from it. IDK, the part where they go on the boat and everyone throws up was supposed to be funny, but it's just bad writing in all honesty. I never found Celine funny either, I guess others do.
You get a whole bunch of these modernist clowns like Hemingway and Joyce and Pound and Proust and Celine and Kerouac who want to 'change' writing and they aren't familiar enough with the history of literature to warrent these ambitions, and the result is just tedious personal details written in an unordinary way, or the reverse which is just incessant referencing with no discernible style. Neither are very fun or insightful to read without the beauty that glues it together. Basically, they're all trying too hard to be different when they are not.
I'd say later Celine is the most successful of the bunch in creating an original style that has value, since it's just entirely the subconcious and at least fun to read, like Professor Y.
Ford Madox Ford and Lowry, I could at least see a frame of reference, Dante, Henry James, Melville, etc. Lunar Caustic is a direct reference to Melville, so I value them much more, plus I enjoy their writing as they've actually studied literature I'd call great, so it is enjoyable to read for me at least.