/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.7396273]

Recommendation list thread

[Anonymous No.7396302]

>>7396273
>not a single kafka or camus book
This is not litcore enough.

[Anonymous No.7396375]

>>7396273
Someone please tell me the saddest one. I want to cry over the weekend.

[Anonymous No.7396379]

>>7396375
The only story that ever made me tear up was The Overcoat by Gogol

[Anonymous No.7396425]

[Anonymous No.7396446]

>>7396302
>he thinks Kafka is supposed to be sad
You must be reading a shit translation my man. Or you just don't understand what you're reading.

[Anonymous No.7396448]

[Anonymous No.7396451]

>>7396302
>>7396446
Same with Camus. He's not sad.
Kafka and Camus' writings are hilarious most of the time.

[Anonymous No.7396459]

>>7396375
Death of a Salesman

Seriously, don't listen to that fuck boii telling u to read the overcoat, if u want to cry, read the death of a salesman

[Anonymous No.7396489]

I read the Setting Sun and found it was the most depressing thing I've ever read and is now quite possibly my favorite book.

I read No Longer Human and didn't find it nearly as good. The main character is pretty pitiful and does an awful lot of whining.

Dazai is great, but in my opinion The Setting Sun is MUCH better than No Longer Human. No Longer Human seems to get all the hype on this board though but I found it to be a bit of a let down.

[Anonymous No.7396617]

>>7396448
Pale Fire not in ultimate mode?

[Anonymous No.7396628]

>>7396448
>The Recognitions
>Women and Men
I like this update

[Anonymous No.7396632]

>>7396617
pretty approachable if you just read / pay attention

nabokov can be oblique, but at least he's stylistically consistent

[Anonymous No.7396636]

Bumping with shit list.

[Anonymous No.7396637]

>>7396448
2666 isn't hard to read it's just boring

[Anonymous No.7396643]

>>7396637
exactly

[Anonymous No.7396648]

>>7396636
>sartre at level 1
Sure pal

[Anonymous No.7396653]

>>7396632
I'm currently writing a post-grad thesis on Nabokov. If you think he's stylistically consistent then you just haven't read enough of his work.

Pale fire is approachable, in the sense you can read the sentences and understand them, which sets it apart from Ulysses. However that's part of why I think it's more difficult, it's the novel as a whole that's hard - the relationship between Nabokov and the narrator is very mysterious, and the reliability of the narrator in regard to his commentary on the poem is shaky at best. Personally I think Pale Fire is one of the hardest novels in existence, certainly more opaque that Ulysses when considered as a whole.

[Anonymous No.7396658]

>>7396648
I said it was shit, friend.

[Anonymous No.7396855]

bump

[Anonymous No.7397044]

[Anonymous No.7397063]

>>7396637
>gomez's shit packed ass is boring

[Anonymous No.7397075]

>>7396379
>>7396459
Thanks

[Anonymous No.7397095]

>>7397044
>Industrial Society and It's Future
>It's Future
>It's
>'

[Anonymous No.7397348]

>>7396448
giving Ulysses a try as a /lit/ newfag. Yes or no?

[Anonymous No.7397351]

>>7397348
no

[Anonymous No.7397358]

>>7397348
No, no, megano, athousandtimes no. Read the Odyssey to contextualize it, and read lesser works to improve your reading skills.

[Anonymous No.7397391]

>>7397358
examples of good "lesser" works? The ones on the bottom of the picture?

[Anonymous No.7397395]

>>7397391
Try The Crying of Lot 49.

It's short and a good intro to harder stuff.

[Anonymous No.7397407]

>>7397395
Thanks for the recommendation, i'll check it out!

[Anonymous No.7397411]

>>7397391
Yes, those are a good start, especially if you are just getting into reading. Trust me, though: without what could be called "practice," little to none of Ulysses will make sense: sequences of events will be incomprehensible, the language will be indecipherable, whole passages won't parse. Even with "training," it will, of course, still be a (no exaggeration here) -rocky- ride.

[Anonymous No.7397432]

>>7397411
I see. English is not my first language either, so i guess that wouldn't make it any easier. I just got into "serious" reading a couple months back and i've been trying to get trough some of the classics (1984, Brave new world, Slaughterhouse 5, lolita etc). Currently reading to kill a mockingbird and got Atlas Shrugged and Metamorphosis (and other stories) waiting on the shelve. Thanks for the advice!

[Anonymous No.7397441]

>>7397432
>English is not my first language either
Ooh, depending on your proficiency with English, you might want to get a translation.

[Anonymous No.7397490]

>>7397441
probably, but i just find it so awkward reading in my first language (Norwegian)

[Anonymous No.7397502]

Good historical surveys?

[Anonymous No.7397544]

>>7397044
>Elliot Rodgers manifesto

[Anonymous No.7398196]

>>7397348

Read Joyce in chronological order, starting with Dubliners.

[Anonymous No.7398248]

>>7397095
but it is.

[Anonymous No.7398250]

>>7396636
>O'Brien above Pynchon and Krasznahorkai
Overall, the list seems to make sense, somewhat. But a lot of them are in the wrong area.

[Anonymous No.7398253]

>>7397044
>Eliot Rodger
>The Quran?

[Anonymous No.7398311]

>>7398250
I agree. It fucking boggles me that Mann, Kafka, Proust, and other modernists are so low. And, considering the fact that this list is based upon obscurity and difficulty, Hawkes should be at level 6.

[Anonymous No.7398318]

>>7396636
>Lowry
>Level 4

but that's wrong

[Anonymous No.7398338]

>>7398318
Ehh, I don't know. Lowry is damn good, so I'd say he deserves level 4 status, but Pynchon should definitely be lower than him.

[Anonymous No.7398396]

>>7396636

I think 0 is kind of harsh, putting real authors with trash like Coelho, King and Atwood is pretty insulting, I mean you're right, they're not good, but they're not in the same category as pure garbage.

Names to add:
Sebald
Levi
Llosa
Poe
Kundera
Milton
Dante
Achebe
Fante
Brautigan

....maybe Fallada too but that's just a personal opinion

[Anonymous No.7398699]

>>7398396

Are you implying that most of those names you've listed belong in 'Level 0'? I hope not.