[ 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: 81 KB, 918x534, 1397181992822.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4762691 No.4762691[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Hey /lit/, I am a newfag to this board from /mu/,

I was wondering whether you would normally read a book that you like more than once, to gain a deeper understanding of it. Of course nobody listens to their favourite album just one time, the more you listen to music the more it grows on you and the images it creates/ the impact it has on you will be stronger.

So does reading a book more than once enhance how vivid the imaginary world is for you?

I recently finished Lolita and it was one of the only books i wanted to start again immediately afterwards.

>> No.4762693

Yes, many serious readers will tell you that re-reading is more important than reading

>> No.4762700

You cannot have a valid opinion on a book if you have only read it cursorily.

>> No.4762705
File: 67 KB, 500x504, 1396806131474.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4762705

>>4762691
i'm at a point where i reread books more often than i pick up new ones

>> No.4762713

>>4762691
You normally need to read a book three times to comment adequately on it.

>> No.4762725

>>4762713
Hogwash.

>>4762693
Name one, preferably a published author of merit.

>>4762700
Word.

Can't hurt, but they're different arts.

>> No.4762726

>>4762691
>course nobody listens to their favorite album just one time
I know: I can listen to coldplay for an eternity

>> No.4762730

>>4762725
Harold Bloom

>> No.4762740

>>4762726
>coldplay

>> No.4762741

>>4762730

> published author of merit

> implying criticism

>> No.4762742

>>4762725
>Hogwash.
Enjoy your Sports Technology Diploma.

>> No.4762750

>>4762740
>not liking coldplay

>> No.4762751

>>4762741
Nabokov

>> No.4762753

i read non-fiction sometimes hundreds of times, otherwise it's pretty much here and gone and makes no lasting impression.

fiction is a one time thing for me, unless there's something unusual about it like A Clockwork Orange where a re-read years later is interesting.

>> No.4762771

>>4762750
Pic related

>>4762742
And what profoundly sad corner of bumfuck do you come from, having developed such a bizarre association?

>> No.4762789
File: 79 KB, 407x286, trolly.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4762789

>>4762771
Forgot the pic lolololz

>>4762751
You've activated my trap card!
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2011/11/are-rereadings-better-readings.html

>> No.4762790
File: 1.79 MB, 1280x720, Titanic.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4762790

>>4762771
>Pic related
>No image.

I think my accusation regarding your tertiary training is on the money.

>> No.4762797

>>4762789
>>4762790

> trying to capitalize on silly mistakes in order to gain social advantage during a minor tiff
> fumbling use of "tertiary"

topkek

topkek

>> No.4762808
File: 587 KB, 1080x459, output.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4762808

>>4762797
>seps cannot into the banter

>> No.4762886

>>4762750
pleebe lol

>> No.4763481

Many authors agree that a good book should be read AT LEAST twice to grasp it. They require it, even. Written with such a purpose in mind.

>> No.4764005

>>4762691
Let me ask you a question OP, do you listen to a song again to get a deeper understanding of the lyrics? Do you rewatch movies to get a better understanding of the plot and to spot subtle things they added you didn't see the first time you watched the film? Then why wouldn't you reread your favorite books?

>> No.4764060

I reread many times. But I still want to reread more. Different periods of my life appreciate these books differently. Some books I read younger, I want to read when I'm older. Some books I read and never read again.