/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3260031]

Why does /lit/ even have a recommended reading Wikia list?

>George R.R. Martin - A Game of Thrones
>Joe Abercrombie - The Blade Itself
>R.Scott Bakker - The Darkness that Comes Before
>Steven Erikson - Gardens of the Moon
>J.V.Jones - A Cavern of Black Ice
>Robert Jordan - Wheel of Time
>Paul Kearney - Hawkwood's Voyage
>K.J.Parker - Devices and Desires
>Melanie Rawn - Dragon Prince
>Brian Ruckley - Winterbirth
>Tad WIlliams - The Dragonbone Chair
>David Zindell - The Lightsone
>Daniel Abraham - A Shadow in Summer
>Chris Wooding - The Braided Path
>Raymond E. Feist - The riftwar cycle
>Greg Keyes - The Briar King
>Patrick Rothfuss - The Name of The Wind
>Scott Lynch - The Lies of Locke Lamora
>Brandon Sanderson - Mistborn: The Final Empire

And that's just the fantasy section!

Am I to believe that /lit/ actually likes this stuff? I shouldn't think so because most of you have expressed your distaste for this kiddy tripe. So who made this bloody Wiki?

[Anonymous No.3260033]

>>3260031
The fantasy section is going to be kiddy shit no matter what. That's what fantasy is. The only people who like that are the fantasyfags here.

The wiki is a community effort. I think it was mostly one guy who made the fantasy chart, however, and it's went through several versions. If he's on, maybe he can address your concerns.

[Anonymous No.3260034]

>>3260033
also, the wiki is much much much more than the fantasy section. The sections for real literature are generally not so "kiiddy" as the ones for genre fiction.

[Anonymous No.3260039]

>>3260034
Indeed, the Wiki has great recommendations for reputable literature. I just assumed "recommended", and knowing this e/lit/ist forum's general opinions, meant only good writing would be present. Oh well.

My opinion on that fantasy section: Tolkien is the only one who deserves to be listed. That is all.

[Anonymous No.3260042]

>>3260039
>no R. E. Howard
>only Tolkien
You are everything wrong with the genre.

[Anonymous No.3260046]

>>3260042
>"Everything wrong with the genre"
Implying I read and "keep up" with the genre at all...

You are everything wrong with READING for liking fantasy. All fantasy after Tolkien is just butchered mythology for children. Forgotten Realms is the worst offender.

[Anonymous No.3260049]

>>3260039
The wiki is put together by a lot of different people. The recommendations come from /lit/ users, but they come from a wide variety of /lit/ users, fro e/lit/ists to il/lit/erates.

[Anonymous No.3260054]

>>3260049
I assumed as much. Fair enough.

[Anonymous No.3260094]

Speaking of the /lit/ wiki, I noticed it doesn't have recommended translations for a lot of books.

Anyone know who does a good translation for The Stranger? Or doesn't it particularly matter?

[Anonymous No.3260147]

>>3260094
The Stranger is the title to the Matthew Ward translation. The Outsider is the title of the Joseph Laredo translation.

Generally, go with the newest one. There's often reviews out there that compare the works side by side with some quotes, allowing you to decide for yourself which style you prefer. Wikipedia does it for The Stranger:

Laredo's 1982 translation is: "Mother died today. Or maybe yesterday, I don't know. I had a telegram from the home: 'Mother passed away. Funeral tomorrow. Yours sincerely.' That doesn't mean anything. It may have been yesterday."

Ward's 1988 translation is: "Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don't know. I got a telegram from the home: Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours. That doesn't mean anything. Maybe it was yesterday."

[Anonymous No.3260167]

>>3260147
Thank you. Hmm never even heard the word 'Maman' before. Might stick with the older translation.

[Anonymous No.3260232]

>>3260167

it's french, but it's also a childish way of saying it. Just leaving it to "mother" doesn't really address the context.

[Anonymous No.3260258]

>>3260232
Why didn't they use momma or mama or something?