Is it just me or this book is massively overrated
just like no longer human, Waiting for Godot, catcher in the rye...
It's not just you, there are a lot of other retards who didn't understand it either.
I thought it was quite good. I don't know if it's overated or not, though.
I can't speak for anyone else, but I legitimately finished it yesterday, and I thought it was pretty great. Could you explain why you think it's overrated?
It's a great book, read it by mistake once, became one of my favourites.
>read it by mistake
I hate it when that happens
i see you read this pamphlet thoroughly
I hated this book. Also not a fan of catcher in the rye. I did read and like A Happy Death though, for what its worth
I read it and found it honestly a bit boring. Probably because the utter apathy towards all thing that characterized the main character clashed super hard with my own many interests and unquenchable curiosity. I wonder if thats what autism feels like.
If you read the english translation, yes.
user, I'm an autist that's trying to enjoy things. How do you do it?
>babby's first antisocial reading assignment
of course you didn't like it
exceedingly little is lost in translation with french
It's high school tier, but still worth reading.
the french isn't any better
I've read both versions. This is truth.
I read the first half of it then got bored
What happens after? Did he go on trial and was he like "why are you all so invested in this lol you're silly"? And they were all like YOU'RE A MONSTER FOR NOT CARING ABOUT REALITY (although he really shouldnt make that anyone else's problem tbqh)
Exactly. The whole draw is that it's simplistic and easy to read while conveying themes integral to the time's existentialist intellectual movement. Same with Metamorphosis
It's to gain a baseline understanding. It's simple for a reason
It's actually shit on more than it deserves on Yea Forums. It's aight at worst.
*"(-cathger-)"* no
This. Yea Forums constantly jerks off the same few books by popular american authors and none of them are pilisophical abstractions like the works of camus.
What's wrong with Beckett?
I just finished it and didn't really get it.
So the main character never really makes any decisions, he's just a passenger in life for the most part, but what's the point the author is trying to make? Society ostracizes him for being unfeeling (how his reaction to his mother's funeral is demonized in the trail), but what is the point Camus was trying to make with this?
I'm dumb and don't understand, please explain to me
life is le randum and we shouldn't care too much about it n stuff *inhales cigarette*
I liked it. I didn't relate to it in the slightest, but I liked it.
Camus is kinda hot, am I the only one who thinks this?
>Oh, but he killed someone. He should be punished. What's the message? He should have saved himself?
You're probably thinking in terms of the system too much...
It's okay. Shit "philosophy" and the MC is just an edgelord.
>We live in a society
Typical conservative autist fag.
>It's high school tier
desu I don't like this line of thinking. I'm not saying it's the best novel ever written but just because a high schooler can understand the surface level plot of a book doesn't mean that the book has nothing else to offer. People do this with Catcher in the Rye as well, they read it once in high school and think they've grown out of it when really it's a really solid novel that opens up to you in new and engaging ways as you grow older and wiser. Good novels give you something new every time you read them and don't stop being interesting past high school. In my class we read Crime and Punishment and while most of the class had a grasp on the plot and basic existential themes of the book, I'm sure that if they reread it now it would seem like an entirely different book to them.
Does the author brag about all the areas he has knowledge in besides lit so much that endnotes make up 1/5 of their 1000 page book? No? Is there a moral layed down in plain sight? No? Is it absurdely vulgar but you don't give a fuck because the author is considered a genius? No? Well, then it's shit by Yea Forumss standard.
But it is high-school tier. That doesn't mean that it's bad, or not worth revisiting, but it's inherently shallow.
I didn't like it at first, then the more I started thinking about it I ended up appreciating it more, but I'd still say it's by far his most overrated work and stuff like The Plague is much, much better so check that out if you care to see what else Camus has to offer.
>but it's inherently shallow.
You read Homer, Sophocles, Orwell, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and Shakespeare among many in high school, so is that inherently shallow as well?
No, just Camus and Orwell.
Aujourd'hui maman est morte. Ou peut-être hier.
I told everyone I loved it when I was 17 and still in a moody, edgy phase where I didn't care about anything. Nowadays I think the book is, at best, OK.
How are those two shallow exactly?
WHat book did you mistake it for?
>high school tier
This line always makes me regret my childhood spent readin YA novels, fuck shitty rural schools
Both L'Etranger and 1984 push simple, straightforward and universal messages. They're also shorter than most novels. They don't use a particularly advanced vocabulary either.
So, being short and and not being difficult to read makes them shallow in your eyes?
Pretty much, except having an obvious "moral" is another factor.
Why does something have to be lengthy and have complex writing in order to have depth?
>having an obvious"moral" is another factor
What do you mean by that, the author telling you how you should think and being overly blatant with the point of it all or?
Length allows for more interactions between characters, so a longer book is going to have more time to develop. Consider the amount of inter-character interactions in The Brothers K compared to Animal Farm.
An author who uses only simple words is either a brainlet or pandering to his audience.
>telling you how you should think and being overly blatant with the point of it all
Yes, exactly.
yea it's a touch overrated but still a very good book
pic related, however, is a masterpiece
spbp
You do know that Dostojewski stretched out his novels because he was payed by the pages?
Also, do you regard Harry Potter as "higher" tier literature than the old man and the sea?
HP is longer and uses more complex writing.
>tfw misattributed this to Sartre during my french baccalaureate
No wonder they shot down my paper.
waiting for godot was so fucking annoying to read. i kept wanting to beat those assholes with their own hats. i like the idea, but holy shit is it poorly done.
The point was less that he didn’t care but more that accepted the absurdity of life. He just doesn’t get bogged down in the mundane details of life that most do. Like, it doesn’t matter what time his mother died, it just matters that she’s dead.
He has this huge outburst later in the book that shows that he cares about things and actually has some strong feelings, but he accepts his lot in life.
I thought it was about genocide and the Gaza strip
>Consider the amount of inter-character interactions in The Brothers K compared to Animal Farm.
You're mixing apples and oranges here. Heart of Darkness is short, yet has immense depth. You equating depth with more complex writing and length is rather ignorant on your part and shows that you do not know what that term even means.