/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.23390234]

>I read the book
Ok recite it entirely, word for word
>I can’t, I can summarize it though
Then why wasn’t the book just a summary if that’s all you retain from it?

[Anonymous No.23390236]

It's in my subconscious.

[Anonymous No.23390286]

>I read the summary
Ok recite it entirely, word for word
>I can’t, I can vaguely describe it though
Then why wasn’t the summary just a vague description if that’s all you retain from it?

[Anonymous No.23390290]

>I studied that topic for years
Ok recite your study entirely, word for word
>I can’t, I can write a book on it though
Then why wasn’t the study just a single book if that’s all you retain from it?

[Anonymous No.23390297]

>>23390286
>I read the vague description
Ok recite it entirely, word for word
>I can’t, I can give you the gist of it though
Then why wasn’t the vague description just a gist if that’s all you retain from it?

[Anonymous No.23390336]

>>23390234
>I lived my life
Okay, recite every single thing that happened to you since the day you were born
>I can't, I can tell you the story of my life thoughever
Then why wasn't your life just that story if that's all you retained from it?

[Anonymous No.23390346]

OP you got btfod in this thread.
You have exactly 15 (siebenunzwanzig) minutes to recite a summary of a book word by word and tell where ghat summary is from (so we can check) or else I will come back to this very thread and call you a stupid nigger in front of all of these people

[Anonymous No.23391147]

>>23390286
>>23390290
>>23390297
The still irrefutable point is that you didn’t read the book if you can’t recite it. So when you’re proudly rattling off the books you “read” to impress someone, maybe consider keeping quiet instead
>>23390346
Your game addicted zoomer brain couldn’t even remember to call me a nigger in front of “all these people” (You). Fünfzig is fifteen, and you didn’t spell 27 right anyway. In short you are a massive retard and have failed to disprove my theory

[Anonymous No.23391159]

>>23390236
This may be the only valid point, if it’s true.
>>23390286
>>23390290
>>23390297
If what we take out of a work is constantly broken down into a summary of it, the method of getting out information is flawed and overly long. Might as well watch a movie

[Anonymous No.23391311]

>>23391147
>fünfzig is fifteen
Ich knie.

[Anonymous No.23391331]

>>23390234
I enjoy actually reading, not merely collecting stories and reciting them. The activity is relaxing

[Anonymous No.23391335]

you didn't beat the book if
>you read it on a screen
>you listened to it
>you stopped reading for more than 3 days
>you didn't read it in the original language
>you read it only once

[Anonymous No.23391414]

>>23391159
No, it’s not flawed. Here are some reasons you need to read the whole book:
>literature cannot be summarised, a novel or poem is an irreducible work of art and an artistic whole
>one often reads literature simply because the process of reading is enjoyable
>even for non-literary non-fiction, a summary often reduces nuance, and one gains a fuller, subtler understanding of the topic by reading
>what each person takes out of the book will be different, and just as this post implies >>23390290, you do not know what will form the summary and bits that you remember most clearly until you have read the book
>a book is not just what you “get” out of it, it’s often a challenge or experience just to read which will change you
>there will be implicit knowledge you gained along the way of reading that maybe you can’t articulate explicitly
>you gain increasingly better knowledge of language use along the way (true also for reading in other languages)
>in what situations is reciting the whole of a book word-for-word necessary? there are almost none, it’s a useless skill that would take too long. our brains tend to remember only useful information, or information that excites us, etc. which is not rote memorisation
>you are reading not to get merely a “summary” but think about it as a map of a territory that you have explored. you need a rough map so that you can re-explore, but a map has to be much lower resolution than the terrain
>knowledge is holistic and organic. we are not just data processors that transfer data word-for-word, the process of learning is actually more human and more complex than that. reading is the process of figuring out what is worth paying attention to
etc.
Now you’re done, recite those points word for word in your head.

[Anonymous No.23391416]

>>23391159
>If what we take out of a work is constantly broken down into a summary of it, the method of getting out information is flawed
Nah the flaw is with you. The fact is that there are people that can read an entire book and word for word recreate it. Those people just have trained their memory or were born savants.
TL;DR Skill issue.

[Anonymous No.23391520]

Another plotfag filtered

[Anonymous No.23391813]

>>23391416
They have truly read the book then. I’m not saying it’s not doable, just that most people don’t read

[Anonymous No.23391826]

>>23391414
>Now you’re done, recite those points word for word in your head.
I did not read the post, not truly

[Anonymous No.23391854]

>>23391414
Humans throw away a lot of the knowledge of a book then. Written language is ancient and needs to be replaced by modern methods of transferring concepts. Instead of describing a smell or taste, add a scratch and sniff pad to the page. Picture books are actually far more advanced than written works for transferring concepts of scenery

[Anonymous No.23391867]

>>23391147
>Fünfzig is fifty.
>Fünfzehn is fifteen

[Anonymous No.23391878]

>>23391867
jannies you can close this one

[Anonymous No.23391910]

>>23391854
If you're not trolling: language is ancient but it's still the most advanced method we have for communicating abstract concepts, ideas, emotions and their relationships (something which pictures can't do and scratch and sniffs certainly can't do without the aid of language).
I don't think "throw away" is the right word because the general context of the whole book still informs the information that you do retain -- and again books are a technology that organises information in such a way that you can return to them if necessary. Full memorisation was only *truly* necessary with the oral poets because they were often composed before the development of writing technology and before widespread literacy, although it's a good skill to try to recite poems occasionally now too.

[Anonymous No.23391930]

>>23391910
I don't know what modern method could explain abstract concepts, but the examples I used are clearly better for those purposes

[Anonymous No.23391999]

>>23390236
this fellow patriots

[Anonymous No.23392273]

OP got fucking obliterated

[Anonymous No.23392316]

>>23390236
Ive noticed this. That when i think on issues and problems, my mind will immediatley go to specific thinkers as a means of addressing it. I won't take their position, but there is a concious recognition that X has influenced Y

[Anonymous No.23392715]

I don’t take defeat very well. Are you sure about that?

[Anonymous No.23392724]

>>23391147
>can't post a measly summary
OP is a faggot, as always