I have a chart but confused on which books to starts first, or help with the dive into it.
the thumbnail is too small for me to know exactly what this is, but from the filename i think itll be useful for you lol.
>>7982561
Just pick one that looks interesting. In its existence literature has covered so
many ideas, wroting styles, ideologies, etc.
Some people love the oldest stuff, very quick paced usually
Some like the 1700-1800 neoclassical slow, hoity toity
Some like the "what le fuck" of the surrealists and stream of consciousness
You just gotta jump in and see what tickles your fancy
If only we had a sticky !
>>7982561
Start with Stoner [9th on the list]. It should relatively measure your ability to get through a novel since it's not grandiose in any sense of the word and a very down to earth drama.
>>7982561
mate, don't let people on 4chan make your decisions for you. read the synopses of each and make up your own mind.
not to be flippant, and not necessarily directed at you, but why do people here often ask what books they should read or read next? i always found it exhilarating to go to a bookstore of library and hunt down my next reading experience. anyone who has been half-educated should be aware of at least a handful of the greats - Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Fitzgerald, Faulkner, etc - and reading them always leads to reading their contemporaries or researching them, which in turn leads to more discoveries of authors. is it because some people, mainly students, are used to people (teachers) telling them what to read that they come here looking for surrogate teachers? for me, part of what makes reading an adventure is the adventure of who or what i'll read next. do yourselves a favor and do your own research. you'll appreciate your discoveries far more than if someone hands you a book and tells you to read it.
>>7982561
My favourite book is the metamophosis by kafka but i think its a bit too early. I would start of with catcher in the rey.
>no one has said start with the Greeks is read the sticky
Sage
>>7982561
We are /lit/ not literature desu.
