Goodreads reviews

>"heh... i bet this showed the DRUMPFTARDS!!!"

this one was supposedly written by a man, I've honestly rarely read an ironic negative review of the bible by a woman, they don't tip that hard

>not liking based emperor Trump
The wall is going to be built, Paco. Enjoy getting sent back to your violent shithole of a third world country, subhuman shit

you quoted the wrong guy my amerifat friend

I quoted a triggered libcuck who thinks saying 'Drumpf' is funny, inspite of it being shitty humor. Only liberals are this bad at making memes

shitty bait man

>the Bible is one book

Name a good liberal meme, you fucking redditor

she has a point though

In a thread near this one people are discussing Tolstoy's review of Shakespeare.

Should he be ridiculed like these people for trying to review a classic or he gets a pass since he was an established writer?

Should works of literature that have historic significance (or any other kind) even be reviewed for something other than that influence?

/mu/ here. Since I'm into noise, does that make her(?) critique valid? I'm enjoying the book so far though

the double is absolute shite though

He gets a pass since he wasn't a dumb cunt.

this actually makes me sad.

she thinks franny is portrayed as an incomprehensible female cliche.
and i feel she is like the bf of franny in the book. someone too stupid and selfcentered to even listen.

i thought someone can makes a Little self reflection after read a book like that. but... the world is too subtle.

It's completely redundant posting any of these if you don't know what book they're reviewing

>I'm into noise
That has literally nothing to do with anything in your post you insufferable pseud

...

Wasn't he basically raped for years?

an even better one

>that one guy who writes all his reviews in Spanish

I don't get it, what didn't he like about it?
And why all the emphasis on 'getting' it, it's a pretty simple and straight forward book.

Ok you're a super ironic dude.
I'm sorry that so many dumb reviews on goodreads are written by women and that in these kind of threads people start talking shit about the gentle sex

What is with these faggy threads? You are succumbing to group think just as you mock people who read YA and genre fiction. They may be classics but that doesn't mean everyone has to enjoy them and give 5 star reviews just because someone said its a classic.

No Fucking way.

Are you retarded, the point is to look at their terrible reading comprehension and weak arguments, and then feel better about ourselves.
No one gives a shit if someone said "not my cup of tea."

>redundant

What book?

Why these people act like characters are people they have to live with?

I like answered prayers even if I hate the main protagonist

He never implied that everyone had to enjoy them. All that was mentioned is simply the fact that these "reviewers" give barely any structural construtive criticism by not finishing the book, not understanding the viewpoints, and fail to analyze the book throughly before making judgements and critique.

>someone uses wayyyyyyyyyyy seriously in a review of a classic novel, let alone any novel.

you don't have to think every classic is fantastic, but please attempt to put forward your thoughts and opinions in a comprehensible way, and not like a six year old.

>crime and punishment

I think the reviewer was just being super contrarian
>everyone else likes this book so obviously I have to call it overrated and stupid

insufferable plebs who completely missed the point

somewhat reasonable criticism but disagree

better one

>i don't like it because it makes me a bit sad

What a crazy bint. All the intelligence of a diplodocus.

>avid reader

Better version - look up the five star ratings on the worst books out there

>The Fault in Our Stars

In what world is that a better version?

>filename
Heh.

That's not what redundant means.

Franny and Zooey
JD Salinger's second-best, first being Nine Stories.

blumb

Not a goodreads review but I think this meets your criterion.

Please stop falseflagging.

it's probably a self-hating women who's testosterone pills are giving her some sort of roid rage

It's definitely a woman. You can tell by how bad the sentences are structured and how triggered she is. Women can stand hearing something they don't agree with, then they go to great lengths to go apeshit over it, instead of being rational and logical about it. Fact is that women are simply braindead. They can't properly think. They can't produce literature. They can't even read it. Deep down women know their inferior

I do appreciate the sincerity of this one. The acknowledgement that it isn't necessarily the novel that is bad, but didn't speak to the individual and is unwilling to put the effort in due to that.

I am SURE that this person allocates their time extremely well

I can't bring myself to read this shit.

for some reason, that post made my dick hard when I imagined that it was carlie who wrote it and that my massive Nietzschean shaft was being shoved down her angelic christian throat as she gagged and choked

Reading that turned me into a misogynist.

guyz opn ur eyez! i'ts litrally 1894!!1!!

compulsory

This one got me.
>Scarlet Letter

The body was overwhelmed and rejected it. Bookshelves: will-try-again-later is optimistic at least.

This might be the worst thing I've ever read

Why are there so many retarded Americans

>implying beautiful and the damned isn't genuinely worth one star

>will-try-again
Kek, 5th time lucky

that is pretty admirable though if she isn't lying

>apparently, every sperm is, in fact, "sacred".

what the fuck
It just went in one ear and straight out the other, this is truly incredible. Imagine not having the intelligence to understand even the basic contention of crime and punishment, how do these people function?

Divine Comedy, by Italy's Main Homeboy

I can see how someone could complain about translating the musicality from Italian away when it's put into English, but this is so dumb. It's quite obvious who is talking throughout, I have the Signet version though.

Do women think people in books are actually real and the things really happen?

what book?

...

...

Intentional "quirky" run-on sentences should result in a caning

peopel who use the word "woman" as an adjective are subhuman

necro

>harshness of reality
>probably refuses to acknowledge radical Islamist terrorism
heh....

lol what a fucking IDIOT

...

Well look at that... arabic people use those jewish parentheses too. And like ten times more than the average /pol/ user.

Pseud, the post.

He's right you know

That's no American.

Reason why women and/or people left of center shouldn't read books.

Strong wymen outsmarts white male author.

Maybe not the stupidest, but the top rated review.

At least she's fat, and thus will be dead soon.

You can tell he's smart because he used the word "sisyphean"

Women were a mistake.

I love ones that try to use lots of complex words to sound smart but this one will do nicely.

Didn't 'the Cheshire cat' used to be a namefag on /x/ or Veeky Forums?

At least she was polite enough to apologize for being a pleb.

it's probably just a kid

Samefag. The broken English is embarrassing.

> "he is not joking" such certainty this guy
> "scoring a cameo in Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure"
> "Plato is stupid"
what did he mean by this?

Probably, but I, when I first read the book when I was about 12, and many other younger people understood the book and the reason to send Boxer to the knacker's.

LOL Midwesterners during the Great Depression absolutely BTFO!