We judge each other based on our top 3 p4p best authors.
>Ernest Hemingway, Yukio Mishima, and Virginia Woolf
rethink your life choices OP
Do you actual read? Or just browse /lit/ and tell everyone you read?
At least my authors speak from real emotion. When's the last time you felt sad, faggot?
>Cool dude but thinks he's smarter than everyone
>Misanthrope, but sardonic enough to not be a bore
Not bad, anon.
>implying I would want to read anybody with that matches that description
>look guys! here's an ugly middle aged man that hates society! look at his ugly ass hair and face and body! he's like Bukowski but he's French so he's probably cooler!
>basically just ad hominems to justify your hatred of an author you've probably never even read
If we're going to go that far, then I suppose its best we stop replying to each other. Or at least I will cease.
At least you have the sack to admit it. I love him, but I never admit it because of the number of fans he has that so completely miss the fucking point.
In fact, fuck any reference to Cthulhu all together.
If you're an American, you think about It and attribute a mythology to it, being frustrated and astounded by the nation you inhabit. You also like recreational doses of speed and alcohol.
You enjoy somewhat antiquated prose that has held up well. As for the stories, the more allegorical, the better. You have an interest in governmental systems. Your sign: Scorpius.
You enjoy a certain flippant attitude towards life. You also enjoy a flippant attitude towards prose, even when it appears well-constructed. No matter how deep the story, it'd better be fucking entertaining. Your sign: Capricorn.
You enjoy a mixture of great prose and great story. Unfortunately, few authors possess a talent for both. You don't enjoy contemporary literature much, but you are dedicated to the classics. You want to become a college professor, or once wanted to. Your sign: Aries.
>/lit/ confirmed for all reading the same 5 authors
Here's mine, come at me.
Depressing to be around
Pq si inquiet mon pote?
Is an atheist, prefers Lucky Strikes to Pall Malls, and spends a lot of time on trains staring out the window with a melancholy feeling while trying to drown out the sound the of the Muslim teenagers goofing around in the isle.
Typical American hipsters
Emotionally well adjusted
kafka is utter shit
how boring do you have to be for him to be your favourite author? he writes like he's describing a court case at all times in the most strict, athletic legalistic prose, and the stories are all simply 'muh oppression'
Pic is my reaction at seeing Kafka's name popping up a lot.
his works are basically the precursor to pg Wodehouse and douglas adams
simply witty and with no substance
I did like dorian gray, however, but his plays are shit
also I hate the fact that he reuses lines in different works
I'm surprised by the lack of Shakespeare ITT, I'm sure we can at least agree that he's everyone's unequivocal fourth favorite
I have trouble imagining someone loving Proust and Marcus Aurelius and not being pretty mellow.
Not nearly as traveled as I'd like to be, but you got the debate part right.
18 actually, but I'm proud.
Ah bon? J'ai trouvé qu'en France y'a pas mal les gens que lisent. En tout cas, Huysmans c'est un vrai génie.
T'as lu Michel Houellebecq's Submission? J'ai entendu que c'est inspire par Huysmans.
>le muh secret highschool anime club face
Il me semble que les gens le connaissent de nom sans jamais vraiment le lire, ils en parlent d'un air supérieur, persuadés d'être des parangons de culture. Laissons les vautrés dans leur vomi pédant.
J'ai pas encore lu Soumission, je suis en train de dévorer toute la Comédie Humaine et ça me prend pas mal de temps.
18, smokes cigarettes, talks about "society and shit, man" with friends, can appreciate good prose, will grow out of this phase. Should read Walser or No Longer Human.
23, Likes witty stuff, probably a little too full of his own intelligence. Should read John Barth.
Rusemaster, as old as the id itself. Should sudoku.
22, finds humanity alienating and the universe really big and weird and empty. Should read Enrique Vila-Matas.
23, thinks people are pretty weird, but doesn't hate them, laughs a lot. Should read Krasznahorkai (though you very well might have already).
19, hypocrite/10. Wittgenstein, genius aside, was the most pedantic person this side of Russell and the most pretentious this side of Nabokov. Should read an encyclopedia if he wants rock-solid declarations in utilitarian language.
25, really likes allegory and human sin. Should read Under the Volcano.
It's because Lost Time is four thousand pages long and is seen as extremely high-art-like by most people.
William H. Gass
I read In the Heart of the Heart of the Country recently. While I really loved the opening story and 2 of the other stories, the other couple left me cold. Could you recommend one of his novels as a starting place?
Also you guys should stop assigning an age to someone's taste in literature. It's silly and I don't really understand what it's based on. The average person who comes in to the book store I work in is probably 40-50 and they mostly read flavour of the month bestseller stuff
> It's silly and I don't really understand what it's based on
This entire thread is judging strangers on the internet based on the names of three authors they like. It's silly from the start. My ages are basically "What type of attitude might lead a person to like and name these authors? Who generally has that attitude/at what stage of life do people have that attitude?" I wouldn't bet more than a nickel on them, though.
> Could you recommend one of his novels as a starting point
Well, he only has three, and I'd suggest Middle C as a first. I'd also suggest searching up some essays of his, because they give a really good sense of his literary attitudes/agenda.
full disclosure i like reading heidegger now because i took a class with a pretty famous heidegger scholar and he complimented me on my understanding/interpretation a lot and reading his work became a lot like masturbation for me. i dont even find it particularly interesting or poignant anymore but it makes me feel like such hot shit. god damn. i genuinely enjoy pynchon and nabokov though.
>I like reading Heidegger because a guy who liked Heidegger complimented me
I really want to call you all sorts of names, but you're being pretty honest with yourself about it, so I won't. You should still curb that, though.
i wasn't very popular in high school and now i get off on people misinterpreting difficult writers that i understand pretty well. it's totally childish but fuck it. once i grow up i'll probably look back on this phase and be embarrassed.
If you're like the average 4chan user, in five years you'll have matured out of "look how smart I am!" and will instead have stopped playing that game altogether, abandoning books and employment and subsisting solely off of food stamps, torrents, and /jp/.
Philip K. Dick
Honestly, never been too big a fan of Shakespeare
>two years ago I was reading Gide and Mishima and drinking beers and smoking cigarettes with cool ppl
>today I read Ishiguro and García Márquez and smoke pot and go to the gym by myself mostly
>I've wasted the vast majority of my teenage years relaxing by myself on the beach with a bottle of wine and the warmth of the sun
>tfw no regrets so far
>read Pynchon and IJ and act like a smug fuck on /lit/
>all my friends think I'm smart
>going to work hard in college and learn all this stuff about writing and philosophy and ideas and...
>don't do any work
>completely disillusioned with liberal arts students
>talk to no one
>spend all my time watching cute grills and calling you're waifu a shit on /a/
It actually feels sort of cathartic to be such a failure.
To build up for the >tfw part, although I guess it would have worked better as regular sentences.
I'm usually getting plastered on the beach alone in between working out at the gym and studying. It relives stress and gives me time to reflect.
All I want is an easy job that pays well enough for me to feed my habits and gives me plenty of free time to exercise and read, to live in a warm city with a decent amount of classical concerts, and to have an average gf who keeps me entertained but mostly leaves me alone.
I figure as long as I always keep my priorities straight I can't go wrong with life. Maybe I'm setting myself up for failure, but I can't imagine being 60 and wanting much more either.
Like a phoenix, you must rise from your ashes and make a choice. Here's a video by UFC fighter Chael Sonnen talking about choosing a path. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tj_h5-V6L0g Maybe the /lit/ life is still for you but not a /lit/ profession? Don't worry about lifestyles, everyone mostly changes their degree plans anyways. It's just up to you whether you choose to advance in your path.
Im probably going to study english in college, can you talk more about why liberal arts students are awful? Ive probably heard it before but id love to be persuaded to study something useful.
Well, I'm at a classical liberal arts school, so this doesn't necessarily apply to a humanities major at every school. For me, though, the issue is that the liberal arts stereotype (non-religious spiritualists with immense respect for Buddhism smoking pot and talking about "SOCIETY, MAN") is very real, and so socially I can't abide that, and then academically everything becomes about message and feelings and shit, and it's all nebulous and about the discussion rather than the answer, and there's no rigor. I feel like the art-school anons who go looking for technical training in classical painting or something and instead find a bunch of people throwing stuff together and claiming it's social commentary. The emperor has no clothes, STEMfags are right, and I should have found a specifically analytic-biased program to enter.
Yeah, at this point Im thinking of just applying to Oxford and doing a STEM degree if I dont get in. The nebulous feels without any academic rigor is something I expect to find at most universities.
I wish liberal arts didn't attract the people who are just incapable of doing STEM.
>tfw you will probably never study English at Oxford or do anything with your life.
someone in the social sciences here.
my advisor was a math major as an undergradn, then got a masters in math, and then decided to switch to social science for his PhD.
not to mention most sociology is based around running regressions
Well, you could always try anti-depressants
Never read Gaddis, but you're probably a 20 something, unsure about your convictions yet funny guy who wants a qt hipster gf
Insufferable academicist who loves to complain at people who read degenerate postmodern prose
Yeah, life will never be as whimsical and ethereal as you want, but LSD helps
Never read Walser, but you're probably depressed at post-modernity's ennui, yet you see things getting better one time or another
Skipping to the last ones 'cause thread is bigger than I thought and I'm kinda drunk
babby's first life makes no sense
You wish your life was more thrilling than it is, so you spend your weekends getting wasted on whatever you get while complaining about the modern world with your friends, but deep down you're a nice guy
Mine are Pinecone, Cortázar and Georges Perec
I guess whimsical is not the world, but you know, surreal in a hazy way? (Also, I've pretty much skimmed through Kundera, not that he's a bad writer, it's just that I didn't had the time, patience or liked the person who recommended it, and ended reading Lightness more on obligation.
I plan to come back to it someday though)
Person pretty much like myself.
You are in love with "the lost generation" and their followers.
Hipster with a good sense of humor.
You love reading history as much as prose, and hate all post 70s literature.
It's turbo-autism taking a normal pastime by reading unverifiable, meaningless garbage into literature. Books people read as a hobby. It destroys the joy in just curling down with a book and getting lost in it.
But autism is a stupid buzzword isn't it? It's mostly just sad. Not sure why the field exists.
The people are all living stereotypes of obnoxious, unnecessarily wordy morons who think that applying elements of "symbolism" makes them sound more intelligent while analyzing really simple art and literature. There's no logic used in nearly any aspect, it's all based on emotion and feelings.
I took several liberal arts courses and the other students completely ruined the experience for me. Every question was brought back to emotion and the misguided opinions were so off the wall that it even stopped being fun to laugh at them.
Think about the types of people who want to be liberal arts majors. They tend to be lazy, brain dead, liberal idiots who wanted to go to college but didn't want to do math. The actual coursework teaches you nothing of any real value and most employers will trash any resume they see for liberal arts majors. Even if you don't fit that stereotype, there are so many people who do that grouping yourself in with those people will only be harming yourself. You can always read on your own time, and that way you don't have to waste time in class listening to people claim that sex in literature is always an analogy for power.