/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2245292]

Here's my winter reading list for the next few weeks. Out of these which should I read first, skip, and/or in what order?

Hunter S. Thompson's The Great Shark Hunt or Kingdom of Fear

Truman Capote's In Cold Blood

Kurt Vonnegut's Cat's Cradle, Slaughterhouse Five, or Deadeye Dick

Franz Kafka's The Castle or his complete story collection

J.D. Salinger's Catcher in the Rye ( second time since I don't remember most of it)

Joseph Heller's Catch-22

Ernest Hemingway's A Farewell To Arms, a Moveable Feast, For Whom the Bell Tolls, or The Sun Also Rises

Tom Wolfe's Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test (was thinking of reading this since I just finished On the Road by Kerouac and I need more Neal Cassady)

[Anonymous No.2245303]

The Castle is perfect winter reading, especially if it's snowing where you are.

[Anonymous No.2245301]

[Anonymous No.2245316]

Unfortunately, no snow by me. Thing is I'm a writer and am trying to delve into writing styles that I've been told I'm similar to, to just get a feel of the words; so it's as much for research as it is for entertainment.

[Anonymous No.2245322]

OP i just got Thompson's Generation of Swine.

Did you read that already?

[Anonymous No.2245328]

>>2245292
skip vonnegut, acquire barth. vonnegut is pomo for teenagers.

[Anonymous No.2245331]

>>2245322
Not yet. I don't think I've heard of that one. Is it good? I just finished F&L in LV and Rum Diary.

[Anonymous No.2245337]

Just finished Catch-22. Fucking amazing.
Started Ulysses and while I initially was kind of annoyed. If you don't reread every passage trying to criticize it, is actually really beautiful in a nonorthodox sort of way.
Hope you have a great winter OP, nice selection.

[Anonymous No.2245345]

>>2245337

Thanks. And I've read some of Ulysses. It's a bit gimmicky for my taste, but I'll definitely check it out after I finish some of the other books. I hear great things about Catch-22.

[Anonymous No.2245364]

>>2245345
Yeah I could get that. I just think the prose is rather interesting. Personal taste I guess.
Anyways, let us know how you like The Castle. Haven't read a good dystopia in awhile.

[Anonymous No.2245481]

Cat's Cradle, it's perfect for the winter. Ignore the one who said to dismiss Vonnegut, that anon is an elitist snob.

[Anonymous No.2245485]

>>2245328

>implying Slaughterhouse Five isn't a twentieth century masterpiece

[Anonymous No.2245487]

>>2245481
Vonnegut : writing :: kool-aid : beverages

[Anonymous No.2245491]

>>2245328
You could always post what book you think should be read instead of just putting a name

[Anonymous No.2245495]

>>2245487

[Anonymous No.2245497]

>>2245487

who's snapple?

[Anonymous No.2245503]

>>2245497
Phillip K. Dick

[Anonymous No.2245514]

Ever thought of reading Sinclair Lewis' "It Can't Happen Here"?

[Anonymous No.2245520]

>>2245514

Hadn't heard of it yet. Will check out.

[Anonymous No.2245525]

>>2245491
sorry you're too lazy to google. my bad.

try the end of the road for a pre-pomo barth and then just dive the fuck in with Lost In The Funhouse or letters if you're feeling particularly hardcore today.

>>2245485
that's exactly what I'm implying, it's clearly not.


i love that guy who defended vonnegut by saying i'm an elitist snob. even if it were true, it doesn't make vonnegut any better a writer.

[Anonymous No.2245541]

Catch-22 before all others.

[Anonymous No.2245544]

>>2245525

>that's exactly what I'm implying, it's clearly not.

Except it clearly is.

[Anonymous No.2245549]

>>2245544
lol right

[Anonymous No.2245560]

>>2245549

[Anonymous No.2245558]

>>2245292
A Farewell to Arms is probably the best winter-time read. There's a good deal of happiness and great scenes but it is a tragedy; it goes to pieces wonderfully.

[Anonymous No.2245599]

>>2245525
Yes, because I can't find your fucking opinion on it and the reason you think Vonnegut is bad, along with a "book recommendation" which is what this thread is about.

[Anonymous No.2245607]

Fine him !

[Anonymous No.2245611]

>>2245599
i gave recommendations. barth is a recommendation. i gave specific books as well when prompted.

>the reason you think Vonnegut is bad

can you quote me where i said he was bad? i just told op to skip him and plunge directly into actual not-watered down postmodernism.

[Anonymous No.2245635]

BAN ME!

[Anonymous No.2245644]

>>2245635
wow, fuck you.

[Anonymous No.2245671]

Aw nice, Catch-22. That is seriously my favorite novel, I would definitely recommend it. Not much out there like it.

[Anonymous No.2245674]

>actual not-watered down postmodernism

What is that even supposed to mean? Just because something doesn't conform to a certain movement or adopt all of its tropes doesn't mean it's watered down. Vonnegut had a very distinct voice and while I don't think he's a genius, Slaughterhouse-Five IS a masterpiece. Just because you don't like it doesn't change that. Let others decide for themselves whether or not they like it instead of just telling people to skip it.

[Anonymous No.2245691]

>>2245674
>What is that even supposed to mean?

it's pretty clear.

>not a genius
>has written a masterpiece

pick one.

>Just because you don't like it doesn't change that.

oh so, it's an objective fundamental axiom of reality that slaughterhouse-five is a masterpiece? just because you like it a lot doesn't mean it's a masterpiece.

>Let others decide for themselves whether or not they like it instead of just telling people to skip it.

well, asshole, let me quote the op.

> Out of these which should I read first, skip, and/or in what order?

if you didn't catch that, let me emphasize:

>skip
>skip
>skip

[Anonymous No.2245713]

>>2245691

>it's pretty clear.

Actually, it's not because it makes no sense.

>pick one.

How retarded are you? An author doesn't have to be a genius to write a masterpiece. Vonnegut was a good writer but it was the sum of his experiences as a human being that allowed him to write his one masterpiece. The same can be said for Joseph Heller and many other authors.

>just because you like it a lot doesn't mean it's a masterpiece.

And, once again, just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not. Since you're going to continue being a faggot, I guess we'll just have to take a look at the definition of the word and see if it applies

Masterpiece: in modern usage refers to a creation that has been given much critical praise, especially one that is considered the greatest work of a person's career or to a work of outstanding creativity, skill or workmanship.

Has Slaughterhouse Five received much critical praise? Well, it's on pretty much every top 100 list of novels of the twentieth century, so we'll go ahead and say it fits that criteria. It is generally considered one of Vonnegut's greatest achievements? Yep, along with Cat's Cradle, it is. So it fits that criteria as well. As for the technical and creative aspects it is regularly praised for its use of a non linear plot, symbolism, and the author's voice. So it fits under that criteria as well. So you can quit it with all the bullshit now.


OP. If you are interested, you should read Vonnegut. Don't ever let someone tell you that you should skip something just because they didn't like it. You should always form your own opinion.

[Anonymous No.2245724]

>>2245713
>Actually, it's not because it makes no sense.

sorry your critical reading skills failed you, maybe try again with a dictionary.

>An author doesn't have to be a genius to write a masterpiece

not if you're the kind of person who gets his definitions from wikipedia, no. to the rest of us, who use, you know, normal sources it means this:

>1
>: a work done with extraordinary skill; especially : a supreme intellectual or artistic achievement

i don't know about you, but i wouldn't say s5 was written with "extraordinary skill", or that it is a supreme intellectual achievement. much less an artistic one.

[Anonymous No.2245730]

In Cold Blood and The Great Shark Hunt are both pretty good examples of 50s/60s journalism, if that's what you're in the mood to read. Otherwise, I'd give them a miss. Nearly everything else on your list is boring, entry-level shit that people read because they're told to, then they don't have the stones to admit they thought it was shit.

[Anonymous No.2245732]

>>2245730
So what would you recommend?

[Anonymous No.2245736]

>>2245724

>sorry your critical reading skills failed you, maybe try again with a dictionary.

Or you could just reword it or explain yourself, which you would have done already if you weren't just spurting shit out of your ass. I'm not even sure you know what it means. Not surprising for someone in your position.

>implying wikipedia isn't an acceptable source for 4chan discussions
>implying the wikipedia definition didn't include your definition
>implying I didn't demonstrate how it applied under that definition already
>implying what you "wouldn't say" matters considering general consensus says you're wrong

[Anonymous No.2245740]

>>2245732

Actually, my eyes must have skimmed over the Hemingway, that's exempt from my previous comment. I'd recommend the Hemingway.
Dyer both right really interesting, left-field stuff that's kind of travel journalism.

For the modern great Americans, Don DeLillo is better than anything on the list in OP - Ratner's Star is like everything Vonnegut ever wanted to write, only done better. And it's maybe DeLillo's worst book. His good stuff rocks socks.

Burroughs is a better writer than Kerouac, who's not got much to offer beyond a certain kinetic quality to his prose, and an engaging style. Ferlinghetti is probably better than either.

Richard Brautigan - not enough people read his stuff.

[Anonymous No.2245747]

>>2245736
>explain yourself

it's not representative of the movement while still claiming itself to be part of it, you dense fuck.

and just because it's on some internet top 100 list doesn't mean it has extraordinary skill. they often include all sort of bullshit to a) pander, b) for their political content i.e not skill.

[Anonymous No.2245748]

skip catch 22, dry and not nearly as funny as it's said to be

[Anonymous No.2245762]

>>2245747

First of all, who gives a fuck if it's representative of a movement or not? Jesus Christ. Second of all, who are you to say it's not representative of postmodernism? There isn't even a general consensus on what postmodernism actually is. That being said, it certainly does share many characteristics with other postmodern novels. Not all postmodernism is Pynchon and DFW, which you don't seem to understand. So of course, no one is going to be able to figure out what the fuck you're talking about when you go on about "actual not-watered down postmodernism" because you don't even know what the fuck you're talking about. Yet, like most ignorant fools, you go on thinking you're the smartest person in the room.

And I'm not talking about some random internet list, you fucking retard. It's on Modern Library's list, it's on Random House's list, it was praised by The New York Times, it was nominated for multiple awards, the list goes on.

[Anonymous No.2245763]

>>2245747

lol where does the book claim that its a postmodernist novel? It claims to be an antiwar novel but thats pretty much it

[Anonymous No.2245768]

aw, babby's first reading list.

Catch-22 is great, as is In Cold Blood. They're all good actually but I'd start with one of those two.

I guess it doesn't even matter which one you read first if you're going to read them all. You must know the basics of what they're about, you decide what you feel like reading.

[Anonymous No.2245826]

>>2245740
OP here. Much obliged for the recommendations, will check them out.

[Anonymous No.2245829]

>>2245748
Dude, I hate to tell you this, but you're kind of an idiot.

[Anonymous No.2247498]

OP here. I ended up getting all of Brautigan and DeLillo's major works. Also checking out Naked Lunch by Burroughs as well. Thanks for the recs.

[Anonymous No.2247542]

>>2245503

>Philip K. Dick

>not an espresso cola mixed with speed