I don't get it
This is the best top x books list in existence.
A good range of things but no Reddit tier slop.
You can tell it's a trash list when the #1 book is a collection of ancient israeli myths
A collection of ancient israeli myths which are so good that 70% of world population dedicates their life to them.
There is clearly more to the Holy Bible than "myths", even if you are not religious.
Kek, the average person vouching for something is a strong indicator it is pleb nonsense. As if 70% of the world population is not third-worlders who cannot do basic algebra or philosophical reasoning.
By that logic Newton's "The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy" is the best book ever because 100% of people believe in gravity.
I never said the words "believe", I said that 70% of world population dedicates their lifes to those myths.
Do 100% of people dedicate their entire lifes to gravity?
We are discussing a top 100 book which is decided by majority of votes.
lol you can immediately tell who's behind it
>american adding token non-anglo authors to seem cultured
If youre only reading anglos youre a fucking pseud
Me neither. I've never read a single book.
most of those are written by the bourgeois lol, the state of this board, jsut good enough to consume the slop
is this what intellectual resentment does to you?
It's sad how these commies just have hate for the world and the beauty in it. Everything beautiful is bourgeois to these people because true art is expensive, it requires time, effort and money. Because a rich guy built a botanical garden it ought to be brought down, or he has enough time on his hands to write books all day we ought to ban his works. This is why the places these people are in charge of lose all color and life.
I can't read, i only buy books based on the covers.
I've read a few books from that list and personally I don't think they're that great honestly. The Iliad and odyssey are okay and all that, but, I don't know, there's a lot of other books that I prefer. The Bible is stupid. The Stranger is pointless. The Republic is retarded, The Catcher in the Rye is just not a good book nor entertaining. James Joyce in general is just not a good writer. Hemingway is mid. Finnegan's wake is literally unreadable. Meditations is acceptable, but still obviously not something that belongs on a list like this ideally. Same with sidhartha. Spinoza's ethics doesn't belong on there either, it's like AI generated philosophy. Honestly this whole list feels like it came from an edgy teen that's trying to impress some imaginary literature professor in their mind by listing out famous books that they happened to have heard about
>this whole list feels like it came from an edgy teen that's trying to impress some imaginary literature professor in their mind by listing out famous books that they happened to have heard about
That is such a stupid argument and reeks of insecurity. So ideally your perfect list of the best 100 books would exclude any and all classics because after all, classics impress imaginary literature professors?
No one's favorite book is the fucking Iliad. If you read the OP image, you'll see it says LULZ posters were asked to submit 5 of their favorite books. And evidently, none of them did, they all just said names of books that would make them look intellectual and well read, despite the fact they don't really like them.
I mean for fucks sake, the Divine Comedy? I understand putting the Divine Comedy in a top 100 of "most influential books" but do you really fucking think the majority of readers would place it amongst their top 5 most enjoyable reads?
the iliad is fucking amazing, why wouldn't it be someone's favourite?
especially if, as i suspect is the case with a lot of this board, it's one of the first serious books you've read. shit is amazing and it will blow people's minds and it will become their favourite thing
Am I retarded or what? I'm rereading and it's a fucking long tug war between the two sides. Did it really need to be this long?
>being 'enjoyable' is the sole quality required to make a book your favourite
Hedonistic bugman thinking. Fucking hylic
Literally yes you fucking retard
Imagine how this would sound about literally anything else
>"tasting good" is the sole quality required to make a dish your favourite
Yes? If "tasting good" was the only requirement, everyone's favorite food would be icecream or salt and sugar filled fast food that's designed in a lab to be as addictive as possible. A nutritious homemade meal is far less stimulating on the brain, but much more nourishing and filling so it wouldn't be surprising if it was someone's favorite meal over junk food that technically tastes better. Same with classic literature.
>>Yes? If "tasting good" was the only requirement, everyone's favorite food would be icecream or salt and sugar filled fast food that's designed in a lab to be as addictive as possible.
which is exactly the case
>my favourite hobby is injecting heroin because it makes me feel SO GOOD and I enjoy it SO MUCH!
Your food analogy is fucking retarded. Whether or not something 'tastes good' is dependent on your nutritional circumstances. Cheesecake is an immediately gratifying food with plenty of fat and sugar to make your brain happy in the short term, but if I make you eat it for a week straight you probably won't like the taste any more, and you probably won't feel good afterwards. When someone picks a favourite meal, they do it because it means something to them and they feel a sense of identification with it, not because of something as basic as 'tasting good'. Maybe it reminds them of their parent who made it for them before passing away, or maybe it represents a lifestyle that appeals to them. Imagine deciding that your favourite film is a porno, just because in the moment of jizzing all over your torso you were 'enjoying yourself' so much better than you would watching any thoughtfully-made piece of work out there. After all, who wants to feel yucky, complex feelings like melancholy or yearning when we could be 'enjoying ourselves' all the time? You've reduced your entire sense of identity to being a dopamine receptor. Pathetic.
Your mind is fucking rotten. If you ask someone what their favorite food is and they say "steak" it's not because of the stupid made-up nonsense you said, it's because they fucking like eating steak.
When you ask someone what their "favorite" thing is, they're going to tell you the thing they enjoy most. Your pseudointellectual drivel i complete horseshit.
No, they would probably say steak because it's seen as an expensive high-status food, or because of its connotations of manliness, or because they think of it as a health food, or because they're a bodybuilder and like the protein etc etc. Taste would obviously factor into this as well (nobody will pick something that tastes awful), but the idea that everything you can experience in life can be reduced to a one-dimensional scale of 'enjoyment', from which you simply pick the most 'enjoyable' options available, is just retarded. This goes especially for abstract media such as literature and music. If you think like this you are practically an animal
No, if you ask someone what their favorite is they will say what they enjoy. I understand this is difficult for you to comprehend because you like pretending there has to be a deeper meaning to everything but that's not how it works at all. You assuming that the reason would say steak is their favorite food is because of a "connotation of manliness" is downright fucking psychotic.
Sure, somebody might say their favorite food is a steak because of you aforementioned reasons, but that wouldn't ACTUALLY be their favorite food, now would it? Their favorite food is the food they enjoy the most, and if that happens to be steak, then it's steak.
>Your favourite food is the food you enjoy the most, and if you say your favourite food is something else than that then you're just lying because it is an axiom that I, Anon, am correct
By the way, food is an extreme example because there is very little symbolic component to it, therefore the pure 'enjoyment' component plays a much a larger role for favourite food choice when compared to other forms of experience. Literature is almost entirely symbolic, so aside from the immediate aesthetic appeal of the font or something like that you can't relate it to something as elementary as 'tasting good'. For this reason the argument is doubly retarded.
You just don't get it. The point is that "enjoyment" is not an objective scale. I enjoy playing video games, but if I play a game for 10 hours a day, I don't feel good about myself. I don't enjoy working out very much, the activity itself is taxing and straining on the body, but after I'm done, I feel great and am very glad that I did it. Same thing can apply to literature. You might not love every second of a more challenging book that you read and there might be frustrations and parts that are boring, but after you're done it may just have been a transformative experience that a lighter, on the surface more enjoyable book wouldn't have given you in the end.
Obviously everyone’s taste is different but every time an anon drops “you only read the classics to look smart”, they never list books that people are “supposed” to like. It seems like projection to me, where because an anon doesn’t like or doesn’t get a book, he assumes no one does. Maybe a hint of an inferiority complex too
here's your (you)
This nigga obviously hasn't read the dead, I spit on your faggof face bitch pussy
You literally skipped over the good ones and mention the ones that “cover the bases”.
Bang on. Delusional LULZizens will try to bully you but they won't be able to provide arguments against you. I did like the Stranger though.
what does this say about me
Read the Russians and Germans
>no harry potter
2018 was better.
Shit, just like LULZ canon, form your own opinions and read your country literature instead of American trash (Gene Wolfe in a top 100 books kek)
most of these arent american
don't read these
If you swap Ulysses for 2666 you've got a solid set of maximalist novels that are actually good, unfortunately Ulysses is cucked (literally and figuratively)
God what a shitty thread with shitty responses and dogshit retarded posters. This board is absolutely and irredeemably fucked
>one hundred years of solitude
Its so fucking over and always has been.
Why does LULZ like Mishima and Jap authors so much?
LULZ loves the Japs, simple as.
>not rayciss just loik em'
there's no musil's 'man without qualities', the book that explores the whole modern condition as the lost of unity, community and praxis, all things that chudcels complnstondk
in about every day
The Bible at number one??? Moby Dick over Brothers Karamazov? Mein Kampf? No Critique of Pure Reason? Also the Idiot is > than Steppenwolf by at least 20 spots.
>industrial society and its future
When the Bible's number 1 you just KNOW LULZ's been mindbroken by Reddit
Also, circlejerking on e-boita doesn't make you cool anons, you're still virgins
The Bible at least make sense. A considerable number of people on LULZ are christian so it makes sense they'd put it on their top 5 favorite books even though it actually sucks dick and is written by retarded middle eastern goatfuckers.
I hate the bible cause I saw a moral orel episode where they said christianity is wrong
Lmao muhammeds on suicide watch
Good list, pretty stupid order
I have maybe 20-30 other books that I've read partially or it was 20 years ago so I can't mark them as read in clear conscience.
I've read 23 of them
next on my list are e-boita, Infinite Jest, The Magic Mountain, Steppenwolf, and Book of the New Sun
which one should I do first?
Magic mountain, it’s amazing.
This chart isn’t a great indicator of LULZ tastes. Such a list is lowest common denominator. Many people have favorite books that don’t make this list. None of my votes did and I found out the hard way it’s better to pad more popular books’ votes than vote for books that have little chance of making the cut. Look at favorites threads and that is a better indicator. Also keep in mind that most anons here are like 20 years old. They simply can’t have read that many books and since LULZ‘s focus is “the classics”, those 20 year olds have a lot of overlap in what they read
Too much fiction, not enough history and memoirs. I don't see any except Mein Kampft and Storm of Steel. I'd have the True History of the Conquest of New Spain near the top, along with Purchas His Pilgrims. High Tartary should replace The Tartar Steppe. How I Found Livingstone in Central Africa should replace Heart of Darkness.
Also, My Sixty Years on the Plains or several other western memoirs could replace Blood Meridian, and Herodotus needs to be on there.
I don’t think you realize how this list is formulated. If you are perplexed why the books you brought up aren’t on the list you are a space cadet
None of the books I listed are obscure. The results are the way they are because LULZ thinks this is a board for literary fiction.
You misunderstand. Try to use your thinker. How is the chart formulated? Will popular books get more votes than less popular books?
PS. The backbone of LULZ has always been literary fiction until recent years
You could go make the same non-point to everyone in the thread who has suggested that they prefer a book which isn't on the list, or don't like some of the books on the list, so go bother one of them instead of inflicting your tedious personality on me.
“Enjoyment” can take on many forms when reading a book so such a broad word means nothing. Enjoy as far as turn your mind off and have fun? Enjoy as in use your mind and learn? Enjoy as gain spirituality? Enjoy as relate to themes/characters/motifs? Enjoy as a combination of some of the above?
>Those who seek pleasure can buy a vibrator, but art, literature, and music do not have the purpose of giving pleasure to people
>I don't get it
It's an outcome of democracy.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save name for the next time I post.