Is this the most objective best-ever list?

lmao

women should be banned from reading

>not posting your goodreads profile
>2016
goodreads.com/user/show/27498265-tyler

>goodreads
How is it possible that people who dedicate a significant portion of their time to literature (or what they think passes as literature) to be so utterly uncultured and unread? Pick up a book, any book no matter its accessibility and bestseller premise, and it still takes hours to read to completion, and requires a degree of reading comprehension to enjoy or otherwise find worth in it. Reading is infinity more time consuming than most other form of media and medium, escapist or not. So, after one has sunk to the abyss of the past yet another portion of their palpably-limited existence in the completion of a generic pop text, how come doesn't said reader attempt to familiarize themselves with works outside their given area of comfort? How can anybody continue finishing off Harry Potter after Harry Potter and forever wallow in literary stagnation, indifferent to the literary excess well within their reach? It's sick.

...

Haha, I chortled

the "popular photos" section is a YA blackhole

>Note to librarians: do not edit this list's description.

KEK

What did they mean by that

>too much of a pseud to put the harry potter books on his goodreads

We know you read them you little bitch.

Librarians probably went into their career for a love of literature, so seeing a compilation of The 'Best Books Ever' filled with nothing but children's books might give them an aneurysm.

Pride and Prejudice is a great work.

what's more likely is that "librarian" is a status on that website that grants the ability to edit list descriptions among other things

>Crime and punishment is a 4.2, while Hunger Games is a 4.35
>meanwhile every-one is shitting on Wuthering Heights

Book thief isn't so bad, r-right?

I only read the first one

I've never read the Book Thief. Is it any good?

She is.

Wow! You found it! Yep, there it is. The most objective best-ever list. Thank you for posting it.

Jesus christ, even when it comes to YA garbage their taste is shit. Order of the Phoenix as the highest ranked HP, are you serious?

I wonder when Harry Potter will become mandatory reading in American high schools.

You're about a decade late, boyo.

Except that's actually good if you ignore the top 50.

You can read through YA books relatively quickly. I think the amount of time it takes to read something is pretty heavily correlated to the amount of time it took to write it.

Nah.

What? Reading is easy as fuck. I remember reading the first two Harry Potter books within a couple of hours when I was 11 years old or so. YA is basically capeshit for teen girls

It's about a German girl who wants to bang a 25 year old Jew and ignores the same age aryan strong boy. Also she is a pussy who can't do anything by herself and steals a book from a library. Also she stole a book from a graveyard about grave digging. Figure it out from here goy.

This is wit.

This is the type of posting that will make Veeky Forums great again. Great post. One of the greatest posts of all time, in fact.

I don't get it.

Harry Potter is a decent book series and a fast read. People read what they want. I like scifi novels. They're easy to read and I enjoy them. Does everything have to be done for some greater aim?

>Reading is infinity more time consuming than most other form of media and medium

Gamers sink thousands of hours into nothingness.

The only good book is pride and prejudice

Hitler made the Jews wear the star of David.

Any list that puts one of the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises shouldn't be taken seriously. each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

J.K. Rowling is a much better writer than you.

That never happened.

I didn't even know she visited this board.

This makes me want to rip out my eyeballs and scream at the top of my lungs.

This list is everything wrong with modern literature.

Please do so

You do realise that your pic related is an ironic troll list, right?

Believe me it's tempting.

david foster wallace would be the first to say popular fiction usually deserves its audience. he assigned Stephen King and C.S. Lewis in his college classes.

At any rate, pic related really changed how I think about 'taste' as a concept. The culture he criticizes is that of 1962 when he wrote it, but I think his predictions for the future are mostly accurate. Let me quote a little:

"The great danger of attempting to impose a higher taste upon a lower one at any time is the possibility of paralyzing both the higher and lower responses. A child may be suspended-- possibly suspended forever-- in a never-never land in which he is immobilized between a lower pleasure he has been taught to suppress and a higher pleasure he does not yet need. He will survive the loss of the lower; children grow up and get jobs anyway. But it is most unlikely he will ever find the need for the higher."

>to kill a mockingbird
>my rating two stars

lol

See, I'm hoping he's trolling as well

I'm impressed they managed to fit one good book into the top 5.
Honestly? Probably Pride & Prejudice & Zombies.

Also, she's the most famous actually good female author.

On book buying sites I keep seeing 'Divergent' and it looks just like Hungry Games. Is it? I'll never read either but I am curious.

Why do people say men are smarter than women if the two best writers are women?
Checkmate alt-righters

It is. A blatant knock-off. It's Divergent that people make fun of, when they make fun of YA; Hunger Games is okay in its own right (and its failings are its own, not its genre's), but Divergent isn't.

Wuthering heights is meant be shit on. Big fucking soap opera. I remember I had to read it in one day and didnt have a physical version of it so I was reading it all night and the worst thing was that the version i had had after 2/3 of the book spaces in every word. When it was 3 a.m. I couldnt notice the difference between the fucking gaps and true space. Not only the book was bad and corny but the e-version i had was just atrocious (i hate reading from anything else than sheets of paper)

does good reads even have a politics section?

>Big fucking soap opera
I fucking hate books like that. War & Peace, Dreams of the Red Chamber, The Great Gatsby (hell, chuck all those 1920s faggots in the trash), that faggot Japanese "first ever novel" (written by a woman: of course), Anna Karenina, most of Shakespeare's comedies, and probably some other hacks.

Spoken like a true plotfag

I've never read them.

I don't know if you took me seriously or not

Subtle bait