thoughts about this book?

[Anonymous No.21623482]

i just bought it. is it worth it?

[Anonymous No.21623501]

what a worthless fucking thread.why are you asking /lit/ for opinions on your purchasing decisions? read the book and make up your own mind you troglodyte. if you're going to kill a thread at least post something worth responding to

[Anonymous No.21623649]

regrettable purchase, op.
next time, buy pic related.

[Anonymous No.21623659]

i just marathoned this thread. what did i think of it?

[Anonymous No.21623674]

Just popping into this thread to say that I hate niggers. That is all.

[Anonymous No.21624130]

>>21623482
>identifies problem
>adds another tedious tome to it under the guise of satire, when really he's an academic belletrist and nothing beside
It has its amusing moments, but ultimately doesn't - and could never - accomplish what it set out to do. A fascinating dead end. To get a sense of it, see Nietzsche on Cervantes. This sort of thing began as 'vicious' picaresques of empty, hollowed out forms. "The [Author] is dead and we have [bullycided] him!"

[Anonymous No.21624249]

>>21624130
You have not read the book.

[Anonymous No.21624319]

>>21623482
i read the book about 2 years ago so bear with me

it's definitely a slow burn, not really the kind of thing you read inbetween errands during your day.

i would recommend finishing the first 50 pages and then consider whether or not you want to continue reading. you can tell whether or not because although the plot(s) go in wildly different directions towards the middle/end the way the book flows does not change. if you don't want to bother keeping up with the three plots going on in the beginning, then you're going to be annoyed having to keep up with the 12 non-chronological plots occurring all at once in the middle of the book.

[Anonymous No.21624356]

>>21623649
That sounds really cool. How pozzed is it?

[Anonymous No.21624427]

>>21624130
>space-separated en dash instead of em dash
go back to your gender studies course at University of Faggot

[Anonymous No.21624742]

>>21623501
We're supposed to read?

[Anonymous No.21624821]

>>21624427
>>21624130
btfo

[Anonymous No.21625011]

>>21624427
That is a hyphen or dash. En-dash would be the same width as the 'n'. Em-dash is the width of an 'm.'

[Anonymous No.21625031]

>>21623649
>>21624356
all me

[Anonymous No.21625063]

>>21625011
I am glad I have this knowledge now but fuck you and I'll – your mother's — until her last name includes -

[Anonymous No.21625205]

>>21625063
An en-dash is not for omision, it is to show relations and ranges, 2010–2015 or the Spain–Portugal boarder. Em-dash can be used for omissions, generally you would replace each letter of the word with an em-dash and leave the first letter. "I'll f——— your mother's c——— until her last name includes -" Using a single en-dash is non-nonsensical here and what your really said was
>I'll through/to your mother's—wait, where was I going with this, fuck this punctuation thing is confusing how long is the pause for each of these dash things anyways?—until her last name includes hypen.

As an aside, if you wanted to make a joke with punctuation you should have gone with "until she has a /" and not forced it with your improper use of en and em-dashes.

[Anonymous No.21625265]

>>21625205
it wasn't for omission.
the en-dash functions as an emoticon
the em-dash is a pun on mother's gash
at a certain point it's deliberate misreadings
but I'm willing to consider you don't do things deliberately.

[Anonymous No.21625308]

>>21625265
>the en-dash functions as an emoticon
not everyone is a zoomer
>the em-dash is a pun on mother's gash
Puns exploit the different meanings, you just ignored the actual meaning, not a pun.
>but I'm willing to consider you don't do things deliberately.
Think I demonstrated rather plainly that I am considerably more deliberate than you.

[Anonymous No.21625312]

>>21625265
idk can we get OP Lord over here?
I'm pretty sure INDPAK is heavily irradiated

[Anonymous No.21625454]

>>21625312
I don't know but I feel like throwing this grammar faggot's head into a computer monitor.

[Anonymous No.21625597]

>>21623482
Try reading it.

[Anonymous No.21625622]

>>21625454
this is a literature board and you tried to make a grammar joke you're just mad at the smoothness of your brain

[Anonymous No.21625783]

>>21623482

Yea its worth it. It's slow but consistent and interesting and engaging. At bare minimum you'll get a pretty incredible portrayal of addiction that's neither romantic nor condescending.

Personally, it helped me let go of a lot of irony and unlock the values of cliches, which has paid substantial dividends in my life desu.

[Anonymous No.21625787]

>>21625312
>>21625622
Made the grammar joke, but misplaced the reply.
Also made a reference to one of the stories in Infinite Jest that proves the value of the book to OP
Seeing that you probably haven't read the book Infinite Jest I should explain the story you have missed to supplement this.
The game of Eschaton, a game of simulated thermonuclear war is derailed as kids start getting really particular about the rules all so that they can win.
It ends up with all the kids fighting and O. Lord is run thin trying to keep some semblance of the game together.
If you read the book you'd know you're being a silly little overly competitive kid trying to win a couple extra points on a thermonuclear war simulation board debating the proper use of lines with varying lengths.
Thermonuclear war and the end of the world would be a wonderful thing to have again but idk if that's possible at this time.
As a concession to your proclivities I am curious about what your opinion might be on the increasingly rare if every used dog's bollocks :— compound point?

[Anonymous No.21625816]

>>21625787
Everyone got your reference. If you really want to be anal about it then Lord would also call you a smooth brain, Eschaton does not see shades of gray, it is mathematical, calculating and logical, this is all explained along with the run down for the game.

[Anonymous No.21625869]

>>21625816
lol no, we don't want to be anal about it, that's the point.
GOD FORBID anyone actually WANTS to see the world burn.

[Anonymous No.21625967]

How many times have I written tldr posts about this book only for the thread to get derailed. Anyway, it’s my favorite book and I wouldn’t recommend it to anyone. It’s long and tedious. The whole thing is set up to constantly remind you that you are reading a book. It purposely rips you out of flowstate with its endnotes and time skips and multi threaded plots and characters. It cucks you from all the action that actually happens in the story. Every character is talking past each other. Everyone is trying to make a point and fails because no one is listening. The only person who’s happy is a retard. Baudrillard was right. I felt a deep sense of loss when I finished it, and I couldn’t tell if it was because of the time I lost reading it or the lost of meaning from having no more book left to read, which is kinda the whole gag itself. It parodies people who autisticly delve into details and worlds instead of characters. It’s racist. It’s classist. It’s fanatical about it’s message of everyone being a fanatic. When I finished it I threw it across the room.

[Anonymous No.21625983]

i just marathoned the cover and it looks good op

[Anonymous No.21626688]

>>21625205
cringe

[Anonymous No.21626977]

how good is infinite jest compare to the rest of his works?
i read oblivion, brief interviews, a supposedly fun thing, and I enjoyed more or less. but also I have found his writing really exhausting-tough from time to time, but i really like good old neon, description of depression in brief interviews, or even essays about tennis or david lynch

[Anonymous No.21626998]

>>21626977

infinite jest has his best writing imo. you could sample it by reading the section early on about the guy waiting for his weed to be delivered (it can function as a standalone short story)