Not ending a book

>That's a great book, God you must be brainless

God you must be college freshman

a*

welcome to post-modernism

>the characters exist inasmuch as they express an idea
are you new to literature or something?

>what does even mean?

Jesus Christ. It means what it literally means:
for Kundera, characters serve the purpose of conveying ideas which cannot be expressed with anything shorter than a novel. It is not about the good old analytic 'getting it right', but (for him) it's about transcending the conventional point-evidence-explanation structure. It doesn't matter if the characters don't convince you, as you're supposed to know that they are fake from page one until you finish the book. If somebody complains about having a hard time believing Kundera's characters it perhaps just shows that postmodernism hasn't quite reached them yet.

why?

That has existed since Cervantes. It's not a postmodern thing. Most writers of merit play with their characters in that way. And unlike something like Dostoevsky, Kundera makes neither the people nor the ideas engaging in any meaningful way.

so what would be a meaningful engagement?
its piss easy to just make all these big claims you make without backing them up...

It's acceptable. I personally drop a book if it's really bad and long, or too difficult.

I'm sorry, you like Kundera so I thought that's what you were into.
One of the ways of reading a book is "what unique ideas is it bringing to me? do they have a meaningful connection with how I understand the world? what is their worth?" and when you say it's the ideas of the novel that matter this is the general approach you take. Kundera's ideas exist for themselves, and don't extend further beyond that. He cherrypicks a handful of Nietzsche and runs with it but they're such loose general concepts he's playing with that they're practically meaningless. So that's the backbone of the novel crippled right there, and what's left is just a bunch of losers fucking and faffing about and there's nothing particularly interesting about them either.

>that schopenahuer quote cockedhead.jpeg

I used to read all books to completion, but as I've gotten older, I've steadily exhausted the supply of decent literature. Nowadays, my approach is to read the first ten pages, and if, in that time, it fails to dazzle, it gets dropped. At a guess, I discard 7 books for every one that I finish.

...

10 pages doesn't give any good idea of a novel. I'd sit down with it at least for an hour.

I would advise you to try skipping ahead in what you're reading to see if other parts of the book interest you

9/10 book. Cool it, kid.

It's not really enough to determine whether a book will be great, but it is typically enough to determine whether it'll be shit.* Of course, I wouldn't recommend doing this for a person who's new to literature, who has yet to build a proper "artistic sense" by which they can critique a work, but if you do read a lot, one day you will inevitably reach a point where the wheat to chaff ratio is so high that you spend more time reading crap novels than good ones; if you don't want to fall into the trap of re-reading your favourite books over and over again, you'll need to develop a strategy to make the discovery as fast as possible.

I do do this as well, if I'm uncertain.

*Depending on the type of literature. The skills of a writer of fine-literature/belle-lettres make themselves evident much more earlier than do the skills of a writer of genre fiction, as the former is focused on areas that manifest from the outset (e.g. word-choice, imagery, characterisation), whereas the latter's primary concern, building a complex plot, needs time to develop. But I don't read genre fiction.

This isn't a postmodern trope, FFS Fyodor was known for this. It really takes credit away from your garrulous didactic post when you conflate POMOism and this trope

That's the exact argument I was making you sperg

Pic related is one of the worst books I have ever read, and I threw it in the garbage with 20 pages to go just to make a point.

Yea.. No. That's a 10/10 books boss.

I still don't see any idea or anything meaningful expressed in this book, and the ones I could found, if I can call them ideas, are watered philosophical stuff with the deep of a soup bowl. I can understand you enjoyed the book like
even if I can't understand how. but this is not a good book. it's like Federico Moccias shit with some bits of philosophy (OMG! here puts Nietzsche!) and some social conflict (some URSS occupation) and nothing more.
this book is for pedantic college freshman girls and their teenager emotions. It's bullshit and I won't even finish this stuff.

you fucking suck, you express yourself poorly and this whole "if you didn't like it, you didn't get it" thing is repulsive. good authors can do things with their characters, make arguments, and express ideas while simultaneously making appealing characters and stories that work as stories.

I tend to not finish non-fiction books that have little to offer besides a chapter or two that I'm interested in.

It fucking cracks me up every time I hear this complaint about Kundera. Were you expecting a 300 page fiction book to critically engage with the philosophy of Nietzsche? It seems to me that you came into the book with flawed expectatives.

Kundera takes a CONCEPT from Nietzsche and spins it in a complete opposite direction from page one. He is not attempting to do a critique of Nietzsche, and he is only sort of dialoguing with him on the idea eternal recurrence by following his rhetorical device on the inverse path (Nietzsche valued this idea for its implications on life and value, and Kundera is exploring the implications of its negation). But most of all, he just found a beautiful and suggestive image and used it as a source of inspiration for his novel. You are looking for a deepness that is not there, and was never intended to be.

Now, why do you get so buttfrustrated that an author borrows a concept from Nietzsche as inspiration? Writers do this all the time, borrow from mythology, philosophy and the other arts. Kundera is explicitly stating it only because that is his narrative style. Of course, the book also talks about music and painting, is it also painful for you to read how he cites Beethoven's name? Did you throw the book into the trash when he talked about abstract painting but did not extensively quote and discuss Kandinsky's "Concerning the spiritual in Art"?

However, for me, the major strenghts of the book do not come from the ideas anyways. It is the prose and the po-mo narrative techniques what makes this a worthwile book. Kundera is constantly breaking the fourth wall, acknowledging his characters as fictional and stating that their motivations and origins are mere ideas or quotes in the mind of the author ("einmal ist keinmal" oder "Es muss sein!"). That he manages to do this with a disjointed and fragmented plot and still the book reads seamlessly is a testament to not only his writing abilities, but also of the ideas exposed. Because it is the (often explicit) exploration of these ideas what holds the book together, and not the plot.

Philosophy graduate here who has read plenty of Nietzsche, btw. If you are looking for deep, comprehensive discussion of philosophical ideas, don't read a post-modernist czech novel and pick up the platonic dialogues instead. But please don't bitch that they lack plot and that the prose is shit. You're supposed to look for that in novels not philosophical texts.

Excellent reply.
Would you recommend the book to someone who reads a lot of philosophy and is currently learning French?

Sure. The philosophy is mostly a starting premise as I have said, but the book itself is quite solid. It does not partake in a rational exploration of the idea of (non)eternal recurrence but in an aesthetic one because, well, it is a work of literature after all. Curiously enough, this is what a lot of post-nietzschean thinkers have revindicated as the go-to critique method for western metaphysics (what Nietzsche calls platonism). Derrida, Heidegger and Bataille being the most notable advocates.

The setting of the book was also quite appealing to me, so I might be biased in that regard. I think that the book was originally written in Czech, even if first published in French. I don't know if Kundera himself was the one who translated it though.

All in all it is a pretty short and comfy novel that briefly explores some interesting ideas (the bit about kitsch stood out for me in particular) in a non-conventional narrative style. I say give it a try if only because you can read it in two sittings.

I have about 7 books on my shelf right now with bookmarkers past the halfway mark that I just can't finish. Every time I try to read them, my mind can't stop wandering and I get frustrated. I've read good books before, like Moby Dick, so it isn't me just being a non-reading retard.

I mostly agree with you, even if the breaking of the fourth wall wasn't so important in my reading of the book, in the sense that it didn't bother me at all (and it kind of joins your conclusion, this discursive process didn't bother me because it was fluently brought).
What impressed me is that, despite what you're saying about the reality of the characters and their motivations, they were very much making a strong impression of reality.

The Unbearable Lightness of Being was indeed written in Czech, then translated into French. The French version originally wasn't made by Kundera. When he discovered this translation, he spent a lot of time "correcting" it because the style wasn't what he was thinking of at all (there is a certain dryness in his writing which was betrayed in the first French version).

What kind of bitter sad people can't enjoy a little Kundera? Jesus. Do you hate Eco, Calvino, and Duras too?

Again. this book has no ideas, no plot, no nothing.
nietzsche and bethoveen are there only to give it some intellectual appearance. it does not develop any idea, it has no plot at all. is just the life of some morons without any purpose. You liked it? nice, good for you.
the book is bullshit.
>muh 4th wall
>muh philosophy grade.

see

>stop liking what I don't like

did not read anything of them, can't answer
>What kind of bitter sad people can't enjoy a little Kundera?
Implying I didn't trascend to a state of pure vinegar already.
>All this butthurt over a book for nerd teenager girls who wants to think and pretend they are smart.

stay mad

>no plot
>book covers the artistic and intellectual life of Czech society from the Prague Spring of 1968 to the invasion of Czechoslovakia by the Soviet Union and its aftermath, filtered through Nietzsche's concept of eternal recurrence.

Gosh, I'm sorry it's not up to your high standards, user.

This book is about atmosphere only.

It's okay, user. If you really haven't read any Eco, Calvino, or Duras, I won't bother being annoyed with you. Come back later.

This book has no ideas, no plot no nothing.
The Odyssey is just there to give it some intellectual appearance. It does not develop any idea, it has no plot at all. It's just a moron wandering around Dublin for a day.

This book is bullshit.

powerful argument man, you sure convinced me with that "if you did not read these authors you are a pleb" go tell your waifu how you showed me, she'll suck your dick.

>the book covers
Hell no, I would like to see that, but the only thing I see is some people and their stupid lifes and emotions as they fuck and cuck on each other. you are trying to hard not to see this: The book is bullshit, I was surprised of how bad it is, I expected at least a plot, some story.

>I expected at least a plot, some story.

I bet you're the kind of faggot that would hate Woolf and Bolaño aswell

L-look honey, I post it again
-You are so smart an mean user-kun, you are a badass
I love you Kundera-chan
-I love you too
(Faps frantically while wearing a hat and thinking about Sabina naked over pollock paintings)

Is the rest of Kundera's work anything like Lightness? I read it a while ago quite enjoyed it, but it seems that it's the only book of his that ever gets talked about. Does he have any other worthwile novels?

In my mind, this is Kundera's masterpiece

Cheers, sounds interesting. I will check it out

is it another one like the insufferable lightness of being?

...

in my mind, it is more concise than the ULOB. The characters seem more "human" but they still serve as stand-ins for ideas to some extent. I don't want to sound pretentious, but the book helped me out of depression when I read it. Personally I have a love/hate relationship with Kundera's books and I can see where a lot of people are coming from (I'm Czech btw so I read a lot of his work in the original, safe for the books he wrote in French, which I read in English)

As i was getting older, i stopped caring about finishing books. If i don't like it, i stop with it.

highly underrated post
10 keks out of 10

It's ok user you're just a pleb

Convince you of what? You've supposedly read half a novel by Kundera and don't like it for reasons that sound like horseshit. I've read The Joke, Life Is Elsewhere, The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Immortality, and Slowness. I'd rather discuss Kundera with someone who's at least finished one book by him. Your half-assed opinion is duly noted. Now, go read something that suits whatever your taste is.

>Engaging
Spooky

reading comprehension everyone.
> I'd rather discuss Kundera
who is talking about Kundera? I was asking about let a book without finishing it, and using this pile of shit some of you insist is a worthy book as a example.
>I've read The Joke, Life Is Elsewhere, The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Immortality, and Slowness
this could be an argument if we were talking about Kunderas style of writing, wich we are not doing.
>for reasons that sound like horseshit
>"I have read a lot of Kundera and you don't so shut up you know nothing"
Ok pal, I can't beat your reasoning skills you sound like Platon on steroids.
>Now, go read something that suits whatever your taste is.
I did. Reading the steppenwolf right now, sure it will be better.

I'm new to this board. is this behaviour (see ) a common thing here?

do you even know what you're saying or are you just repeating things you've heard?

No user, you started a thread trashing a perfectly fine book for stupid reasons. Other anons have pointed out the redeeming qualities of the book and why you may be looking for the wrong things in it. Instead you have retorted to ad hominems, writing waifu fanfics inserting the posters you disagree with in them, and repeating "but guys there's no story!". As if the concept of modernism and post-modernism is alien to you.

It's fine if you don't like this book (I don't think that it's anything to write home about either) but at least give coherent, well argumented reasons for it, or don't throw a tantrum when you are told to read more.

>I'm new to this board. is this behaviour (see ) a common thing here?
Are you new to Veeky Forums?

Mate he's trolling you, stop replying to him

Since it's a depiction of Sabina, what did you think of the movie?

>you started a thread trashing a perfectly fine book
Thread title: Not ending a book.
First coment "is awful bad"
>stupid reasons
Not having a story is not a valid argument.
I like Milan Kundera and I have read all her stuff is.
>Other anons have pointed out the redeeming qualities of the book
yes, no one in this thread also dislikes the book.
>As if the concept of modernism and post-modernism is alien to you.
but it is. I don't know what you mean by modernism or post-modernism. post-modernism sounds to me like a lot of modern bullshit like feminism or the gender as a social construct and all that teftie stuff. I say this to point out I already have a bias even not knowing about it, so I recognice this.
>but at least give coherent, well argumented reasons for it
I told before, no story, just a bunch of stuff about the characters feelings and some bits of philosophy here and classical music here to give it a "intellectual" mood. when it just not develop anything at all.

this last argument sounds a lot like that one "this is good but you don't get it because you are not smart/progressive/whatever enough to understand it" wich added to the said post-modernism and the defence of this book ("IT IS GOOD you damn retard, you just don't get it") remembers me a lot about the pic.

>Are you new to Veeky Forums?
I've been here time enough to know that different boards behave differently. as example, no one called me a faggot already, wich would be the first response on other boards. neither someone started a discussion about the jews, as example.
so, you didn't know this? are you new to Veeky Forums?

Don't ever reply to me or my son again

I enjoyed the movie quite a bit, but it was a very different beast than the book (and I hear it made Kundera swear off movie adaptations of his writing). About the time one is lulled by the relatively lightweight love triangle, the invasion sweeps in and suddenly the film's tone takes a harsher turn, which helps sustain it through a long running time.

...

Thanks for your reply. I had a feeling, just watching some parts of it, that it treated the book precisely in a kitsch way, which Kundera wouldn't have approved. Does it?

>post-modernism sounds to me like a lot of modern bullshit like feminism or the gender as a social construct and all that teftie stuff

Just please learn a trade, make an honest living and accept that reading is not for you. You can't give a comprehensive overview of post-modernism, which, let me remind you, has been pretty much the main thing on the Continent since the end of the Second World War? (Give or take 20 years, I would not descend into a debate about this.)

>D-dude you dislike posmodernism I-I can't even.

Fuck yourself. I don't need this whole salt of yours faggot.
so, postmodernism is which comes after WWII? you mean mediocrity? you mean ruin? you mean decadence? then I was right.
run to that safe space of yours and tell people how uneducated are the outside troglodites who don't give a fuck about your feelings.
great job, you made me mad.

But don't forget to start with the Greeks when you cover for the obvious things you've missed

What are some recommended Czech authors beside Kundera? I have been watching a lot of czech cinema from the new wave period lately and it has got me interested in the country and the culture.

XX or XXI century preferred. Yes, I already know Kafka was Czech

The Unbreakable Lightness of Kimmy Schmidt

>I'm new to this board
Perhaps r/books/ would be more up to your speed.

Bohumil Hrabal was god tier. If you liked the films you'll surely like his work (he wrote Closely Watched Trains which was later turned into a film which then won an Oscar)

...

josef skvorecky

>tfw you'll never go pubbing with two presidents at once

>Closely Watched Trains
Amazing, I really liked the film so I'm gonna give him a try.

Thanks. Any recommended works in particular?

There are plenty of books I haven't finished in terms of, I started it, enjoyed it, something happened in my life that prevented or distracted me from finishing it but I intend to return to.

One example is The Master and Margarita, I was working at a music festival at the time and ended up so busy, out of my face or tired I never read it.

By the time I got home and recovered, I couldn't remember where I was or what happened (in the book) and felt I'd have to start again, so I started something else instead.

I've organized novels I've done this with on a shelf and I'm currently working my way through them.

I've never "dropped" a book though. Never walked out of a cinema or turned off an album either.

Hrabal also wrote this novella runs for about 80 pages or so, which wouldn't be anything strange safe for the fact that it's entirely composed of ONE sentence. As far as I know, it's the longest sentece ever published in a book.

The Engineer of Human Souls. Also you could check out Michal Ajvaz.

Getting bored with Celine's Journey to the End of the Night. It's regarded as a good book so I set out to read it, but after the war part, his adventures in africa and the US, it just got boring. More than half way done and considering dropping it.

Are you reading a translation? This book has a fuckload of slang and it really does not translate well to English.

Cheers lads, noted all of them

Currently reading Red and Black by Stendhal and I really want to drop it, is a great book, but the whole rich people love thing is so chessy

>I'm new to this board
Fuck off, you're not wanted

this thread gave me cancer

everytime Veeky Forums bashes kundera and calvino i'm reminded of what a shithole this place really is

it must to be hard to grow in a home were your parents shout that at you user, you poor thing.

see and go choke on thousand dicks

Kek'd

Jesus Christ this thread

>Veeky Forums bashing Calvino
I thought he was pretty well loved around here, I don't think I've seen anybody shit on him yet.