feminine

[Anonymous No.7365334]

what's the best book ever written by a woman
I can't think of any book that's particularly great by a female author
I don't think I'm a mysoginist, though

[Anonymous No.7365394]

>>7365334
Agatha Christie
Rowlings
Selma Lagerlöf

history easily forgets women also

>why Jünger

[Anonymous No.7365400]

>>7365334
Kvinnor och Äppelträd.

[Anonymous No.7365402]

>>7365394
>Rowlings
do you mean Rowling? never heard of a Rowlings
so, three genre authors basically?
seems good
I picked jünger because he seemed good

[Anonymous No.7365407]

>>7365334
>I can't think of any book that's particularly great by a female author
i see you don't like the modernists, OP. good for you, it's hard to go against the flow of history

[Anonymous No.7365411]

>>7365402
Du Maurier
Woolfe
Smart
Gibbons (if you want some comedy in there)

[Anonymous No.7365412]

>>7365407
modernists are my favorite actually, I just don't like virginia woolf
any other suggestions

[Anonymous No.7365413]

>>7365402
In what way is Lagerlöf a genre author?

[Anonymous No.7365416]

>>7365413
childrens book
I suppose you could consider that not-genre

[Anonymous No.7365420]

>>7365412
the other side of the modernists, the imagists, probably won't be to your liking either, but HD was considered better than anyone by Pound. likewise, Barnes is considered high modernism's best, but i don't think you'll like her either.
which modernists do you like?

[Anonymous No.7365422]

>>7365334
All the ones I can think of aren't really /lit/ material
(I just assume anything I like is plebtier)
>tfw even Carmilla was written by a man.

What about Frankenstein, or The Haunting of Hill House?
As the Meat Loves the Salt- Maria McCann
Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell - Susanna Clark
Mary Renault in general.

[Anonymous No.7365423]

>>7365416
But she only wrote one childrens book.

[Anonymous No.7365427]

>>7365334
Memories of Hadrien by Yourcenar

[Anonymous No.7365431]

>>7365411
what's du mauriers best book

>>7365420
kafka, döblin, beckett
who is HD
I generally don't respect pound btw

>>7365423
it's her most well known book though, it got her the nobel prize

>>7365422
>What about Frankenstein, or The Haunting of Hill House?
>As the Meat Loves the Salt- Maria McCann
>Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell - Susanna Clark
>Mary Renault in general.
out of those I've only read fraknkenstein, which I didn't like, the rest also don't sound promising

[Anonymous No.7365433]

Michael. Ein Jugendbuch für die Infantilgesellschaft

[Anonymous No.7365436]

>>7365433
I like jelinek but she's pretty limited imo
havent read that one though

[Anonymous No.7365439]

>>7365400
>Bortglömd författare som grävdes upp för politiska mål
låt mig skratta lite hårdare

[Anonymous No.7365441]

>>7365431
>it's her most well known book
True, but it's kind of strange to call someone a genre author if they only wrote one.
>it got her the nobel prize
Yeah, I'm pretty sure this is wrong.

[Anonymous No.7365442]

>>7365431
>I generally don't respect pound btw
pound's one of the most bro editors in history. HD is Hilda Doolittle, one of the key imagists.
Since you like Beckett and Kafka, you'd probably like Zurn since she was closer to the Theatre of the Absurd.

>didn't like Frankenstein
have you considered you don't have good taste?

[Anonymous No.7365445]

>>7365431
>the rest also don't sound promising
you're not going to get anywhere with that attitude. If you're specifically looking for good female authors, you can't just dismiss them out of hand.

[Anonymous No.7365446]

>>7365439
>Let me pretend that "laugh harder" can be directly translated to Swedish without being unidiomatic.

[Anonymous No.7365449]

>>7365441
it's right actually, I suppose you can't nail down what the jury thinks, but the book was a major sensation the year before she was awarded

>>7365442
>pound's one of the most bro editors in history
a fascist that never read the rusheens isnt my thing, I also have a general dislike for poets

>you'd probably like Zurn
I considered her before reading this thread, might read her again, seems fairly minor to me though
>have you considered you don't have good taste?
I have

>>7365445
you're right I suppose, but if you really think you can't judge a book by it's cover then you haven't spent enough time around books
also jonathan strange is just straight up trash

[Anonymous No.7365450]

>>7365446
är du rumpfrustrerad min vän?

[Anonymous No.7365453]

>>7365449
>a fascist that never read the rusheens isnt my thing, I also have a general dislike for poets
oh wow you're just a bigoted idiot who knows nothing about modernism. you probably even still like eliot pfffft
>I considered her before reading this thread, might read her again, seems fairly minor to me though
so fucking ignorant
>I have
might be time to stop making judgments and try to hid behind a misogynistic image rather than let people know you're dumb in more ways than one, bro.

as someone else suggested, jackson might suit your reading level too.

[Anonymous No.7365455]

>>7365450
Nej, sket nyss. Runda fina korvar.

[Anonymous No.7365496]

>>7365453
I don't like elliot, I guess I am pretty bigoted though, I don't see how disliking syncretic hacks makes me so

>so fucking ignorant
sure thing name calling bro, how you could think that she's anything but minor is beyond me
most people seem to not have actually read the OP, I was looking for great books, not books that are palatable that happen to be by a woman

>might be time to stop making judgments and try to hid behind a misogynistic image rather than let people know you're dumb in more ways than one, bro.
why would I want to hide behind an image if I have no problem with admitting my real opinions, especially on an anonymous imageboard?

pretty sure a jackson wasn't suggested in the thread, and I don't really have a reading level

[Anonymous No.7365499]

>>7365496
>I don't really have a reading level

[Anonymous No.7365504]

>>7365499
I wasn't brought up with the abstract concepts o the american education system and I've always read whatever interested me, Iapparently that makes me worthy of a >, seems good

[Anonymous No.7365509]

>>7365422
Lmao Maria mccann? She's actually respected? I thought I had just accidentally picked up gay erotica by a pervy old woman when I read As Meat Loves Salt

[Anonymous No.7365514]

>>7365334
Not gonna be a popular answer because non-fiction, but my favorite female author is Bethany McLean.

Smartest Guys in the Room, and All the Devils are Here are fucking fantastic non-fiction that include moral judgement right out of one of Plutarch's Lives. Shes also bangin

[Anonymous No.7365516]

>>7365504
I'm not American either, but I assume that reading level refers to what you *can* read (and understand) and not what you *do* read.

[Anonymous No.7365517]

>>7365496
>I don't like elliot, I guess I am pretty bigoted though, I don't see how disliking syncretic hacks makes me so
if you dislike someone for being fascist and claim you like modernism, you'll run into the problem that Hamsun is a fascist and foundational to modernism, d'Annunzio is one of the founders of fascism and modernism, even ee cummings liked McCarthy. It's practically impossible to disentangle fascism from modernism, even Lawrence was right wing as fuck while being a faggot.
>sure thing name calling bro, how you could think that she's anything but minor is beyond me
it's not namecalling, it's what you are. she's major to anyone who knows shit about surrealism, it's like calling someone ignorant for saying either duchamp is minor
you're ignorant of not just modernism but most major 20th Century movements. you whining about it is not going to change western canon's opinion of you.

>pretty sure a jackson wasn't suggested in the thread
Shirley Jackson wrote The Haunting of Hill House, you ignorant fuck. You have the reading level of a poorly educated preteen, since even high school kids read Jackson.

[Anonymous No.7365518]

>>7365514
Also was deeply impressed by this years nobel laureate svetlana alexievich work on chernobyl, and am planning on reading all of her works, especially her book on afghan whore boys

[Anonymous No.7365520]

>>7365334
Nabokov admitted to having a "prejudice" against women writers. He wrote to Edmund Wilson, who had been making suggestions for his lectures: "I dislike Jane [Austen], and am prejudiced, in fact against all women writers. They are in another class."

[Anonymous No.7365522]

>>7365509
I don't know, I just went to my bookshelf and picked a couple that weren't Tanya Huff or Naomi Novak.

I actually haven't read it

[Anonymous No.7365525]

>>7365517
That guy isn't from the United States, anon.

[Anonymous No.7365527]

Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage.

[Anonymous No.7365530]

>>7365525
it's not called high school in my country either, i just figured making the distinction of age groups was easier than if i had said lycee etc

[Anonymous No.7365533]

>>7365520
First google result for that quote:

> This was Nabokov in a letter to Edmund Wilson, before he liked Austen: ‘I dislike Jane, and am prejudiced, in fact, against all women writers. They are in another class. Could never see anything in Pride and Prejudice.’ (Austen could have written this – with its chiming prejudices – into the mouth of one of her famous boors.) Then Vlad read Mansfield Park, admitted it to be one of the best books ever written, and gave a two hour, chapter by chapter lecture on it.

[Anonymous No.7365540]

>>7365517
>if you dislike someone for being fascist and claim you like modernism, you'll run into the problem that Hamsun is a fascist and foundational to modernism, d'Annunzio is one of the founders of fascism and modernism, even ee cummings liked McCarthy. It's practically impossible to disentangle fascism from modernism, even Lawrence was right wing as fuck while being a faggot.
I'm able to differentiate, most modernists I like were leftists or communists
>she's major to anyone who knows shit about surrealism
yes, she's a secondary representative of a secondary movement, she's niche, you might call it

>you're ignorant of not just modernism but most major 20th Century movements
right, except I've said practically nothing about movements
>you whining about it is not going to change western canon's opinion of you
I don't think I was whining, atleast I didn't feel like it, and I think the canon is more on my side than yours

> since even high school kids read Jackson.
maybe they do in the us or english speaking schools, but they don't in germany
apparently this is a ghost story? this is the sort of thing I generally don't read, I just ctrl+fd the thread and there was no jackson, I was just asking for clarification, but whatever

[Anonymous No.7365543]

>>7365540
>apparently this is a ghost story?
Not him but its worth your time, especially during winter storms. The movie from the 60s is good as well

[Anonymous No.7365544]

>>7365394
lol! Christie was a hack, literally only writing to fund her husband. Formulaic genre trash is not a 'best book'.

The fuck has happened to you /lit/? you used to be e/lit/ist and now you accept shit like harry potter?

>shame shame shame

[Anonymous No.7365548]

>>7365543
sure, I have a backlog like everyone else and little time though, so I'll probably never get to it

[Anonymous No.7365549]

>>7365544
The Harry Potter thing is the same as Redwall or Enders Game in previous decades. Fantasy books that inspired millions to read, of which only a small percentile actually moved on to literature.

>>7365548
Story of my life

[Anonymous No.7365551]

>>7365411
lol, have you even read Rebekah?

Its melodramatic shite, there are korean dramas that are more grounded in reality.

[Anonymous No.7365556]

>>7365540
>I'm able to differentiate, most modernists I like were leftists or communists
so you dislike most of modernism, including the pinnacles of modernism (woolf, barnes) and the founders. yeah i got that. i like the series friends, but none of the characters, plot lines, or episodes, i don't know why people think i dislike it.
>yes, she's a secondary representative of a secondary movement, she's niche, you might call it
she's a primary representative of the movement which you claim to like one of the secondary authors of beckett
>right, except I've said practically nothing about movements
you said modernism was your favourite kek
>>7365540
>I don't think I was whining, atleast I didn't feel like it, and I think the canon is more on my side than yours
baaaah fourchan called me names and knew more about modernism than me

>maybe they do in the us or english speaking schools, but they don't in germany
Oh sorry, I forgot Beckett wrote in German and this is a German language board, and that German modernism is the height of style, and Kafka didn't want his works burnt. It's like that time that I thought Jackson was a major figure with several different movie versions of her book The Haunting of Hill House and who had a major impact on English literature.

seriously, just pretend you're a misogynist, it would make you look less ignorant of the past century's literature than trying to defend all these points.

[Anonymous No.7365560]

>>7365549
inspiring others to read or lowering their expectations with repetitive and overly long sagas?

I'm all for getting kids reading again but with material that stretches them and develops their character.

[Anonymous No.7365564]

>>7365544
No one agreed with it, we just ignored it.

[Anonymous No.7365566]

>>7365560
>tv star
>makes fun of tv

[Anonymous No.7365572]

>>7365560
You and bloom agree. That said, there is a minority (including some of the autists here) that started out going to bookfairs and getting gifts from their parents when they were young, and getting sucked in from there.

Ill admit that Indian in the Cupboard opened my eyes when I was in third grade. Its not patrician, but it serves its purpose.

>stretches them and develops their character.
I have two girls and let me tell you, reading them what you want them to read is not the way too go, I have had many failures. Wind in the Willows makes them fall asleep, but reading them like 7 berenstain bears books in a row, or an illustrated classic of treasure island makes them get sad when reading time is over.

[Anonymous No.7365573]

>>7365533
And Harold Bloom recalls Nabokov always giving praise of Austen with the disclaimer "not as good as Gogol"

[Anonymous No.7365577]

>>7365556
I never said that I liked the majority of modernists, I don't think.
I also have never watched friends so I probably don't understand your reference properly.
>she's a primary representative of the movement which you claim to like one of the secondary authors of
I don't consider beckett a surrealist nor do I consider zurn a primary surrealist, agree to disagree I suppose

>you said modernism was your favourite kek
so? some people like the choo choo train, that doesn't mean that they believe themselves to be engineers

>baaaah fourchan called me names and knew more about modernism than me
I'm beginning to think you might be projecting with this supposed immaturity thing, though I might be mistaken
I'm really not upset about your supposedly superior understanding of modernism, like, not at all

>Oh sorry, I forgot Beckett wrote in German
yes, because I like someone that wrote in french I was educated in england, quite right
movie versions? I think I've lost you entirely

>seriously, just pretend you're a misogynist
why? I really don't see what you're trying to say here

>than trying to defend all these points
but I haven't made any points? the only thing you might consider a point is that zurn is not a titan, if you will, of 20th century literature, which is uncontroversial

[Anonymous No.7365582]

>>7365527
BTW, has anyone seen the film version? Is it any good?

[Anonymous No.7365584]

>>7365449
> I also have a general dislike for poets

lol

>>>/reddit/

[Anonymous No.7365591]

>>7365584
>>>/plato/ actually, but whatever

[Anonymous No.7365593]

>>7365334

>ctrl f

>no 1001 nights, or even tale of Genji

[Anonymous No.7365598]

>>7365577
>I never said that I liked the majority of modernists, I don't think.
You said modernists were your favourite in response to my complimenting you on not liking them.
It turns out you dislike a lot more of them than you like, so yeah, I was right.

>I don't consider beckett a surrealist nor do I consider zurn a primary surrealist, agree to disagree I suppose
Considering that both wanted to work in the vein of the Theatre of the Absurd, I agree that you disagree with general consensus of literary distinctions and the authors' intentions. So yes, you're wrong and free to continue being so.

>I'm beginning to think you might be projecting with this supposed immaturity thing, though I might be mistaken
I think you complained about being called ignorant and when proof of your ignorance is demonstrated you respond with girlish answers like "agree to disagree" and ask people to take the name calling down a bit to not invalidate their claims of your ignorance by using the term ignorant. You can think what you like about me and the distinctions of canon, but you won't come across as well-versed in modernism if you outright reject any fascist or female author therein. In short, you'll look ignorant or whatever synonym for that you find kind enough to accept as your mantle.

>yes, because I like someone that wrote in french I was educated in england, quite right
You attempts at logic are not digging your out of the hole of ignorance you find yourself in.

>movie versions? I think I've lost you entirely
It's a sign of popular impact to have your works repeatedly inspire another medium.

>but I haven't made any points? the only thing you might consider a point is that zurn is not a titan, if you will, of 20th century literature, which is uncontroversial
"I disregard all fascist modernists" is a very perverse point to make as someone who claims to like modernism the best. It's like saying "I like all female authors, except the ones with vaginae"

[Anonymous No.7365600]

>>7365402
>>7365413
>fucking Lagerlöf
>not Astrid Lindgren

[Anonymous No.7365605]

[Anonymous No.7365607]

maybe you need to read more books

[Anonymous No.7365615]

>>7365593
>1001 nights
Shahrazad didn't exist. It comes from oral traditions passed down usually through males and some females.

[Anonymous No.7365623]

>>7365598
>It turns out you dislike a lot more of them than you like
I suppose I should have said "my favorites are modernists" rather than "modernists are my favorite".
I also don't think I actually dislike a majority of modernists, it just meant that it does not matter to me how many of the modernists I actually like, I still appreciate modernism as a movement, while I disagree with some of it's ideals and representatives
>Considering that both wanted to work in the vein of the Theatre of the Absurd, I agree that you disagree with general consensus of literary distinctions and the authors' intentions
apprently you've read a book on this subject and you digested it wrong, beckett was a modernist and not a surrealist, zürn was a german house wife that made contact with french surrealists in the 50s and began writing prose in her 40s, about 20 years after the major surrealist works were written.

>I think you complained about being called ignorant and when proof of your ignorance is demonstrated
but you demonstrated no such thing?
>you respond with girlish answers like "agree to disagree"
so you are the mysoginist here, is that what's happening? I also don't see how that answer is ""girlish"" nor do I see what's wrong with it.
>ask people to take the name calling down a bit
I ask people to take the name calling down for their own sense really, people incorrectly sense their own dignity imo
> to not invalidate their claims of your ignorance by using the term ignorant. You can think what you like about me and the distinctions of canon, but you won't come across as well-versed in modernism if you outright reject any fascist or female author therein.
I'm not really sure what you're saying here, but I don't dismiss female authors outright, and I don't really dismiss fascists either, I'm quite fond of people that might be considered fascists, like the OP.

>You attempts at logic are not digging your out of the hole of ignorance you find yourself in.
yes, accurate, simple logic, dear friend of ignorance

>It's a sign of popular impact to have your works repeatedly inspire another medium.
but this thread is about literary merit and not popular success

>"I disregard all fascist modernists" is a very perverse point to make as someone who claims to like modernism the best
again with the name calling, perverse in this context means nothing, I really think it's better for your sake if you try and articulate what you mean better rather than baselessly rage at someone on an imageboard, while attemtping to espouse your intellectual superiority.
>It's like saying "I like all female authors, except the ones with vaginae"
You seem to think that fascism is somehow essential to modernism, something that is, shall we say, tendentious at best. Maybe you should actually acquire that education you seem to be so proud off instead of posting here. At this point I hope you're trolling because you make no sense.

[Anonymous No.7365624]

Flannery, you tannery, sure she is the ascending sun that warms my face.

[Anonymous No.7365631]

>>7365623
>more whining about how everyone else in literature is wrong
whatever m8, we tried to help you

[Anonymous No.7365643]

>>7365551
muh fukn dick

[Anonymous No.7365649]

I don't read much fiction other than the classics and some modern short stories, so my exposure to female authors is mostly via academia.

The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir, and Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt are great examples of great works in modern philosophy.

Also Fast Machine by Elizabeth Ellen is a pretty great collection of short stories.

[Anonymous No.7365660]

Better yet
>What's the best composition ever written by a woman

[Anonymous No.7365669]

I like Jane Eyre a lot. Maybe not the best book ever written by a woman but it comes to mind.

[Anonymous No.7365687]

>>7365669
What exactly do you like about her, other than the fact that she's a female

[Anonymous No.7365765]

>>7365687
Jane or Charlotte?

[Anonymous No.7365896]

>not being misogynist

Do you even read?

[Anonymous No.7366135]

>>7365514
>Bethany McLean
>tfw milf fetish

[Anonymous No.7366142]

>>7365765
emily was the best sister

[Anonymous No.7366149]

>>7366142
That doesn't answer the question of whether >>7365687 meant the character created by Charlotte or Charlotte herself.

Your opinion is wrong tho, Emily a shit, Charlotte a best

[Anonymous No.7366150]

Primero sueño by Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz

[Anonymous No.7366159]

>>7365687
Jane Eyre is the name of the book... Charlotte Brontë is the author. I liked Jane Eyre too; it's very well written.

[Anonymous No.7366160]

>>7365334
Read more, dumbass

[Anonymous No.7366563]

Yourcenar's Memoirs of Hadrian

[Anonymous No.7367334]

>>7365334
The fucking Memoirs of Hadrian??

And if you think none of the Brontes were "particularly great", you're an idiot.

[Anonymous No.7367339]

>>7367334
not OP, but if you require the Brontes or, worse, Austen, to be considered great to meet your standard of not retarded, you're probably retarded.