Literary confession thread

Literary confession thread

I can count on one hand the number of books I've read in the past 5 years

I can barely read at all without Adderall

I like to read YA novels

I can't read.

What is this thread about?

I make outlandish comments about authors without having ever engaged with their work.

I find pure philosophy to be mind-numbingly boring. Weave it into something resembling a narrative or incorporate it into another storytelling device, just don't serve it up to me dry as a fucking desert. This is the one part of Veeky Forums I don't understand. I love classic literature, I love poetry, I can enjoy the major movements and appreciate different writing styles and ideas, but I'm not going to force myself to slog through hundreds of pages of someone's angsty dry thesis about how the best rulers commit genocide.

I hate Nabokov and his writings.

I quit reading like a month ago

Why?

I try to be obscure as possible when choosing which authors to read.

I read to feel superior to others

I spend more time on Veeky Forums than I do actually reading

I ain't read books. I just come here to shitpost.

This

I get anxious when reading translated literature because I think I might be missing out on a better translation.

Sounds like you're reading shitty philosophy. What do you think about Nietzsche, Plato, Descartes, or Russell?

I knew know exactly which book(s) to recommend in various contexts, despite never having read them. I often receive praise and thanks for this.

How do I develop this? I want a job in a small bookshop but I am not well read enough.

I force myself to read classics

I have an ideal picture of myself. I have a bookshelf with lots of dusty old books that I like and I read them wearing effay glasses and a comfy sweater in some old fuck off armchair. I worry that I care more about the aesthetic of being a reader than the reading itself.

I am fighting against this too.

ive been reading facade as fack-ard for about five years now, didnt know

fack-aid* woops

My favourite book is House of Leaves. I know it's a gimmicky thing, but it's a haunting story to me

this tbqh. ironically i read mostly translated literature anyway because contemporary american lit is neoliberal hogwash

I don't understand all this "I've only read twelve books this year" business.

Who counts the books they read?

It's not that hard famalam. Even though I exclusively read on a kindle, I can count how many books I've read lately.

That's pretty dumb user.

Slavish as Slav-ish for me.
It's pretty hard.

I mean, even if I read books in a linear fashion (which I don't), I'd have trouble remembering all of them. Not to mention when I started and finished them.

I read Ulysses and I haven't understood most of it

I make a note of a book on goodreads after I finish it, so it tells me every time I go on.

>If you need goodreads to remind you then the book isn't worth remembering

Probably true for most people but I have a very bad memory. It is nice to look back on what I read and be reminded of stuff I should maybe re-read.

I had a mild crisis when I realised that even though I post about philosophy all the time, I've actually read very few works.
Read Veeky Forums.

>re-reading
>ever

It's just a memory thing then. I have bad memory for most things too (don't smoke too much pot in high school, kids. It'll fuck you up a tiny bit), but I do recall that I've read like 16-ish books this year.

I remember things being important and useful, but then I get lost in daily life, the pathways in my brain aren't etched in enough. The actual substance is lost. So yes, I can say 'I have read x' and collect my medal, but it is just a ghost of a memory. I need to re-read.

I'm rereading IJ and aside from it being shit I can feel that I'm basically in the same spot dfw was, which isn't good

Memory isn't why you read, though. You read because it's fun -- or, I hope that's why you read. And there's so many works, so much wholly new stuff -- why reread? Okay, perhaps the occasional favourite, but even so...
Remember to stream it when you do it.

I read a ESL translation of a James Bond novel before reading the actual Flemming copy

In a weird way, I like knowing the story and going back and reading the prose for analysis

Most of the time I have to force myself to finish a book. It really becomes hard work sometimes. Often I'd rather start a new book, than finish an old one, even if the old book was great. Basically, I am addicted to novelty. I blame the internet.

To learn something, not just rushing to read as much as possible.

If we're talking about philosophical works then you make sense, but not with fiction.
You lost nothing with the ESL.
The internet did nothing to you. But I'm the same.

I'm an anti-intellectual

>force

What are you, a virgin?

I'm reading Nietzsche to impress a girl (and I find it quite interesting)

Faggot. Fuck men like a man.

I was going through a pile of books I haven't touched in years yesterday and practically all of them were dogeared around the halfway mark.

That would never work with me, every time I talk about philosophy I look like the biggest autist in town, I can't help it.

Despite being a cultured person, I've read almost none of the classic novels, because they're too damn long.

Reading 800-page essays doesn't scare me though; but any 250-page novel (masterpiece or not) already looks like a torture device.

So, no Balzac, no Tolstoy, no Proust for me.

I tend to get really excited about reading a book on my backlog, but once I'm a third of the way through I get bored and start looking for another book
oh I once wrote Metal Gear fanfiction

I finish reading a fraction of the books I start. I sometimes find more interest in reading about the lives of great authors than their works themselves.

Also this

hurt me more!
more! more!

I'm only reading in preparation to make artful videogames

Maddness, maddness and stupidity

I prefer the contents of philosophy. I very much enjoy learning new arguments and arguing in favor or against them.
With that being said, I think it's ridiculous to actually read philosophy. A lot of philosophers, like Kant, purposely use the most confusing language possible in order to create the illusion that they're more intelligent than they are. It's a waste of time.

S...s..snake

"oh Otacon it's been too long..."


you can have the rest for 5$

I will be the master of the total artform

only if we're talking ZWD

kys

I only accept hamburgers

>To read, instead of the original works of philosophers, all sorts of expositions of their doctrines, or history of philosophy generally, is as though one should get some one else to masticate one's food. Would anyone read the history of the world if it were possible for him to behold the interesting events of ancient times with his own eyes? But, as regards the history of philosophy, such an autopsy of the subject is really possible for him, to wit, the original writings of philosophers; in which he may none the less, for the sake of shortness, limit himself to well-chosen leading chapters, especially inasmuch as they all teem with repetitions, which one may just as well spare oneself. In this way, then, he will learn to know the essential in their doctrines, in an authentic and unfalsified form, while from the half-dozen histories of philosophy annually appearing he merely receives as much of it as has entered the head of a professor of philosophy, and, indeed, as it appears there. Now it is obvious of itself, that the thoughts of a great mind must shrink up considerably in order to find a place in the three-pound brain of a parasite of philosophy, from which they emerge again clothed in the contemporary jargon of the day, and accompanied by his sapient reflections. Besides this, it must be considered that the money-making history-writer of philosophy can hardly have read a tenth part of the writings which he reports. Their real study demands the whole of a long and laborious life, such as formerly, in the old industrious times, the brave Brucker devoted to them.
>But what can such persons, who are detained by continuous lectures, official duties, vacation tours and dissipations, and who, for the most part, come forward with their histories of philosophy in their earlier years, have thoroughly investigated? Add to this, that they are anxious to be pragmatical, and claim to have fathomed and to expound the necessity of the origin and the sequence of systems, and even to judge, correct, and dominate over the earnest and genuine philosophers of former times. How could it be otherwise than that they should copy the older ones, and each other, and then, in order to hide this, make matters worse by endeavouring to give them the modern tournure of the current quinquennium, pronouncing upon them, likewise, in the same spirit? On the contrary, a collection of important passages and essential chapters of all the leading philosophers, made by honest and intelligent scholars, conscientiously and in common, arranged in a chronologically-pragmatic order, much in the same way as formerly Godicke, and, after him, Eitter and Preller, have done with the philosophy of antiquity, although much more completely in short, a universal chrestomathy accomplished with care and a knowledge of the subject would be very useful.

I have started transitioning to a woman and have found the hormones have made the things I used to like seem pointless.

What do you like to do now and are you cute?

Posting Reddit image. Get off Veeky Forums raidfag

I'm a socialist and proud of it.

Thanks for the bump :^)

Sounds like depression bro/sis

Fuck off spammer.

I really enjoy the prose of the english translation of The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo

dry, flavorless, focused entirely on character and environment detail. The way mysteries should be.

Oh man, Veeky Forums sure has moderators

Thinking discredit means shit even with numbers. People can read the Pic they know what your doing you daft cunts. Even if your just casual Veeky Forums left wings you should know better then to let anyone push propaganda on people.

wish i got paid to do this like you shills.

this isn't /v/, my guy.

I'm not really a fan of herman melville

>I want a job in a small bookshop but I am not well read enough.

Of all the bookstores I've patronized, I've encountered one with an employee who was "well-read" beyond James Patterson, Janet Evanovich, etc.

The only works of fiction that I've ever completed are Creepypasta- all of which received lukewarm reception.

>transitioning a woman
>wonders why he's becoming dumber
Also trannies are subhuman, you should have fixed your mental issues and not blown thousands so that you can pretend to be the opposite sex. People like you are destroying Western civilization. I sincerely hope you kill yourself.

Go back to /r/communism

>If we're talking about philosophical works then you make sense, but not with fiction.

Personally, I reread quite a few of the books I read and I reread almost all of the shorter works (poetry, short stories, most novellas, essays, etc.). You might be surprised at how much you see differently on a second read, user. There are frequently many details, contrasts, etc. that you don't notice until you've read it through already. It is really probably ideal to reread everything immediately after finishing it, and I've done that on occasion, too (fairly freqeuntly with the shorter works), but usually my rereads, at least for novels, come a few years later. You also will realize how much you've changed from your experiences and everything else you've read, you'll get more allusions, etc. I really can't say enough about why rereading is to be encouraged.

I will never stoop so low, McCarthyist.

I suffer from extreme depression which my doctor refuses to treat because he wants me to go into intensive autism tests, which I had when I was younger and fucked me up pretty bad, which has led to me obsessively reading classics hoping that through osmosis and sheer force of will my brain will rewire itself into feeling happiness again.

Good luck

>russell
You almost got me

Anyone that says they understood Joyce's rambling is simply lying to seem smart

I unironically enjoy Terry Goodkind's worldbuilding in the Sword of Truth series. That's the only reason I finished the entire thing

From as far back as I can remember I've never enjoyed fiction of any kind. There's something about fictitious stories that just fail to captivate me, and the more fantastical they become the more detached and ridiculous they seem.

From GRRM, Tolkien, to less sophisticated work from Rowling; to Nabokov, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, McCarthy, Joyce, etc. ad nauseam. Can't even enjoy the movie versions, they just seem ridiculous and boring.

History and philosophy however, i.e. that which seems to turn off a lot of people by virtue of its sheer dryness in dealing with facts and ideas, really gets my dick hard.

Tried to pick up A Farewell to Arms after seeing it lauded here, first time I'd picked up a genuine novel in years, and I just don't give enough fucks about this guy's personal interactions and this burgeoning love story in the middle of it. Maybe I've SuperAutism.

Perhaps I'm unsophisticated, boring, and unimaginative, but I at least try my best to leave you guys alone as 90% of Veeky Forums takes an interest in works of fiction.

Look here, faggot. History will forever be more interesting than literature ever can be. Go back to you containment board:

Why is that, because you're a brainlet?

I've read basically all Russian classics but barely any English ones

I read for entertainment. Some history books on the side but mainly sci-fi and fantasy

I use Veeky Forums to discuss philosophy, mostly; I don't both you literaturefags

leave me alone this thread is supposed to be a safe space reeeeeee etc etc.

That's okay, user. It's because the Ruskies are superior in literature.

So around what point in history did writing sentences that are paragraph length stop being a thing?

pseuds are still doing it to this day

i haven't read a book cover to cover in 8 years

I have only read textbooks in the past 10 years

i incessantly shitpost about certain authors whose names I barely google, and I write long criticisms about books that I've never read, and people still manage to take my posts seriously, or at the very least, respond

You represent the majority of Veeky Forums

>Anonymous 11/28/16(Mon)10:24:31 No.8774449▶
>
>I make a note of a book on goodreads after I finish it, so it tells me every time I go on.
>>If you need goodreads to remind you then the book isn't worth remembering
>Probably true for most people but I have a very bad memory. It is nice to look back on what I read and be reminded of stuff I should maybe re-read.
It's not shit, though.

The way I like to read best is on my phone

I read for plot.

Kill yourself

Reee, etc.

Redditors should be gassed