Conclusions I had from reading goodreads threads

Most of the lurkers of Veeky Forums read the popular books of Veeky Forums and rate them high. But also rate generic adolescent literature as high as Veeky Forums's memes. I feel that Veeky Forums's taste is either bipolar or that many people here have inferiority complexes. This due to the fact that one cannot indulge in the difficult activity of reading "Gravity's Rainbow" and enjoy it, than read "The Unbearable Lightness of Being" and give it the same mark that he gave to GR. To clarify, I'm not saying that either of these books are good or bad but that the degree of intellectual maturity required to read them is very different. It would be like rating "Harry Potter" and "The Great Gatsby" the same. Both books aren't that hard to read, but the maturity required to understand the main issues of each book is different. One deals with magic and growing up and the latter with several social, personal and economical problems. It's also very strange how one can one month read James Joyce and in the next month read "Kiss of the Spider Woman". Only someone that tries to like the classics or Veeky Forums's memes would do this. Only a pretender would try to force himself to like Veeky Forums's memes and rate them as high as a 5/5.

Another conclusion is that Veeky Forums's lurkers prefer to meme than to read. If you go to the catalogue you will see a lot of big names like Stirner, C.S. Lewis, Hegel, Zizek and others. But the truth is that barely anyone reads them. Some of us read them, but many meme them.

All this begs the question: who are the petulant assholes who go to every thread accusing others of having a shit taste?

>the difficult activity of reading "Gravity's Rainbow"
Stopped reading.

You're the exact type of people I'm criticizing.

It's not what you read; it's how you read, candy-ass.

>Who are the petulant assholes who go to every thread accusing others of having a shit taste?

Apparently you?

Apparently? Where and how did I accused anyone of having a shit taste?

I wouldn't take GR ratings as that solid a representation of opinion anyway, OP. I can rate some random non-fic as a 5/5 for how well it presented information and the depth of research involved. That doesn't mean I consider it on par with Proust.

Gravity's Rainbow is not a difficult book. If you are on Veeky Forums and think Gravity's Rainbow is a 'difficult read' in a thread that states
>many people here have inferiority complexes
I simply don't care to read the rest of the statement.

Some of us are capable of reading between the lines, moron. You aren't even aware of what you're writing. Your entire post is a judgement of taste.

The final line is an accusation of hypocrisy - how could that question be begged if you weren't implicitly saying that Veeky Forums has shit taste?

And don't try to argue your way out of it because it is what it is. You spooked yourself lol.

>Your entire post is a judgement of taste.
You already said that. If that is true why didn't you explained how and where I did that.
>And don't try to argue your way out of it because it is what it is. You spooked yourself lol.
So you're asking me to not defend myself from your accusations while constantly showing signs of rage? Did my post got you that much in distress or are you always like this?

Non-fic is different. My point was mainly directed at sci-fi and magical themes.
GR is a difficult book to read. The vocabulary isn't accessible to those who aren't in college wasting their time in literature degrees. It's also a hard book for non-native English speakers and as you might know, at least 40% of Veeky Forums's lurkers are foreign.
>I simply don't care to read the rest of the statement.
If you don't care why do you continue to post? This does not make you seem cool or hard to get, but rather edgy.

>go on goodreads
>look at first 5 posts in feed from Veeky Forumsbros

>Kant
>Huysmans
>Hunter S. Thompson
>John Stuart Mill
>Soren Kierkegaard
>Thomas Harris

Conclusion: OP full of shit

The simple fact is that we (most of us) exist in similar communities/social groups (largely Western and [on a global scale] relatively affluent) so really it isn't any surprise that the folks around these parts have similar opinions about things. I would love to read Plato from the perspective of a Greek citizen in 375 BC or Ulysses as a Dubliner in 1922 or Origin of Species as a English clergyman in 1859 but it just isn't possible. When it comes in interpreting literature we are all irreparably narrow-minded on account of us being fallible humans that exists for brief periods of time only and OP's complaining that we can't approach any work of literature as an objective observer is IMO an ungraceful and seriously undeserved sort of elitism. Everyone's opinions are biased and it isn't a remotely novel concept but thanks for trying.

>strange how one can one month read James Joyce and in the next month read "Kiss of the Spider Woman"
>strange how one would have an interest in innovative English fiction and the next month read innovative Latin American fiction

>give it the same mark that he gave to GR
Every person on goodreads uses the rating scale in a different way. I rate in a way that immediately defuses any and all "but why did you rate this over this" arguments.

not op, but "Kiss of the Spider Woman" is basically propaganda

>The vocabulary isn't accessible to those who aren't in college wasting their time in literature degrees
Like I said earlier - you are obviously just projecting.

I am with you. Also the pleb accusations are just silly. Even if true, so what? It's not possible to force oneself not to be if he is, right?

Can you substantiate the statement that Gravity's Rainbow isn't a hard book to read, with reference to the presumable simplicity of its language, themes and frame of reference? Because I think you'll find that most people would disagree with you. Not only the average guy on the street but also the average college-educated professional would find it an arduous and frustrating task to read Gravity's Rainbow.

In fact I don't think this would be an uncontentious statement in any company except a bunch of elitist poseurs who hold that anything less obtuse than Finnegan's Wake is childishly simplistic.

>implying Kundera or Puig are pleb tier

Fuck off.

>The majority is projecting not me!
If Gravity Rainbow isn't hard why aren't schools dropping "The Great Gatsby" and reading GR? Surely any 9th grader can read it. It's not that hard after all.
Joyce's works are critiques of society, while that Puig's book is mainly about political activism and peronism.
You get it. I'm not advocating an objective standard of X or Y being good and Z being bad. I'm merely asking for people to be coherent. Some anons try to force themselves to like Kundera, Eyre or whatever when they truly prefer to read other authors. Bullying people to read certain types of books is only leading to more hate and incoherence.

Learn to meme or fuck off to reddit OP you massive semen drenched faggot.

>If Gravity Rainbow isn't hard why aren't schools dropping "The Great Gatsby" and reading GR?
An informal fallacy and a redirect - we aren't discussing Gatsby, or what is read in schools, not even what should be read in schools.
We are discussing whether or not Gravity's Rainbow is a
>"difficult activity"
So far your only statement to me attempting to support this claim is
>
>The vocabulary isn't accessible to those who aren't in college wasting their time in literature degrees
A rather clumsy sentence that is steeped more in envy than in academe. Based upon this, your errors in spelling and grammar, and your unsupported claim of
>"many people here have inferiority complexes"
it is obvious that you feel lesser because you struggle with Pynchon's works despite the fact that Gravity's Rainbow only has about a 12th grade level vocabulary.

>tfw OP exposes himself as an ignoramus

>An informal fallacy and a redirect - we aren't discussing Gatsby, or what is read in schools, not even what should be read in schools.
Ironic how you abuse fallacies and suddenly try to appear to be on moral high ground. Something being hard or easy is always relative. It was a comparison to an easier book to read which by your standards would be a lot easier to read than to read GR. If you're going to accuse me of a false analogy express it directly and explain why. Don't be a coward and hide behind vague affirmations.
>Based upon this, your errors in spelling and grammar,
What spelling and grammar errors? Is this another empty accusation like all the others?
>it is obvious that you feel lesser because you struggle with Pynchon's works despite the fact that Gravity's Rainbow only has about a 12th grade level vocabulary.
What does the context of that quote has to do with my "difficulty"? I believe this is a non-sequitur.

Also,
>academe
This was so unnecessary that I'm not even going to call your pretentious.

>also rate generic adolescent literature as high as Veeky Forums's memes
I'm sure my good reads is like this, when I first signed up for it years ago I began to rate books I had read before, a large part of which were the science fiction stuff I used to read in my youth. Five years later my reading material has improved, but it's not as though I'm going to go back and re-rate books I read in the past lower based on new information.

Tl;dr OP is autistic.

"I am right, everybody's else opinion is wrong"

>I'll call him ignorant because I don't agree with him
You're the cancer that I'm denouncing.

>I didn't read OP but I want participate too
Another fine example.

I have a simple goodreads rating system. If it meets the expectations I felt it was setting for itself it gets a 3/5. If an action book has good action it gets a 3/5, if a comedy book is funny, if a sci-fi book has good ideas, etc.
4/5 means it exceeds what could be expected from it. If it does the above but also has amazing characters or great writing or in some way blows me away it gets 4/5.
5/5 is for the books that truly transcend any expectations. Books that I would recommend to anyone and everyone.

2/5 is when they don't meet what could be expected of them and 1/5 is for true and utter failures.

Your arguments are illogical, your evidence is non-existent, you rely on redirects and personal insults. And you think GR has difficult vocabulary. You and your thread are trash.

>hypocrisy: the post
>redirect
It's called analogy and it is used in Law and in Philosophy. You must got really offended because you were nervous all day stalking this thread trying to make me look dumb. Just give up.

So are there any good Veeky Forums users tha read good stuff? Link to their GR accounts?