Has anyone ever actually completed the Reddit Meme Trilogy? I got through a few pages of Ready Player One and couldn't stomach any more. And I know there's no way I could get through books described as "Ready Player One but in World War 2" and "Ready Player One but in space" so I was just curious if anyone's actually gotten through them all.
I don’t even like Pynchon, but you’re really trying too hard with this incessant hate train.
>>25197720Calling Project Hail Mary "reddit" isn't really accurate. It is liked by reddit, but it's not like reddit. Weir's books in general aren't like most fiction you'll read because they aren't centered around a human conflict. They're much more man vs nature type stories, just in a high tech environment.
I thumbed through them, realized pop culture reference filled books weren't really my thing, and moved on. Found a nice used copy of The Cannibal the other day which has treated me great.
>>25197735lol kys
>>25197735It’s one of the few books I’d argue is even more reddit than it’s already reddit fanbase
>>25197741>The Cannibaldamn, great novel. never expected it to be referenced in a thread like this.
>>25197944Why not?
>>25197720I never finished ready player one but when I read it I thought the idea was that the protagonist was super jaded from living in a dystopian hellscape not that we were supposed to take his pessimistic outlook seriously.
>>25197954because it's a thread about the "reddit meme trilogy" and included GR with two shit books (I assume they are, never read them)
>>251977202/100/100/10
>>25198247T to the R to the VKE boom
I think these will go nicely alongside my books about how to understand women.
>>25197720>Has anyone ever actually completed the Reddit Meme Trilogy?I have. Moby-Dick is great, I love it. I was filtered by Ulysses, but I admire its structure. Anna Karenina I don't see the appeal, it's just a worse version of Madame Bovary.
>>25198286Is Ulysses just part of every literary meme trilogy?
>>25198293>is ulysses a meme?Duh
>>25198299It’s a pretty well written meme though.Checked
>>25198301It's my favourite book, but it is a gigantic meme
>>25198305It was mine until I read paradise lost but nothing wrong with second place, with Gargantua and Pantagruel just behind that, pretty comfy placing, eh?
>>25198311>Gargantua and PantagruelShiet, I've gots to get around to reading that, considering how much I love Ulysses and GR. I need to read more satires in general.
>>25197720Pynchon isn't reddit, and no one gets pynchon on reddit you Buffon. They just like the sex scenes and think it's le cool
>>25198345I’m guessing with reddit they’re more concerned about the plot than anything.
>>25198345>They just like the sex scenesWoah... they're just like me... GR is the only book I ever wanked it to.
>>25198356It did give me a hard on from time to time.But I abstained from busting
>>25198366>It did give me a hard on from time to timeI'm currently reading the wild boys by burroughs and I was rock hard through all the gay shit, which perturbed me since I am not gay or anythingI ended up having a wet dream about fucking a tourist guide I met in Indonesia last year though so I guess subconsciously at least I am straight as an arrow, but I do wonder why that novel is titillating like that to me
>>25197735PHM is quintessentially reddit. It has the same reddit humor that The Martian did and it’s unclear if the retard author even has he ability to write anything else.
I haven’t read any of them. Never will. I don’t read reddit books.
>oh my science: the books
>>25197720>>25197732fpbp - I don't understand 4chin's bizarre preoccupation with what reddit allegedly likes/doesn't like.
>>25199427It's so weird. Like, I haven't read those books in the op because I don't read books the exemplify the qualities usually associated with reddit, but I couldn't care less whether they're popular or not on reddit... and I would never make a thread or constantly post about them.
add duneon crawler carl to this image plz
>>25199687But then it wouldn't be a trilogy...?
>>25198356yukyukyuk in sure ol’ Thomas was busting nuts left and right while writing it.
>>25200415If you seriously think that then you have no understanding at all of Pynchon or his works. I'm so sick of you faggots hating on him. Can't you genreslop retards stick to your containment threads?
>>25200448He was a retarded junkie.
>>25200448I don’t even hate him, retard. It’s called poking fun. And if you want to cope that pinecone detractors only read genreslop, fine, but I swear some of you faggots take him far too seriously. Stop acting like he’s the most profound writer in the history of mankind. He’s good, I thought GR was great, one of the most unique things I’ve read; hell maybe even the best post war novel I’ve ever read. Just chill out for one minute.
>>25200526cry harder
>>25200448"Some of us have more Backbone, I suppose....""A bodily Part too often undistinguish'd," Dixon replies, "from a Ram-Rod up the Arse."
>>25200718So you can’t say anything intellectual about Pynchon? Pynched. It’s ok though. He’s a hard writer to understand. Enjoy your genre fiction.
>>25198391>I am not gayMmm hmmm
>>25197720My best friend absolutely loves Ready Player One but he also came from an abusive family that kept him under a rock for the most part. He's Gen X and had no clue who Nirvana were until he escaped their clutches which was about 10 years ago.
>>25200808>So you can’t say anything intellectual about Pynchon?Dude, you're not going to find anything like that here. This place is only good for trolling. A few days ago there was a Pynchon thread and someone said his entire thesis to understanding Pynchon was that Pynchon doesn't write novels.Then someone else replied with a quote from Pynchon where he said he had just published a novel. So yeah.
>>25200922>A few days ago there was a Pynchon thread and someone said his entire thesis to understanding Pynchon was that Pynchon doesn't write novels.Eh?
>>25200922Let us look at a few of the unclassified books lying on the boundary of "non-fiction" and "literature". Is Tristram Shandy a novel? Nearly everyone would say yes, in spite of its easygoing disregard of "story values." Is Gulliver's Travels a novel? Here most would demur, including the Dewey decimal system, which puts it under "Satire and Humor" But surely everyone would call it fiction, and if it is fiction, a distinction appears between fiction as a genus and the novel as a species of that genus. Shifting the ground to fiction, then, is Sartor Resartus fiction? If not, why not? If it is, is The Anatomy of Melancholy fiction? Is it a literary form or only a work of "non-fiction" written with "style"? Is Sorrow's Lavengro fiction? Everyman's Library says yes; the World's Classics puts it under "Travel and Topography."The literary historian who identifies fiction with the novel is greatly embarrassed by the length of time that the world managed to get along without the novel, and until he reaches his great deliverance in Defoe, his perspective is intolerably cramped. He is compelled to reduce Tudor fiction to a series of tentative essays in the novel form, which works well enough for Deloney but makes non sense of Sidney. He postulates a great fictional gap in the seventeenth century which exactly covers the golden age of rhetorical prose. He finally discovers that the word novel, which up to about 1900 was still the name of a more or less recognizable form, has since expanded into a catchall term which can be applied to practically any prose book that is not "on" something. Clearly, this novel-centered view of prose fiction is a Ptolemaic perspective which is now too complicated to be any longer workable, and some more relative and Copernican view must take its place.
>>25201077The essential difference between novel and romance lies in the conception of characterization. The romancer does not attempt to create "real people" so much as stylized figures which expand into psychological archetypes. It is in the romance that we find Jung's libido, anima, and shadow reflected in the hero, heroine, and villain respectively. That is why the romance so often radiates a glow of subjective intensity that the novel lacks, and why a suggestion of allegory is constantly creeping in around its fringes. Certain elements of character are released in the romance which make it naturally a more revolutionary form than the novel The novelist deals with personality, with characters wearing their personcte or social masks. He needs the framework of a stable society, and many of our best novelists have been conventional to the verge of fussiness. The romancer deals with individuality, with characters in vacuo idealized by revery, and, however conservative he may be, something nihilistic and untamable is likely to keep breaking out of his pages.The prose romance, then, is an independent form of fiction to be distinguished from the novel and extracted from the miscellaneous heap of prose works now covered by that term. Even in the other heap known as short stories one can isolate the tale form used by Poe, which bears the same relation to the full romance that the stories of Chekhov or {Catherine Mansfield do to the novel. "Pure" examples of either form are never found; there is hardly any modern romance that could not be made out to be a novel, and vice versa. The forms of prose fiction are mixed, like racial strains in human beings, not separable like the sexes. In fact the popular demand in fiction is always for a mixed form, a romantic novel just romantic enough for the reader to project his libido on the hero and his anima on the heroine, and just novel enough to keep these projections in a familiar world. It may be asked, therefore, what is the use of making the above distinction, especially when, though undeveloped in criticism, it is by no means unrealized. It is no surprise to hear that Trollope wrote novels and William Morris romances.
>>25201081We remarked earlier that most people would call Gulliver's Travels fiction but not a novel. It must then be another form of fiction, as it certainly has a form, and we feel that we are turning from the novel to this form, whatever it is, when we turn from Rousseau's Emile to Voltaire's Candide, or from Butler's The Way of All Flesh to the Erewhon books, or from Huxley's Point Counterpoint to Brave New World. The form thus has its own traditions, and, as the examples of Butler and Huxley show, has preserved some integrity even under the ascendancy of the novel. Its existence is easy enough to demonstrate, and no one will challenge the statement that the literary ancestry of Gulliver's Travels and Candide runs through Rabelais and Erasmus to Lucian. But while much has been said about the style and thought of Rabelais, Swift, and Voltaire, very little has been made of them as craftsmen working in a specific medium, a point no one dealing with a novelist would ignore. Another great writer in this tradition, Huxley's master Peacock, has fared even worse, for, his form not being understood, a general impression has grown up that his status in the development of prose fiction is that of a slapdash eccentric. Actually, he is as exquisite and precise an artist in his medium as Jane Austen is in hers.
>>25197720What does reddit meme trilogy even mean? Maybe read a book and form your own opinion about it and not just quawk other people’s opinions.
>>25200922>his entire thesis to understanding Pynchon was that Pynchon doesn't write novels>a quote from Pynchon where he said he had just published a novelLol, this is the level we’re at. I can’t believe prople are so bad at literature here.
>>25201132Shoddy scholarship is everywhere. Melville and Hawthorne were quite clear that they wrote romances, not novels, yet Moby-Dick and the House of the Seven Gables are still referred to as novels
>>25197720Troons thought they could make threads conflating their interracial porn obsession with gravity's rainbow without tainting it, lol. Well now it's reddit
