/lit/ - Literature

Nietzsche
Montherlant
Proust
Joyce
Homer
Hugo
Baudelaire

>>4345872
Probably some YA author or other from when I was a kid, just by virtue of their having written a million easily-read books each.

>>4345876
Tolstoy too

Honestly? Probably, George R R Martin.

>>4345888

Oh my goddddd

Steven King

>>4345876
I think this guy is a lying

Charles Bukowski
Ernest Hemingway
Haruki Murakami
Cormac McCarthy
Roberto Bolano
Christian Kracht
Thomas Pynchon
William Faulkner
Hermann Hesse
Bret Easton Ellis
Irvine Welsh
F. Scott Fitzgerald

Terry Pratchett, for sure.

>>4345876
it's going to be a pain in the ass to have to read all those books again when you're not 18 and actually have a modicum of experience to be able to relate to them in any non-superficial way

>>4345938
Although in terms of books written, RL Stine or KA Applegate (if ghostwritten books still count as the same brand-name author) could be up there. Pratchett would win in page count no problems, though.

Vonnegut
Shakespeare

>>4345943
>throwing this empty 'experience' buzzword around
>being beuvian scum

Oh god please.

more like Phallis am I right guys

>>4345981
>it was the dick that masted me

Faulkner (his big three)
Kafka (all his fiction and some of his personal writings)
Conrad (HoD, Lord Jim, Nostromo, Under Western Eyes, The Secret Agent)
Carson McCullers (HiaLH, Short stories)
Donald Barthelme (most of his short stories)

probably Lovecraft. my familiarity with most authors rarely extends beyond one or two novels, but i read a considerable number of his short stories back in high school.

>>4345872
I strongly suspect it's actually Terry Pratchett. I can't remember how much Asimov I've read, though, must be a reasonable amount.

>>4345888
This image legitimately made me guffaw. I can barely even process it... it seems to be making a million jokes at once.

either terry pratchett or david foster wallace

Hemingway by far. Pynchon is up there too if I go by pages read/hours spent reading.

I've read 7 books by Milan Kundera. I think that's the highest. I'll read everything of his eventually. I have also read a hella lot of Anton Chekhov.

>>4346087
Oh, and all of Cummings. Every. Last. Word.

>>4345973
What Shakespeare and Vonnegut you read?

>>4345888
You look like Woody Harrelson.

>>4346101
I think he looks like a young David Spade.

>>4345888
Oh for fucks sake.

I've read Hesse, Hemingway, and Tao Lin about equally. Not saying I enjoyed them all the same, just that I've read approx. the same number of books.

>>4346093
>every last drop
ftfy

On my 7th Dostoevsky right now.

I don't know what it is about him (or the translation or whatevs) but it's just such a joy to read.

All you people saying something suitably /lit/erary, did you never read any big long fantasy/sci-fi series when you were a kid? I'm pretty surprised that nobody has said J.K. Rowling, for example.

>>4346146
Read all (all.) of Dune and Fundation from 10 to 12, I think.

Patrick O'Brian 20 novels. (The Master and Commander Series
Cormac McCarthy 10 novels
William Faulkner 6 novels
A bunch at 5, Hemingway (plus the Short Stories) DeLillo, Dostoevsky, Dickens, Mailer, Phillip Roth, 4 novels and a memoir for James Salter.

>>4346146
>J.K. Rowling
I'm looking forward her next play, Sunhawk's Suicide: A Tragedy in One Act.

That guy who wrote wheel of time. I stopped when he died (and now I wished I'd given up earlier), but it still makes about ten thousand pages.

After that, it might be Proust, just from In Search of Lost Time.

>>4346146
>>4346600 here. I thought about Rowling maybe being my second most-read, but word counts place In Search of Lost Time as longer than all of HP combined (and, though I couldn't find word counts for her most recent books, it might be longer than her entire oeuvre).

Nietzsche (unfortunately) and Machado de Assis. I may be accused of being an underage shitposter, however I'm getting a disturbing sense that the userbase not only of /b/ but also of this board may be far too young and naive to actually adequately hold a decent "literary discussion", as in most users were born between 1993-1995. They just aren't old and experienced enough to have properly read even 3% of the classics and other relevant books, and the joke's on me. I probably picked up Nietzsche when I was 14 because he was so overhyped by my philosophy teacher. His first book I read was Beyond Good and Evil. The impressions and feelings this book evoked on me were quite interesting, as I had a profound disgust by reading it. His cravings for criticizing the humbleness and negative submissions of medieval Catholicism whilst praising self-determination the the will to live completely antagonized my oversensitive and dramatic self, who cried over the evils of humanity and languished my own futility of weakness and resentment. The Ubermensch, the Eternal Return and the Spirit of Putridness were concepts I couldn't quite grasp and the way he worded his convictions of assertiveness over pessimism and grief by alluding to a controlled flock of sheep being preyed by an eagle considerably opposed what I believed in. These are the impressions I got from reading him in such an early age, and I personally much prefer Schopenhauer personally as I still get a sense of hostility and survival of the strongest from his books. Also, as he would criticize many philosophies before him I may have gotten a blurred interpretation due to my limited knowledge. I won't get into Asceticism, frankly.

>>4345888
This is the funniest picture I've ever seen.

>>4345926
>Bukowski
Just read one Bukowski book and you've read all of them.

For sheer number of books, probably Elmore Leonard. Good chewing-gum novels, though most aren't especially memorable. I haven't read one in a couple of years now, so I'm not sure how they'd stand up if I reread some.

Karl May. I loved his books as a kid. I've read every single book by May available in my local library.

>>4345872
rl stine nigga

probably read over 100 of those

>>4345872
Kawabata and Brautigan.

Frank Herbert and the guy that wrote the Redwall books.

Marcus Aurelius, I ever bring his confessions in my pocket wherever i go.

>>4345872
I'm having trouble parsing the meaning of your post. Please clarify

>>4347978
based on quantity
which author's works have you read and how many
i assume

>>4345888

>Ann Coulter, DFW and Nietzsche on the same tier
>Hemingway and Fight club on the same tier

10/10

>>4346255
It's funny, I got a one-day ban for putting on that trip for a while- one of my posts was 'not about literature'. Turns out even being fake Sunhawk is grounds for a ban.

>>4346722
Yeah, it's actually pretty entertaining going from one book to the next and trying to picture what kind of freakish human being would have such incongruent opinions.

>>4345872
Plato, read all dialogues last summer

>>4345872
David Eddings most likely, I read a great deal of his works in middle school. Haven't touched him since though.

Recently it's been a lot of Lovecraft and Howard, also trying to find some Ashton Clarke and Dunsany.

And if "series" is allowed I've been consuming "A very short introduction"'s like possessed.

>>4345888
That's one masterful ruseman.

Brian Jacques

Hemingway i think.

Philip K Dick
possibly Shakespeare

NO! Actually, R. L. Stine

Kafka

>>4345872
Hemingway, Steinbeck, Kerouac, Raymond Carver

>>4345872
Poe

i've literally read everything by him that's available to see

and dostoevsky

Murakami
Peter Carey
Dostoevsky
Scarlett Thomas
Iain M Banks
David Mitchell
Doris Lessing
Borges

To be brutally honest Stephen King. I was young /Lit/ so young and stupid

>>4345872
Poe, Shakespeare, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Plato, Marx

>>4346749
Are you German?

Neal Stephenson. I've read all his books.

>>4345876
>>4345888
>>4345943
>>4346039
>>4347986
ive never noticed how tripfag-infested this place has become...eaugh

>>4346022
This.

Roberto Bolaño, Javier Marías, Charles Bukowski, Fernando Vallejo, Jorge Luis Borges, Horacio Quiroga, Mario Vargas Llosa

Fuck off latin american literature shreds.

>>4348819

Hiya. Dont mind us, we dont bite.

>>4348819
>durr anon iz leegyonn

Ray Bradbury
Agatha Christie

>>4349048
>>4349055
We've been over this.

>>4349108
if the idea behind this website was total anonymity, there wouldn't be a name field you retard.

>>4349108

But we arent arguing, this is a thread about personal experience and subjective taste.

>>4349120
>the stench of ignorance and newfaggotry

>>4349129
stick to /b/ child

>>4348819
>ive never noticed how tripfag-infested this place has become

what a joke

>you will never read another ty shitpost thread suggesting he will commit suicide
>Mogwai will never post an al greene thread on /lit/ again
>3rd will never again collect another archive of /lit/ posters posing naked
>BB will never greentext another story about spurning bitches with shit taste in literature
>Hakas-affendi will never be arabic in a thread again
>Isabelle Huppert will never make another share thread with dozens of scans
>Married oldfag will never be absolutely entirely forgettable again
>Onionring will never post something retardedly esoteric about something philosophically unimportant in a thread again
>Stagolee will never make a troll thread on /lit/ again
>Caracalla will never lose an argument with me again
>Fabulous will never make a thread about being gay again
>Courage Wolf will never be a gimmicky tripcode using piece of shit ever again
>Historian will never post something I can mention ever again because I wasn't here when he was
>Behemoth will never again post pictures of his terrible stack on books on the floor and be generally less knowledgeable about philosophy than I am
>you will never berate the /lit/ zine team for being a plagiarising scam again
>there will never be another /clit// /litclub/ tinychat again
>no-one will ever make an amazon christmas wishlist thread for degenerate beggers again

Fernando Pessoa.

>>4349152
Get a life m8.

>>4349198
But I do m8, i just visit this board every six months to see if it's still a reeking shithole solely populated by transient passive-agressive little shitposters like you

>>4349232
Either you possess an eidetic memory or you're a lying cunt. Personally I'm going to place my bets on the latter since I've already determined that you fit into the cunt category.

>>4349243
You don't need an eidetic memory to keep track of the few people who actually have personality or expertise on a board, it doesn't even have to be /lit/. You may not be able to comprehend this yourself considering you no doubt habitually post anonymously, and the content of your posts will not be remembered by anyone within a few hours at most, so you have no reason to remember anyone else's.

>>4349269
>personality and expertise

don't sage me mate, I can tell

>>4349301
What is your experience with Philosophy (let it be Classical, Continental or Analytical or any combination of those) and why are you considered to be smarter than stan on this board?

>>4349317
he's a mouthbreather. at least stan is creative. lacks the subtle thought necessary for philosophy. all of his arguments have gaping holes, but this board is beginner-core so he has a leg up once in a while.

Going by time, in no p[articular order, probably:

Nietzsche
Kafka
Nabokov
God
Burroughs
Woolf
Pynchon
Dawkins
Kierkegaard
Foucault

>>4349317
go through the archives once in a while bud i am not here to wipe your arse for you

>>4346715
>Spirit of Putridness

u wot m8?

>>4345872

Chesterton (all major works with many of his essays)
McCarthy (all works including his screenplays and short stories)
Gene Wolfe (Almost all works except for some short stories, The Land Across, and There Are Doors)
Faulkner (the only works I haven't read are Pylon, the Wild Palms, Requiem for a Nun, and The Mansion)
Dickens (Most works, Bleak House is his best)
Flannery O'Connor (All works)
Dostoyevsky (all major works except for The Gambler and The Adolescent)
Tolkien (Everything except for The Lays of Beleriand)

I've read a lot of other authors extensively, but I would consider these the ones I've read the most of.

R.L. Stine
Followed by J.K. Rowling.
probably true for most of the people on this board, considering the median age is right around 20.

>>4349348
Pretty sure it will take me a lot more time to find anything close that resembles a post that says of your experience with Philosophy than you writing a few sentences right now.

Don't be lazy.

>>4349378
i hate blowing my own trumpet and you shouldn't be allowed to post on this board without having already familiarised yourself with the most important people posting on it.

Hop to it, it's the tripcode with the second largest post count to anonymous, cheers good luck.

>>4349393
this is bait

>>4349393
I have been here for 1 year or so, but haven't seen you post as much; let alone seen a post of yours that would represent your experience with Philosophy.

Are you really this dense? How hard is it to answer a question; moreover, a question that would only boost your confidence [if you're indeed experienced and knowledgeable].

Goethe and Dosto

I absolutely love Calvino and have pretty much exhausted all of his work, including his essays and the translations of Italian folktales. In addition, despite the fact she didn't write very much at all, I find myself being drawn back time and time again to Emily Brontë; I enjoy her poetry a great deal and find myself rereading it often.

I suppose Asimov also deserves a mention, though quite a few of the Robot series I read when I was much younger and I keep intending to reread them at some point.

>>4349431
>I have been here for 1 year or so, but haven't seen you post as much; let alone seen a post of yours that would represent your experience with Philosophy.
i haven't been here for like a year mate

>a question that would only boost your confidence [if you're indeed experienced and knowledgeable].
if I was experienced and knowledgeable I wouldn't need to boost my confidence by telling some clueless nobody something that anyone who is worth anything on this board already knows. Good thing I am :)

>>4349467
>if I was experienced and knowledgeable I wouldn't need to boost my confidence by telling some clueless nobody something that anyone who is worth anything on this board already knows. Good thing I am :)
>wow much smart a subliminal modus ponens wow much logic etc.

>by telling some clueless nobody
If one asks you a question, you only answer to and talk with "somebodies"? The only people that you find worthwhile speaking to measures in respectable status (education wise and otherwise)? Seems a bit arrogant to me.

>something that anyone who is worth anything on this board already knows
Does this mean that the people who possess any worth by your standards are people who have looked for and read all of your posts within the archive? Why would any newcomer to /lit/ would do that, let alone know how to?

> I wouldn't need to boost my confidence
Why not? Such behavior, although not acceptable by many, is good for your mental health.

>>4349431
>not knowing Deep&Edgy, the all time greatest /lit/ trip.

>>4349747
I still have a Deep&Edgy folder.

>>4349767

post more

>>4349776

>>4346715
lol

>>4349785

>>4349792

>>4349152
All of thsoe people were boring pieces of shit

>>4349327
Satan is pretty embarrassing to read sometimes honestly

>>4349798
I agree. Deep & Edgy wasn't boring though.

>>4349152
A couple of them were knowledgeable academics but they were all boring

>>4349152
I wish TyBrax would post again. I wish GamerGirl would post again

Does anyone here remember GamerGirl?

I wish that chubby camwhore studying Latin would post again

I wish that tripfag who posted nigger all the time would post again.

I wish that guy who got mad at people for calling fantasy novels terrible but was actually pretty cool with good taste in literature would post again.

To be honest, probably Neal Stephenson. Which doesn't mean I consider him a great writer or anything; it's just that between Criptonomicon, Baroque Cycle and some other novel it's just a huge fucking amount of pages.

I wish that guy that typed in all caps would post again.

>>4349850
I think he still posts, but without the caps.

>>4349850
Also he's a fag.

I wish that guy who posted stuff from a really advanced forum would post again.

I wish that guy called Anonymous who calls people fags and derails threads would post again.

>>4349866
You are him though.

>>4345888
>NIght Angel trilogy
>Inheritance Cycle
>Kingkiller Chronicle
>Harry Potter

We'd get along just fine.

>>4349869

Sunhawk is the best troll on this board.

I know it's sad, but the author I've read the most is Anne Rice.

I read a fuckin lot fantasy-series when i was a kid, mostly unknown shit from german authors

- Markus Heitz about 13 Books (Ulldart series 9 books, the dwarfs series 4 books)
- Harald Evers (die höhlenweltsaga 8 books)
- all of the harry potter shit
- Terry Pratchet about 20 (Discworld, the nome series and some other books)
- H. P. Lovecraft, tons of his short stories

I'd say Patrick Sénécal and Stephen King.

George R R Martin followed by Kurt Vonnegut.

I really need to read more ;_;

Philip K. Dick and only because his body of work is so massive

I got big into Terry Pratchett from like 8-12, I've read 30+ of his books. For sheer number of novels I've read no other author comes close.

Gaiman
OSC
Dan Simmons
Lovecraft

:3

>>4345872
Me.

>>4350462
you sound exactly like a friend of mine

Christopher Hitchens

C-Come at me.

Marx.

>>4345926
Can someone please explain to me the appeal of Murakami? Do people find him funny or suspenseful? Just like his prose style?

I was reading a short story where he mentioned a character's friend, adding "that guy really knew how to tell a story", and I couldn't help but burst out laughing; his stories are just so awful


My cousin's wife mentioned loving him and I really would like to see what she sees, or add something profound the next time she mentions him

I wish someone who could match my swag was here.

>>4350571
is that a bad thing?
I have read a much wider variety of authors, those are just the two I've read multiple works from

>>4345888

Quentin! I missed you

:3

Graham Greene
Kingsley Amis

>>4345943
Can you post your graduation thesis D&E, I'd like to read it.

Hemingway
Greene
Steinbeck

Those are probably the only decent authors I've read four or more novels by.

>>4349523
>wow much smart a subliminal modus ponens wow much logic etc.
It's a tautology unless your conception of being experienced and knowledgeable is malnourished enough not to include those things

>Seems a bit arrogant to me.
There are a lot of things I could be doing with my time, I can't waste it with people who aren't on my level or who do not entertain me in some significant way. That's not arrogance, that's being smart with your time and smart with the company you keep. You only think it's arrogance because you're on the short end of the stick here.

>Why not? Such behavior, although not acceptable by many, is good for your mental health.
There are a variety of ways to boost your confidence, the form you are talking about is among some of the most worthless and despicable. I don't need to boost my confidence in the first place because I already have a very fulfilling life.

>>4351745
it's shit mate i think it even had spelling errors when i got it printed and bound.

John Grisham
Shakespeare
Orwell
Huxley

Pynchon, Palahniuk and Easton Ellis

im a loser

>>4351977
>It's a tautology
Eh, you aren't that smart after all.

Well, I guess that's that. Keep on pretending you are the center of the Universe if it makes you feel any better.

>>4349339
>Nietzsche
>Dawkins
>Kierkegaard
>God

How does this work?

Stephan king

Byron, Shakespeare and Richard Yates.

GK Chesterton

According to my goodreads my top 3 are:

-Stephen King at 11 books (I read him also exclusively in high school so no surprise there)
-Philip K Dick at 6 books
-Kafka and Dostoevsky tied at 5 books

>>4351977
>I can't waste it with people who aren't on my level or who do not entertain me in some significant way.

>is talking with nobodies
>"I don't have time to talk with you nobodies"
>why
>"why would i waste my time responding to you"
etc
etc

I hope you see how ludicrous that situation is.

Also, simply as a matter of principle, spending posts expounding your own worth and declaring there is no need to establish your importance, even if it wasn't a complete waste of time, is at the very least vulgar, narcissistic, and embarrassingly needy.

So is having a trip on an anonymous board of course, it's never a surprise when these things go hand in hand.

>>4352034
just because you're a shallowed-pated dunce doesn't mean that the q is a y

have a good day mate, don't even so much as try to link my posts from here on out because you're not entitled to

>>4352123
Forgot my trip

>>4352107
>etc
You're greentexting things I never said because it's easier to vilify a caricature of me than to address what I'm actually saying. If you want me to expand on or clarify anything I said you're free to do so, but arguing with yourself doesn't achieve anything.

> spending posts expounding your own worth
Where have I done that in this thread?

>declaring there is no need to establish your importance
Calling it a declaration is misleading, everyone who's been here as long as me already knows this and I only made it clear as part of a response, there was nothing said about the subject before other people made it an issue.

>So is having a trip on an anonymous board
Having a trip is the only way to contribute in a concrete form to any community on 4chan, which is an imageboard that one can choose to post on anonymously, because it is the only means of verifying a poster's identity and the history or quality of their posts.

lol subliminal logical argument lol

it's an implicit premise, idiot, the paragraph itself is the logical argument

>>4352107
>I hope you see how ludicrous that situation is.
watch it with that subliminal reductio ad absurdum bro lol!!!

>>4345872

Myself, because one has to correct mistakes everytime one writes.

Other than that. I don't know. I am not obsessed with any author.

>>4352157
>it's an implicit premise, idiot, the paragraph itself is the logical argument
>watch it with that subliminal reductio ad absurdum bro lol!!!
Why are you name-dropping terms that do not correspond and show up in your posts at all?

Stop embarrassing yourself. Take a class in Logic.

>>4352195
>Why are you name-dropping terms that do not correspond and show up in your posts at all?
It's just a demonstration of what you've been doing for the benefit of the audience, who are laughing at you along with me.

>Stop embarrassing yourself. Take a class in Logic.
glad you learned your lesson mate

>>4352205
>It's just a demonstration of what you've been doing for the benefit of the audience, who are laughing at you along with m
No one is laughing with you, Deep&Edgy. No one laughs with Deep&Edgy. It's common knowledge.

Also, you've been wrong since the very beginning, that sentence that I referred to as modus ponens was not a tautology; and now you are trying to awkwardly turn things around by parodying the poor guy who "name-dropped" a phrase in latin that has everything to do with pointing out the structure of your sentence.

Can you be any more cuter though?

>>4352226
>No one is laughing with you, Deep&Edgy. No one laughs with Deep&Edgy. It's common knowledge.
Besides everyone?

>that sentence that I referred to as modus ponens was not a tautology
Yes, it was, if you understand the meanings of the terms involved, as I do. Is there something you don't understand? Do you not understand what a tautology is?

> phrase in latin that has everything to do with pointing out the structure of your sentence.
Except that it was neither the structure of the sentence nor was it the proper application of the logical form, as I pointed out rather well in my parody.

You're an adoreable lil bro tho keep it up

>>4352234
>as I do
Well, that's the problem, isn't it. It's a tautology to you and only you. It is perfectly conceivable that someone else DOES NOT find you experienced and knowledgeable.

>Do you not understand what a tautology is?
Tautologies within the natural languages are hard to come by. There will always be someone who disagrees with your premises.

>Except that it was neither the structure of the sentence nor was it the proper application of the logical form
Are you trolling or merely playing hard to get?

"if I was experienced and knowledgeable" = P
"I wouldn't need to boost my confidence by telling some clueless nobody something that anyone who is worth anything on this board already knows." = Q
"Good thing I am :)" = P

The rest, I'm sure, you'll be able to figure out for yourself. It has everything to do with structure and logical form.

>>4352265
>It is perfectly conceivable that someone else DOES NOT find you experienced and knowledgeable.
That's not the subject of the tautology, try to pay attention.

>Tautologies within the natural languages are hard to come by
Not only are they not hard to come by, they are ubiquitous and constitutive of language. This is aside from the soft sense we are mostly concerned with, however.
>There will always be someone who disagrees with your premises.
A platitude, the only significant question that arises in this case is whether I care whether some clueless nobody on the internet disagrees with my premise. I'm waiting to be convinced.

>Are you trolling or merely playing hard to get?
You can dance around the issue all night mate, I've got plenty of coffee-breaks coming along to respond to your bullshit.

>"if I was experienced and knowledgeable" = P
>"I wouldn't need to boost my confidence by telling some clueless nobody something that anyone who is worth anything on this board already knows." = Q
>"Good thing I am :)" = P
Oh, I see, you misunderstood me. Not needing to boost ones' confidence by telling some clueless nobody something that anyone who is worth anything on this board already knows is a property of being experienced and knowledgeable, it is not separate proposition in itself.

If you need any more help feel free to ask, I can help you on your upcoming freshman logic test for christmas but I do charge heavy fees.

>>4352284
>[...] is a property of being experienced and knowledgeable
>I'm waiting to be convinced.
Still not a tautology, because, again, it is perfectly conceivable that someone else DOES NOT find you experienced and knowledgeable, meaning that the proposition wouldn't be true true on all models :P :)

Unicorns exist in my imagination, but that doesn't make them real and actual. Ditto with your "tautology", champ.

>>4352354
>it is perfectly conceivable that someone else DOES NOT find you experienced and knowledgeable, meaning that the proposition wouldn't be true true on all models :P :)
A non sequitur par excellence. By the mere fact that someone does not BELIEVE some part of a proposition, it does not follow that it is not therefore any less of a tautology. There may be an undiscovered island in the pacific where only one person in a community understands the terms involved in the proposition such that he's alive while he's alive but the fact that no-one else in that community doesn't does not make it not a tautology.

>Unicorns exist in my imagination
That's not a tautology, but I appreciate the empirical element. The same is true of my tautology, where it is relevant to have the same degree of experience as someone as confident, wise and clever as myself to be able to correctly understand the terms involved and therefore be able to see that it is a tautology. Any more stupid wrong shit for me to clear up kiddo?

Mishima and (15 years ago) RA Salvatore

>>4352446
>>it is perfectly conceivable that someone else DOES NOT find you experienced and knowledgeable, meaning that the proposition wouldn't be true true on all models :P :)

>someone doesn't believe or understand something
>therefore it's not a tautology

epic :^)

>>4352452
im somewhat new to this thread, but a cursory reading gives me a pretty perfect description of your posting style and content.

you are the cancer that makes this board hard to stomach past a thread or two

not involved in this little dick measuring contest, but I just wanted to say that this is why I filter all tripfags. /lit/ trips are the fucking worst

>>4352446
> By the mere fact that someone does not BELIEVE some part of a proposition, it does not follow that it is not therefore any less of a tautology.
Well, if you put it THAT way, then okay. But still, my whole fucking point was: it is not a formal tautology (logical truth) and that's that. You haven't been clearing up anything honey, merely continuing on to miserably justify that you are experienced and knowledgeable and subsequently refusing to accept that someone else might not identify the so-and-so property in you that you so passionately ascribe to yourself.

To call that a tautology is, more or less, as arrogant and egotistical as you can get. It's stupefying why would one ever commit on defending such a miniscule and hilarious tautology.

>>4352508
>merely continuing on to miserably justify that you are experienced and knowledgeable and subsequently
Where have I done that? I simply pointed out, maybe twice at most, that one should search the archives for proof of this. I haven't attempted to persuade anyone of anything beyond this, because as I said, why should I?

>To call that a tautology is, more or less, as arrogant and egotistical as you can get.
The bitter words of a no-namer perpetually stuck, again, on the short end of the stick.

>It's stupefying why would one ever commit on defending such a miniscule and hilarious tautology.
Why would I need to defend it. As I've said before in this thread, it doesn't bother me whether you believe it or not, or whether you understand the terms involved.

Eoin Colfer

>>4346726
I too have Bukowski in my most read list. I read almost everything, including the short stories.
The subjects are different, in Women, it's women, in Factotum, odd jobs, in Post Office, life in office jobs, Hollywood is Buk trying to get a film produced, the story takes place in the film industry. etc.
But the best one for me remains Ham on Rye, about his childhood and youth.
Bukowski's motto was "don't try", and Ham on Rye is the one where I feel he actually wa trying the least. You can feel the urge he had to tell that story, the violent father, rejection at school, trying to become a tough guy, becoming good at boxing, the discovery of booze...
When he became a professional writer, you can sense at some points that he is "trying", because he needs the money.
The point where I've seen him try the hardest is in Women, where he "reveals" that though he looks like a tough guy, he does lick pussy. You get all the details about how good at it he thinks he is.
You can really tell there that he wrote to be liked by his woman readers, to get them (he writes that he was fucking his fans all the time).

I recommand Factotum, about all the odd jobs he did during the war. Originally, he had studied journalism for a short time in university. After working as a janitor and other menial jobs for years, he gets a job as janitor (or something) at the LA Times. He manages to talk to the editor, says he studied journalism and proposes to write articles. The editor was not impressed by a university dropout dressed as a janitor.

Eventually he found another way to be a journalist. With all his books.

I guess all other authors end up boring me. Bret Easton Ellis, I read American Psycho twice, but I feel it's enough. I don't need more feels about being ultra rich and feeling disconnected.

Stories about money issues and everything, I never can get enough, because it's my life.
Everything I read in Bukowski felt real, he doesn't bother inventing plots and characters. I like the 0% bullshit attitude. I like to read his opinions about art, history, literature. It's pretty blunt.

I say this with no shame: Christopher Hitchens.

>>4349393
>familiarised yourself with the most important people posting on it.
I'm an oldfag here and I absolutely have no idea who you are.