Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon.

Pages: 1-

Should I read these books?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 15:39

Should I read:

The Foundation
or
The Forever War
or
Slaughterhouse 5
or
[write in choice for similar book]

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 16:23

or

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 17:10

Foundaton, I guess, if you really have time to be reading old books when new ones keep coming out.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 20:11

>>3
Your implication is that newness makes a book better?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 20:22

Slaughterhouse 5

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 21:42

>>4
No, but I do believe that it's better to stay current than to read old books just because they're classics. It's not good when an art form devolves into historical preservation (cf. classical music, jazz). If there's something old that you particularly want to look into, or if you've polished off the new releases that look good, go for something old, but it's better to read a new good book than an old good book.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-03 22:51

>>6
Personally, I don't think there are enough interesting books being published in recent years to get by on. Most of it is trendy hipster shit that will be forgotten in ten years. How can you have any perspective just reading new books? I can't imagine how shitty your reading list is.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 0:02

>>7
If you don't read new books, you've got nothing to have a perspective on.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 0:24

>>8
Which is better Harry Potter or Twilight?

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 1:31

>>9
You can guess as well as I can.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 4:09

>>9
They are equally not worth reading.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 8:57

The Forever War and Slaughterhouse 5.

both of them you can read in a day or two if you're quick.

The Foundation is part of a trilogy, so read it afterwards and decide if you want to read more of it.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 9:01

>>6
wether you read an old or a new book has no effect on the 'art form', new books will still be written, old books will still become classics. why the fuck would you care about external effects? read what appeals to you! (luckily) there are no 'trends' to follow with literature. don't be a dick.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 9:18

>>13
No trends in literature? Tell me you're kidding.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 9:29

>>14
as a writer there may be trends!
for personal reading there are not!

try to follow me here...

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 13:25

>>15
I'll follow you when you go somewhere worth being. I can't believe you don't think there are trends in reading.

>>13
The audience has no effect on an art form.
Durr hurr.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-04 14:51

>>16
so you think you will be socially outcast for reading an unpopular or old book?

this argument is getting convoluted.

personally i read for myself. be it an old or a new book, i don't care at all about its publicly perceived 'trendyness'.

Name: Anonymous 2009-04-05 13:54

>>17
so you think you will be socially outcast for reading an unpopular or old book?
What. I said that if the trend is to read "classics" it's going to keep contemporary authors down.

this argument is getting convoluted.
As of >>16, it is.
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List
All trademarks and copyrights on this site are owned by their respective parties. All comments and posts are the responsibility of their own posters.
- Tinychan + 2ch Mode -