/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.2932170]

Alright /lit/, I forgot a gen ed elective so I'm finishing it up this semester. One course I looked at has these books as the required readings and is classified as an American Lit course. I'm a science major and mainly read French+German literature as a hobby, so I know absolutely nothing about any of these authors save what wiki has told me. They all seem like typical girl romance novels, albeit in the "classic" section so they must have some merit.

What do you say about these, /lit/, and would it be an enjoyable experience as a young adult male to read these?

>"Pride & Prejudice" - Austen
>"Jane Eyre" - Bronte
>"Mrs. Bridge" - Connell
>"Hours" - Cunningham
>"Wide Sargasso Sea" - Rhys
>"Mrs Dalloway" -Woolf

[Anonymous No.2932175]

You're gonna have a really bad time.

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932178]

Doesn't seem too fun. Those books are enjoyable, but I imagine I'd get bored if I was reading them all without more variety between books - you know what I mean?

If I were you, I'd look up some reviews of the professor and see how (s)he is (or at least how they grade).

[Anonymous No.2932180]

>"Jane Eyre" - Bronte
>Jane Eyre, Bronte
>Doyouevenread.jpeg

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.2932181]

There are all good novels, but...why the fuck is every author (aside from Connell) a woman? Proportionally that wouldn't make sense unless the person choosing it wanted it to be so. I mean, I have nothing against female authors, it just seems odd

[Anonymous No.2932185]

All of these save Connell are great.

But fuck man, are you taking a women writer's course? Why the high concentration of female writers?

[Anonymous No.2932190]

>>2932175

That bad, huh?

>>2932178
The prof does have good ratings, albeit all for them coming from a different course. It's either this, a course on American fiction that has another list of books I have never heard of except for gatsby, or russian short stories with a tougher prof that starts half a mile from my class ten minutes prior.

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932197]

>>2932181
Classes on literature by women aren't uncommon.

I kind of wish George Eliot made an appearance on that list though. And Edith Wharton. And Flannery O'Connor. But I could probably go on all day. Those books OP mentioned are good choices.

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932203]

>>2932190
>or russian short stories with a tougher prof that starts half a mile from my class ten minutes prior.
Despite the impracticality it presents, you know /lit/ is going to tell you to take this.

Why don't you post the list for the American literature class as well and we can compare. [And if the professor has genuinely good ratings, I'd expect him to be consistent across multiple courses. Especially for something like English.]

[Anonymous No.2932204]

>>2932185
>But fuck man, are you taking a women writer's course?

I was honestly surprised also. I was hoping for some Hawthorne at least with it being a general "American Literature" course in the English department...not even in gender studies.

[Anonymous No.2932206]

>>2932190

Pride & Prejudice alone renders the list insufferable. Save yourself.

[Anonymous No.2932209]

Pride and Prejudice and Jane Eyre are both pretty bad.

Austen had a decent prose but she had absolutely nothing interesting to tell anyone.

[Jeff Mangum Died For Your Sins !rAl8Mz2mp2 No.2932208]

>>2932197
>Classes on literature by women aren't uncommon.
That'd make more sense, but then why Connell?

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932221]

>>2932208
Unless the book (which I haven't read) deals with issues pertaining to women, I have no idea...

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932226]

>>2932206
I disagree. Austen is funny and brilliant.

[Anonymous No.2932230]

>>2932206 >>2932209

Wait, Austin is considered bad? When did this come out?

[Anonymous No.2932240]

>>2932203

The other course's readings are as follows:
>Chicago: City on the Make - Algren
>Winesburg, Ohio - Anderson
>My Antonia - Cather
>Great Gatsby - Fitzgerald
>Buried Child - Shepard
>Adventures of Huck Finn - Twain
>Balm In Gilead - Wilson

It kills me that I'm passing up the Russian short story course, but I'll be late every lecture. It's just too far and in a fucking maze of a building that takes long to navigate.

[Anonymous No.2932246]

>>2932209

> Austen had a decent prose

Here is an actual quote from Pride & Prejudice. I highlighted it when I was reading because it was so outstandingly bad.

> This part of his intelligence, though unheard by Lydia, was caught by Elizabeth, and, as it assured her that Darcy was not less answerable for Wickham's absence than if her first surmise had been just, every feeling of displeasure against the former was so sharpened by immediate disappointment, that she could hardly reply with tolerable civility to the polite inquiries which he directly afterwards approached to make.

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932249]

>>2932240
Ooh, well Fitzgerald, Cather, Twain, and Anderson make that class look pretty fuckin' good. Maybe (if neither professor seems obviously preferable to you) look up the books and see which ones interest you more?

[Anonymous No.2932250]

To date, Pride and Prejudice is easily the worst, most insufferable thing I've ever read.

[Anonymous No.2932251]

>>2932246


I wish I could go back in time and be an American author so I could come up with some quote about how anytime I read pride and prejudice I "want to dig up Jane Austen skeleton and beat her over the head with her own shin bone."

But sadly I can't, so that quote will never be said...by anyone...ever.

[Anonymous No.2932252]

>>2932246
I mean overall. It stands out from most of the old shit that I've read. Stop expecting every last sentence of a book to be flawless.

That said, her books are insipid bullshit

[Franz !!8ZELb56UWUx No.2932253]

>>2932250
The only book or which you didn't use Sparknotes? Because you loved the movie?

[Anonymous No.2932254]

Looks like a good but pretty samey course and considering you are a 'young adult male' I can't see how you're going to enjoy Pride and Prejudice. It's obviously clever, but it's damn insufferably written.

Also looks like some weird authors to choose for something called an American lit course or general ed for that matter. Aren't there any other lit courses available?

[Anonymous No.2932264]

>>2932249

No preferences, profs are comparable. The one course books looked like typical chick novels, where as the other course that I just posted looks a little "stale" I guess with the exception of Gatsby which I've actually read at least 5 times. If the others read like Gatsby then I'll take that course in a heartbeat over the Austen/Bronte one.

Again, I have absolutely no basis in my opinion except for reading the short summary wiki for each work. /lit/ is usually overly critical which is exactly what I like since it helps get the raw opinions out and yes/no answers.

[Anonymous No.2932267]

>>2932254

Yes, I have one other choice basically. see >>2932240 for the readings in that course

[Anonymous No.2932273]

>>2932240
Take this one.

[Anonymous No.2932282]

>>2932264
Well, I'd say it might be a somewhat interesting course since, except Pride and Prejudice, which I hate, and Mrs. Bridge, which I haven't read, all the readings a quite good. Also notice that Wide Sargasso Sea and Hours are actually modern adaptions of Jane Eyre and Mr.s Dalloway respectively, and there'll probably be some kind of interesting comparative analysis to be made.

Also, watch the Pride and Prejudice 1995 TV series instead. It's stomachable.

[Anonymous No.2932300]

>>2932282

If they're adaptations I'll definitely lose interest I think. Judging from everyone's opinions I'm going to go with the other course.

Thank you /lit/

[Anonymous No.2932395]

>>2932170
I couldn't even stomach Pride and Prejudice. I started reading it earlier this summer, with an actual mindset of getting through it, but I was distracted by books that were entertaining. I just never seem to care about any of those people. Elizabeth comes off like a bitch and Im pretty sure Austen wants me to identify with her for some reason...

And Woolf is like watered down James Joyce. I don't like it. I also don't like Joyce

[Anonymous No.2932401]

>>2932253
Never seen the movie, read the book.