/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3678968]

Awful.

[Anonymous No.3678973]

Thanks for your one-word sparkle of sheer intelligence, acned teenage male.

[Anonymous No.3678981]

>>3678973
So how long ago was your 20th, friend?

[Anonymous No.3678994]

>this book is old, /lit/ will be so buttmad when i make a negative comment about it
>lel le epic trollface

[Anonymous No.3679000]

>>3678994
I definitely don't expect /lit/ to like this

[Anonymous No.3679051]

You and your mother are the only people on this planet that care about your opinion.

[Anonymous No.3679058]

>>3678968
>this post
Awful.

[Anonymous No.3679067]

>>3679000
/lit/ hipsters are always trying to ascend to meta-hipsterdom via counter-edginess, so threads like these are their bread and butter. Without actually saying, doing, or reading anything themselves, they can safely jump on you (en masse, without risk of getting into an argument that might require they substantiate their opinions) for having what might be an edgy opinion. By conforming to the establishment view and deriding you as a caricature of an uninformed newbie reader, they become in their minds, by default, the wise and legitimate litterateur. Feels good man. It's basically 2deep4u 2.0. Most of them probably haven't even read the book.

[Anonymous No.3679078]

>>3679067
or maybe people just
like
have their own opinions

not everything's a big fucking meta-ironic conspiracy

[Anonymous No.3679089]

>>3679078
"Awful" isn't much of an opinion. Well, it's not a reasonable opinion, in any case.

An opinion that is unreasonable shouldn't be taken into account at all.

[Anonymous No.3679096]

>>3679089
Just because someone has a stupid opinion doesn't make it all a big edgy whateverthefuckyouwereonabout.

And this is coming from someone who legitimately loves Wuthering Heights.

[Anonymous No.3679180]

I don't like this book. But I like the books of Charlotte and Anne Bronte. Jane Eyre for example - I just love it.

[Anonymous No.3679199]

>>3679089
>"Awful" isn't much of an opinion. Well, it's not a reasonable opinion, in any case. An opinion that is unreasonable shouldn't be taken into account at all.

Not OP, but the natural state of any book isn't good. If awful is an unreasonable opinion, then so is good.

[Anonymous No.3679205]

Awe full.

[Anonymous No.3679238]

>>3679180

Me too. It's a beautiful love story that nicely treads on both comedy and tragedy's properties.

[Anonymous No.3679304]

Still, OP should rather explain why the book is supposed to be "awful" (or whatever other normative judgement he might come up with). If he/she is incapable of providing said explanation, I'd rather he/she STFU.

/lit/ is full of preposterous uneducated "opinions" already, the place is bad enough. If you don't want to talk about literature (and related subjects) in a reasonable way, instead of meaningless and ill-informed nagging about books you simply don't understand (or don't "like" for some other reason that is fully your own problem), kindly GTFO.

Protip: Write a book yourself and see what other people have to say about it (provided they can even be bothered to read it)

Pic related. It is a good example of a concise justification why one very popular book might be considered superior over another very popular book.

[Anonymous No.3679320]

>>3679180
Jane Eyre I could maybe see, but most of the Brontë oeuvre falls far short of Wuthering Heights.

Wuthering Heights>Tenant of Wildfell Hall>Jane Eyre>Vilette>The Professor>Shirley>Agnes Grey

[Anonymous No.3679326]

Kate Beaton applies

[Anonymous No.3679986]

I enjoyed it.

It has an interesting structure.