3 reactions
At what point can you say, now I have a good overview of literature?
Before diving deep into individual authors, my plan is to read very widely, i.e. one single book from every important author.
The goal is to get a good overview of literature before focusing on single authors.
So far I've read ~150 literary writers. But what should be my target number to get a good overview? 200? 500? 1000? More?
At what point do the authors start to overlap too much?
Is Trollope really that different from Dickens so that he becomes a must-read, even if you are already familiar with Dickens?
Do you need to read all Brontë sisters or are they so similar that one is enough?
I've read Philip Roth. Is it now recommended to read John Updike, Saul Bellow and Martin Amis too? Or is the difference negligible?
There is however a noticeable difference between Sebald and Thomas Bernhard, so I guess both must be read?! The same goes for McCarthy and Faulkner. Or Borges and Calvino. Or Sartre and Camus. Or Musil and Broch.
But you can play this game forever and keep piling on authors, there will always be a tiny difference between any two authors, just like every human has a different character and upbringing.
If we define some arbitrarily broad categories of possible styles, stories and backgrounds of the authors, then there must come a point of diminishing returns (where the overlaps become too noticeable).
At what point can you say, now I have a good overview of literature?
#entertainment
source
Before diving deep into individual authors, my plan is to read very widely, i.e. one single book from every important author.
The goal is to get a good overview of literature before focusing on single authors.
So far I've read ~150 literary writers. But what should be my target number to get a good overview? 200? 500? 1000? More?
At what point do the authors start to overlap too much?
Is Trollope really that different from Dickens so that he becomes a must-read, even if you are already familiar with Dickens?
Do you need to read all Brontë sisters or are they so similar that one is enough?
I've read Philip Roth. Is it now recommended to read John Updike, Saul Bellow and Martin Amis too? Or is the difference negligible?
There is however a noticeable difference between Sebald and Thomas Bernhard, so I guess both must be read?! The same goes for McCarthy and Faulkner. Or Borges and Calvino. Or Sartre and Camus. Or Musil and Broch.
But you can play this game forever and keep piling on authors, there will always be a tiny difference between any two authors, just like every human has a different character and upbringing.
If we define some arbitrarily broad categories of possible styles, stories and backgrounds of the authors, then there must come a point of diminishing returns (where the overlaps become too noticeable).
At what point can you say, now I have a good overview of literature?
#entertainment
source
| 8,000 mlx | |
| 7 | |
| 3 |