[ 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: 39 KB, 550x310, goodreads.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6495392 No.6495392 [Reply] [Original]

I haven't been on 4chan in weeks. I know you all have goodreads.
discuss what you're reading/post troll accounts/shit-talk people who review classics

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/34001908-dottie-b

>> No.6495417

>>6495392
>age
...you mean there's another adult on /lit/?

>> No.6495433

>>6495392
A qt who appreciates Richard Yates? please be in NEW YORK!!

>> No.6495434
File: 104 KB, 800x1143, 1416954323571.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6495434

>>6495392
>search: bible
> click kjv
> read comments

>> No.6495688

>>6495392
Dottie seems chill af

>> No.6495765

Can someone tell me what exactly goodreads is for? The notion I've gotten is that it's like facebook except to show off what you've read. Is that a fair judgment or am I way off the mark? Also what are the demographics like in terms of people who read "classic literature" or whatever term you want to use vs. those who exclusively read stuff like Lord of the Rings, the Game of Thrones books, 50 Shades of Grey, etc.?

>> No.6495777

add me

>> No.6495782

>>6495765
No you're exactly right, it's a place for plebs to discuss genre shit and pseudos to "like" books they've never read. It's like /lit/ but everyone knows your name and it's even more shit.

>> No.6495787

>>6495765
It's a toxic social networking website and the reviews are worse than amazon reviews.

However it's pretty useful to keep track of what you've read and add books to the "to read" list. That's what I use it for.

>> No.6495792

>>6495765
What I use it for:

a) Keeping track of what I read,

b) the "yearly pledge" of reading X books is a good way of keeping myself reading ("I'm 3 books behind, better stop playing CS now"),

c) I usually write tiny reviews for myself mostly to get my thoughts in order,

d) I follow about 20 people whose reviews turned out to be good in the past, and I got some great to-read books from them

e) keep track of the books I want to read - every time I see an interesting book, I add it to my to-read shelf, then when I finished a book, I randomly pick one from that shelf. In about 3 years that shelf has grown to 1400 books, and my read shelf is at about 400 books. It's a lifelong uphill battle.

The demographics are mostly female YA-readers, so you can discard the majority of the site (you can discard the majority of any site).

The book recommendation engine ("because you've read X, you might like Y") is quite shitty, I've gotten better recommendations from the people I follow. They recently been bought by Amazon, I thought this would improve the recommendation thing, but so far they've only bound the site tighter to Kindle.

>> No.6495794

>>6495765
There are different ways you can use it, but what I like to do is find and add a handful of reviewers, enough so that there will be at least one very well-written review from someone on my friends list for just about any book I can find.

I find the views of a few trusted strangers (and a few IRL friends) much more reliable than the aggregate rating for a book, or even the top few reviews, which are often very surface-level.

So I use it to decide between a handful of books, what to buy or check out of the library or read of books I already have. Whatever your demographic is (classics or pop lit), you can create a nice comfortable echo chamber for yourself by choosing whom you follow.

>> No.6495798

>>6495794
I'm the guy from >>6495792
and I agree with

>or even the top few reviews, which are often very surface-level.

so much - the "most liked" review is usually crap

>> No.6495851

>>6495782
>>6495787
Thanks for the input.

>>6495787
Fair enough. I personally don't see a reason to "keep track of what I've read" with a system like that, and I maintain a short to-read list of the next several books I will read with a shit load more that I will get to someday but haven't prioritized yet. I can see why someone would use it for those reasons, though.

>>6495792

(a) see above

(b) I'm sorry but I really find the yearly pledge thing a bit ridiculous. Maybe if I had more time to read, but I just read as often as I can (sometimes just the 30-40 minutes I'll be waiting for and riding the bus going to work if I'm working a double, or maybe several hours if its my one day off per week) and don't feel the need to set a goal. I will still probably read about 70-80 books this year if I can give a very rough estimate). Since I already spend the majority of my free time reading (except for after work, that's reserved for getting as drunk as possible before I have to pass out in time to get to work the next day), I don't see the use for a "pledge".

(c) I've often thought about doing this but have yet to act on it. I feel like whatever I have to say about it will be silly in comparison with the text itself. Might be stupid of me, but I can't help it. I won't even reread books I had to annotate back in high school because I can't imagine how foolish my notes on Moby Dick must've been back then.

(d) Sounds like the first really good reason so far, but rely a lot on the opinions of certain friends whose thoughts I feel are worth heeding, and usually get a sense for how I'll enjoy something based on what I can find online.

(e) See above. Also I would be the same way, adding dozens of books at a time and I don't want to intimidate myself like that.

Thanks again everyone. The verdict is in: I will continue to avoid this site just facebook and the like.

>> No.6495861

>>6495851
>(b) I'm sorry but I really find the yearly pledge thing a bit ridiculous. Maybe if I had more time to read, but I just read as often as I can (sometimes just the 30-40 minutes I'll be waiting for and riding the bus going to work if I'm working a double, or maybe several hours if its my one day off per week) and don't feel the need to set a goal. I will still probably read about 70-80 books this year if I can give a very rough estimate). Since I already spend the majority of my free time reading (except for after work, that's reserved for getting as drunk as possible before I have to pass out in time to get to work the next day), I don't see the use for a "pledge".

That's a valid point - to me, I "work" better on something if I have a goal on it, like "write exactly 500 words per day" or so. Without a precise goal I "work" less. I realise this sounds like I don't enjoy reading, but I enjoy being lazy more.

>feel like whatever I have to say about it will be silly in comparison with the text itself.

it helps to read a few other reviews first, there's a good chance yours can't be the stupidest

>> No.6495894

>>6495787
>>6495851
>maintain a short to-read list of the next several books I will read

I do this in my head I mean. This list usually contains at most 5 or 6 books and as I finish that list I create another. The lists are generally related in some way, whether they are by the same author, are from the same time period and cover similar themes, etc. For example I recently went back and reread a bunch of Greek literature, and now I'm currently in the middle of reading three books in succession by the same author and they are all historical fiction set in classical Greece. Next I will be reading some of the earlier novels written in the English language and then plan to read a few by Somerset Maugham after that. Once I get to the Maugham works I'll decide the next group. It might be some earlier American works or maybe some from 20th century American lit, maybe just a bunch of Hemingway, who knows. Like I said before, if I had a good reads, my to-read list would be fucking insane. This is how I've managed that for a good few years now and it seems to work for me.

>> No.6495918

>>6495861
>I "work" better on something if I have a goal on it, like "write exactly 500 words per day" or so. Without a precise goal I "work" less. I realise this sounds like I don't enjoy reading, but I enjoy being lazy more

Totally valid as well. It can certainly be a good way to stay focused and just push yourself. I get it.

>it helps to read a few other reviews first, there's a good chance yours can't be the stupidest

It definitely would be far from the stupidest but even still. My parents fucked me up and I grew to be a perfectionist with no self-confidence whatsoever. They would make me feel stupid about myself if I got anything less than a perfect score on a school assignment and I would be grounded for my grades if the majority weren't A's at all times. Hell they pulled me off my high schools Model United Nations academic debate team because I had a C on a fucking progress report freshman year (I really fucking hated math and just wouldn't do homework or study for tests). By "they" I really mean my father. Mom was pretty cool.

>> No.6496586

you all bring up good points. Dottie would be proud. Now post your actual Goodreads.

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/35515738-austin-langer

>> No.6497072
File: 93 KB, 454x590, 1428966595239.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6497072

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/4769248-diego

>> No.6497084
File: 158 KB, 1366x768, chad ulysses.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6497084

>> No.6498131

goodreads.com/atom_cable

I write decent reviews

>> No.6498255

>>6498131

you're no Chad, but I'll add you

>> No.6498265
File: 42 KB, 560x432, 1429402500769.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6498265

>>6497084
>like with the IRA

yeah they sure are a group of joksters them IRAs

>> No.6498276

>>6498131
You're cute.

>> No.6498679

Validate me through social media please.
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/39996883-sacha

>> No.6498757

you can add me

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/2408134-sebastian

>> No.6498791

>>6495792
>3 books behind, better stop playing CS now
Iktf

>> No.6498837

Are there any good reviewers or reviews? Anyone have an example? Everybody on the site seems so bloody pleb, and most reviews on more literary stuff just seems to be people completely misunderstanding the work in a lot of cases.

>> No.6498846

>>6496586
I deeply respect your refusal to play the ratings game by instead rating everything 5 stars, but if that's how you feel, why do you use the site?
>>6497072
I think Goodreads should max out to-read lists at maybe 10% of the read books or something, otherwise the "compare books" button gets worthless (they could also just remove "to-read" from the compare books, which would make more sense). anyway please let me be the one to stop you from reading Pynchon's and Vonnegut's short stories, or at least recommend you read other work from them; they're both great authors but pretty mediocre short story writers.
>>6498131
5 stars to Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close? There better be a reason for this, like you're also autistic and lost a parent in 9/11 and went on a quirky journey to learn about them or something.
>>6498679
Best taste ITT, but why have none of you read more than ~50 books?
>>6498757
oh never mind, this guy is best taste ITT, and he has the extremely good judgment to list the best PKD novel (Palmer Eldritch) as one of his favorites

I deeply respect all of you btw. /lit/ is a safe space

>> No.6498864
File: 41 KB, 709x748, 10155756_805128949535903_94968911218139616_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6498864

>>6498791
>7 books ahead nice I'll read some more
feels good man

>> No.6498872

>>6495392

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/5220919-nerdboy

>> No.6498971
File: 939 KB, 3794x1832, 1422324633648.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6498971

>>6495792

>> No.6498983

HELLENISIMOS - https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/42092365-kieran

>> No.6499448

>>6498846

I am >>6496586

Nobody on goodreads deserves to give a book stars. Stars or a five-star rating system DO NOT belong to art criticism. Movies/books are 'enjoyed and recommend' or 'did not enjoy and do not recommend' plain and simple.
Personally the reason why I rate everything five stars is because
1. I only show what I've read and enjoyed because shit-talking on a book review site is pitiful and embarrassing (see: bible reviews, Ulysses reviews, Tao Lin reviews.)
2. I don't use the site for reviews because it's probable that some or most people do not read books for the same reason or in the same way I do (unconditional re-reading, being neutral/open to every single book read.)
3. It is very interesting to see what other people are reading, how their 'taste' evolved over time, or what people in general enjoy. What I find uninteresting is people who review books for the sake of having an opinion instead of using their page to lead others to fiction they might enjoy, not leading them away from fiction they might not like because your opinion conflicted with it.

>> No.6499507
File: 839 KB, 1920x1080, 1421451995518.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6499507

>>6498276

It's the cover from a Chelsea Wolfe album. Sorry darlin'.

>> No.6499516

>>6498846

Not that I have to justify my taste to random strangers, but I read Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close during a time of rather intense emotional vulnerability and it happened to strike a proper chord with me.

Others see it as emotionally manipulative or opportunistic or saccharine, but I found it wonderful and re-read it at least once a year.

>> No.6499530

>>6495392
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/29831737-pinkyivan
Most people on /lit/ probably already have me added, but here you go anyway.

>> No.6499531
File: 133 KB, 600x600, gene wolfe pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6499531

>>6499507
Did someone say Wolfe?

>> No.6499537

I am this guy

>>6498757

>>6499448
>Personally the reason why I rate everything five stars is because

I rate everything I liked 3 stars. 4 and 5 stars are reserved for books I consider Masterpieces. 2 and 1 stars are for books that might be okay, but I did not dig them.

>> No.6499548

>>6495392
Add me if you like! https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7656542-sarah

>> No.6499559

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/42639826-rafael

Recently read Fable by Robert Pinget.

>> No.6499563

H-hello

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/32443560-erik-lind

>> No.6499629

>>6499548
pleb

>> No.6499646

Just realized again how most of the little pile that I've read so far is minor oddball stuff, but oh well, aren't we all trying to move up?

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/28279594-alex

>> No.6499978

>>6499646
>private profile
Don't do that.

>> No.6500006

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/41901972-theedgiestofalltime

I still have to go through and add all the other books I've read

>> No.6500067

>>6498757
>https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/2408134-sebastian

Heh, we're friends already. I've always wanted to ask you, how in the everloving fuck do you read so much? Do you do nothing in your spare time but read?

>> No.6500088

>>6500067
>Heh, we're friends already. I've always wanted to ask you, how in the everloving fuck do you read so much? Do you do nothing in your spare time but read?

I was in a psych ward for two month earlier this year. I read two months through.

>> No.6501606

http://letterboxd.com/films/popular/
https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1.Best_Books_Ever

who has better taste, /lit/?

>> No.6501771

>>6499548

>>>6499629

>> No.6501784

>>6501606
>https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/1.Best_Books_Ever

23k people voted for the top book out of ~5million people

>> No.6501798

>>6498757
>>6499548
>https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7656542-sarah

you are following me, why not send a friend request?

>> No.6501924

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/3463412-gnosis

feel free to add

>> No.6503198

>make troll account to shitpost on Hayek, Rand, Mises, and other libertard books
>make a troll account to shitpost on Marx, Benjamin, Hedges, Klein, and other leftist books

>> No.6503226

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/39773708-clorisu

be gentle

>> No.6503241

>>6503226
>didn't start with the greeks

>> No.6503248

>most profiles barely even have 100~ books read

It all makes sense now.

>> No.6503648
File: 24 KB, 377x561, 1422188193688.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6503648

Added/already friends with everyone in this thread. Feel free to add me, recommend books, send messages, etc.
I just recently started writing reviews and will continue to do so:
https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/33000286-arthur-c-p-g

>> No.6503730

>>6503248
>I am a NEET and have time to add all the books I've read in my life to a social network

>> No.6503734

>>6503730
not that guy but I added all of mine while I was boerd at work

>> No.6504402

>>6495765

I used it primarily as a source to compile books on my reading list. It's ok to stir discussion theoretically but I've never ever had a serious discussion caused by Goodreads yet.

>> No.6504445

>>6498757

>lower ratings than me for literally everything

Very patrician tbh.

>> No.6504483

>first time I've been on Goodreads in a really long time

>a gril liked one of the automatic posts on my wall of wanting to read a book

>never seen or talked to her before

>not on my friends list

What?

>> No.6504488

>>6504483
spam account, wants you to follow/add her in order to increase friends in order to raise the price of the account

>> No.6504497

>>6504488

She didn't send me a friend request though.

>> No.6504508

>>6504497
It's like on Twitter - spambots favorite tweets with their words of interest in order for you to check out who they are and follow back/add as friend

>> No.6504590

>>6498837
What really gets me is that guy that has to make up an entire story instead of just making a fucking review. You can tell while he was writing it he had this shit-eating grin on his face thinking he was oh so clever and witty. While his review amounts to nothing more than "this was boring, why would anyone read this, here read these books instead".
Fuck this guy.

>> No.6504635 [DELETED] 

https://m.ask.fm/SarahHambleton/ask

Spam it like hell >:)

>> No.6504686

>>6504635
reported

>> No.6504796
File: 133 KB, 850x750, 1386915147257.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6504796

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/33337370-evan

Feel free to add.

>> No.6505056
File: 125 KB, 886x1263, pepeelcuco.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6505056

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7002468-carlos-eduardo

R8, h8 and masturb8.

>> No.6505088

https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/13464582-tegan-boundy

Go for it.

>> No.6505100

>>6505088

currently-reading (201). what?

>> No.6506060

>>6505056
>https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/7002468-carlos-eduardo

what did you think of The Confusions of Young Törless? do you plan to read der mann ohne eigenschaften anytime in the future?

>> No.6506065

>>6506060

I read der mann ohne eigenschaten last summer when germany won the world cup, I am german, I watched all world cup games and read inbetween, one of the best reading experiences of my life.

>> No.6506377

>>6498837
You sound like such a fucking elitist. I write reviews. Are they the best? Fuuuuuuuuuucccccckkkk no. They help me organize my thoughts though. I feel I get better with each one too. There's reviews I wrote when I got the account like 4 years ago that make me cringe. The ones I write now make me cringe less.