I have read 10 books
>>23319129First list them in alphabetical order, then list them in the order that you read them, then list them in a ranking from favorite to least favorite, then, finally, list them in another ranking but this one on an objective assessment of best to worst.
>>23319129This month?
>>23319136Cat's Cradle Catcher in the Rye Conspiracy Against the Human RaceFear and Trembling Flowers for Algernon Frankenstein The Kite Runner No Longer HumanNotes From the UndergroundSharp Objects >The Kite Runner>Catcher in the Rye >Flowers for Algernon>Frankenstein >Sharp Objects >Cat's Cradle >No Longer Human>Conspiracy Against the Human Race>Fear and Trembling >Notes From the UndergroundFlowers for AlgernonNo Longer HumanFrankensteinNotes From the UndergroundSharp ObjectsConspiracy Against the Human RaceFear and Trembling Catcher in the RyeCat's CradleThe Kite Runner>Notes From the Underground>No Longer Human>Fear and Trembling >Conspiracy Against the Human Race>Catcher in the Rye>Frankenstein>Flowers for Algernon>Cat's Cradle>Sharp Objects >The Kite Runner>>23319153In 20 years
>>23319165>20 yearsDude...why? It's time to dig your heels in and get moving.
>>23319165based listerI've also read Catcher in the Rye, Flowers for Algernon, Frankenstein, and Notes from Underground. If you like stories with protagonists that are (or at least feel like they are) outsiders to the societies they live in, then I recommend American Psycho, Child of God, Crime and Punishment, and The Stranger.>>23319171I think he's saying that he's 20 years old and that these are all the books he's ever read.
>>233191718 of those are in the last ~6 months and there are a couple I didn't mention. I'm okay with this pace, zoomer brain and all that.>>23319184Started American Psycho years ago but I extra didn't read back then so I didn't get past 30 pages before getting bored. I need to finish Lolita, Blood Meridian, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest then I'll add it back to the pile earnestly.
>>23319136>>23319165lists 3 & 4 should be identical
>>23319196cap
>>23319184It makes no difference. He needs to dig his heels in and move. >>23319194>I'm okay with this pace.You shouldn't be overall, but at least you've gotten moving in the last months. Get on to the Bible, Shakespeare, Plato, and Aristotle before long. You'll need to return to all of them, so the sooner you read them for the first time, the better. There's so much to consider. Maintain that pace as best you can anon. Increase it if you're able, but not to the point of dimming retention and comprehension.
>>23319198i don't see why not
>>23319196I don't see why.
>>23319209I intend to read The Bible in the by next Easter. Can someone less faggy vouch for Shakespeare?>The Greeks>>23319211Fuck You>>23319213Thank You
>>23319209shakespeare saidFall to them as you find your stomach serves you.No profit grows where is no pleasure ta'en
>>23319221>in the by damn I'm drunk
>>23319213unless you have no ability to see a work of art as it really is
>>23319221I wouldn't say you need to read all of Shakespeare, but certainly don't go without exposure to at least his tragedies, but you would do well to take in at least one of his comedies and romances too. He really can't be overlooked. Take, for instance, Lord Alfred Tennyson. If you read the poem Ulysses which is obviously a reference to Homer, and yet is full of Bible references as well, but say you read it, and you do not hear the voice of Shakespeare in Hamlet and Milton in Paradise Lost, you are not reading Tennyson at all, and there are many such examples as that throughout all of literature and art for the greats. Just as in philosophy and the sciences, intelligent men across history are all in conversation with one another, wresting with various parts of the same Mysteries. I was thinking whether Homer ought to be substituted for Aristotle, but, really, Hesiod and Homer should simply be added. They will permit you comprehension of most mythological references and give you the basis of poetry. If you want the basis of drama (and it is worthwhile), then consult the three major Greek tragedians, Aeschylus, Euripides, and Sophocles. >>23319223While there's some truth to it, balance is key. You cannot be an intelligent reader or appreciator of Art in general without those four. Too much has come out of their wake. Let's for instance, imagine a man which shirks them in favor of his inclinations. While some idiosyncrasy of mind might be born because of his deficit—i.e. any inspiration which strikes him strikes him as the inspiration of one more ignorant—there's nothing to guarantee this idiosyncrasy will produce anything worthwhile, yet we can guarantee that it will render him uneducated and ignorant. To some degree, we must all pick and choose. There isn't time for all that is, but the foundations should be walked upon by every man who has any intention whatsoever of calling himself a student of literature, Art, Philosophy, or anything like it. Not even film, really, can be watched with an intelligent eye without these basics, nor even politics participated in with any intelligence without Aristotle, for example. But I'm a nobody. This is just my perspective and my advice.
>>23319238Whether a man can see isn't the issue. Even if I objectively consider a work to better, it doesn't mean I still won't prefer another. I can see a woman is objectively more beautiful than another and feel nothing, yet have my blood run hot for a woman who repulses me and is repulsive. Such is life and human emotion.
>>23319264Shakespeare might not be surprised to know that his plays are still bringing money to producers and fame to actors throughout the world. He would be greatly surprised, however, to know that they are studied (by compulsion) in the classroom; they are conned by scholars, dissected by pedants, and fed in synthetic and quite distasteful doses to students. Of course if you have no literary judgment, no ability to see a novel as it really is, you spend your time groping for guidelines like what critics have said or might say about it, what class it seems to fall into, where it seems to be aiming, whether its style strikes you as normal or not, above all whether it can be called important or not - which is far easier to decide than whether the thing is any good or not.But importance isn’t important. Good writing is.
>>23319264Fine, I'll see about Shakespeare
>>23319297And the good writers have all studied Shakespeare. Shakespeare wouldn't be surprised at all if he knew his own influence. You're just babbling empty pretentions.
>>23319324Good man. You won't regret it.
>>23319365Good and bad writers have influenced people (e.g. Ezra Pound). Think for yourself.
I've read millions of books, but none of them are what you'd traditionally call a book. Every piece of information filtered in my mind is essentially the same.
>>23319373I am ChatGPT
>In 20 yearsProbably beats the /lit/ average desu
