I give this a light 6.
cool
now go kill yourself, you tasteless piece of garbage.
I give this a light 6.
Kill yourself
I think your 6 is upside down, mate.
>>7429668
Read Woman Hating by Andrea Dworkin next. http://radfem.org/dworkin
Thank me later.
>>7429668
I honestly give it much less than that. I usually love /lit/s circlejerk novels (Stoner, IJ, etc) but I just could not finish this. Gave up on it about 3/4 of the way through. What the fuck, no girl would ever act like that in real life. This book is essentially pedophilc daydreaming as far as I can tell.
>>7430077
> This book is essentially pedophilc daydreaming as far as I can tell.
heres your response:
no shit
>>7429668
>>7430077
this -- >>7429674 >>7429987
In all honesty, if you don't like it then you aren't reading carefully enough. I literally am finishing a course that covered this book this week.
Nabokov was a huge proponent of careful reading and aesthetic, consequently he dropped many very subtle hints as to what is actually going on IF you pay attention.
For instance, the couch scene is actually really fucked up. Humbert Humbert makes it out to be as if she came onto him, but during the scene he frames it like a movie (a farce), and -among other things- he CLAIMS that she never said or did anything to protest but LATER states that she got up to pick up the ringing phone that he had UNTIL THAT MOMENT not heard.
In other words, he basically semi-molests her and is so deluded by his lust that he doesn't even hear anything from her until the moment he's broken from his trance by the phone that SHE picks up.
There's even some overt instances where it shows how she's crying and abused. By the 2nd road trip the only reason she's more promiscuous is (like many abused children) they develop fucked up ideas of sexuality, and she wants to manipulate her way out of his control.
Its a fantastic book, and beautiful written, one of my top 5 easily.
>>7430042
Go away and stop shit posting please, you're b8 thread already failed.
>>7430095
I feel like anyone who didn't get these things on the first read didn't read the book.
>>7430101
There's different depths of it, but generally I would say yes. I mean, if you go into the book THINKING its a pedo fantasy and reading it overly quickly than it'd be easier to gloss over though.
Either way, people that don't get what its overall message and themes are are pretty stupid by the end. Its obvious that she was abused and obvious from even the first paragraph that Humbert Humbert is an unreliable narrator that justifies his own actions.
>t. Anthony Fantano
Am I stupid for not predicting that it was Quilty she ran away with?
>>7430095
>shit posting
>b8
Don't know what you're talking about.
Dworkin should be read.
Are you referring to the pornography thread? I thought a board on 4chan would get hugely triggered by anti-pornography feminism, but there was a lot of support.
This is a good board. I like it.
>>7429668
my dick gave it a hard 6hard 5.5
>>7430132
>>>/tumblr/
i gave it a firm 7 if you read me
>>7429668
>he couldn't handle prose perfection.
>>7430289
>>>/makkesprojects/
>>7430292
Does MLP read Dworkin?
>>7430309
I like ponies tbqh. Most people on /mlp/ are not well-read about anything really. A reply to Dworkin would result in posting some Sargon of Akkad vids, /pol/-tier #bantz, and infographics.
>>7430320
Aww, shame. Maybe I could appeal to them by making a ponified version of Catharine MacKinnon. She got that rad black/white hair, could make a badass pony.
Gotta spread the gospel!
(All jokes and self-parody aside, I luv MacKinnon, Dworkin, and friends. I want to huggle them all and spread their ideas everywhere.)
>>7430343
>>7430309
>>7430320
Well meme'd lets not talk about Lolita in this thread, it being the subject at hand, it wouldn't be interesting anyways.
>>7430077
>pedophilc daydreaming
It's a tale of a stunted adult being used by a premature child
>>7430271
breathtaking. I read this book last year and already want to re-read
Why are people from /mu/ and Fantano fanboys coming on to /lit/?
Stay out
>>7430785
why do I have to stay on only one?
>>7429668
out of 6
>>7430836
Because you don't bring any good discussion, just shitty memes that only high school kids with "ironic" twitter pages like.
You seriously suck
>>7430095
Holy crap are you in my course? RU?
>>7431211
Nah. I'm Canadian m80. In Ottawa.
>>7431226
Hur många huvudstäder har Kananda?åtta va?
>>7431226
That's a shame, I'm tasked with writing a preface for Pnin currently from his or Nabokov's point of view, leaning towards Pnin, as his writing quirks are easier to emulate.
Any input?!?! Or hey maybe you are an amazing guy and want to write some for me, supposed to be pretty short but capture their voice.
For the love of Christ can somebody get me a decent ebook of this? I've been trying to read it for months but every copy I found online has formatting errors and missing punctuation galore and the book is basically unobtanium physically where I live.
>>7429668
I give it a heavy 8, maybe a light 9.
Should I read Nabokov if I want to improve my english?
>>7430271
>bragging about your prose on the first page
Why is Nabokov is based?
>>7429668
this book is a itmus test, they don't like you call them plebs, they like too much you call them non-patricians. it's a great book that being said. but it's not end game.
>>7433786
Fyi I took him up on his b8 last thread he shitposted and did a point by point analysis of paragraphs from "Scapegoat"
If you want to hear about how masculinity was the motivating factor of WW2 and Nazism then it'll be a great read!
Doesn't at all sound unreasonable and uncritical. Dworkin is only worth reading for a laugh, and to challenge your views. She'll hardly give you anything of substance based on what I've seen thus far.
>>7433811
It's not bait and I don't shitpost.
I posted my recommendation in several threads though.
I also don't remember anyone quoting Scapegoat. (Although I haven't read it yet, I didn't see anyone quoting a book point by point and analyzing it.)
I guess you argued with someone else and thought it was me.
Also
>random guy on /lit/ thinking he's a match to Dworkin
Kekking my oshiri off.
>>7433811
Shit, found a PDF real easy. We'll see what I think.
I'm okay with feminists, btw.
>>7429668
Nabakov was a complete fucking hack.
>>7430271
>first person narrative
WOW it's like we're reading his diary or something :o) or like he's verbally telling us his entire story, with metaphors and pretty language and everything right off the cuff :oooooo))))))
>>7433832
All the PDFs are at http://radfem.org/dworkin
>>7432213
You don't have the ability to use Amazon?
>>7430848
*out of light six
>>7432606
Probably not, unless your English is already pretty good. He has a lot of intricate wordplay (especially in Lolita) and he uses many words that are obscure or unknown even for native speakers. It's worth it to read through it even if you have to use a dictionary, but it would be challenging if your English isn't already somewhat strong.
>>7430320
>reply to Dworkin would result in posting some Sargon of Akkad vids
Which incidentally would blow her the fuck out.
>>7433857
Now I've lost interest.
>>7434084
>Prejudiced much?
I'm the one that said I'm okay with feminists.
But you think she'd contain most of what she'd want to say in one book.
>>7434095
Authors who write more than one book are automatically bad now? Wut?
Just read Woman Hating (200 pages) if you don't want to delve further.
>>7429668
My eyes skimmed and thought you posted a tight 6.
>>7433851
>>>/reddit/
>>7434110
It's just, does one really want to read over half a dozen books on pretty much the same topic?
I'll read Women Hating, though.
>>7434137
spoilers it's awful
>>7434137
Why would you assume it's all the same topic though?
>Woman Hating
Hate against women in history/mythology
Hate against women in pornography
How a utopian world without woman hating could look
All in a mere ~200 pages. Brief and powerful, something of a manifesto.
>Intercourse
An in-depth analysis of the act of sexual intercourse and how it's practiced, experienced, realized as a form of woman hating.
>Pornography: Men Possessing Women
An in-depth look at pornography and all the different ways in which it boils down to woman hating, as well as often being outright exploitation and violence during its production (not just metaphysical hate).
>Right Wing Women
An in-depth analysis of why many women escaped back to right-wing politics after their disappointment with "sexual liberation" culture, why many women stuck with right-wing politics the whole way through, and why they're basically wrong although their reasons could be seen as a legitimate trade-off.
>Pornography and Civil Rights
An in-depth analysis and discussion of the drafted Civil Rights Ordinance which was a law meant to make pornographers accountable for harms their publications could cause, given said harms could be proven in court in individual lawsuits against individual publications. (I.e. explicitly not a censorship law.)
>Scapegoat
A look at anti-semitism and misogyny, drawing parallels between them etc., haven't read this so don't really know.
And then some are collections of small articles or speeches she gave here and there, some are collections of random elaborations on different topics published during ongoing times of debate, and some are just fiction.
>>7434193
It pretty much boils down to the same topic, though. She's an activist writer. Most of these books are probably being bought and read by people that already follow her.
I stopped reading activist books when I realized they just laid out the same arguments over and over again.
>>7434114
thats the joke.
>>7434235
I guess if you're Like Really Smart then it might be enough to get the basic principles and the rest will theoretically follow, in which case Woman Hating might be all you need, but I do think it's useful, especially for the average Jane and Joe, to see how the principles can be applied to a vast array of topics in different ways.
There's certainly repetition though, no doubt about that. I like it anyway since I agree with her so much.
>>7430095
> this book has a section where you have to pay attention to see what really happens! this makes the book special from all the others where you have to pay attention to see what really happens. in my top five fo sho
>>7434290
>I like it anyway since I agree with her so much.
See, that's exactly what I'm saying. Authors like her just preach to the choir. Rather than effecting much change, it's just lining her pockets with change, because she's tapping into a market, with her own fanbase that's going to buy her stuff.
Now, there's the chance that some random Joe or Jane will pick up any one of her books because of its specific topic, and might gain perspective, and considering that, I guess it's good for her to spread her ideas throughout so many books, but I find it unlikely that a legion of books is going to do that, vs. a definitive book of ideas.
'Cause let's be honest, how many times have you looked at the latest book by Anne Coulter or Bill O'Reilly and said, "I'm gonna pick that up?"
Agreed desu senpai
>muh misleading narrator
Notes from underground did it better and far earlier. Also the prose was a fucking letdown.
>>7434325
>it's just lining her pockets with change, because she's tapping into a market
LOL
>>7434415
Fin.
And it was all for money.
>>7434419
Women Hating is the book for me, then.
>>7434084
>>7433909
>>7433900
>>7433857
>>7433830
It is b8. First of all, feminist essays and analysis is politics, not literature. If the story was done in allegory of it was an overarching philosophy than maybe, but MOST definitions TELL you its a political movement.
So in the first place you're breaking a roll of the bat.
Second of all (if i remember correctly) you're practically begging people to read Dworkin and shilling her shit constantly across threads but when people go to the trouble of reading her and then say that its bad or uninteresting your response is /pol/tier
>"I disagree, doesn't seem interesting"
>"Prejudiced much?"
Seriously? I guess she's so utterly infallible that its not possible to think her theories are wrong eh? But you're not prejudiced of course.
>>7434193
>Haven't really read this
Well i have. More than you apparently at any rate. Its trash. Not worth reading 440 fucking pages.
You've literally referred to your shilling as "spreading the gospel" how is that NOT an over the top parody of radical feminists? Unless you're trying to sarcastically parody people that parody them? That'd pretty dumb.
But either way you've contributed literally nothing on the topic at hand other than your own shilling, you may as well be the kind of person that posts waifu-anime jpgs in threads off /a/
>>7434315
When autists routinely misinterpret it then yes it would seem as if that idea is pretty validated, outside of the utterly flawless prose and the fact that there are more subtle clues in conjunction with how these "clues" fit-into the grand theme of the work.
Its considered a great book, and since I'm young its near the top of my list. I have read Moby Dick, Ulysses, Boroughs, and a lot of other greats.
>>7431226
oh shit ottawa here too!!
>>7434474
First of all, we both know that you can't have a serious discussion on /pol/.
Secondly, I'm trying to post in /his/ now, and they're too retarded to even understand that what I'm posting is on-topic. I got an off-topic warning and a thread removed with zero replies because they literally didn't get that Pornography and Civil Rights is relevant to history, philosophy, etc. This board is simply superior to discuss these things. Blame 4chan and the shittiness of other boards.
>"I disagree, doesn't seem interesting"
>"Prejudiced much?"
Are you implying that they *have* read it or haven't read it? You're the first person to have mentioned to have actually read any books by her. (Apparently one I didn't read.) I also didn't post many posts calling people prejudiced; you're probably conflating me with many other posters because you can't bear the thought that there's several people on /lit/ who are fond of Dworkin.
>More than you apparently at any rate.
I'm about to finish my 5th book by her. Get fugged.
>You've literally referred to your shilling as "spreading the gospel"
Either I made a joke that was so significant I don't even remember it, or you're again confusing me with someone else.
>shilling
>shilling
>shilling
Why don't you just fuck off back to /pol/?
Currently reading Ada, it's singlehandedly the most beautiful and most autistic book I've ever read.
>>7434821
Borrowed it from a friend but haven't wanted to take it to work or anywhere outside for fear of ruining it (it's an old-ass copy) and at night I'm tired.
Not bad from what I read so far. Though of the Nabakov I've read, the only one that's went beyond my mere appreciation of it is The Eye. Fucking loved The Eye.
