[ 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: 147 KB, 626x710, GustaveDoreParadiseLostSatanProfile.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4995027 No.4995027[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Have you read everything important by

> Plato
> Aristotle
> Ovid
> Virgil
> Shakespeare
> Goethe
> Dante
> Pushkin
> Milton

If no, why aren't you working towards that now?

>> No.4995041

Because there are other authors to read as well.

>> No.4995044

>>4995041

None of nearly the same importance.

>> No.4995054

I dunno... Zola, Nietzsche, DeBeauvoir, Sartre, Balzac, Voltaire seem pretty important to me. I'm nearly at the end of The Last Days of Socrates by Plato, but it's the first book of his I've read. It's all subjective anyway man.

>> No.4995055

>>4995054
Is The Last Days of Socrates just made up of Crito, Phaedo, the Apology, etc.?

>> No.4995057
File: 44 KB, 399x266, Commie Scum.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4995057

Shit. Knew I forgot someone, Dostoefsky, Turgenev, Camus among others.

>> No.4995058

>>4995044
You're actually claiming Pushkin is more important than Cervantes? Get out of here you plebish moron.

>> No.4995063

>>4995027
>Ovid
>more important than Marx

>> No.4995066

>>4995027
>Virgil
Just calm down.

>> No.4995070

>>4995055

Yeah, I'm pretty sure. It goes Apology, Crito and then Phaedo. I thought what was said about Justice was interesting but I'm not sure about how Socrates just embraces death with such open arms.

>> No.4995072

>>4995054

> the importance of a writer to his or her culture is subjective

No. SHAKESPEARE coined hundreds of words and phrases which have entered the English subconcious in a way which no other wroter has approached. He is objectively the most important.

>>4995054

They all are, but less important than my picks.

Also you are French and I am Anglo.

>> No.4995073

Only Ovid and Virgil.

>> No.4995074

>>4995063

I... I just wanted to put up a funny picture...

>> No.4995077

>>4995072

I'm Irish.

>> No.4995078

>>4995057

I like Turgenev but if you think he's a very important writer you're wrong.

>>4995058

I forgot Cervantes.

>>4995063

> Markx
> literature

Yes Ovid is more important to literature than marx is.

>> No.4995080

>>4995078
>Plato
>literature

>> No.4995082

>>4995057
>Dostoefsky
kek

>> No.4995083

>>4995072

I'm Irish. Some call me the reincarnation of Samuel Beckett.

>> No.4995088

>>4995080

You could say that about Aristotle maybe. Plato is undoubtedly literature.

>> No.4995093

>>4995088
Written as literature, yes, but if we're talking importance to literature I'd say he's just as valid a figure as Marx.

Aristotle, while not exactly written in the literature format, wrote Poetics, very influential on literature.

>> No.4995094

What are the total 'important' works of all of these authors IYO? How many for each? They've all put out so much.

>> No.4995098
File: 104 KB, 396x294, 1327027431555.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4995098

Because I don't waste time on reading things I do not enjoy.

I read classics, if they interest me. If it doesn't, then I drop it and read something else.

/lit/, where everyone pretends to enjoy reading every classic book on the planet in their short 16 years on this earth, which is completely possible.

>> No.4995101

>>4995094

lol I wrote "important" only to exclude a few pointless aristotle works.. so read everything by all of them... except Aristotle.

>> No.4995104

>>4995098

> wasting time

I guess if I don't enjoy learning French or a language, or working out it's a waste of time?

So stupid.

>> No.4995106

>>4995104
Correct, if you don't enjoy it, it is a waste of time.

Anyone over the age of 23 would understand this basic knowledge of life. I think you have a few years to go. Enjoy learning a language you hate.

>> No.4995110

>>4995106

LOL

Fuuuuck what a moron.

>> No.4995111

>>4995027
you forgot cervantes, chaucer, montaigne

>> No.4995113

>>4995110
Fantastic counter argument, I'll leave now, I am ashamed I tried to match wits with you.

>> No.4995114

>>4995106

> I am a shortsighted idiot
> I like eating junkfood and lying around all day more than healthy food and working out
> improving yourself through effort is a waste of time
> I don't enjoy challenging myself or strugglig because I am stupid

That's you

>> No.4995115

>>4995101
that would take forever, there's so much more interesting things to read

>> No.4995116

>>4995111
also homer you tard how u forget homer

>> No.4995117

>>4995111

I added Cervantes and Chaucer/Montaigne aren't quite as important.

>> No.4995118

>>4995117
montaigne definitely is... chaucer is debatable but if you're an english speaker he is

>> No.4995120

>>4995114
If you're not in school then spending months reading things you don't enjoy is stupid. There's no big exam in life, you're not preparing for something. You can learn as much and more from thousands of other authors that aren't in OPs list. Be creative, it's not a competition.

>> No.4995121

>>4995115

> nine authors
> would take forever

Retard.

>>4995116

I figure he was unnecessary to put.

>> No.4995122

>>4995121
>I figure he was unnecessary to put.
for what reason

>> No.4995123

I honestly only read sci-fi and fantasy, or other fiction that I like (horror, etc). I don't read to learn, I read for pleasure, not to brag about my reading some old shitty book no one understands any more.

>> No.4995124

>>4995120

You're utterly stupid if you think the only reason to read and better understand wetern literature is for a school exam.

>> No.4995126

>>4995027
idk op why aren't you

>> No.4995128

>>4995122

He wrote two books everyone has read already and he goes without saying,

>> No.4995129

>>4995122
Who doesn't know to read Homer, when the mantra of /lit/ is to start with the Greeks?

>> No.4995131

>>4995129
who doesn't know to read these other authors lol

>> No.4995134

>>4995120

Also hell if you don't enjoy Shakespeare, Ovid, Virgil, Pushkin, Goethe and Dante (Milton, Aristotle and Plato may be less enjoyable) you are one dumb fuck and should probably stop reading altogether.

>> No.4995135

>>4995121
Provided you have a job, Goethe's catalogue alone would take the best part of a year.

>>4995124
Congratulations on completely misreading my post.

>> No.4995136

>>4995134
>milton
>less enjoyable
pshhh

>> No.4995137

>not reading the complete lope de vega
FUCKING PLEB

>> No.4995138

>>4995136

I like Milton but I can understand someone disliking his work, the other authors have universal appeal to an intelligent reader.

>> No.4995142

>>4995135

You must read like twenty minutes a day.

>> No.4995145

>>4995120

>it's not a competition

Hard for most people to see that, because they generally don't even realize their competing

>> No.4995196

Reading them would be good but it's not required.

>> No.4995205

>>4995027
Tolstoy on Shakespeare:
I remember the astonishment I felt when I first read Shakespeare. I expected to receive a powerful esthetic pleasure, but having read, one after the other, works regarded as his best: "King Lear," "Romeo and Juliet," "Hamlet" and "Macbeth," not only did I feel no delight, but I felt an irresistible repulsion and tedium, and doubted as to whether I was senseless in feeling works regarded as the summit of perfection by the whole of the civilized world to be trivial and positively bad, or whether the significance which this civilized world attributes to the works of Shakespeare was itself senseless. My consternation was increased by the fact that I always keenly felt the beauties of poetry in every form; then why should artistic works recognized by the whole world as those of a genius,--the works of Shakespeare,--not only fail to please me, but be disagreeable to me? For a long time I could not believe in myself, and during fifty years, in order to test myself, I several times recommenced reading Shakespeare in every possible form, in Russian, in English, in German and in Schlegel's translation, as I was advised. Several times I read the dramas and the comedies and historical plays, and I invariably underwent the same feelings: repulsion, weariness, and bewilderment.

>> No.4995207

>>4995138

I don't think a really intelligent reader - or, at least, a reader with developed taste - could find Plato and Aristotle appealing.

>> No.4995210

>>4995205
Continued:
At the present time, before writing this preface, being desirous once more to test myself, I have, as an old man of seventy-five, again read the whole of Shakespeare, including the historical plays, the "Henrys," "Troilus and Cressida," the "Tempest," "Cymbeline," and I have felt, with even greater force, the same feelings,--this time, however, not of bewilderment, but of firm, indubitable conviction that the unquestionable glory of a great genius which Shakespeare enjoys, and which compels writers of our time to imitate him and readers and spectators to discover in him non-existent merits,--thereby distorting their esthetic and ethical understanding,--is a great evil, as is every untruth.

>> No.4995214

>>4995205

Oh that proves it then... forget about what Ezra Pound, T.S Eliot, Borges, Chekhov, Kierkegaard, Dostoyevsky, Ibsen, Joyce and practically everyone else thought of Shakespeare... Tolstoy (who you realize believed that art was strictly meant to expand and instruct moral virtues) didn't like King Lear and that means Shakespeare is bad.

>> No.4995219

>>4995205

I'm not offended by Tolstoy's opinion, he's entitled to it, but I am bothered by the scores of plebs who appeal to his thoughtful response to justify their own lazy misreading of Shakespeare.

>> No.4995226

>>4995214
I think it is to make a point that SHakespeare is not OBJECTIVELY great and necessary to enjoy.

>> No.4995229

>>4995214
No need to be rustled, friend. I was just pointing out that there are no absolutes.

>> No.4995230

Because I've only just gotten into literature and I didn't arrange my huge backlog of books into chronological order.

>> No.4995231

>>4995219

Seriously... aside from that Tolstoy was a pretty unreliable critic or commentator on practically anything (and I am a huge Tolstoy Fan).

>> No.4995238

>>4995226

In my op I said Shakespeare was important, which is objectively true.

>>4995229

> providing a reasonable couter to your argument
> rustled

lol

>> No.4995239

I'm reading "the peak of eloquence" if that counts.

>> No.4995247

>>4995210
Continued:
May I suggest that you should be careful not to imply that Tolstoy's great Shakespearian heresy has no other support than mine. The preface of Nicholas Rowe to his edition of Shakespeare, and the various prefaces of Dr. Johnson contain, on Rowe's part, an apology for him as a writer with obvious and admitted shortcomings (very ridiculously ascribed by Rowe to his working by "a mere light of nature"), and, on Johnson's, a good deal of downright hard-hitting criticism. You should also look up the history of the Ireland forgeries, unless, as is very probable, Tolstoy has anticipated you in this. Among nineteenth-century poets Byron and William Morris saw clearly that Shakespeare was enormously overrated intellectually. A French book, which has been translated into English, has appeared within the last ten years, giving Napoleon's opinions of the drama. His insistence on the superiority of Corneille to Shakespeare on the ground of Corneille's power of grasping a political situation, and of seeing men in their relation to the state, is interesting.

>> No.4995253

>>4995247
The above was George Bernard Shaw, which continues:
Of course you know about Voltaire's criticisms, which are the more noteworthy because Voltaire began with an extravagant admiration for Shakespeare, and got more and more bitter against him as he grew older and less disposed to accept artistic merit as a cover for philosophic deficiencies.

>> No.4995259

>>4995238
I did not make an argument, Miss Lol, but pointed out that Tolstoy saw Shakespeare as evil. You countered nothing, Miss Lol.

>> No.4995264

>>4995207

>a reader with developed taste

I consider myself a reader (because I read)
I consider myself really intelligent (because I am)
I have a good taste (because I do)
I don't find Aristotle and Plato appealing (because I don't)
Therefore, really intelligent readers (or, at least, readers with good taste) must not find Aristotle and Plato appealing (because this makes sense and my assumptions are correct because they are)

>> No.4995278

Because I read for fun, I find no joy in reading utter trash that pretends to help you but in the long run will only lead you to a job at the local fast food chain

>Liberal arts
Burger flipping

>Philosophy
Store clerk
Professor if lucky

>Art
Lol

>Political science
Grocery bagger with Marxist ideas

>> No.4995290

>>4995205
of course tolstoy didn't like shakespeare, he is the anti-poet

shakespeare represents the peak of the poetic way of writing, tolstoy the peak of the novelistic way of writing... it is a natural and eccentric hatred

>> No.4995295

>>4995027

Reading The Divine Comedy right now, pretty interesting stuff.

>>4995058

Come down child.

>> No.4995297

>>4995278

>I find no joy in reading utter trash that pretends to help you but in the long run will only lead you to a job at the local fast food chain

Don't try to take shots at great minds because you lack the perspicacity and wherewithal to achieve great things like they fought and managed to do, you insecure fuck.

>> No.4995308
File: 14 KB, 243x326, sarcasm1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4995308

>why are you not working towards that now?
because I'm on 4chan, same as all of you.

>> No.4995309

>>4995106
>>4995098
>>4995120
This guy bringing age and experience into everything. Obviously in your early 20's, but you still have a teenage mindset:

>Seniors are cooler than juniors
>"I'm a grade higher than you"

Wait until you're 30, then you'll realize emotional maturity and intelligence has little to do with age.

I wish I was still 21.

>> No.4995313

>>4995309
do you even realize how blatantly hypocritical this post is

>> No.4995332

>>4995278

>utter trash that pretends to help you

it's hilarious how defeated you are

protip: no one owes you anything, least of all academia

academia isn't going to hold your hand and do all of your thinking for you. you have to actually work for it you absolutely abject pleb

stay mediocre, kid

>> No.4995342

>>4995106

Stop posting here.

You don't belong here.

>> No.4995346

I just came to /lit/, setting plans for a jaunt through philosophy thanks to the wiki notes that should last me a few years.
Regarding fiction, my interests lie towards more modern stuff, I'll admit. Right now I'm favoring modernism since it brought me into the literary fold.

>> No.4995415

Why isn't Orwell on this list?

>> No.4995498

>> Plato
Trial of Socrates, Meno. Protagoras. Reading Republic. Don't plan on reading any more.
>> Aristotle
Nicomachean Ethics, Poetics. Don't plan on any more.
>> Ovid
Metamorphoses. Plan on reading his love poems and rereading Metamorphoses.
>> Virgil
Aeneid. Plan on reading his pastoral poems.
>> Shakespeare
R&J, Macbeth, Hamlet, Othello. Plan on reading his tragedies and sonnets
>> Goethe
Faust Pt 1. Plan on reading Werther and assorted poetry.
>> Dante
Reading Mandelbaum's trans
>> Pushkin
Plan on reading Onegin.
>> Milton
Read a few poems: Nativity, Lycidas. Plan on reading Paradise Lost.

There's a never ending list of classics to read.

>> No.4995567

>>4995498
I do not know which English translation of Werther is best, but definitely do not read the Penguin edition. It is absolutely terrible and ridiculous.
Just giving heads up.

>> No.4995597

>>4995057
> Dostoefsky
No.

A fancied journalist.

>> No.4995604

>>4995101
> I read everything by Goethe
yeah right

>> No.4995618
File: 35 KB, 334x500, 0679643087.01.LZZZZZZZ[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4995618

>>4995567
Thanks, I was planning on reading the Pike translation despite the embarrassing cover.

>> No.4995626

>>4995618
*in spite of

>> No.4995641

>>4995618
what.the.fuck. Is this from the early nineties?

>> No.4995648

>>4995618
I hope it catches a glimpse of Goethe's genius. He is truly a master. (Painful cover indeed.)

>> No.4995650

>>4995044
How about fields that aren't philosophy?

>> No.4995902

>>4995070
It's been a bit of time since I read the Crito, but if I recall correctly his arguments run:
I am not scared of death because I do not know what comes next. There is no need to be scared, it might be beautiful out there. Plus, my personal god told me my "defense" (comprised of attacking the court, the Apology) was perfect, so I'm doing things right.
Also, the Law wasn't wrong, the jury (comprised of men) was, but since I lived in the city without leaving I must obey the Law. Xenophon's version of the Apology also cites Socrates saying that death would be better than getting old.

>> No.4995925

>>4995207
How could anyone not enjoy the Symposium or the Apology? Sure, Republic can get dull from a literary point of view, if you've someone encountered all his arguments before, and I'll admit Aristotle isn't a barrel of fun to read, but Plato is captivating.

>> No.4995931

>>4995650
>Spear-Shaker
>philosophy

>> No.4995933

>>4995498
Before you leave Plato, read the Symposium.

Also, to answer OP's question, I still haven't left the Greeks.

>> No.4995939

>>4995313
im 75% sure this is a troll thread

>> No.4995944

>>4995567
What's wrong with the Penguin edition, I thought it was very true to the original

>> No.4995953

None of these authors published anything "important".

>> No.4995982

>>4995931
>francis bacon
>not philosophy

>> No.4996089

>>4995953

You're are retarded.

>> No.4996110

>>4996089
Jokes on you, I'm only pretending.

>> No.4996120
File: 69 KB, 460x611, 1402221390263.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4996120

>>4996110

>> No.4997076

>>4995027
After Plato and Aristotle I can think of plenty more important things to read than what's on that list.

>> No.4997087

>>4996120
I want tiny beers

>> No.4997088

>>4997076
Such as?

>> No.4997100

>>4997076
I think OP has it pretty much right.

Possible important omission of Horace.

>> No.4997109

>>4997100
>Whore Ass
hahaja lollllllllllll

>> No.4997117

the only important one on there is ovid.

>> No.4997196

>>4997117
Milton is transcendental.

>> No.4997201

Because I would rather read things I enjoy, not trawl through a collection of dry texts just to be pretentious.

>> No.4997210

>>4997201
>any of those writers
>dry

>> No.4997223

>>4997201
your childish obsession with authenticity is holding you back

>> No.4997224

>>4997201
Goethe is certainly dry as fuck.

>> No.4997231

>>4997224
i dont think you know what that word means.

>> No.4997238

>>4995027
>> Pushkin
Good one.

>> No.4997296

>>4995044
>Homer
>Augustine
>Montaigne

>> No.4997387

>>4995415
Because when you read
> Plato
> Aristotle
> Ovid
> Virgil
> Shakespeare
> Goethe
> Dante
> Pushkin
> Milton
you suddenly get all the fancy literary allusions in other famous works. If you read them in the right order, you should be able to find the allusions to the upper writers in the works of the lower writers. And that's just an added bonus to enjoying the literature itself.

George Orwell is too modern, and I haven't seen any fancy allusions to 1984 or Animal Farm.

>> No.4997401

What is the point in reading translated pushkin?

>> No.4997419

>>4997401
>mfw learning russian
>mfw feminine accusative adjectives
seriously wat

>> No.4997421

>>4995027
>important

to what, or who? i could live life as an illiterate and still live as well as if i'd read the complete bibliography of all the authors you listed

>> No.4997426

why is Pushkin thrown in there? He seems like the one that doesn't belong.

I've read Plato and Shakespeare and Dante but I kind of roll my eyes at 'fancy allusions', more often than not they just come off as pretentious. I only like Dante's allusions because they're obviously central to his work.

>> No.4997427

>>4997421
lol no you couldnt
>muh relativism
suck a dick

>> No.4997445

>>4997427
You're an idiot

>> No.4997448

>>4997445
distressingly for you Im not

>> No.4997454

>>4997426
He invented russian literature

>> No.4997464

>>4997448
By who's standards?

>> No.4997465

>>4997427
its not even relativism. what can you get out of reading all of that material that you can't get out of something else?

>> No.4997483

>>4997465
The ideas and associated experiences they contain?
>>4997464
society's

>> No.4997495

>>4997483
That's relative you faggot

>> No.4997512

>>4997483
those authors do not have a monopoly on ideas and experiences, especially the latter

if you meant more specifically, your argument is at best a tautology

>by reading them you benefit by reading what they wrote

i could just as easily argue that by never reading them and doing something else like traveling the world you get the ideas and experiences you get from traveling the world.

>> No.4997583

>>4997464
>who's
>who is

>> No.4997653

>>4995205
tolstoy confirmed for pleb

>> No.4997673

If I want to get into the most basic, entry level philosophy, what should I read first?

>> No.4997754

a) i don't need to live up to traditional notions of knowledge and worldliness and read what interests me. those interests might motivate me to pursue those writers when the time feels right, instead of what other's expect of me.

b) i'm lazy.

>> No.4997790

I'll read the classic English authors since they actually knew what they were doing with the language. Those other guys are bit more tricky

>> No.4997839

>>4997653
You're just finding this out?

>> No.4997873
File: 62 KB, 209x277, Might_is_right.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4997873

>>4997653
Tolstoy said bad things about Raggy
Pleb as fk

>> No.4997879
File: 46 KB, 255x225, The-Most-Interesting-Man-in-the-World.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4997879

>>4997839
>In 1908 Tolstoy wrote, and Gandhi read, A Letter to a Hindu,[3] which outlines the notion that only by using love as a weapon through passive resistance could the native Indian people overthrow the colonial British Empire. This idea ultimately came to fruition through Gandhi's organization of nationwide non-violent strikes and protests during the years c. 1918-1947. In 1909, Gandhi wrote to Tolstoy seeking advice and permission to republish A Letter to a Hindu in his native language, Gujarati. Tolstoy responded and the two continued a correspondence until Tolstoy's death in 1910. The letters concern practical and theological applications of non-violence, as well as Gandhi's wishes for Tolstoy's health. Tolstoy's last letter was to Mohandas Gandhi.[4]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kingdom_of_God_Is_Within_You#Tolstoy.27s_relationship_with_Mohandas_Gandhi

>> No.4997884

>>4997879
U mad?

>> No.4997932

>>4997873
That's because Might Is Right is retarded

>> No.4997934

>>4997932
Nope

>> No.4997940

>>4995205

>reading translations of Shakespeare

Clod.

Tolstoy is basically describing the fact that it's difficult at first to grasp Shakespeare's English.

OK, Tolstoy.

>> No.4997943

>>4997934
Yes it is.

>> No.4997944

>>4995278

>you can either make a good living or read good books

Well, damned if you do, damned if you don't, eh?

>> No.4997954

>>4995123
Why are you even on /lit/?

>> No.4998385

>>4997940

Tolstoy was just a very bad critic and he wrote most of his criticism in "What is Art" where he asserts that the only purpose of art is to provide edification and moral instruction to people... Aside from Shakespeare he criticizes Dante, Beethoven, and Michaelangelo.

He was also an extremely bad theologist/philosopher so it's very ironic that his aestrtic ahievements with War and Peace, Anna Karenina and his short fictions should overshadow his career as a moralist/preacher. He probably would have criticized War and Peace if somebody else had written it.

>> No.4998406

>>4997426

Most important writer by far in the Russian language whose readers make up a good chunk of the western world. I was trying to cover all Europe too so maybe add...

> Pessoa
> Cervantes
> Montaigne

And throw in

> all the important greek tragedians
> Homer
> The Christian Bible
> The Koran
> The Mahabharata/Ramayana (abridged, nobody is going to read 20, 000 pages of it)
> The Icelandic Sagas
> Chaucer

And the original

> plato
> aristotle
> shakespeare
> milton
> virgil
> goethe
> pushkin
> dante

>> No.4998616

>>4995063
You're a fucking fool to think Marx is more important than Ovid - Metamorphoses is the principle of all art and form - its a universal principle

>> No.4998620

>>4997117
Agreed 100%

>> No.4998624

>>4998406
Chaucer, Nordic Sagas and French/Celtic/Anglo Medieval shit are generally ignored - (save for Beowulf and a couple of note worthy works)... Religious work is a given as well - you either have one or another

>> No.4998716

>If no, why aren't you working towards that now?
I'm paralysed by the immensity of the task, and a lack of direction on where to start with it

>> No.4998729

>>4998624

Nordic sagas represent a mythology which is pretty well referenced in literature and art all the way to the present. I studied it quite a bit sort of retroactively from Wagner... it's like 1500 pages at most, you might as well read them.

>>4998716

You can hit the source religious material and the major works of everyone I put down in around 100 books which can be read easily in two years or if you have a lot of time for reading in one. You will need to supplement the canon with probably an equal ratio of history and other non fictions.

Anyway it's a 2-5 year task depending on your speed.

>> No.4998739

>>4998716
Page 1, numbnuts

>> No.4998742

>>4998739
page 1 of which translator, idiot.

>> No.4998911
File: 25 KB, 600x455, 1368548040106.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4998911

>Have to listen to at least another 300 hours worth of classical I have not heard before.
>Have to watch scores of old foreign films
>have to read at least +150 books
I really wish I was self-retired

>> No.4998929

>>4997940
tolstoy could probably read shakespeare fairly easily in english actually

>> No.4998935

>>4998385
he did criticize war and peace

>> No.4998941

>>4998911
i know a secret and it's that you don't actually have to watch those films because no film is as good as a major work by an author in OP's list

>> No.4999018

>>4998935

lol he did a little, but I think he would have found it more distasteful had someone else written it.

>> No.4999052

>>4997387

I don't see the need for reading "fancy allusions" when I have a book of the same caliber as 1984 in front of me. It cemented Orwell's place as a theorist on the effects of totalitarianism on the individual. Something which I don't think anyone captured as succinctly as Orwell. Plus it's an interesting read.