[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 2.45 MB, 4032x3024, IMG_1395.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22477413 No.22477413 [Reply] [Original]

Who put this in a Starbucks’ little library?

>> No.22477421

>>22477413
I recently got that from the little free library by my house. Maybe old John is trying to secure his legacy and leaving copies of his books anywhere he can.

>> No.22477423

>>22477413
I will find you, your wife, and your children and beat you all to death tonight

>> No.22477427

>>22477413
Kino book

>> No.22477428

>>22477421
Kek. I just feel like someone who reads Barth has a higher chance than average to have posted on /lit/

>> No.22477445

>>22477413
Why are you lying?

>> No.22477450

Is this book actually a comfy Tom Jones type book or does it go up its own arse?

>> No.22477464

>>22477445
No lie. I’ve never taken a book from there only got rid of books. I know Dalkey is releasing it in a couple weeks so I figured I’d sample it and buy it if I like it

>> No.22477472

>>22477428
There is a fair chance it is forgotten book that has spent its allotted time in the lost and found already, this was most of the books in the library at the coffee shop I used to work at.
>>22477450
Probably not what you want but who knows, I have yet to read it.

>> No.22477801

>>22477450
It’s a comfy book, Barth doesn’t get totally stuck up his own ass like in some of his more explicitly metafictional works. It’s a great book to pair with Mason & Dixon, and rather underrated on this board compared to it. It’s very fun, and very funny. I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote, where the length of the novel isn’t a drag but actually a joy to read.

>> No.22478570

>>22477801
>I'd compare it to Don Quixote
YA DONT SAY
WHO EVER WOULD HAVE THOUGHT THE SOT-WEED FACTOR AND DON QUIXOTE HAD CONNECTIONS?

>> No.22478621

>>22477801
I’ve never read Barth yet(I’m OP) but I read a Steiner essay where he absolutely destroyed one of his books, I think it was LETTERS, to the point I can never read that book without having the essay prejudice me

>> No.22478635

i put my copy of confessions of a mask in the one my mom made right across the street from the middleschool.

>> No.22478636

This book is kino.

>> No.22478661

>>22478570
Of all the retarded shit that gets posted on /lit/, this is probably my favorite genre.

>anon makes an unremarkable attempt at analyzing some aspect of a book
>statement is perhaps banal but shows actual effort and interest, which puts it above 95% of posts on the board (excl. pure philosophy/religion discussion) at any given time
>faggot sees his chance to flex
>hurrrrrrr that's SO obvious, what a rube you are for pointing it out! ha ha!
>chilling effect on future attempts at analysis ensues
>not even over an actual fucking disagreement

If I had the choice between getting rid of, on the one hand, all the incel debates, the race debates, the tranny debates, the communism debates, the peterson debates, the BAP debates, the religion debates, and the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy; and, on the other hand, you; I would choose you. Those retards just distract and take up space, you're the one actively stamping out the tiny bit of green growing in a barren wasteland, because it's a wild daisy and not a perfectly cultivated rose. What an utterly contemptible spirit it must take to make a post like that.

>> No.22478691

>>22477801
>rather underrated on this board compared to it
The marginally 'period' prose in M&D is wearing it in drag -- he outed himself in Against The Day and has gotten worse every offering. Imagine sending Barth a copy inscribed "Been there, done that." Insufferable horse faced buck-toothed fucking industry plant weasel.

>> No.22478698

>>22478661
>completely misses the point
The first anon seemed to be blissfully unaware of Don Quixote's influence on the Sot-Weed Factor. He said he would compare it to DQ because both are long books, yet entertaining reads. The second anon called him a retard for not realizing the obvious connections bewteen DQ and the Sot-Weed Factor. (You) are equally a retard for not grasping this.

>> No.22478710

>>22477413
Woah, what state are you in?

>> No.22478749

>>22478661
> the people who proudly announce how much they "don't care" about literature/philosophy

This is the strangest one to me as they are on a literature board which has a history of interest in more literary works. These types of anons are more insidious than the obvious cancer threads desu. It seems like more recently there has been a push to demoralize and dumb down the board, saying things like no one reads the classics but if they do, they only do for status, or something of the sort. You’ll also see a type of demoralizing when anons comment that a book isn’t read unless it is visibly damaged. I don’t understand the point of dumbing down the board, the demoralization posts, and spreading the belief that no one reads “the classics” or more intellectual books here

>> No.22478764
File: 595 KB, 498x498, IMG_7271.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22478764

>>22478570
Yah I know. This Ebenezer Cooke guy, it’s funny how similar he is to the old Quixote. For those who aren’t in on any of the jokes, a big part of the comedy of the book is Ebenezer Cooke’s initial naivete (he’s a Candide-like figure) which slowly gets abraded and transformed into cynicism throughout the tale, leading up to him writing the “satyr”ical poem, “The Sot-Weed Factor; Or, a Voyage to Maryland. A Satyr,” a real poem by a real poet whom Barth based the novel on. A particular point of comedy is his sexual naivete and inexperience, with him refusing sex with several attractive women who offer it to him out of an old-fashioned Puritan-Christianesque mentality. He and the gang also get sodomized by pirates, in one funny chapter. I like it. Funny! Yes!! Haha!!!!

As another point of my rambling drunken monologues trying to somewhat bump up the quality of this board by mentioning a good book I’ve read (albeit many years ago, as a freshfaced naive young man not unlike Ebenezer himself, when I plowed through books quickly, simply for their reputation, and without necessarily having much retention of the books I’d read, due to my speed of reading and youthful lack of erudition and sophisticated vocabulary …) … one of the parts I liked most about it… was Barth’s somewhat anachronistic investigations of nihilism and existentialism, spoken about in the book in unmistakably yet subtly modern ways … similar to the use of anachronism (sometimes subtler, sometimes more obvious) in Pynchon’s M&D, about thorny questions about the objectivity of history, power structures in politics, drug use, religion, sexuality … anyway … I hope you get brutally murdered, Or you’re a great poster and these types of posts are more of what we need on /lit/ and I love you and I screenshoted and saved this post out of admiration and affection for it and for you, or whatever I’m supposed to say… years of liberal drug, pot and alcohol abuse have rotted my brain to the point where I honestly forget the exactly perfect, astoundingly well-remembered details of books I read in late high school or early uni years, details that would astonish and impress others with my erudition if I remembered them … because that’s all books are about, is reading them and having something impressive to say to others about them — showing off your massive literary/philosophical COCK-size in how impressively, eloquently, and interestingly you can speak of them. Also, just so people don’t accuse me of being a “Reddit c*ck” or whatever for how flamboyantly and hammily I speak, FUCK KIKES, FUCK NIGGERS AND FUCK TRANNIES or whatever I’m supposed to say. I am drunk as fuck and also was drunk when writing the brief post you replied to. Watch Pepe wink when you open this gif. He’s holding a glass of golden champagne. And he’s a strangely beautiful character, if you’ve gotten used to him and formed a psychosocial parasocial bond to him.

>> No.22478992

>>22478749
You're missing the forest for the trees, it's a much greater trend than what you describe in which the very notion of "caring", or having any sort of passion, standard to be upheld, or higher ideal is actively derided and shamed in every facet of society. Hence, what might be the the most common phrase of the current day
>omg why do you care so much?

>> No.22479042

>>22478992
I think there is a difference when one goes on a special interest forum and criticizes said special interest with “why do you care?”, or “you can’t enjoy that, it’s just a pseud larp”

>> No.22479148

>>22479042
They're just insecure looking for someone to tell them it's ok that they don't "get it". Sad!

>>22478764
Based slightly deranged drunk anon. Picaresque is always fun.

>> No.22479903

i read this book because i've seen some anons say it is better than mason and dixon, and they were right.

>> No.22479963

>>22478661
Excellent post

>> No.22480006
File: 1.32 MB, 443x250, 1615515975506.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
22480006

>>22478661
Fucking 10/10 post, excellent summation of the issues with this board. I love reading, but any actual discussion of material is nigh impossible on this board. It's almost a reddit-level circle jerk of pseudo intellectualism, along with /mu/, which is why I almost never post to either. People like to shit on /v/ but /v/ actually allows freedom of discussion, and has users willing to debate and take seriously arguments that would immiediately be disregarded on any other site, and new points of view and ideas can actually gain traction there (such as an unironic gain in appreciation for Devil May Cry 2). It's really a shame that the same level of discussion can't be found on this site's other boards, especially here where it should be most like that, yet is ironically one of the least.

>> No.22480097

>>22478661
Very based post, thanks anon.

>> No.22480115

Great posts in general guys. I’m new to appreciating literature but I’ll check out this Mason and Dixie since Dostoyevsky has been a brick wall.

>>22478764
Where do you live I would like to speak with you. I can be anywhere in the world in ~November.

>> No.22480119

>>22480006
I'm convinced that /lit/ and /sci/ are the most toxic boards. Yes even above /pol/. In both cases it comes down to LARP IQ-posting. Nowhere else is so obsessed with tearing posters down for the slightest sign of imperfection.
I like anon's flower analogy. This place ought to be a field of daisies, instead we have the dust smugly pointing out the lack of roses.

>> No.22480122

>>22478661
Nu-male post

>> No.22480135

>>22477801
>It’s a great book to pair with Mason & Dixon
I read M&D ages ago, then SWF a few years after that, and finally reread M&D this year. Sot-Weed was clearly an influence and they're pretty fun to compare. Not sure which I prefer.

>>22478710
I saw a Giles Goat-Boy in a little public library inexplicably in ghetto-ass Hartford recently. Hope a nigga actually reads it, it's even better than Factor.

>> No.22480147

>>22480115
> Where do you live I would like to speak with you. I can be anywhere in the world in ~November.

I would be lying if I said I wasn’t flattered by this offer and perhaps even secretly a little turned on (at the fantasy of you as an attractive literate woman tracking me down, that is, since I’m not gay), but I’m afraid I don’t feel comfortable enough sharing this for security reasons, feds probably watch me and I don’t want to explicitly give out something that would clearly link this device to where I live.

>> No.22480168

>>22477428
Maybe a very slightly higher chance. /lit/ has basic taste, almost everything talked about on here is well-known

>> No.22480201

>>22478661
too based for this board

>> No.22480203

>>22478661
Great post. But also, this:
>>22478749

>> No.22480205

>>22478661
Bro, you need to calm down and stop seething for being called out for being a superficially unread loser

>> No.22480211

>>22480006
I don't agree with this, however. /lit/ has its problems but it is by far and away the board with the greatest discussion element in my experience. Never seen a decent discussion on /v/ and but I haven't used that board or played video games in years.

>> No.22480219

This board is full of redditors and this thread is proof

>> No.22480226

>>22480219
citation needed

>> No.22480227

>>22480006
Writing
>I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote
does not constitute “actual discussion,” you dimwitted pseud

>> No.22480230

>>22480226
Considering I found the Arno Schmidt pseud’s reddit account should be more than enough

>> No.22480239

>>22478698
I'm a different anon, but how dense are you? You're the one who missed the point, idiot. I'm revoking your posting privileges for a month.

>> No.22480243

>>22480239
>Me? I am not retarded! You’re the retarded one here! I revoke your posting privileges, good sir
>>>/reddit/

>> No.22480311

>>22480006
>>22480119
Books being synonymous with intellectualism is one of the worst things parts of this board and it leads to pseuds flocking here. I don’t use pseud to mean I am smarter than them, but I use pseud as one who cares about upholding appearances or an image. As has been said a lot of potential discourse grinds to a halt when the dick sizing starts. In my experience intelligent people are usually open minded and curious people. They are willing to listen to the thoughts and opinions of others and churn them over before coming to conclusions, but the conclusions are always susceptible to change. You mostly see hardline stances and refusal to engage honestly here because the idea of people wrong or changing an opinion is a major blow to the ego of one who thinks they above others here. The flip side is >>22478749
which is really just an insecure way of maintaining the belief or image of intellectual superiority. Like a form of projection. One certainly cannot be honestly reading more perceived highbrow books is the thought of an anon who doesn’t read those perceived highbrow books, because that will mean anons have more perceived erudition, which would be a blow to the ego. The IQ obsessed anons are a strange phenomenon and definitely belong on another board as it mainly involves pattern recognition and problem solving. Everyone seems to be gifted going by the posted numbers posted here, but that clearly isn’t the case, as this board is retarded

TLDR: read books and discuss them in good faith. Don’t be an argumentative dick. Don’t try to knock others down to make yourself seem better. If you are so worried about your image on an anonymous website, you can do that by posting strong content, not dick sizing and kneecapping others

>> No.22480416

>>22480227
And neither does insulting someone for their ignorance, but when someone says
>I’d compare it to a book like Don Quixote
This gives you the opportunity to engage with this person in a constructive manner and perhaps they will learn something and further discussion will develop from this. Insulting them and putting on pseudointellecutal, pompous airs only serves to shut down the discussion and contributes nothing at all of value. It's simply a waste of space and discourages people from posting here.
A little gatekeeping is a good thing, but there's a difference between gatekeeping and being a tryhard little shitheel faggot.

>> No.22480439

>>22480416
I don’t think some anons realize how low the bar is here; simply making a comparison, elaborating on a theme or symbolism, or following the arc of a character, constitutes a some-effort post. This can be done in a few sentences or less. Besides, often discussion needs to bounce back and forth a few times before something good comes out of it. I’ve come to terms that I am a better replier than OP maker. I need something to go on or some food for thought to push myself more. What it comes down to for me is is an anon posting in good faith and putting at least a tad of effort in. That effort can take the shape of many forms and that thread end can be followed to potentially more lucrative grounds

>> No.22480448

>>22480416
>>22480439
lmao this is absolute midwit cope

>> No.22480452

>>22478661
you may be right, but one must remember: despite this being a literature board, it is still 4chan, which means on average the posts you engage with will be hyper-aggressive attempts to one-up other posters for a cheap ego boost. its the inherent nature of this website

>> No.22480501

>entire thread is midwits seething because
>one anon compared SWF to DQ because both are long books he enjoyed reading
>another sarcastically pointed out that SWF is heavily influenced by DQ
>cue reddit levels of frothing at the mouth downvoting because the midwits who read SWF never realized the DQ connection

>> No.22480520

>>22480501
Yes, because instead of being a snarky dicksucker, the anon could have replied elaborating on the deeper relationship between DQ and The Sot Weed Factor. That way, the ignorant anon would have learned something and perhaps would have decided to reread the book. And what's more, further discussion may have developed in the thread instead of this mind numbing shitposting.

>> No.22480552

>>22480122
>>22480219
You don't get how gatekeeping works and where it can be applied. Clearly the concept of gatekeeping itself needs to be gatekept from people who are incapable of discernment. Hint: there needs to be something worth gatekeeping, and the person doing it needs to be able to offer something of value. If the board wasn't complete shit, or if he had replied with some scintillatingly intelligent take in comparison to which the other post looked foolish, it wouldn't be a problem.

Another subtlety that escapes you because you are just posting out of knee-jerk aggression is the fact that the first post mentioning DQ was obviously not written by some clueless noob who needed to be harshly corrected, it was a decently well-read poster just making an offhand comment about the immediate reading experience, as proven by his later response. You don't get to be le epic hardcore 4chinz gatekeeper if you can't tell the difference between those two things.

>>22480501
Barth is neither entry-level nor particularly popular on here, especially not since pomo has fallen out of favor. I highly doubt there are a bunch of people reading him who are unaware of DQ and the extreme similarity between two meta-Picaresque novels. I think it's just that faggots who engage in bad-faith uncharitable interpretation, of a sort which can be applied to any post that doesn't autistically overclarify every little point and explicitly pursue every possible tangent to its logical conclusion, are extremely unlikable.