Just read it. It sucked. What am I missing?
>>24972789t. Mr. Collins
I'm tolerably not prevailed on to read this book by this thread
>>24972789care to elaborate?
>>24972840In a word, it's over-wrought. Too much flowery description that takes you out of the story. It feels more like a documentary, than a love story, with the way everything is narrated.
>>24972902Nabokov felt the same way and afterwards said he didn't think women could write. Then he read Mansfield Park
>>24972789>What am I missing?A vagina
>>24972902couldn’t the same charge he made against the second homeric epic? in more ways than one? the lively and sometimes irreverent way the odyssey plays with iliad material suggests a poetic culture that knew the older stories well and enjoyed reworking them: using homer’s tragic lines about the water that achilles heated for washing patroclus’ corpse to describe odysseus’ comfortable warm bath when he got safe home to ithaca; and putting hector’s touching farewell speech to andromache into young telemachus’ mouth when he forbade his mother penelope to interfere in male affairs.charlotte bronte’s the spell is similarly strewn with mock-heroic tags.
>>24972793fpbp>>24972902If anything, I never saw Austen as "too flowery" but I understand the documentary point. Keep in mind that Austen is, in some form, commenting on the social mores of the day and the mild absurdity of it all.
>>24972789This >>24972931Like every book written by a woman, it's about the author's vagina. Pride and Prejudice specifically is an expression of Jane Austen's repressed sexuality and sexual frustration. She was a femcel seething that nobody would marry and fuck her in the only way that was appropriate for her time. You don't understand because you don't have a burning desire to get fucked in your cunt.
>>24972940The Odyssey wasn't written by Homer, the Odyssey was written by a woman.
>>24972803As if you would know how to
>>24973026Impossible, vaginas have only a cursory, motivational role in the narrative.
Try the one with Zombies. That might be more your speed.
>>24972789A soul
>>24973151hole =/= soul
>>24973156Girls have 3 holes, while you have one. Explains your gaping asshole faggot
>>24973175Ironic considering yours was just blown out by two words.
>>24972789
>>24972902>In a word, it's over-wroughtOh look: another soulless bugman who wants literature to be as prosaic as possible. What makes this even more egregious is that PaP is light literature
>>24972789An attention span.Stick to comics, zoomer.
>you don't like femcel cliterature? heh you must be retarded or somethingThe absolute state of simping. Jane Austen is not going to fuck you.
A soul
>>24972789>What am I missing?Nothing. It's empty soulless scribbles, waste of time, ink and paper. One of the most pointless books ever written, a literary equivalent of a celebrity reality TV show.
>can't enjoy slice of lifeno soul, may as well commit sudoku
>>24972931/Thread
>>24973564You don't get enough life slices in real life, you goddamn animal? If you want to feel life, you can just leave the room and touch grass for once
>>24972789It's a cozy respite from the terrors of modern civilization.
>>24972789If you don't like Victorian-era tongue-in-cheek humour, you're not going to like Austen. Her books are only enjoyable if you understand the social conventions of her time and how she plays with those in her books.
>>24972902In other words, you don't want realism, you don't want literary artistry, you want a retarded adventure novel centred around the plot.
>>24973583NTA but the point is to capture life in art. If you had any aesthetic sensitivity in you at all you would appreciate the difficulty and beauty of such a thing.
it's my least fav of hers ive read id rank:mansfield parkpersuasionsense and sensibilityemmapride and prejudice>>24973002>If anything, I never saw Austen as "too flowery"because she literally isn't, she gets away with little setting descriptions sometimes imo, sometimes the characters feel a bit floaty esp in P&P
>>24974380>you want a retarded adventure novel centred around the plotSounds based, any recs?
>>24974412infinite jest
>>24974380>P&P>literary artistry
>>24974384>NTA but the point is to capture life in art.No, the point is to capture meaningful manifestations of life in art. While P&P is as shallow, as the outlook of its characters, which are unsurprisingly reflective of the shallow soulless socialite nature of the author.
>>24974432You have a comic book notion of what a 'meaningful manifestation of life' is. When succeeded at, and which is no easy thing, the literary capturing of life justifies itself. As Walter Scott remarked, Austen renders ordinary common place things interesting. And that is the nature of art. Whenever nature is successfully mimicked she will be the source of aesthetic pleasure. If you could transcribe 'shallow' life as well as Austen then we would all be reading you, but you cannot.
>>24974454No, you simply have a celebirty reality TV notion of what life is.>Austen renders ordinary common place things interestingShe does not, at least outside of the soulless socialite circles.>but you cannotAww, this is adorable, did I struck a nerve, you little twat? Is it anger reducing your intelligence, or are you genuinely this dull, quite fittingly with the Austen's prose in fact, in that you are incapable of comprehending the difference between shallow life and a shallow outlook of the author? A real author is able to produce brilliant literature out of describing the most shallow drag of existence. While Austen relishes in this mind-searing socialite filth like a pig in a puddle of dirt and excrement.
>>24974473Anon, calm down. All you've done is take my description of literary quality and say 'Austen didn't do that'. Okay man, that's your opinion, no need to fluff your post up trying to seem like you've got more to say. At the end of the day you just don't appreciate literary artistry, and that's fine, not everyone has the aesthetic refinement to do so.
>>24974483>literary artistryThat's your opinion, no need to fluff your post up.
>>24974483What's the matter, little twat? Upset that your braindead presuppositions about this braindead piece of garbage "literature" aren't being accepted unquestioningly? At the end of the day, you're a subhuman little twat that has convinced herself that there's literary artistry in a XIX century equivalent of reality TV. Thankfully, not everyone has the eroded cerebral capacity to do so.
>>24974358regency era you troglodyte
>>24972793
>grokinho seething ITTkek you are brown
>>24972789a sense of humour?
>>24974473NTA but you seem like the triggered one here
>>24974497Yep, you're definitely triggered
>>24974390Emma filtered me so fucking hard. What even is the point?The penguin version I have literally has a prologue that says "don't try to read all of this in one go, it is boring and it sucks"
>>24974473>>24974497This is why /lit/ is dead. Pride and Prejudice is far from a "deep" work of literature (in fact, it was rightly considered light literature at the time), but it does a great job at depicting societal norms around courtship at the time. It's really not that serious and you sound absolutely unhinged to be seething at a slice of life book
>>24975722>you sound absolutely unhinged to be seething at a slice of life bookYou sounds like reddit faggots that defend modern h*lywood smearing their wilful subhuman mugs with corporate capeshit on an annual basis "because it's just entertainment bro chillax it's fun". Eat shit and kill yourself, soulless subhuman golem.
>>24976034Ah, makes sense now. You're a /pol/tard.back to your containment board lil pup >>>/pol/
>>24976034Ah, makes sense now. You're a butthurt capeshit subhuman.Back to your containment paddock, pig twat: reddit.com
>>24976034
>>24976584 is for >>24976536 subhuman, obviously.>>24976764Niggers and other faggots are the main audience of capeshit, animeshit and reality TV, especially the celeb one. Anyone who likes P&P is a philosophical nigger.
