Have you given up on meeting other readers in real life? Every time I meet a "reader" they are nothing more than a memer;
>"yeah I love to read! twilight is my favorite series!"
>"yep I love harry potter :)"
I resist the urge to kill myself every day. I swear to christ, less than 1% of humanity reads actual books.
>it's another "forever alone" /lit/ edition thread
>the worthless janitor is nowhere to be found
>I consider directing the obviously underage OP to /r9k/ but think better of it and hide the thread.
>beethoven's 3rd symphony starts playing.
I live in Alabama and my last two girlfriends have been more into reading than me. I met the girl I'm with right now because she was reading George Saunders on the other side of the room in a college class and I walked over and told her we needed to stick together in this world of peasants.
if I can do it in alabama you can do it anywhere
>graduate student in English
>most classmates don't give a shit about the classics or really complex lit
>they talk about Doctor Who, fantasy, Harry Potter, or comics most of the time outside of lecture
I teach at the college level now and at least it's clear that most of my coworkers are dedicated to literature (or at least obtaining tenure). I was teaching Byron and Shelley the other day and discussing Intellectual Beauty and in general getting really fucking excited about how they portray the perception of the true artist. Most of my students didn't give a shit, but it's really that feeling of absolute excitement over content and context in literature that I wish I could find in other people.
In general, people who are educated and passionate in their field are wonderful people.
A close friend I met working as a dishwasher of all things is my literature friend. I've long since given up on finding others with shared tastes on campus as the humanities department is full to the brim with empty headed "intelligentsia".
I live in D.C. and there's a cafe here called Kramerbooks & Afterwords Cafe, it's right up on Dupont Circle where the yuppie residences and the financial district intersect. It sounds pretentious but I went there, there were THOUSANDS of books, there were literary journals for sale, there was a cafe in the back, there were different sections for drama philosophy biography Latin-America and not meme picks either. I was so humbled as I entered that store. So much that my first thoughts were, "Goddamnit how does someone read all these novels"
that's pretty much my experience too, with the occasional fedora who likes mostly science fiction but claims to like writers like joyce and faulkner even though he can't form a coherent thought about them
im doing a science degree currently. the following is a real conversation
me: so what's your major?
person: creative writing at the moment
me: oh so do you have a favourite author or book?
them: uhhh haha im re-reading harry potter at the moment... probably my favourite book
funnily enough I work as a dishwasher - at a cafe-cum-bookstore - and the only person i've met irl who's as passionate about literature as me (aside from profs) is a fellow dishwasher. it's funny, at these hipster parties people make loud contentions about Gatsby or Ulysses that make it obvious they haven't read it, or even read a back cover probably, but once you tell people you're working minimum wage at a shitty store your opinions get discounted, like you couldn't possibly be able to get through Swann's Way or Man Without Qualities (not that anyone has heard of the latter) or w/e
it would annoy me if i wasn't inured to peoples meretricious 'look-at-me-i'm-an-intellectshul' schtick
specifically have trouble reading the Romantic poets. I think my problem is that I read prose very visually and that transferring over to poetry does not work. I can do some of the modernist stuff which is more imaged based and anything dramatic/narrative.
Op there's no way you're at an ivy and you can't find people that want to talk about this stuff; I go to one and every literature / philosophy class I have been in has been an incredibly rewarding experience, because even if it's not their major or particular interest, these kids are bent on reaping intellectual discourse from the the concepts of the class. And that's incredibly valuable
I know you're lying because no one (not a single person, not even one) likes Twilight anymore. Not little girls. Not mom's. And definitely not college girls. This would have been believable if you had mentioned a more hip and in YA series.
have you tried Basho et al? the inflection of imagery with hinted narrative is incredibly poignant and I found it a good primer for the Romantics -- not that he's not wonderful in his own right
Yea, I feel that way but I still have to desperately try and reach out for some connection or I'll die of loneliness. Wish I knew more English graduate type people, the few I've met are really well read, even if it's just in their speciality.
Just met a hot guy who studied Greek and knew it all, inside out, more than me and I started with the greeks. Wish I made a move on him even if he was way out of my league.
I regularly hold casual conversation about Dostoevsky and the Corpus Aristotelicum with other members of the marching band at a middling SEC university. You're not looking hard enough if you can't find readers at an Ivy. Try going to club meetings with a small paperback in the pocket of a heavy winter coat. It sparks conversation easily. A copy of Lolita poking out of my backpack is how I met my current girlfriend.
Wow, what country are you from? Even here in Guatemala, a third world underdeveloped shithole, most of my reader friends (not all of course, but most of them) like authors like Dostoyevsky, Camus, Kafka, Hemingway and so.
They're hard to compare. Of course you'll find people going in both directions on who is the better poet. Wordsworth tends to be more eloquent in his control of poetic structure. I'm personally more a fan of Byron because I'm a sucker for his use of symbol.
(The more radical Shelley, Byron, and somewhat Keats collective does more for me than Coleridge and Wordsworth, though all of them are gifted poets.)
Byron's Childe Harold's Pilgrimage really speaks of the struggles of an individual and a generation so poignantly that I wouldn't care if his form wasn't "elevated" enough, and while it is almost painfully "Romantic," it comes along with the territory with that period of writing. That said, that's the poem that made Byron become famous overnight... and it was with just the first two Cantos... the last two are the true stars of the work.
Original /lit/izen here. With the Romantics, most of the poetry is hyper visual... it really was that way from the Romantics through the Victorian writers into the Modern. I'm just speaking directly from British Lit here obviously. The Romantics, there are some longer narrative poems, but there's a hell of a lot of shorter works. Their stuff is easier to grasp, overall, than say the Metaphysical poets and some of the satirical poetry of the Restoration... I'd say the only real complexity comes from not having a good background in Greek mythology or being able to perhaps relate to their tendency to fall into "tortured soul" mode or "perfect artist experiencing nature" mode. I find it very difficult to express to students how to interpret the kooky artist-spirituality of the Romantics because it's supposed to be an experience that sort of goes beyond explanation.
The Romantics typically are either loved or hated by readers. Coleridge and Wordsworth pull less of that tortured artist shit in their writing, so you could try them... but honestly they're all pretty visual with only some narrative works at the time. The Romantic period in England was when poetry was the star of literature. So people wanted to showcase their poetry on the basis of theme and form... narrative sometimes but it was less important in most works. Now, you get to the Victorians, and because novels dominated those decades, the poets start getting heavier on narrative BUT still held onto the imagery of the Romantics. So maybe try Elizabeth Browning or Tennyson.
Not OP, but unfortunately most people go for YA novels or general easy, entertainment reads written within the last 40 years.
I have a few friends who read voraciously, but I have to literally shove a classic novel at them for them to read it. They're smart enough to grasp it, and yet, they'll just go re-read Harry Potter instead. Found out one friend read Fifty Shades of Gray, all of it, the other day and felt so perplexed about it.
For a creative writing major, you hope they aspire above Harry Potter or are at least inspired as writers by something beyond YA. I saw it all the damn time as a grad student with a concentration in creative writing. Harry Potter is fun and all, but branching out to more complex books is how someone becomes a good writer. How many famous writers of the past WEREN'T well read?
I have a similar situation, except that my dad studies alchemy. No shit, it's kind of crazy but he's pretty much a genius with chemistry in general and has a broad understanding of ancient esoteric writing. It's definitely influenced my writing and my interest in symbology and off-beat fiction writers.
We don't share an interest in reading fiction, but we have a lot of shit we talk about and it's partly why I've always been passionate about learning.
He can read shit like this... which was written by Sir Isaac Newton apparently.
I often wonder if it's worse in Alabama or here in Louisiana. I already know my state is better than the shithole that is Mississippi, but I always assume that Alabama, being close to Georgia, has some hope in the major cities of being less "dumb ass southern." I've driven through the northern part of Alabama a few times and it seemed okay I guess.
>have some time in between classes
>not enough for a nap but enough to get some reading done
>decide to get some coffee
>read while drinking my coffee
>qt sits down at a table diagonally from me
>originally was going to have her back towards me
>switches so she faces me
>it's obvious she wants to get a good look at me
>finish my coffee
>put my book up and get up
>she looks at me and smiles
>I just cast a quick blank glance at her before I leave
I don't even know what came over me.
I'm in a book club that also does some creative writing. Its pretty cringy to see all of the English majors in the club are just hoping to write the next HP or Got. Each submission is some fantasy world with shitty cliched characters, but they think they are so deep for writing schlock.
In my years at uni I've met two guys actually interested in lit. We went to a half price books and had a fucking blast. Just keep on reading and bringing it up in conversation, eventually you'll find someone. I'd probably steer clear of the English undergrads though.
>tfw so demoralized by a lifetime of striking out with girls that you don't even consider talking to them anymore
My mom has heard all of my fuckups and as of yesterday is still convinced that I can get a girlfriend whenever I want, but am simply "too lazy."
>girl watches you as you read
>actively ensure you never make eye contact
>relieved when she leaves
I am currently studying English adolescent ed/ Literature at a SUNY School and it is painful to see how some of my peers react in class. I am not the most well-read guy in the world, but I can admit it.
If it is not Toni Morrison or a topics course on a pop. writer, people do not discuss in class at all. I took Shakespeare and the conversation was nil. I had a friend who did not submit sources for a major research paper and he still received a great grade in the course. I'm taking YA science fiction where we read CHILDRENS books, yet most of them will sit silently as two or three kids engage the professor, it is a class filled with pre-service teachers too. If you can't speak up in a classroom setting now, what are you going to do with a room filled with hormone fulled teenagers. At least google the book before class to look like your engaged! God damn.
Ever notice how if you don't masturbate for a week every girl boosts in attractiveness like tenfold? I think your story is the equivalent of that except for when you abstain from common human interaction.
>tfw I'm the guy who doesn't speak up
I want too, I read the texts, but I just can't and I don't know why.
That's fine, as long as your not trying to be a teacher. People have anxiety in the classroom and it can stem from shitty teachers who made conversing in class a competition. In my observations of middle school/ high school classes, some teachers are downright abusive to there students. Taking in class should be a way to share ideas with the class and your professor. As a side note, what could a teacher do to make you more comfortable in class? If you are on this board you must feel like you have a lot to share about literature. If you do the reading you are ahead of 50% of your classmates at least.
you dumbass syou should try to meet nonreaders and turn them into readers, nothing hits harder than the first time you do it rush
or, find readers that no longer read and get them back into readers
I have a few friends here in Tennessee who read, but for the most part people just get confused when I tell them I read. It's like they can't see any reason or purpose to such an activity. I guess they're to busy worrying about keeping their temp job at amazon, or something like that.
In my whole life I've met one person that reads, he likes Poe, like to the death. Fuck's sake. But on the upside now there's a plethora of people getting hip with anime, they all like Attack on the Titan. Whatever, plebs everywhere. And people don't watch any films at all either, fucking Avengers. At least I have you /lit/. :(
Well shit I saw that in graduate school in a class of 10-15 people.
I'm actually painfully introverted, but it's the sort of introversion that Johnny Depp must have that makes him a mumbling awkward mess in interviews but confident while acting. It's like savant introversion... I can't make small talk with my coworkers without stressing but when I teach I am a fucking confident beast. I'm 32 and still can't handle a simple one-on-one conversation with people I don't know well, but lecturing is entirely different.
So in graduate school, I was already teaching, and I'd see people deathly afraid of presenting something for 5-10 minutes was like, shit really? Once you do it enough, most people will eventually realize talking in front of people isn't a big deal. Some are crippled in all situations though... knew one girl so painfully awkward in grad school that she always sounded winded when she spoke during class and she started hyperventilating during her presentation and ran out the class sobbing.
Yeah but even Rowling read mythology and shit to come up with her ideas. If you read just Rowling primarily, you'll just hack all of her ideas instead of being inspired by other sources to do something original in the same genre.
At least they aren't hooked on Michael Bay? I'll never get why AoT is so popular. There's 90% action and 10% character development. Even shit like Naruto built up their characters more.
Shit don't even waste your time on people who see no value in reading at all. The statistics of people who never read an entire book for decades of their adult life is disturbing. The number of college graduates is staggeringly high for that too... obviously not English majors.
Dunno. My dad could explain a lot of the symbology behind work done by writers like Blake and Yeats who were both into the occult.
Otherwise, my dad never attempted to turn lead into gold to my knowledge. It seemed to fulfill him for decades, and he did some neat shit that I can't really explain because I'm no expert, but at the very least, the symbolic imagery is so unique and captivating that it holds my interest as an outsider. For anyone who is interested in Chemistry, this predated it and Chemistry probably would not have become a legit science for years without the work of the Alchemists.
I grew up barely seeing my father (divorced) but we both took an interest in literature. He's really well read and quite a collector. We have great discussions when we meet up every now and then. Maybe it's in the genes.
>searching for male virtues in women
don't do this. find a girl who is attractive and has a pleasant personality. if you want people to talk to about literature etc and to be impressed by their tastes and opinions, find male friends.
I hate how true this is. I've been with beautiful girls who were legitimately super smart but they were all crazy.
It's the old triangle theory, that the best you can actually hope for is a woman who is two of the following three: hot, smart, and/or crazy. You can never have all three.
>tfw no qt 3.14 who reads and is pretty but not slutty
I know she doesn't exist but still it haunts me.
That feel when want to comment but will get the usual response.
I know a girl like that. She's short, chubby and reads bullshit like Twilight "but not because it's popular". She doesn't believe in love and hates me because I banged her best friend.
What are "male virtues", as in, what human virtue could be claimed exclusively by all males regardless of their rearing and environment? And why do you defend your poisonous attitudes about women when it's clear that such a self-perpetuating cycle of prejudice works against the well-being of society?
It exasperates me to post on /lit/ knowing that just stating my gender in a gender-related discussion will cause some people to accuse me of seeking attention. However, it's relevant in this case because I want to refute the supposed inferior nature of women that so many anons defend. The crucial point is that gender roles are social constructs perpetuated by custom and bitterness against women caused by harmful concepts of masculinity which forbid men from expressing their emotions. If we just start reforming or ignoring institutions that promote gender stereotypes, like the popular media and sports sectors, it will go a long way towards healing the relationship between the sexes in America.
As a child, I was sheltered without notions of gender roles, so I was always egalitarian in my assessment of the world. Now, I see that men and women are biologically compatible yet socially estranged. My understanding is that women are outsiders as regards intellectual discussion, and androcentric concepts of masculinity espoused in such circles deny men the ability to befriend women. My male friend has told me that this happens because many men just don't like people who are "lazy, weak, and stupid", and that men tend to prejudge all women as belonging to that group as women are perceived to show more collective personality than men. Still, the fact is that anyone who is raised with a good work ethic can succeed, male or female. It's silly and probably self-pitying to suggest that women are NEVER! COMPETENT! EVER! WAAA! because it's a self-defense mechanism against male feelings of alienation (which are totally normal and should be dealt with by becoming more involved with the community and one's self-development).
As for me personally, I know I am unable to control the prejudices that people hold against me. However, I worry that men's and women's misconceptions about gender identity are preventing BOTH genders from succeeding in the work place. I am sure /lit/ will understand why it's so urgent to drop misogyny as a "fashionable" social statement. Both sides need to quit yelling and discuss ways to solve the nation's problems.
I hope that you step back from this post and realize that you're throwing an elongated tantrum with no particular point and very little, if any, understanding of the text or context of the post that you're addressing.
Subdue your fee-fees and try to be articulate next time.
Calm down, it's okay. Getting tackled for just admitting to having a second X chromosome says more about the poster than the one who posts. It still bugs me a tad, but it's so painfully predictable and pathetic that some guys get a high from taking down the "attention whore" who most likely is just adding insight that will make more sense if they acknowledge their gender.
On the flipside, I'd love to meet a well-read man, but it seems that most end up being pretentious assholes who just want their egos stroked... and apparently some think I can't actually exist. I get strange looks for admitting that I think some of the best western poetry is the carnage depicted throughout the Iliad. Sorry, some bookish girls don't worship Jane Austen and the Brontes and instead prefer epic works or social satire or surreal postmodern.
>I get strange looks for admitting that I think some of the best western poetry is the carnage depicted throughout the Iliad.
>just stating my gender in a gender-related discussion will cause some people to accuse me of seeking attention
That's because men don't state their gender
(Nobody would give a shit anyway because men don't have inherent social value, only their accomplishments have value)..
Let's be clear, most /lit/ posters are not "average" individuals, many of them are exceptional to some degree. Men are biologically predisposed to deviation from the mean. That means, more men are retards and more men are geniuses. /lit/ posters lean towards the latter and substantially less geniuses will be women.
Describing reality is not misogyny.
How fucking detached from reality are you? The amount of women on any 4chan board is <30% (maybe except the cosplay one for obvious reasons). If you honestly think /lit/ is some bastion of the intelligentsia you're either retarded or attempting to justify the amount of time you waste on this site rather than doing anything productive.
In your words, "reality" is the causal relationship between the belief that "men have no inherent social value" (i.e. their abstention from mentioning their gender in their posts) and their revulsion to those who mention their gender in their posts -- the link between those two ends being the belief that gender should never be relevant to a post because the majority of posters are men who are valued solely for their accomplishments. Thus, you're saying that my mentioning my gender in the previous post was akin to me saying, "I'm a pretty snowflake who is above all the posters on /lit/"; an unwelcome detail that should have been disregarded in favor of a simple opinion on gender relations. The problem is that, had I left out my gender, my insight would have been without context. In fact, my post was merely "describing reality" in the context through which I experienced it. Nothing wrong with that.
you're surrounded by (basic) teens or just talking with wrong people.
I'm studying science too, I've done a couple of creative writing subjects as electives and I've always been the most well read kid there.
It's not that they love harry potter or anything dumb, just that they read one book by marquez or murakami or something and talk about it in every class. One girl said she loved postmodernism because she liked lolita and slaughterhouse five.
The thing that has annoyed me the most though is not their taste in literature but their approach to writing. Most of them straight up say that they just get an idea into their head and just write it down in one go and refuse to edit because it limits their expression or something. someone will often say something like 'i just like this story, i think trying to analyse it or make this a metaphor will ruin it'. it's bizarre. i don't understand why you'd even study creative writing at university if that's how you feel.
while workshopping a piece i wrote one girl said that she was confused about the bit where the narrator changed. i asked what she meant and she said 'well bill is telling the story at the start, but then towards the end the narrator switches to emily'. the piece was written in the third person. shit, that was weird
>I'm actually painfully introverted, but it's the sort of introversion that Johnny Depp must have that makes him a mumbling awkward mess in interviews but confident while acting. It's like savant introversion... I can't make small talk with my coworkers without stressing but when I teach I am a fucking confident beast. I'm 32 and still can't handle a simple one-on-one conversation with people I don't know well, but lecturing is entirely different.
This is an interesting way to phrase it. I'm the same way-- complete autist who can't even look people in the eye in normal conversation, but when it comes to public speaking I get tons of earnest comments on how good I am.
It's almost like being an autist 'outside' the realm of interaction gives you insight into 'acting' like you know what you're doing.