"What book should everybody read once in their life?" brought to you by /Reddit/
>Flowers for Algernon is near the top
Seriously though, what 1 book would you give to the whole world if you knew everyone would read it at least once?
'Siddhartha' by Herman Hesse is the obvious choice for me.
major top keks at the ledditors
"a driving manual" is one of the top responses
do these fucking morons really derive literary pleasure from fucking manuals? wew lad I had no idea that reddit was actually as autismal as you guys promised me
Why are you mocking reddit but posting Kanye West memes and talking about your love for books that were required reading in high school? I see zero difference between their shit taste and yours.
Giving an infant an ipad is really bad parenting. Children learn moth through tactile experience, and you're basically starving them sensually speaking if all they can interact with is a flat glass plane.
I don't think there's a single book from which all of humanity could prosper or at least learn something, or derive pleasure from.
Maybe something easy, nice and interesting like Siddhartha?
Then again the majority of people aren't even literate so it's a meaningless question.
>Seriously though, what 1 book would you give to the whole world if you knew everyone would read it at least once?
The Bible, to learn that it’s easier to be told by others what to think and believe than it is to think for yourself
No it's not. It's unrealistic to assume a child will have someone's undivided attention on the at all times. If the childs parent wants to have a 5 minute conversation with another adult, handing the kid an ipad is no different than handing the kid any other toy to play with on their own.
I honestly hate that i've read the same books that these reddit scum have read, seriously why can't they just stick to their high school books, thankfully most of them all have entry level taste and even their "obscure" is read by people here on their 2nd week.
>remember to upvote.
Huh, of course. Since small children experience the world most through tactile sensation (this is why they always put stuff into their mouths) it's important to not deny them that sensation. Give them anything but a flat glass surface
back to reddit
I don't think it's bad parenting as long as the kid is also able to interact with a bunch of other stuff. It will be really interesting to see what sort of tech advancements come from the generation raised on smartphones and tablets.
Me too tbh fam.
I don't see the point. I'm not particularly good at giving personalized recommendations to anyone for anything, though.
It's less that I'm indecisive and more that I just don't care.
>I didn't go to the reddit thread. Is it full of shitty, nauseatingly unfunny puns?
Unsurprisingly yes. Most of the top answers are books (you should look because you'll laugh), but if you read any comment chains or anything you'll probably frown.
I don't get it either.
no, you see, i post on the good books website where we talk about thomas pynchon, but there's another books website where they talk about bad books, but they're starting to talk about thomas pynchon now too, so things in my life are very hectic right now.
I honestly feel bad for those people, they will never truly appreciate great art. I mean, Camus? You can get much more eloquence from your existentialism with Pynchon. Brave New World? Come on, Pynchon showed us that the actual dystopia was already here, we were just blind to it. Vonnegut? Just subpar toiletless Pynchon.
Major cultural impact, many fine points, amazing story, has the potential to demystify the classics and make people pursue more of them on their own time.
Siddhartha instead of a Buddhist text so people don't get aggravated. Give them something too difficult right off the bat and they'll be pissed. It's a beautiful and accessible work.
Vonnegut is quite fine. For teenagers, mostly, but fine nonetheless. I think with Vonnegut, there is a window of time to read them in mid to late adolescence. That's what I did, and I enjoyed them thoroughly. If I reread them today, it would probably not be much more than nostalgia and sentimental value.
Vonnegut's perfect for kids and teenagers, but the adults who go on about him are always those special people who believe themselves to be witty, cynical, and smarter than everyond when they're not.
Back when I was first looking for a place to talk about weird, postmodernist books I tried going to r/books. It might as well be renamed r/YAliteraturecirclejerk.
Nearly every thread is something like "What was your opinion on Slaughterhouse 5?" Or "Recommend me a book" with dozens of different answers saying Farenheit 451 or To Kill a Mockingbird. These aren't innately bad books, but this is a community that thinks themselves intelligent for having read material that is intended to get CHILDREN to expand their worldview. Whether they don't realize this, or they've moved the goalposts on their own expectations I can't even tell.
Their adult discussion is expanded to include Steven King (patron saint of intellectuals, writer of masterpieces, and ubermensch of r/books) and Murakami (a philosopher only the most sensitive and intelligent of redditors will truly understand). Expect to see dozens of threads on these two daily.
/lit/ does many of the same things, but it has two important differences, the repetition here is on a higher level. I'd rather discuss Zizek or Joyce a hundred times than "Pet Cemetary" ten. And there's a level of self awareness here that at times leads to diverse topics, and usually resultsnin diverse opinion at the very least.
I am agreeing with you so hard right now.
/lit/ is at least completely self-aware. It's been this way for years. There really is something different about this place, as much as I hate you bastards.
I wonder if the structural differences (i.e. anonymity, no le upvotes) between the sites could account for this or if there is simply an entirely different culture here as a result of those structural differences/preferences.
I wonder what the Myers Briggs type distribution would be like in both places.
I wouldn't consider Steven King to be any more "adult" than Vonnegut, Bradbury, or Lee.
> I'd rather discuss Zizek or Joyce a hundred times than "Pet Cemetary" ten
The thing about these discussions is very rarely have all the participants actually read the books being discussed. It's mostly memes, and in the case of philosophers politically-charged shit-flinging.
makes fun of reddit but posts kanye tweets and picks Siddhartha as alltime essential
I'm sure there's dozens of obscure little reading forums where this exact conversation takes place in regards to /lit/ instead of /r/books.
Somehow I can't bring myself to be sure that I'm self-aware or we've all just reached the next rung of the ladder in the succession of ego-stroking.
>Somehow I can't bring myself to be sure that I'm self-aware or we've all just reached the next rung of the ladder in the succession of ego-stroking.
digits of truth
are we self aware or are we just aware of the concept of self-awareness?
Had to read that for senior-level English in high school. For the essay we were assigned on it (the presence of suffering and how it leads to the loss of faith) I wrote a ~2200 word-er on the necessity of suffering for faith to be valid.
I barely mentioned that awful 'autobiography' because it would have only sullied one of the few decent essay topics I had seen in high school.
Doesn't that simply prove that we're self aware? In that matter we're not aware of ourselves relative to others, but we still have the capacity to look out and see places that are both better and worse than our current situation. We're heavily flawed, but it's a step in the right direction, and miles beyond those who don't look about them at all so long as we don't allow ourselves to be caught in the mindset.
True, but that's a product of 4chan as a whole rather than /lit/. There isn't a single board free of contrarians who shit up things for fun, even /diy/ whom I'd consider the most serious and on-topic board is full of them at this point. It detracts from the place as a whole, but does little to lessen the impact of smaller, more serious, and important discussions.
It kind of comes out to digging through trolls for people speaking in ernest, and digging through vapid superficiality to find people who're speaking about more vapid superficiality.
This has gotta be some kind of jackass attempt at "It's useful for everyone's life and you never even considered it! Upvote please :)" right? I mean that's misguided because everything you need to know about driving can be learned in a few hours by being told what to do, and it's practice rather than theory that makes a good driver, but they can't actually be serious. Can they?
>but we still have the capacity to look out and see places that are both better and worse than our current situation
No we (as a collective) don't. Case in point: the tards ITT who unironically think 4chan has better discussions than reddit.
Bad 4chan discussions are generally just dank memes, while reddit discussions are usually just ego-stroking about the most entry-level possible lit. They're different kinds of shit, is what I'm getting at.
are people really not aware that the "driving manual" post is like a dad joke about how other people are such bad drivers
is it possible that this place is more autistic than reddit (don't answer that)
>starving them sensually
Go away Humbert Humbert
>'Siddhartha' by Herman Hesse
A friend recommended it to me.
I dunno what I'd choose as a mandatory read for everyone. Probably Schopenhauer's On the Will in Nature or Spinoza's Ethics or something like this.
>My man... 1615 it was written in 1615 it is the first real novel, Cervantes hey went to jail, worked odd jobs.. got his vision on paper ok it's not Tom Clancy, but give it a chance, it's a time machine
It's not really original, it's just a moving account of existentialist thought, the conclusion is open-ended and down to you to make, but he really quite lucidly leads you down to that point of self-determination. I mean, to a reader with no real history in philosophy, that would be pretty insightful, maybe not for the average anon here whose already made their leap.
>For a French novel class in college, I had to read Swann's Way (in French) and I absolutley HATED reading Proust. I respect the novel and what it accomplishes but I could not stand his writing style.
Reddit is broken as hell. The thread OP posted is another example of this. Yes, Reddit is sharing 'numerous books,' but it doesn't matter when they're books that everyone already knows about. Reddit is a massive circlejerk over the same drivel. /lit/ is too, but it doesn't have a retarded point system that exacerbates and perpetuates it even further.
I agree that Reddit, in particular a default area like /r/askreddit or /r/books, is very surface-oriented (better areas do exist deeper within the site) and that the karma system compromises genuine discussion, but all of the heat and the absence of light in this thread is not any kind of alternative.
I should try to practice what I preach. If I had to pick one, I'd have to agree with >>7225892. Barring that, I'd say The Brothers Karamazov for how it balances archetype and psychological insight. It's hard to pick just one though, and the question may ultimately be unanswerable in trying to cover every person/situation/etc.
>what 1 book would you give to the whole world if you knew everyone would read it at least once?
None. Do you realize how diverse the world is? There's not a single book that's suited for everyone, and his or her personality, culture, desires, needs, etc etc
The Biblemy man. I'm so sick of this cultural relativistic bullshit on this board. Not everyone deserves a ribbon at a sports game; football wouldn't exist as a sport if everyone was a winner.
>the average redditor is probably (unfortunately) smarter and more patrician than the average person
This is complete bullshit. The average person reads real books. The average redditor laughs at memeshit like 20 minute fail compilations and thug life videos. Reddit is a containment network for autism.
go to a college campus and ask around what peoples' favorite books are. the answer you'll get are at best what you see here from this reddit thread. the average person reads Harry Potter and Game of Thrones
>implying college isn't full of people with pleb taste
I spent four years at one of the most prestigious universities in my country, and I can confirm that albeit being capable of a higher level of discourse than your average Christian backwater yokel, having a post-secondary degree doesn't guarantee that you spend your free time on intellectual pursuits higher than watching children's cartoons and playing video games.
>smells like australia in here
every shitpost thread is an australia thread
I took the easy way out. I read a translation in my language. Of the authors I choose I'd do
>Joyce - A Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man (easier to read than Ulysses.)
>Hugo- Les Miserables