If you like McCarthy, read Platonov's "Dzhan".
It's about a bunch of hungry people in the desert, much better than The Road imo but also kinda different.
>still writes books
I think he'll be fine
>still writing the best prose since Joyce
I'm sure hell be fine
This is 'White Flag' by the painter Jasper Johns. It is considered a modern masterpiece. Anyone else wanna blow their brains out rather than try and understand modern art? I mean a lot of it I can appreciate but this is completely opaque to me
If you read about the art preceding and following any masterpiece it becomes a lot easier to understand it's significance
It's the same with literature, I imagine
ok I take back everything I said, this I can get behind. This is Tracy Emin's bed, literally her own bed exhibited as art but
>The artwork generated considerable media furor, particularly over the fact that the bedsheets were stained with bodily secretions and the floor had items from the artist's room, such as condoms, underwear with menstrual blood stains, other detritus, and functional, everyday objects, including a pair of slippers. The bed was presented in the state that Emin claimed it had been after languishing in it for several days;...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
This is a terrible book. I'm about 250 pages in. There's so much jumping, no real plot yet, no "main character(s)" for that matter. Every section seems to have a new major character who fucks around and doesn't accomplish anything. Has anyone else read this book? Does it get better? Help, because I'm considering using my copy for kindling.
I met a girl that said she reads, I asked her what she thought of Steinbeck because I figured he is well known enough. She had no idea who he was, her two favorite authors were
>a. John Grisham
>b. Nicolas Sparks
It was a complete turnoff. Where did I go wrong?
Why even bother talking to girls about this shit like this and taking it seriously? The real conversation you should be having takes place in the subtext, the body language, the emoting, etc. Getting your panties in a bunch because some girl doesn't like lit tier books is a good way to remain virginal.
It's the same for film buffs dude, just bite the bullet and accept that a pretentious attitude is going to be seen as a reaction relative to the norm whether you have it or not.
Accept that most people are forever plebs and either ignore the topic or recommend her books and say your back list is 100 strong so you won't have time for hers... that's the way it should be for women, they don't want to be influential they want to be known of and influenced.
Are you going to read Infinite Jest for its 20th anniversary on February 1st?
And what was your favorite scene? I liked whenever Orin and Hal were on the phone
What are some good books about David Bowie?
I think this board is too obsessed with the classics and other old ass shit. Sure the classics are classic, and the old greats are great, but if we don't look to the future; try and stay on the frontier of this artform, then we'll be a bunch of assholes talking about the same shit over and over again forever. More so then we are now.
So, in the last 5-10 years: What books do you think were instant classics? What authors do you feel represent the best living literary voice?
Other stuff. More words.
But seriously, is Art of War worth reading if you're not an ancient Chinese general? Does it really contain timeless wisdom that is abstract enough to be applied to any age, as popular culture seems to portray it? And if it does, is it concrete and frequent enough that it makes the entire book worthwhile and not just a collection of vague witticisms?
The Art of War is a timeless masterpiece on warfare. Similar to it's western equivalent "On War" by Carl von Clausewitz. Both examine how and why various strategies remain universally applicable regardless of era. The removal of an enemy's social/political support is a instrumental achievement for pursuing victory. These books are deeply rooted in examining human psychology.
Do you'll like this guy? I never see him mentioned.
My boss recommended me American Tabloid. I thought it had decent prose but I never finished it. The last pulp-y American book I read was either Inherent Vice or the Stand, and I hated both (though I do like Pynchon's Against the Day, GR and M&D). I'd assume this is where to start.
OP here, if you really don't believe people get some enjoyment out of some of the more difficult works of literature, go back to Reddit.
Hi /lit. What is the best way to get good at understanding poetry? I've always been a big literature fan and shied away from poetry because it kind of pissed me off. Anyways, are there any books that can help me out or any recommended poets to start with?
How articulate are you? Is being articulate an indication of being well read?
Has there been many writers who have changed their styles many times and managed to do it well?
It seems to me that people get bent out of shape over the term "feminist" or related labels because they don't explicitly etymologically make room for the perpetually disenfranchised white heterosexual male. Grow the fuck up. That's like saying that you believe slavery should be abolished, but don't consider yourself an abolitionist because the term only deals with a struggle faced by black folks. That you believe Jews should have their own homeland, but don't consider yourself a Zionist because the term isn't inclusive to gentiles. That you think gay people should have equal rights as straight people, but don't support "gay rights" because the movement isn't called "all rights".
Using this logic, no equal rights movement in history or today deserves its own label and they should be neatly boiled down to a single"humanist" entity (we'll ignore the ridiculous distortion of the term "humanist" here and save that for a future discussion). The fact of the matter is that equal rights movements throughout history have emphasized empowering the disenfranchised and often took on names that reflected the group they were seeking equality for. Feminism is about attaining genuine equality for women, hence the name. People who get caught up on the semantics are generally just looking for a reason to oppose gender equality in general and are far from the "humanist" egalitarians they purport to be.
News flash - if you call yourself an egalitarian yet believe that the social status quo among the genders is acceptable, then you're not an egalitarian.
>the perpetually disenfranchised white heterosexual male
This is why you're making enemies. You paint the heterosexual white male as the lord of all existence, failing utterly to identify that he is just yet another slave to the capitalist system, just as stifled in expression as most other groups, and faces problems unique to him self. You do this casually and without thought. Microaggressive bitch.
Feminists are the useful idiots of capitalism. They misidentify...
Comment too long. Click here to view the full text.
What do you guys think about this book?