Walk into bookstore

>walk into bookstore
>take philosophy book
>move it to childrens section

>it's Schopenhauer

>find a bible
>move it to a fantasy section
That's going to enlighten those seeps

>walk into bookstore
>take stirner
>put it in the trash

>Find the Qur'an
>Drop it on the floor
>Put it back

>the pictures
m8, what meme country are you from, 1910s America?

I don't think it's allowed in most countries, because if that was the case nobody would buy the overpriced popcorn

That self help book 'How to win friends and Influence people' actually ruined me socially for a while because I started overanalyzing everything, and some points in the book are just blatantly wrong. Never getting into self help ever again.

>turns out it's actually the best read there because most fantasy is pulp trash

There is a study that went by a few years ago which concluded that self help books are worse for you.

>Find The Book Of Mormon
>Thumb through it
>Buy it as a joke gift for a friend

This honestly. Worst fucking book ever. Though Pease's books are pretty fucking good honestly, maybe because of the scientific bases behind them.

It's actually very effective, but it's a guidebook for sociopaths because it's all about creating the illusion of closeness so you can bilk people out of their shekels. It's considered a must-read for salesmen for a reason.

>implying there's anything wrong with pulp novels

I swear you people think that a book has to be a hideously boring, difficult slog in order to have merit.

>I swear you people think that a book has to be a hideously boring, difficult slog in order to have merit.
BUT ANOOOOOOOOOOON! IF YOU DON'T LITERALLY FEEL LIKE PULLING YOUR TEETH OUT WHEN READING BOOKS THEN YOUR BOOKS ARE TRASH OMG!!!!!!!! HOW COULD YOU POSSIBLY NOT WANT TO FORCE YOURSELF TO READ THINGS THAT ARE PURPOSEFULLY WRITTEN IN AN EXHAUSTING WAY!!!

Seriously, I hate these kinds of people. They're the worst kind of snobbish, they think they're "intellectual" because they only read books written by other snobs who purposefully tried to make the prose as long-drawn and unentertaining to the mind as possible. Inevitably, pointing this out makes them go "HURR YOU HAVE A SHORT ATTENTION SPAN", but the truth is at least I personally don't. If the subject matter interests me, I could read a book all day provided I don't finish it. My issue isn't that. My issue is some books purposefully provide nothing that could be considered "interesting", that is, they dilute the actual content in fancy wordings so much that they put homeopathic medicine to fucking shame.

People call it "beautiful prose". I call it "tedious junk of edgy tryhard-tier prose".

Actually, on that topic, I'd appreciate if anyone explained to me what is supposed to be so great with Moby Dick. It's one of the few books of this kind I've actually managed to slog through, and I found nothing particularly entertaining. I can still recall the endless amounts of tedious, boring descriptions of whale hunting that imply I somehow ever gave a shit (hint: there never was any point at which the book seemed to try to make me give a shit. In fact, it seemed like it was the other way around, I gradually started caring less and less. This wouldn't have happened if the author didn't inflate everything to 10 times the amount of words needed, or even if it was just 3 times smaller; that would've still have given room for artistic prose without making me want to gouge my eyes out), and all the actual...

I mean, you've pretty much cracked the nut here. "Literary" novels are written by prose fetishists, for prose fetishists. They like jacking off to flowery, absurdly overdone exhaustive descriptions of everything and feeling like they are superior to disgusting plebs who 'read for enjoyment' .

Literary critics are prose fetishists for a living, so they laud these types of books, and it goes on ad infinitum

...action which I bet that if you took out all the needless pseudo-encyclopedic whale and whale hunting descriptions would fit in 50 pages. I seriously hated that book all the way through.

I'd rant some more, but I feel like I've used up my allotted opinion difference from mainstream literaryfaggotry. I'm going to go back to things that cause electric impulses in my brain

This is precisely it.

>Read a novel about whaling
>Ugh why is so much of this book about whaling

Kill yourself.

There isn't neccessarily wrong with pulpy fantasy, in fact it could be done very well.
I was mainly using it as a generic pejorative, but the majority of fantasy is garbage that simply draws from other fantasy and waters it down, rather than drawing from things like mythology or culture.

It's not the subject matter, it's the fact that it's being described for the sole purpose of being described. If I wanted to read about the nuances of 19th century whaling or whale anatomy I'd pick up a purely scientific book on whale anatomy or the history of american whaling, which wouldn't tear at my patience by hiding the information in a sea of needless epitheths and references.

One could admit that in a book, describing the theme of the book, that is, the flourishes and the setting could deserve, perhaps, even as much as twice the amount of pages for adding immersion. The issue is, half the book feels like filler, and the unintriguing description to plot ratio is through the fucking roof. Perhaps 10% of the book has something going on.

tl;dr no, you go kill yourself

It's a 19th century novel called "the Whale" that's about whaling, is set on a whaling ship, was written by a whaler and was basing the plot of off of historical events that happened to actual whaling vessels. What the hell were you expecting?

>It's not the subject matter, it's the fact that it's being described for the sole purpose of being described
No it's pretty thoroughly laced with metaphors.

Something that didn't waste my time.

Is this that hard to get into your head?

Also, I actually feel tempted like hunting some of the source materials he used. There's something telling me the narration has more substance than The Dull, Endless Journey of a Sailor with the Entire Arc of the Book being essentially A Sideplot to the Endless Descriptions.

Maybe it is. Metaphors don't make it good, nor do they make it less description for the sake of description. Metaphors for the sake of metaphors is about as bad.

kek why is he wearing sandals

Because that's not Stirner, just some other subject that resembles him