/lit/ - Literature

[op No.2066909]

>Fiction, non-romance
>Spot-on accurate historic settings
>Fantastic tie-in and exciting!

Does a novel with these exist?!

I really don't know much about history... And I seriously need to read more novels. Is it possible to tackle both at once?

[Anonymous No.2066926]

War & Peace

[Anonymous No.2066929]

Europe Central by William Vollmann

[Anonymous No.2066933]

Considered entry-level by most of lit, but still excellent and not without its merits.

[Anonymous No.2066934]

Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon

[Anonymous No.2066937]

>>2066933
Seconding this. Entry level doesn't mean shit. Classics are classics for a reason.

[op No.2066938]

Thanks for the responses!

Actually, I was hoping to change it...
Not just history, but any sort of fiction that's taught you a great deal of knowledge whether it's culture, music, or whatever!

[Anonymous No.2066945]

>>2066938
Oh then Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon

[Anonymous No.2066947]

>I really don't know much about history... And I seriously need to read more novels. Is it possible to tackle both at once?

No. You need to read monographs, chapters and journal articles by historians. At the same time you need to read novels.

As far as novels with historical contexts, does Aubrey-Maturin count as a romance. They share a bedroom.

[Anonymous No.2066960]

>>2066947
This would be ideal for a person of infinite patience, but people aren't like that. I would never have become interested in history were it not for the interesting novels I read and plays I read that were set in times other than my own. Just be prepared to look unfamiliar stuff up as you encounter it. Literature is the funnest way to learn history (if not the best).

[Anonymous No.2066962]

>>2066947
>monographs, chapters and journal articles by historians
Yes, of course!

When repeated in the form of a narrative the details and world become so much more memorable. Unfortunately I have an incredibly bad memory. Names, dates, and specifics are hard to hold onto for a long time.

[Anonymous No.2066967]

Ulysses by James Joyce. It's absolutely crammed with knowledge. Finnegans Wake, too.

[Anonymous No.2066975]

>>2066967
>>2066945
>>2066934
This is like throwing a kid who has just learned how to put his skis on out of a helicopter above K2. Be gentle, guys.

[Anonymous No.2066977]

>>2066962

[op No.2066985]

>>2066962 whoops forgot name tag
>>2066975
Thanks for the heads-up. I'll leave those for later in life.

[Anonymous No.2066988]

>>2066962
History does not take the form of narratives, nor of names, places or dates.

Most historians follow the trend of social and cultural history, the result of E.P. Thompson's /Making of the English Working Class/ and the French Annales school.

Thompson asks: when did the working class become the working class, and answers with reference to methodism, machine breaking, and the London Mob.

There are no names, dates or places which particularly matter more than "1770-1820" and "Wilkes and Liberty!"

History is not the accumulation of pretty stories—it cannot be told as novels.

[Anonymous No.2066993]

>>2066985
No, actually, you should read them as soon as possible. I'm not kidding. If you don't, you'll never appreciate literatur

[Anonymous No.2066995]

>>2066993
OP should read them as soon as they are _able to do so_.

Why not start OP out with realist novels like Dickens and Zola and the Russians?

[Anonymous No.2067004]

>>2066995
You are able to read those books as soon as you are able to read. Just open them up and interpret the words on those pages. If you see a word you don't understand, look it up on the internet, like you would for any book. It's what I did and I'm all the happier for it

[Anonymous No.2067009]

>>2067004
Yes, from The Hungry Hungry Caterpillar to Gravity's Rainbow in one step. Because literacy is a binary.

[Anonymous No.2067025]

>>2067009
>2011
>Not acquiring a background in all spheres of Western culture and conventions of literary criticism while still in the womb.
Fuckin plebs.