What is the most beautiful English prose that you have ever read...

>Why did the old Persians hold the sea holy? Why did the Greeks give it a separate diety, and make him the own brother of Jove? Surely all this is not without meaning. And still deeper the meaning of that story of Narcissus, who because he could not grasp the tormenting, mild image he saw in the fountain, plunged into it and was drowned. But that same image, we ourselves see in all rivers and oceans. It is the image of the ungraspable phantom of life; and this is the key to it all.

Fitzgerald

hmm.. what is Shakespeare's best prose?

joyce
dostoevsky
sartre
huxley
borges
cioran

>nabokov
love his writing too.

Ah yes, the prose. The prooooooose. the PROOOOOOOSE. There's a reason why the pseuds on this website are always so willing to talk about "the prose" of a book when discussing its merits or flaws. Why attempt to analyze the merits and effects of the literary devices used to add to the development of characters, why attempt to understand the interplay of the perspectives of different characters and the emphasis this places on different themes, the spectrum of ironies used throughout the novel, the historical significance of the novel and the influence it has spawned in literary tradition or the influences seen throughout the work, the specific structure and literary underpinnings of the novel and the way it influences the tone, the author's relationship to the characters and the theme, the presentation of the novel itself to the audience and thus the relationship between reader and text --- why do any of this, when you could talk about "the prose?" You know that you have such a deep understanding of the book, don't you, when you talk about "the prose," the "musicality of it," the "sparseness." What a great artistic touch you have, don't you! Such a highly refined poetic sense! And you feel like such a true reader of literature when you are able to compare these styles: "I am partial to the lyricism of Joyce's prose, as well as the clean and scientific prose of Borges," you might say. What a deep understanding you show! Because the "prose" of a work is such an accessible topic, something that is felt immediately in the body and senses, a nice little sensation and flutter of the heart. Art obviously has nothing else to it, nothing other than the little sensations that I experience, because why should i attempt to understand it on a deeper level than this, when I have such a "refined" sense of the "prose?" Why even attempt to analyze the prose and the poetic and rhythmical underpinnings of it, when I could use a pretty little metaphor for it? It matters little that virtually every reader of literature has access to the music of the words and so my understanding is not quite so advanced as I would think, that form is something that goes hand in hand with theme, that I missed all the deep relationships between characters and between text and reader that existed in the work and that comprise a large part of the literary merit of the text, for my understanding of "the prose" shows such a mastery of language, a fine-tuned sense of the magical flow of the words! Having understood this work, I may as well move onto the next, the next bundle of pretty sensations to experience, the next bagful of fun linguistic treats!

Veeky Forums.ORG

I will tell you why; so shall my anticipation prevent your discovery, and your secrecy to the King and queene: moult no feather. I have of late, (but wherefore I know not) lost all my mirth, forgone all custom of exercises; and indeed, it goes so heavily with my disposition; that this goodly frame the earth, seems to me a sterile promontory; this most excellent canopy the air, look you, this brave o'er hanging firmament, this majestical roof, fretted with golden fire: why, it appeareth no other thing to me, than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours. What a piece of work is man, How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty, In form and moving how express and admirable, In action how like an Angel, In apprehension how like a god, The beauty of the world, The paragon of animals. And yet to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me; no, nor Woman neither.

There is so much to pick from

>dostoevsky
>sartre
>huxley
We're talking about prose fool

i never got the knocking people's hats off thing my edition didn't explain it in the notes

Its an antosocial dick thing to do - he's in a bad mood and must go a-whalin

every like fourth paragraph in The Recognitions hits me like a truck for how breathless and beautiful it is. If only I was cultured enough to understand the references.

>If only I was cultured enough to understand the references

tfw the lack of recognitions

that is a dick thing to do. vischmael. like vicious ishmael. ha.

also what is the comfiest chapter in md? i like the one where he spends the night at the inn, and wakes up with queequeg cuddling him. cute.
or the one where he firsts sleeps in his living quarters.
wait, wasn't there a passage where melville talks about comfort? what chapter is that in

the evil white things chapter is my fave - its like an old testament book

I just started Moby Dick and was kind of underwhemed, the kind of hype I was hearing did not seem appropiate for the tone/prose. Some dumbass told me it was biblical, poetic and serious.

>I just started
>I just started
>I just
>I
>just
>JUST
>started
>I

I heard and am hearing still that the first few chapters are great. Certainly am not going to drop it

nvm i found it! read this shit, look me in the dead eyes and TELL ME this not the highest-tier of comfy lit
>We felt very nice and snug, the more so since it was so chilly out of doors; indeed out of bed-clothes too, seeing that there was no fire in the room. The more so, I say, because truly to enjoy bodily warmth, some small part of you must be cold, for there is no quality in this world that is not what it is merely by contrast. Nothing exists in itself. If you flatter yourself that you are all over comfortable, and have been so a long time, then you cannot be said to be comfortable any more. But if the tip of your nose or the crown of your head be slightly chilled, why then, indeed, in the general consciousness you feel delightfully and unmistakably warm. For this reason a sleeping apartment should never be furnished with a fire, which is one of the luxurious discomforts of the rich. For the height of this sort of deliciousness is to have nothing but the blanket between you and your snugness and the cold of the outer air. Then there you lie like the one warm spark in the heart of an arctic crystal.

I don't know if this is pasta, but if I wanted to analyze a piece based off merit, I would start a thread about it. There is meaning and there is beauty, and if you can't appreciate both, then that is unfortunate. This thread isnt about the former- it's about the latter, and if you think that appreciation of style is worthless or entry level, then you don't really care about the different qualities of literature. Substance is important- perhaps the most important- but never think that style isn't. "Prose" isn't superficial.

>I’m a king with a crooked crown, my kingdom is built on lies and what was once my queen is shooting up heroin. Fallen down the rabbit hole and refuses to come back out, living in Wonderland while I cut down her enemies. I’m a white knight in blood soaked armor, trudging through the battlefield that is my brain. Searching for some sort of answers. Battling demon after demon with no one but myself. But the answers I seek are ones locked away by the boy with the golden hair. Hidden for my own protection, for an eternity I search for the sands of time buried in the desert that is my subconscious.

Kind of cheese but I really liked it.

This. Some of the best prose I've ever read in English. I don't feel that compelled to reread him, however. Idk why

Wtf is this? is this some kind of r/writingprompts copy pasta?

Falstaff

Orwell's essays are probably the best. English by its very nature is not meant for emotive, flowery images. It can't carry rhythm or tune. It's a language of fact. This is why Orwell is the greatest writer of the english language. No one can communicate as succinctly, clearly, and matter of factly as him.

>talking about prose
>no Mishima

Pasta or not, I unironically agree with this

“Yet how strange a thing is the beauty of music! The brief beauty that the player brings into being transforms a given period of time into pure continuance; it is certain never to be repeated; like the existence of dayflies and other such short-lived creatures, beauty is a perfect abstraction and creation of life itself. Nothing is so similar to life as music.”

>English by its very nature is not meant for emotive, flowery images
>the extremes of the evocations of language are matter-of-fact exposition and flowery imagery
pllllEEEEEEEB

This. Also Jeremy Taylor, De Quincey (esp. The English Mail Coach), Walter Pater, and John Ruskin.

*Less well known are William Cobbett and Sidney Smith.

> the evil white things chapter
Doesn't sound like you got it.

Couldn't disagree more. I like Orwell, but his writing is bland and his prescriptions in that essay have probably had a more negative than positive effect. God I detest the short sentence, simple prose crowd.

Moncrieff and Davis translating Proust
Nabokov's The Gift
Beckett's trilogy
Shakespeare, particularly Touchstone's monologues in As You Like It, Rosalind's O, I Know where you are speech and the epilogue, Hamlet's Alas poor Yorick, and Henry V's Before God I am exceeding weary
Browne's Urn Burial and Religio Medici
Joyce's Ulysses, particularly the opening and the start of Oxen in the Sun
the Anna Livia Plurabelle section of Finnegan's Wake
Pilgrim's Progress -- the opening, Christian crossing the River of Death, Christian in the House of the Interpreter, Christiana in the House Beautiful

The trinity

>he HAS to "get it"
>cannot just enjoy a great novel at his own pace, internalizing whatever details peak his interest
>we must all have a scholarly understanding of every minutiae crammed into a 650 page work
>look how smart i am, guys
>guys?
>why does nobody ever want to talk to me
i'm using your words. this is what you said

i live falstaff's short soliloqy on honor in henry iv pt. i
regardless of how you choose to interpret the tone as serious, sad, or funny, it's very enjoyable to read.
i watched a performance where the actor read his honor speech, and after ever question (is there "honor" in he who died on wednesday?) gestured to the croud to shout no. everyone was giggling and having a bunch of fun. what a great speech. and great performance.

usually i have a really hard time understanding shakespeare but watching that performance made the wonderful details i missed upon reading it clear and powerful

thanks for the great recs mate

>this guy is a good writer because he writes about pretty things
>this guy is a bad writer because he writes about ugly things

Are you a fucking ten year old? It's obvious that those words are used for shock value, not because he has limited vocabulary. Not a fan of Martin but this is the worst criticism I've ever seen of him

Reminder that gaddis wasn't especially cultured and that virtually every religious reference in the book (and desu that covers most of the book's references) can be traced back to a fewer than a dozen books he was reading at the time.

>Proust
>Sartre

No. Chateaubriand, Flaubert, Céline.

>Cioran

Yes.

Threads like these make me think much of Veeky Forums hasn't read or understood a damn thing. It might be populated by a bunch of planet nibbling clueless fucking morons. Cancer, out.

>might

Updike unironically beats or is a good challenger of everyone in this thread at his best.

this is super mean to say
we're just having fun here man
nobody is doing anything wrong
:(

Finespun and impartial, the summer sunlight poured down prodigally on all creation alike

so who is cultured then?

I won't wait for an answer, don't worry yourself

you have no idea what you are talking about, do you?

this is not an old pasta. Fairly recent. First came up in a thread a few months ago. Maybe July. Could be wrong about the month.