How accurate is pic related?
Reading Tiers
As you keep reading you'll eventually find that all fiction is various levels of easy compared to the really difficult stuff out there.
Joyce - "late era" or not - would still be a cakewalk compared to a thinker like Alfred North Whitehead..
Meme tiers are all pointless btw.
Avoid them and just read whatever it is that you personally find interesting. Don't let Veeky Forums melons meme on you.
>tip of the iceberg tier
>lacks any substance
I think that's an unfair way to put it. The problem with most of the listed authors is that their books are good arguments and absolutely nothing more.
For the most part I think the black to white divide is fine at least. I'm surprised Camus made it below ocean level.
In these tiers stuff at the bottom if not good is at last interesting, that's why I like them, sometimes they are accurate but you shouldn't take them seriously (everyone is elitist in some way but at a certain point is REALLY childish). They can work as a cluster of recommendations which is also nice.
This shit again
>reading for the "difficulty"
you guys are missing the entire point of art
It's retarded.
>alfred north whitehead
>disgraced mathematician that began publishing laughable neoplatonist garbage
Bukowski, whilst barely becoming incoherent or complex is still artful in the way he presents his vision, dare I say, much like Hemingway.
Therefore, they both transcend the tier system as the tier system only counts complexity and not originality.
>implying "early era" Gass doesn't contain The Tunnel
>implying Alexander Theroux is worthy of being on this list
>Gertrude Stein at the bottom of the fucking chart when her "difficulty" is her tedious repetition
>spanish wannabe joyce deeper than McElroy
>Schmidt not lower than Joyce
>Coover "difficult"
>Gaddis level 4
>Woolf lower than Pynchon
>Calvino lower than Faulkner
>DFW lower than McCarthy
this was written by a literal retard
Joyce is overrated af
joyce put the bar so high it ruined it for other writers.
get over it
what the fuck are you on about? you think ulysses and finnegans wake are only complex, not original? joyce created a whole new dimension in literature
cervantes is not original? tolstoy? dante?
those you mentioned are not high because the chart doesn't consider "originality", but because they were nothing special, specially bukowski.
i fixed your picture
>Rowling
>not Kaur
>Not exclusively reading accounts records from the Babylonian Kassite dynasty era in cuneiform inscribed clay tablets
>Ever reading anything other than proto-Chinese bone carvings from 4,000 B.C.E.
They put Sartre over Camus. Enough to make me disregard.
What’s wrong with Theroux
>intellectually consuming any item other than Neanderthalian cave paintings circa 50,000 bc
This
kek
Where is Pessoa?
Dfw is atleast tier 4
Dostoevsky on level 2 while Woolf is level 4.
...Ok...
>Tfw haven’t gone any deeper than Bolano
>realist easier to read than modernist
>...Ok...
>ranking literature based on it's difficulty to read
Tolstoy is suprisingly low on the list.
Why is Beckett so low? He's such a boring brainlet.
It must be a sad life to value literature based on how removed it is from reality rather than how connected it can make you feel to it
the only tier that is said to be worse than any other is the first one
>no Verne anywhere in that graphic
Go fuck yourself OP. SAGE
Can't speak for myself as I have read comparatively little, but a prof at my local university with a PHD in lit said that after Finnegan's Wake nothing seemed challenging to read anymore, so he moved on to astrophysics.
So if you read books to be challenged(and some do) this list is at least party accurate.
reported and bumped
>Orwell
>Tier 0, lacking substance
Glad that was the first thing I saw, otherwise I'd have had to actually scroll through what I presume to be a tremendous waste of time.
In the event that you're not a troll, here's a tip for you, OP: find something that interests you, such as a particular genre of fiction or nonfiction, and start reading books associated with said subject. You will quickly discern what you can appreciate in literary works that coincide with that particular topic, and what you cannot.
Falling for the "Veeky Forums approved" meme is going to stifle your education if you hinge every literary decision you make upon what a shitposter (who you [more often than not] can safely assume hasn't read the book you're inquiring about) says.