Alastair reynolds and Traci Harding for sci-fi and David and leigh, eddings for all your fantasy needs,
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-14 4:57
I love the Berenstain Bears The Spooky Old Tree.
Jewish literature isn't for everyone though.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-14 19:15
>>11 I think he was asking for an adult reading list, but you included David and Leigh Eddings.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-15 18:11
Paradise Lost by John Milton
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-15 19:01
Anything by Jung.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-16 2:30
The Sword of Truth series by Terry Goodkind is my favorite book series.....and i never hear of ANYBODY online having read the books, even though every single book in the series has managed to top the bestsllers chart.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-16 23:02
Terry Goodkind is an Objectivist fag who is obsessed with bondage. Confessing that you like the Sword of Truth series is on par to admitting you are a pedophile and furrie so it is not too surprising i see your post on these boards.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-17 0:12
Agree with 17, Goodkind is a crack head writer who randomly writes about communism vs. captilism then reverts back to asine fillers. Anyone who likes his shit should be shot.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-17 3:46
Catch-22's a good one. I'm currently reading "The Bounty"
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-18 20:28
It's difficult to come up with one that -everyone- should read. But I've decided on Generation X by Douglas Coupland.
Classic literature fans should really read Headhunter by Timothy Findley. If you haven't read a lot of what I'm assuming are still part of the literature 'cannon', I'm not sure you'd appreciate it as much as it deserves.
Uhm, how about good literature instead of pulp? Or is that all you read?
Tolstoy - The Kingdom of God is Within You
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-26 1:11
yeah because it really makes a difference whether you read what some might consider pulp rather than what others might consider "good literature"....
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-26 3:10
Spin, Robert Charles Wilson.
Or almost anything else by him.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-26 5:15
>>24
Maybe you should read a book that just has the letter A reprinted on 800 pages (the standard for fantasy books selling weight-wise), since after all, all that matters is that you read latin letters printed on paper.
let me help you: A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-26 10:26
>>26
Get over yourself and realize that some people dont want to be educated or enlightened when reading a book. I'm all for reading said books, but I'm not about to try to convince them that reading the philosophical ramblings of a long dead author is the right thing to do. Such coersion is cheap.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-28 2:39
>>26 Charles Dickens is totally a pulp writer, amirite? Paid by word the fucking hack.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-28 11:25
Even if you read your whole life, you can only read maybe a thousand (or so) books. Reading shitty pulp = lose and fail.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-28 13:03
>>29
Haha, oh wow. I'm only 19 and I have a bookshelf with around 500 books on it (all of which I have read) right next to me, and I've read a lot more that I don't own.
And anyone who says that only the old classics are worth reading is simply not worth talking to. It'd probably be difficult if you tried, anyway, what with them having their head so far up their own ass. I really cannot stand the kind of people who say things like that.
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-28 13:09
>>30
Guess what Anonymous? Real literature is a lot harder to read than shit like Pratchett and Le Guin and Brown and ...
Name:
Anonymous2006-12-28 13:44
>>31
I didn't mention what books they are, because Anonymous would just call it lies if I did. But regardless, I didn't say I don't read what you call real literature (because I do read a lot of it), I just said that if you think that everything else written is worthless, you're an idiot.
lol I'm in the same situation, though running out of shelf space now.
Anyway, the important thing to recognize is that literature can not be divided exclusively into "classics" and "shitty pulp." Some of the classics are worth reading. Dostoevsky, Shakespeare, etc. But some of them just suck. Moby Dick is not worth reading. For a much better treatment of similar themes, watch Cannibal Holocaust, lol.
Why should we allow the establishment to dictate what is quality literature? It's not even consistent. Moby Dick was not considered worth reading until the 1920s when faggy academic-types unearthed it. Dickens was considered pulp when it was published. (Admittedly, Dickens is. His works suck.)
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-02 17:50 ID:qW9W83Ap
I recommend Felidae by Akif Pirincci. It is detective story, the detective has to find a serial killer. I know sounds very cliche. The differnce about this book is every charachter (minus a very small handful of minor yet very important charachters) are cats. Mind you they are regular cats not furries. The plot is excelent and it keeps you guessing till the end. And when that end hits, it hits hard.
song of ice and fire, the 4/7 there are out up to date (i think)
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-08 13:38 ID:UF1gJQXw
>>45 Hell yeah, but someone already said Orwell so I recommend Huxley as a runner-up.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-08 19:37 ID:udW33sWY
Die Blechtrommel (engl: The Tin Drum)
If you're in any way interested in recent European history, you have to read it. If not, it's still worth reading. Dude got a fucking Nobel Price of Literature for that one.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-10 19:06 ID:rxyLkFzl
Am I the only person who thinks Lolita is overrated and boring?
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-11 9:10 ID:9+FNFECH
Doesn't meet up to your loli fantasies?
Yeah internet pornography ruins all kind of classic literature.
Who reads de Sade, D. H. Lawrence, or William S. Burroughs any more?
Movies are where it's at. You should join our forum at /tele/
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-11 9:28 ID:sFnnmZri
I don't have loli fantasies, being a faggot.
I just thought it was pointless, reading it. I can see how it would have been an interesting book when it was new and shocking, but as it stands it hasn't aged well.
And fuck you I've not watched TV for near a year and I won't begin now.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-11 13:08 ID:9+FNFECH
lies
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 11:23 ID:W+YOhNMn
lulz
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-15 20:33 ID:BSBaQI50
Fight Club
Ishamel
The Last Unicorn
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-17 8:48 ID:yeZocFkJ
Galapagos - Kurt Vonnegut
and almost anything else by him
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-17 20:17 ID:UpFaesc8
Dune, naturally...
The Anita Blake series by Laurell K. Hamilton...
The wheel of time by the Jordan something dude
Elliot Kate's crown of stars...
The illuminatus Trilogy are pretty damn nice - a brain-fuck sort of read... If you like that sort.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-19 0:38 ID:RcRrSoCz
someone mentioned Vonnegut already but Slaughter- House Five is my favorite. Really makes you think, it plays with your head but in a good way.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-19 4:10 ID:6t/xTRL0
Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov.
It's one of the most beautifully written books I've ever had the pleasure of reading. I'm quite serious.
Futurological congress by Stanislaw Lem.
What the hell, Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell and Glen Cook's Black Company as well.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-19 4:11 ID:6t/xTRL0
>>Am I the only person who thinks Lolita is overrated and boring?
YES.
What...seriously how old are you? Maybe if you're a kid you'd find it boring because you can't fully appreciate the wordplay and lush imagery and amazingly poignant and well-crafted story? Otherwise WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-19 5:27 ID:ov7tVO/l
>>59
I'm 19. And I find it boring because I just don't think it's a very interesting book. It may seem shallow, but no matter how lush or vibrant a landscape the words craft, if that world does not contain something interesting to me, I can't be motivated to delve deeper.
>>if that world does not contain something interesting to me, I can't be motivated to delve deeper.
I thought it was a chilling and heartbreaking exploration of monstrosity, selfish self-interest and the fragility of sanctity and dignity.
Well if you're not getting that from the book, fair enough. But maybe come back to it in a few years and see if you change your mind and it's become your thing.
Ah, I plan on doing that. I have it on my bookshelf, and I'm sure I'll pick it up again in the future.
I was just turned off by prose that I felt was overwrought and cloying. I guess I'm used to more contemporary reading with a larger focus on events, as opposed to Lolita's sort of poetic monologue. I suppose a lot of it depends on how you absorb literature... I'd say that you would take in Lolita the same way you would listen to a song, where as I am much more used to fiction that requires a cinematic aesthetic.
I understand a bit more where you're coming from now. I'll just throw out that the overwrought prose is partially a function of the nature of the narrator, and his pleas to a jury that I don't want to elaborate on for fear of spoiling the book. Humbert is a chatty, sometimes over-educated little man who reveals more about himself and what's really going on in occasional split-second slip-ups than he does in a dozen paragraphs. (Then again I loved reading between the lines of the novel - for me it was part of its great charm)
Good to hear you're willing to take a crack at it again sometime though. A lot of people I know will read two pages of something then toss it down if it doesn't grab them right away. Swine, I tell you...
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-20 17:37 ID:LzAaJAk4
Capital by Karl Marx
One of the most famous but least read books, certainly. Full of literary references and Marx's dry humour and attention to detail (some of the footnotes span several pages). It is interesting to note that modern "Capitalism" has evolved into something closer to Marx's ideals than anything the corrupt stalinist regime accomplished.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-21 0:55 ID:6XHKYwx5
Just finished Lolita, actually. Fucking amazing.
Name:
Anonymous2007-05-21 4:16 ID:2Uj+6Djk
>>65
If long footnotes are your thing, pick up House of Leaves. The thing has footnotes inside footnotes.