Iceberg Chart

I'm down to make one if you get the template

thanks

I've really only scratched the surface with the stuff I have read

damn apparently being an old guy who played games in the early 2000s and late 90s makes me some sort of deep abyssal explorer

played like 80% of every level except the lowest

Go crazy, boy

The works at the very bottom of this kind of charts are always awful. The authors have failed as artists and their works are no better than a random tard's ramblings, with no real meaning outside their little heads. Most of the time only the authors themselves can fully comprehend them (if they have any meaning at all).
In music, we have random noise with sheep sound in the background; in film, random images and sounds poorly edited in black and white; in literature, we have abominations such as finnegans wake. This works, supposedly are very heavy in meaning, have deep metaphors and allegories, but in reality their message (again, if it even has one) can be always transmited without being purposefully obscure, random and experimental.
This works have stopped being art in their search of obscurity and 'originality' and are only appreciated by pseuds or contrarians who value 'difficulty' above everything

What about Marquis de Sade? I feel like he should fit on the list somewhere

i just like reading Finnegan's Wake out loud in a heavy Scottish accent

That's, like, your opinion, man, and the thing about opinions is: they're not facts.

This is a very silly belief. Just because a work of art requires dedication and an incisive eye to properly appreciate doesn't automatically make it some discrediting affront to more accessible works, nor does this make it inherently better for attempting to pioneer w/r/t technique or substance. I'd rate something like The Sun Also rises, a concise and direct application of minimalist, terse diction as opposed to something like the overly verbose, meandering prose of something like Finnegan's Wake- but this isn't to say that a piece of art which equalled Finnegan's Wake in terms of "difficulty" could not outmuscle a more facilely discernible piece.

Reconsider your pleb ass opinion baka desu senpai

it must take a special kind of stupid to stop at seeing something as 'experimental' and not see what it is experimenting with

>no musil

x^)

but they can be true

Inbetween levels 1 and 2. He isn't particularly difficult.

(you)

Probably around level 2, since it presents a controversial topic, then reinforces it with arguments. It not deep enough or elaborate to be level 3, but its not THAT shallow and acessible.

It's basically Hedonism 101, but with an explanation other than "dude, pleasure lmao"

N-no, because the other thing about opinions is: they're based solely on the sensibilities (or lack thereof) of the individual, meaning they cannot, no matter how much you deny it, be an objective fact.

Gogol and Borges are inaccessible now? Who put this list together, an American?

Idk, Nose was pretty inaccessible, at least for me. I will admit to being a pleb, but it really goes 0-100 if you read Overcoat first and as such will turn off readers.

My high school had a class specifically for Joyce and Woolf. How can they be deep if they are high school level literature?
urbanschool.org/page.cfm?p=222

what'd I tell you fuckers?

's

Is there a place for Sempre Games? Kind of how "indie games" used to return interesting results, incrapre, zachtronics etc..

Borges is pretty hit or miss in terms of comprehensibility desu senpai

>Finnegan's Wake
>'

High schoolers discussing James Joyce - /r/iamverysmart final level

>/r/iamverysmart
>mfw this actually exists

What makes late DeLilo so difficult?

Looked it up, and it's just making fun of those sorts of people. The guy you replied to was saying that the only high schoolers that talked about Joyce were the "I'm so much smarter than you" retards that get posted there, I think, because no high school would run a class on an author like that.

Obvious plebeian contrarians and edgy children, 2 hurt ?

...

>because no high school would run a class on an author like that
Are you joking?

>underestimating high schoolers

HAW HAW

boi I read Ulysses and To the Lighthouse at 17. I had to take my time and missed out on plenty I'm sure, but it's very posssible. Had there been a course on it, i'd have probably understood most everything

>most everything

Post your top picks then pussy boi

>Scottish
I hope this is bait

Level 6 sounds like pretentious shit desu senpai.

Shape without form, shade without colour.

They try hard to impress all while failing to convey powerful ideas or emotions.
Except Nabokov. Nabokov is my nigger.

Somebody else plays Panzer General? :3 I played that game so much as a kid. I don't know why it's so deep though, unless it's just about obscurity rather than difficulty.

I'm 2/3 of the way through Chimera, and I'd say Barth is a good example of a writer who can use complex formal techniques in order to (more powerfully) convey "powerful ideas or emotions."

I think it gets to a point where the artistic value is no longer found in the plot or character, but in the technique.

>dwarf fortress above cataclysm DDA

nigga what?

Geneforge was a triumph.

>This is the most mind fuck into to book ever.

Finnegans Wake

riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.
Sir Tristram, violer d’amores, fr’over the short sea, had passen-core rearrived from North Armorica on this side the scraggy isthmus of Europe Minor to wielderfight his penisolate war: nor had topsawyer’s rocks by the stream Oconee exaggerated themselse to Laurens County’s gorgios while they went doublin their mumper all the time: nor avoice from afire bellowsed mishe mishe to tauftauf thuartpeatrick not yet, though venissoon after, had a kidscad buttended a bland old isaac: not yet, though all’s fair in vanessy, were sosie sesthers wroth with twone nathandjoe. Rot a peck of pa’s malt had Jhem or Shen brewed by arclight and rory end to the regginbrow was to be seen ringsome on the aquaface.

>level 5
>rape simulators

why is Calvino considered obscure? He talks in a very easy language and also the meanings of his books are quite clear to the reader,while Sartre for example is far more difficult to understand.

>bely
>incoherent

>sim city higher than uncharted

what in the fuck

sony pony

made an attempt

>gospel of eve
no way, i've never seen anyone but me post about this on Veeky Forums or even mention it anywhere.

Gnoice.

quick Q: why are the classics so deep, they're not that difficult to read, unless you're meaning in their original language. And if you mean in their original language, why would Virgil and Ovid possibly be lower than Homer?

Meh.

bc no one really reads the classics, especially normies

Ever heard of the cultural omnivore?

nice b8 m8 i r8 8/8

>criticizing pretension
>quotes from Waste Land-era Eliot

kys my man

...

I guess that's true. I misunderstood what this chart means then. Because Aristophanes and Sophocles are much "easier" to read in English than most of the writers in the Pinecone section.

What did you post about it? I only know it really in passing reference.
I only decided to add the older classics in around then to pad these sections and cos they looked like a cool inverted pyramid towards Ulysses but take that as the reason cos it sounds better.

Also i didnt bother with many romans or other shit cos i got bored

Please don't ever attempt a thing like this again

>the bible

My spleen just imploded with 20 different types of cancer

A book of really elongated proverbs was influential but holds little if any literary merit

Pretty much this.
When I started faking an English accent, Canterbury tales made 100x more sense.
Finnegan's wake just makes no sense because most people aren't Irish. It'd be like a New Zealander trying to read Huckleberry Finn.

>Dante below Pynchon
What? I mean, I love it, but most translations are perfectly easy to read. It's only the symbolism that takes effort.

fight me thes lot a yas

this was decent untill i saw Javakhishvili, he is from my country and every single pleb likes him here, it's entry level, if most of the authors i don't know in deeper levels are like him then you are all deluding yourselves

But it's true. That sentence describes the last 100 years.

...

How is Gertrude Stein unreadable?

die in 9/11 you cunt

you're right and people disagreeing with you are stupid

Who cares? Literature in general is a meme for losers that can't do real stuff

>This pleb has not read Ecclesiastes
>Current Year

...

Tender Buttons

>no murakami
fucking neck yourself lad

>being a murakami fanboy
look at the top lad and just kill urself

metanarrative I guess.

>Are you joking?

No, absolutely not. The goals of a high school is to teach you analytical abilities, not to spend the vast majority of the course teaching the kids what's actually even happening in the book, leading to them all just not having the ability to analyse the text and write essays on what's actually being said.

There's a reason that the high school list books are all quite easy to understand and get through, but having another layer or two to write about in assessments.

>boi I read Ulysses and To the Lighthouse at 17.

That's very cool of you user, and also very irrelevant. I'm not saying that it's impossible to read it as a teenagers, just that you're going to miss mostly everything, and generally kids only force themselves through texts like that to look smart, they don't have the ability to fully appreciate it. And in a classroom setting, even if one or two kids did have the potential to, that doesn't mean enough kids are going to be able to in order to put it in the curriculum. As I said earlier in this post, the goal of a high school english class is to teach kids how to analyse different texts, not to spend an entire term struggling through a book and not having anywhere near enough time to explain what's going on throughout the whole thing, meaning the kids just won't be able to write an essay on it.

in favorite bible passage threads.

I was going through a very .. gnostic .. phase a few years ago and when i read the lost gospel of eve it felt so right, like a key slotting into a lock in my mind that turned and opened my body into a upwelling swelling light that could not be contained by my physical body - I felt every fibre of my mind and body aflame

but I think the "seed" interpretation + semen eating based around it is horsehockey.

I stood on a lofty mountain and saw a gigantic man, and another, a dwarf; and I heard as it were a voice of thunder, and drew nigh for to hear; and He spake unto me and said: I am thou, and thou art I; and wheresoever thou mayest be I am there. In all am I scattered, and whencesoever thou willest, thou gatherest Me; and gathering Me, thou gatherest Thyself.

-from the gospel of eve

I read it with a study guide and also checking resources online, I don't think it's humanly possible to understand all these allusions and references without being a scholar in 1900s france or some shit