/lit/ - Literature

>>18689861
>If it is similarly hard

>>18689861
start with the greeks

>>18689875
Which Greeks?

>>18689903
homer and hesiod

>>18689861
yes when I read GR I had to slow down my normal reading speed so I could really understood what was being said but it was well worth it. For GR you aren't supposed to understand everything that happens anyway

>>18689930
>you aren't supposed to understand everything that happens anyway
cope

>>18689930
>For GR you aren't supposed to understand everything that happens anyway
What about Blood Meridian? It's either that or a weak vocabulary for me.

No two authors are hard in the same way.
McCarthy’s only real hurdle is obscure vocabulary.
Pynchon’s writing is like jazz improv, the narrator, subject, setting, and whether it’s literal plot or schizo/dream stuff can change multiple times over the course of one paragraph of stoned beatnik jargon.
You WILL NOT understand more than the rough plot of GR on your first read, which is the point, since a major theme is conspiracies so convoluted that following everything to its end will drive you insane.
It’s worth powering through but you will be frustrated.

>>18689936
you are meant to understand the words in the book anon holy fuck why do I have to say this.

>>18689932
You understood everything on the first read? Or more likely you’ve never read it.

>>18689945
>Pynchon’s writing is like jazz improv, the narrator, subject, setting, and whether it’s literal plot or schizo/dream stuff can change multiple times over the course of one paragraph of stoned beatnik jargon.

Okay, so that's why Crying of Lot 49 was so much easier to read than Blood Meridian. Thanks anon.

>obscure vocabulary
I'm glad to know, I thought I was too retarded.

>>18689946
That is not what I meant.

>>18689985
I'm reading it right now alongside Weisenburgers companion book.

>>18690030
This actually made me think of something.

How do anons on here read books? Do you use companion texts and take notes? Do you re-read multiple times? Do you actively look for symbols and themes or just enjoy the plot? I'm curious about everyone's habits.

>>18690212
Bump.

>>18689861
gravity rainbow is significantly more difficult than blood meridian. BM is mostly just the vocabulary, GR frequently requires abstract thinking and inference to understand what is even happening in a scene

>>18689861
It's alright. Here's what you do, power through it. Then when you're done reading it again. Make sure you actively read it and ask yourself active questions as you go. Good books deserve good quality active reading.

>>18690212
I read two pages then skip one for efficiency. I also read the plot summary on wikipedia ahead of time so I don’t have anxiety about what will happen and can focus on details.

>>18689936
The narrative in BM is straightforward pretty much, with some events only implied. You can understand what happened in the book if you just stick through with it. If you mean 'understanding' it in a complete thematic sense then even 10 reads aren't enough without supplementary material, even then there are myriads of different contradicting interpretations on practically everything in the book.

GR is much harder to get through. There is constant shifting of scenes, reality to dreamscape and what not. Part 2 and part 3 are relatively much more straightforward though. Reading with a guide will help you get some obscure references and make the experiment easier. Same thing again if you want to complete it in a thematic sense.

Bump, just got back home.

>>18690353
>frequently requires abstract thinking and inference to understand what is even happening in a scene
I can do both those things, it's my vocabulary that's weak.

>>18690384
Is it normal to do this for harder books? Will I ever get to a point when I just understand it on the first go?

>>18690652
>with some events only implied
That's what I thought initially, but J thought I was just too stupid to understand it. Both are true.

GR actually sounds really fun, maybe I should've read that first. Also, unrelated, but how tough is Finnegan's Wake? I'm not reading it anytime soon, but I'm curious.

>>18690212
Another bump for this specifically.

Do not fall for the posturing meme. Enjoy your reading; do not choose slogfest central, a waste of time.

>>18691541
I read regular books too. I'm doing this purely out of a desire to learn, not because /lit/ told me. I also really enjoyed the parts of Blood Meridian I did understand.

>>18691540
Finnegan's Wake is written in its own language and the events it describes are totally abstract. I dont think there could be a harder book to read.

>>18691540
>>18691603
Guise, it is Finnegans not Finnegan's

>>18691621
It's gibberish is what it is.

>>18691540
If Vocab is your only problem then go for it. Pynchon also uses a lot of technical and religious jargon but it is not as crazy as McCarthy's vocab.

>>18690212
I remember when reading Foucault's pendulum I got filtered by the very first chapter and could not make head or tail of what the fuck he was talking about. I found out that only the first chapter was like that and then it was all smooth sailing from then on. Since then if I ever get to a point in a novel that filters me k just move along and see if it gets better. This was particularly useful when reading Pynchon or other authors like that since it allows the writing to gain momentum and gets me in a trance like state that's really involving and it's not that big of a deal if I miss something since the plot is never really all that important in those type of novels. Once I finish it I may or may not look for external material to understand stuff that's still unclear and go back and re-read those passages that baffled me the most to see if they make more sense.
I feel that themes should emerge organically and that I should not actively look for them.
Never took notes. Used to when reading Russian lit to keep track of all the weird names and nicknames but now I'm just used to it

>>18691645
Any recommendations for intermediate books to fix my vocabulary? I was going to use a dictionary but that seems like overkill.

>>18691701
How long did that take you?

>>18693031
>How long did that take you?
For what?
Btw you should absolutely use a dictionary

>>18693044
To get used to it. And yeah, I'm going to study a dictionary. Mine only has 150k words though.

>>18690030
cope

>>18690212
the first thing I do is rip it open at the half way point to crack the spine and nice thick crease down the middle

>>18691621

>>18690212
Another bump, maybe I should just make another thread for this.

>>18691540
>how tough is Finnegan's Wake?
It's like doing a crossword puzzle only you are supposed to glean some sort of narrative and meaning from the words you manage to understand because things are actually happening only not really because they are happening on several levels of reality and eventually you just give up because it all sounds like gibberish anyway
The few instances where I understood what was going on in a scene were genuinely rewarding and even invigorating, but in retrospect it wasn't really worth the effort

>>18689932
t. retard pretending to be well read

>>18689936
it uses archaic language, even very well read people will be looking up words when reading it. It's not a bad thing to look up words while reading

>>18693093
To Russian names? Idk I think I took notes only for crime and punishment since that's the way the girl who lent me the book read it, but after that since I didn't want to feel like doing homework I just ditched it
Btw you don't have to study a dictionary you mega austist. Just look up the words you don't know when you stumble into them