/lit/ - Literature

At what rate of reading does one stop being capable of actually absorbing anything about what they read? I've hread of people who read a vook every week, but that seems just racing to fill a self imposed quota to flex on others while retaining nothing about it

How do you feel about reading two books concurrently? I am currently doing it for the first time and it feels fine given that the two books are very different ('Anna Karenina' and 'Goebbels: Mastermind of the Third Reich'). After becoming mentally fatigued upon reading one of these, I can take a short break and have a sense of renewed energy while reading the other book.

I suspect that reading two pieces of literature which share more in common would create confusion?

>>21588824
If you know, you know

Is DeLillo overrated, or am I just getting filtered?
His concepts seem to be pretty half-baked and his satire doesn't hit the mark. Hitl0r/ Elvis studies? What is that parodying, and who cares? A man riding in a limo is the world in microcosm? Sound like a worse implementation of the concept behind Ulysses.

>>21518930
If you know you know

>>20170545
>i usually am reading 2 books at once
Like, simultaneously?

>>19659406

>>19030390
>>19029765

>>18801094
>pic related
is this you?

no honestly, how can you read more than one book at once?

>>18779874
just looking to litmaxx my friend

of course

Hey, /lit/.
Just learned how to read words in order. Give me the quintessential's of literature. Also, I'd like to know your personal favorite. Thanks.

>>18014020
No. It's an absolute waste of time.

I can do a bunch of other things that are not only more enjoyable, but also more useful to me in my life.

Imagine literally spending years of your life for a board game. Real NPC behavior there.

And as much as people want to think that it does. Chess does not make you smarter, at all. This has been proven in many studies.

If you're going into chess with the hope it will make you more intelligent, don't bother.

But then again, don't bother at all. It's a waste of time.

Life's too short to read secondary literature; just use Wikipedia.

>>17571627
Small is Beautiful by E.F. Schumaker is the essential sustainable living book. Forget any robber barron faggot that got rich off of excessive living telling us to stop. That's literal hypocrisy right there

>>17460844
The Beginning of Western Science by David Lindberg is pretty good, as.is Peter Galison's Einstein's Clocks, Poincaré's Maps. Against Method by Feyeband is pretty much a case study of how Galileo's experiment wasn't really all that scientific in nature since he really didn't follow the scientific method meanwhile the Church had wrong beliefs about the orbit of the planets and the like, but were more scientific but still relevant. Same with Quantum Philosophy by Omnès.


>>17462719
That's not bad either

What does /lit/ think about the following authors:

>Foucault
>Carlyle
>Rousseau
>Wollstonecraft
>Peirce
>William James
>Pascal
>Montesquieu
>Tocqueville
>Kuhn

I'm the most dangerous kind of man there is. A brother who's both booksmart and streetsmart.

>>16641911

If you were to read two books at the same time (one fiction, other non-fiction, for example), how would you divide the time between them?

>>16386920
Same. I saw the Ramayana as how people should idealistically act according to their Dharma, while the Greek Tragedies is about how people realistically act, positive attributes but also flaws. Aristotle mentions the epics many times in his "Poetics" talking about how the characters are good people who a realistic hubris like wrath or lust.