Most books are longer than necessary.
>>7750218
That's not Jorges.
>half way through IJ
>Desperately want to read The Sound And The Fury
Why is it so fucking long?
>Book is immensely long
>You begin reading it and enjoy it immensely
>suddenly the characters and style of writing you enjoyed end and a bunch of shit you dont care about happens
>there seems to be no end of it
Savage Detectives and 2666 I'm looking at you.
>>7750233
Literally why do they do this?
>>7750218
This is why poetry is partish and books and imperfect
>>7750236
Authors get bored? Cryptonomicon, Name of the Wind, Les Mis, Moby Dick, The Stand, Brief History of Seven Killings (im looking on a list of popular doorstoppers), almost every 1000+ page book does it and its bullshit.
>>7750218
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca7Wt8lDK0s
>>7750233
>>7750236
>>7750241
>reading for plot
>>7750241
When something is so long I assume the writer doesn't know what he wants to say or at least how to say it. Rambling books usually dont belay a point as well succinct ones
>>7750252
I can't tell if this is serious or not
>>7750255
>He unironically reads books for quality of prose!
>He thinks rejecting the fundamental aspect of literature, storytelling, has somehow elevated him above the crowd!
>>7750266
it has though. what are you insecure?
>>7750252
Its interesting because this guys autism has taken a strange extroverted form
>>7750269
I just feel bad for you.
I bet you think Suttree is McCarthy's best work.
>>7750269
>he reads prose narratives for the prose but is too pleb to handle poetry
kek pleb
>>7750276
if it means I can enjoy all those doorstoppers you didn't then you shouldn't feel bad for me
>>7750281
So you'd rather read 1000 pages of a book talking about poop with beautiful prose than books with some content and normal prose?
>>7750369
People have stopped making sense. I blame the internet.
>>7750266
>>unironically
>fundamental aspect of literature
>storytelling
>>7750227
Just take a break for a few days and read TSatF. It's an incredible book.
>>7750369
"Oh, why's it that to be call'd a piece of shit is an insult? I wonder I do, if we're not simply missing something, if perhaps in our prejudgment of bodily waste lies the birth of all aversions. Think, how when you eat, pleasure is found in fullness; now when you excrete, 'tis thanks to emptiness that it comes, the same joy as brought by ejaculation--and are those two not the same: front and back, white and black, start and finish, in short, birth and death? Are then not all changes expulsion: man from paradise then spirit from flesh? Our life as a whole, it all feeds on death and birth, so d'not feel an offense in being call'd 'crap', for you are the propagator of reality in simply taking one--to reject the turd is to not conceive it makes everything, that it is the essence of the world, the true Matter.
"Yes, to reject your expulsions is to deny all you do, to excrete is to make concrete, like create needs eat, it is in shit. So look at what is the real sacred syllable: in it the double O, a secret agent, a paired void like infinity, a howl, two zeroes --double negative-- making a whole; and surrounding them, a biad, bilabial, closing to open in palindrome like uroboru. So salute with me --no, not gaseously!-- the hankey, say Hail, Hail to the Poop!"
>>7752964
7/10
>>7752969
Danks, senpai.
>>7750255
>>7750266
you're both kinda wrong. literature has many facets, one of which is narrative. but narrative alone will not do the trick. it needs to work with precision, clarity and pleasure. it needs images, symbols, inferences and explications, situation-proper diction, and an adept use of metaphor. people who criticise others for "reading for plot" usually miss the point that the prose may indeed be slowing down and taking excessive indulgences in itself, usually in long digressions or even abrupt shifts of setting and discussion. Moby Dick does this, Proust does this, so does Musil. at the same time, as noted, narrative plot is not the "fundamental aspect" of literature--even cavemen had to learn how to craft a story, though all nonetheless had stories to tell.
>>7753379
I think that comes to the heart of the '>reading for' meme: that no one thing that literature contains is enough for all it(')s worth. it is only when taking the broad many-flavored view that one fully appreciates it. and reading for any one picayune, small, particular aspect is missing something, inevitably.
