What are some books women have a harder time understanding?

so you're telling me that if people ask you what your favourite directors, musicians, or authors are, you've never given a risky/controversial response?

then you're a woman.

I've gauged situations. I don't want to come off as a pretentious bore, so I--as Veeky Forums would say--check my power level, and when I warm up or feel more comfortable being honest, I'm more inclined to share my opinions. women do the same thing in my experience when I've talked to them about artistic things.

very, very few women read and understand anything that's actually "good".

Having above average intelligence is a minimum requirement for reading dense and complex works. Although similar to men on average, women fall into a taller bell curve, meaning less highly intelligent women overall. You also need to have a passion for interacting with things rather than people - something more commonly found in men than women.
Combine these factors with other requirements like patience and free time, and you'll be hard-pressed to find a woman who has read, enjoyed and understood the depths of a book like Ulysses.

>inb4 muhsoggyknee, virgin
Even if you want to bring in the anecdote of "I knew a girl who really liked Ulysses" etc. we both know she is the far exception to the rule. When women start forming book clubs around reading Joyce and not pulp-tier "martha queefs out a tea-set" type stuff, then i'll be impressed.

It's one of my favorite works, but I wouldn't put it on the level of Shakespeare or Sophocles in terms of "depth" (although it is unsurpassed in poetic and structural brilliance as is tge Odyssey). War in Homer is a pissing contest, full of immense pettiness; unfortunately Achilles doesn't see this until he's in hades, where he sees war for what it is (which completes his disgust expressed to Odysseus in the Iliad)

I can't think of a "risky" response. If you're terrified of people learning about what music you listen to, either get new friends or stop fixating so much in yourself. Newsflash: grownups don't shun you for listening to the wrong music

>pissing contest full of pettiness
nigga do you even into eternal glories rather than being alive and shit. do you even anger bro?

>women do the same thing in my experience when I've talked to them about artistic things.
I don't know if the negative connotations of having a deep or pretensious appreciation of art/hobbies is the same for women. There just aren't that many lonely spergy women who can create the stereotype, not near the same rate as men anyway.

Did you not remember the message Achilles had for Odysseus in Hades? You're literally like the people who see Scarface as endorsing gang life

>what music
It's mostly about books. But even for music people will think I'm an autist for actually enjoying Bach

different book sweetheart, likely by a different author.

Are you thirteen? Adults don't shun you for liking Bach. If they don't like Bach then they just don't care if you like him and say, "That's nice. "

Are you a part of scholarly circles? I work a trade and associate with complete plebs. I would look like a fucking idiot saying I listen to bach hahah

Uh, no. Contemporary scholars agree it is the same author because it specifically avoids covering any of the Iliad's material in the flashbacks, and because Homer's style is very distinct even among epic poets (which is why his works were so exalted compared to the numerous other epic poems of the Trojan cycle).

non-white tier reading comprehension confirmed

yes, the lines in the odyssey were a repeat of one of the options Achilles was considering. In the Iliad it was a debate for him between glory (death on the battlefield) or life (living out the rest of his days as a shitty slave). In the Odyssey he recants the same lines about him rather being a slave because he is expressing a hint of jealousy at Odysseus' position, that is, he too wishes he were still alive. What is petty about the dead wishing they weren't dead?

sweet child, that's incorrect.

news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2015/01/150104-homer-iliad-odyssey-greece-book-talk-travel-world/

I work as a janitor in a thrift store. No one cares that I like classical.

>misogyny

He's a dissenter repeating 19th Century theory of Homer mixed with general Marxian theory of art, bi whoop. Most contemporary scholars believe Homer's compositions were commissioned (he probably dictated them), because they are much, much, much longer than any known purely oral poems, and because of the extensive and almost rambling descriptions of the Iliad.

Your guy is not a scholar of Homer, he can't even read Greek, and his assertions are clearly based on subjective experience of Homer

No, I'm not. Liking Bach is pretty common any way though, he's hardly limited to scholars, he's the Shakespeare of music.

so far it looks at though I have a reputable source to support my assertion and you don't have one for yours.

Glory is worthless when you're dead is the point . Achilles says this much to Odysseus even in the Iliad. He realizes the choice of glory over a long, happy life (which is what he was offered, not a slave's life, he only says he would settle for a slave's life in hades), was a major mistake

I agree, but I also think a lot of the reason for men's interest in art is also about trying to project an identity and thus, in a sense, get pussy. It's that will to power, bud.

Can somewhat confirm. I don't talk about literature to get pussy, and would rather hide my power level, so to speak, but I have almost gotten laid when a girl asked my favorite book, and I said Gravity's Rainbow as a joke, but then went on to explain why I liked it, realised I really do love the novel, and my passion for the novel and for literature in general seemed to really impress her.

Your source isn't "reputable" here, it's pop, not academic
Barry P. Powell supports what I've said, and he is an actual scholar of classical literature

Because journals and critics are never biased

I'm female and I tried reading infinite jest but I just didn't get it.

Actually my friend contemporary scholars agree that both works are the product of oral tradition and multiple generations of authors all contributing in a standard folk tale process. Also you still havent included a link or source.
>neither have you
journal.oraltradition.org/files/articles/4iii/6_scott.pdf

you're right, why trust anything anyone ever says because everyone could be biased.

The Big Five personality dimension of openness differentiates into interest in ideas and creativity. Men score higher on average in the former while women score higher on average in the latter.

I do think that regarding any piece of complex literature there are meanings which are more obvious to one person over another, and vice versa. Also, you'd probably see different patterns of interpretation if you divided interpretation by gender.

If you think that women can't appreciate literature like you do, you're a pathetic and resentful beta male. How about you make something of yourself so you can actually appreciate art for its own sake, instead of cowering behind your "taste".

bump

...

>contemporary scholars agree that both works are the product of oral tradition and multiple generations of authors all contributing in a standard folk tale process.
Nope, if that were the case the beginning and ending of each story wouldn't be so definitive and their plots would not be so elegantly structured. You'd have the beginning and ending both pushed to cover additional material prior and post. Such a tidy structure is impossible to arrive at through patchwork, a precise start and resolution were made and unchanged in both works, and the beginning flows systematically to the conclusion . In fact, Aristotle considers them masterpieces in terms of plot structure

my diary desu

You seem to weigh your opinions as legitimate sources. What you need to understand is no one else gives a fuck what you think. Scholars say oral tradition. Retard on a korean cartoon forum says no because he likes the ending.

lots of girls like anna karenina though