If I was able to complete pic related without much trouble at all, should I be able to jump into Gravitys Rainbow and enjoy it and at least mostly understand it?
Basically I'm wondering how big of a leap in comprehension there is between IJ and GR before I go out and buy a copy of GR
I'd say GR is significantly more difficult. You'll be fine though.
in terms of difficulty
ij < gr < ul
have fun
You should be OK. It is definitely more difficult than IJ but you dont really need to master the entire Western Canon for it. Just dig into it, take your time, and dont be afraid to look shit up on the internet if you aren't clear about something.
>>7765716
Read V. first and you'll be more or less ready.
>>7765720
This
>>7765716
Maybe.
>>7765730
Don't do this. Just read GR.
>>7765730
V.>GR
>>7765794
He's going to say that you don't "need" it and/or he hated V.
Which is pretty dumb because V. and GR are undeniably companion pieces (V.>V-2, etc.).
You're gonna need to be *very* familiar with physics and chemistry or you're not gonna know what the fuck
>>7765814
>V.>V-2
Oh shieet
So is GR more or less a sequel?
>>7765818
I have chem101 knowledge and no knowledge of physics.
>>7765814
>Which is pretty dumb because V. and GR are undeniably companion pieces
Keep going
>>7765827
become familiar with the physics as produced at the beginning of the twentieth century and how it applied to the military
>>7765814
>V.>V-2
Spoilers
>>7765716
You will most likely not understand everything, as it should be. GR is strange for a purpose, if you find yourself doubting the text look up a credible chapter summary or buy the companion, it will help a lot.
Fuck anyone who says you need physics knowledge or a reading companion or whatever. if you got through the headier or more tedious parts of IJ, you can handle GR. You probably didn't get everything in IJ and it'll be the same here, but wtf that's fine.
Just don't worry about it and dive in. It's a beautiful book. More difficult and stream-of-consciousness than IJ as a whole, but it's not a massive leap. You'll be fine.
I say this as a pretty entry-level reader who went the same IJ > GR route.
Read V. first
>>7766031
Read V. simply because V. is good, but this is absolutely not necessary.
>>7765720
Where would guys place The Tunnel in that ranking?
>>7766105
b-bump.
>>7766105
The Tunnel is on a level of its own. I--would--highly recommend--reading various supplementary materials to aid you in your--comprehension of Gass'--(and Hawke's)--dense prose. However, diving right in--and letting his rhythmic--even poetic--use of words consume you can be rewa--rding in itself.
--
>>7765886
>tfw your GR companion is misbound
>>7767685
i see a booger on ur page
>>7767472
I unironically agree
if you could stick with GR you should be fine even though it's harder.
remember that all these great books we talk about--IJ, GR, ulysses--are supposed to be funny. just enjoy them and don't worry about understanding them the first time. GR is even more fun on the second read, and there's no shortcut to that.
>>7767713
Mmm...brown one.
>>7767713
It was tobacco. I s-swear.
Is this charts placement of IJ good?
>>7769860
it's fine. no memes. people can nitpick on specifics but overall this chart is fine in terms of "accessibility"
>>7769860
Needs more Proust.
Aside from that people generally don´t get IJ.. which is fine, in some sense it´s a kirkegaardian point of the un-graspable, delivered in somewhat light prose. Also Either Or by kirkegaard should be on initiate or soldier.
If you haven´t figured out how Wallace solves the psycho-physical problem you should reread IJ, spoiler, it´s not the retard solution you find if you google infinite jest explained. The problem is explicated in geopolitical relations in the macro-cosmic sense, and solved through a character who bears a certain resemblance to a certain gland, Descartes were somewhat fascinated by.
>>7769890
low quality bait desu
>>7769894
Maybe. But putting swans way instead of the entire novel is literally retarded.
>>7770282
What's this from?
GR is like IJ, but actually good. And Ulysses is better than both (especially IJ).
>>7770282
>tfw you've already gotten your Dick from Pynchon
>>7765824
No. There are some characters in both though.
>>7769860
>mfw I read moby dick first
Picture disproved
>>7772408
I tried reading Moby Dick a couple years ago, couldn't do it
>>7769890
I think the idea was to imply In Search of Lost Time.
>>7765886
>people unironically read companion texts
what the heck, y'all.
>>7769860
>Moby-Dick on Knight
I just started it a few days ago and I think i'm around page 90 or something(they've just sailed out from port). Only read like maximum 10 books my entire life, 7 of them the last year.
Have I dun goofed?
Should I leave it for now and read any of the other books my brother gave me? Got Picture of Dorian Gray, Monte Cristo, Blood Meridian, The Master and Margarita, The Trial and Lolita.
Like I said, i'm a pleb.
>>7772934
no. keep reading Moby Dick.
it'll do ya good, anon.
>>7772934
though, monte cristo is fucking great, but rather long. I think if you can finish Moby Dick, monte cristo will be a great reward for you to look forward to. I would kill to have Moby Dick's purity as one of my first books. You might have moments of difficulty, and boredom, but it really is worth the trouble. I just finished it myself, and I had already read Ulysses. that Knight bs is meaningless.
GR isn't hard to follow and requires far less English and scientific understanding than it's ridiculous hype implies. The prose is dense, but it's just stream of consciousness at the end of the day, and just around a bit.
>>7772951
>>7772955
Alright i'll keep on with it then. Haven't really had any major problems with it, sure it has some difficult language at times but it is beautiful and the story so far have captivated me and the adventure it is surely building up for excites me.
Just that I've heard it is a somewhat difficult book and here it was placed in the "knight" category, spooked me a little. And desu /lit/ do give me somewhat of a splash of literary autism and I wonder at times..
>sure it is beautiful and I do like it so far BUT do I really get it?! I mean do truly understand it?! On a deeper level, on a more philosophical level? READ BETWEEN THE LINES YOU JACKASS!
>>7772979
don't be so hard on yourself, honestly. yeah, sure, you could be getting every bit of meaning and subtlety from the grout, and that's fine for later readings, but as a beginning reader, it's essential to be able to take in a whole book and stick with it. The thing is, if you can complete Moby Dick, you wouldn't have even the remotest of troubles reading practically anything else in the english language (obviously there are the memeworthy exceptions).
Just remember that it's meant to be enjoyed. Even the difficult stuff. people here will shit on the idea of enjoying a book, but to hell with that. Try to enjoy the story, even the infamous cetology chapters (that have nuggets of humor if you pay a bit of attention), try to trust the author in where he takes you. and don't worry about overthinking it. Melville was a genius, and he'll do the thinking for you. Just let him take your hand.
>>7771237
Interview with William Gibson about Neuromancer
>>7772995
nice advice
thank you anon
>>7773353
no problem, i'm no patrician anyway, but not everyone on this shit board is a complete prick.
>>7772789
Try again in a few months/years.
It's one of those books that changes when you come back to it.
