/lit/ - Literature

>>1109837

then* ffffuuuu

>>1109022

Have they been? Or do you just like them because they are considered great works? I've read plenty of classics and there are a ton whose merit I either didn't understand, or else I acknowledged that the book had merit but the writing style or ideas presented weren't my cup of tea.

If you like every classic you've ever read than you are either;

1. Extremely lucky in your selections, or getting good recommendations suited to your specific tastes

2. Terribly non discerning

3. Not very well read at all

Solid Gandhi thread.

>>1108999

Ugh I hadn't decided on "We aren't all" and "we can't be". I really need to give my posts a read over more often.

>>1108987

I think that you are probably a remarkably non brilliant person and statements like...

>Contemporary that I don't recognize or care about...

Reinforce my view. Sorry we aren't all be little western cannon babies discussing Camus and Dostoyevsky with you esteemed intellectuals.

>>1108983

She's just my type ^.^

>>1108942

I don't like the way you phrased your comment. As if this entire board only discusses terrible books and now that someone has come to discuss a real classic you have to comment on how unique that is; as if everybody hasn't already read most of Kafka's overrated cannon.

What did you like about 'The Trial' anyways? Okay well that question is stupid really, and if you don't answer I won't hold that as some sort of proof. I like a lot of books and I don't always feel like defending my tastes either. But the appeal of this book I have never understood.

Definitely.

>>1108906

incredible -

It's not that hard to spell incredible I've been doing it since I was four and a half.

>>1108886

God if there's one thing I hate it's someone saying that something "isn't that hard" followed by a proclamation of their own incredibly feats of strength or intelligence.

Fuck your face faggot.

>>1108894

>Wow a thread on a famous book written by a widely renowned author on /lit/! I just assume that it's great even though I haven't read the boring clusterfuck piece of shit myself.

>After all I read The Metamorphosis and The Judgment and that shit was da bomb!

The thing about 'The Trial' is it actually just sucks.

>>1108361

Pffft you're not Kate Beaton. Kate Beaton would know that her earlier stuff was the best and cartoons like 'Duchamp makes breakfast' would be hilarious even if they were stick figures.

Though the faces you draw really add a ton and I was wondering how you... or whether or not you... *gush*
*biting wrapped up sleeve*

eeeeeeeeeee

>>1108334

No... no she can't be married.

Oh man I am totally crushing over this girl.

JESUS CARHIIIIIIIIIIIIST

Or is that Wes Anderson? I can't tell them apart.

^.^

Every second post in /lit/ is a trip.

>>1104878

Sounds good man. I have a collection of Crazy Bones, the likes of which you've never seen.

>>1104738

Oh :(

>>1104704

laaaaaame

>>1104718

(italics)Yes(italics). (period)

>>1104688

Fuck you for being a faggot then. SOT is ass. Pure ASS.

But whatever, it's not God Bless you Mr Rosewater or nuthin. I'll be friends if you will man.

It depends on you. I enjoyed it but a lot of people don't. If you're interested in the lore but find the actual reading of the Silmarillion to be too much of a chore then the Wikipedia page on Tolkeins universe is pretty interesting.

But I say give it a go.

>>1104679

I read 95% of what Kurt Vonnegut has written when I was fourteen. I've reread a few of his books on plane rides and what not, but that's it. It's possible that some of the stuff on my list sucks more than I remember it sucking.

I remember quite liking Breakfast of Champions so in good tier it remains sir.