How to Read a Novel
adjacentpossible.substack.com
How to Read a Novel
1–10 of 64 posts
Re: How to Read a Novel
#2[dead]
Re: How to Read a Novel
#3[deleted]
Re: How to Read a Novel
#4> But my admiration for Middlemarch and Bleak House goes beyond their portrayal of the psychological interiority of their characters. [...] Both novels succeed at something else: they invite us to think across multiple scales of experience—and to make causal and associative connections between those different layers.
To toss another into the ring, I can't think of any novel I've read that could rival The Brothers Karamazov in this regard. Possibly East of Eden, but as great as it is it plumbs nowhere near the moral and psychological depths of Dostoevsky.
Re: How to Read a Novel
#5the single takeaway from this book ad of a post: the CEO of Stripe claims to have read 10 novels/yr. Which is either a boast of how much free time he has or how he skimmed through some major novels. Third option: a lie.
Re: How to Read a Novel
#6> But my admiration for Middlemarch and Bleak House goes beyond their portrayal of the psychological interiority of their characters. [...] Both novels succeed at something else: they invite us to think across multiple scales of experience—and to make causal and associative connections between those different layers. To toss another into the ring, I can't think of any novel I've read that could rival The Brothers Kar…
Lol I always laugh when I see people talk up Dostoevsky and any 19th century writer. It's 2025 now and literature has improved in depth and characterization as much as any other field.
Re: How to Read a Novel
#7the single takeaway from this book ad of a post: the CEO of Stripe claims to have read 10 novels/yr. Which is either a boast of how much free time he has or how he skimmed through some major novels. Third option: a lie.
I did 30 novels a year in highschool, it's nothing crazy. Though tbf kids do have more free time than working adults, I think it would really only drop if you become parents though.
Re: How to Read a Novel
#8> But my admiration for Middlemarch and Bleak House goes beyond their portrayal of the psychological interiority of their characters. [...] Both novels succeed at something else: they invite us to think across multiple scales of experience—and to make causal and associative connections between those different layers. To toss another into the ring, I can't think of any novel I've read that could rival The Brothers Kar…
Lol I always laugh when I see people talk up Dostoevsky and any 19th century writer. It's 2025 now and literature has improved in depth and characterization as much as any other field.
Weird take - how exactly could literature improve "in depth and characterization"? What new "technology" has been made available to authors that enables them to create deeper characters?
Re: How to Read a Novel
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lol I always laugh when I see people talk up Dostoevsky and any 19th century writer. It's 2025 now and literature has improved in depth and characterization as much as any other field.
Weird take - how exactly could literature improve "in depth and characterization"? What new "technology" has been made available to authors that enables them to create deeper characters?
Not OP, but breadth and depth of understanding about psychology have improved dramatically and exposure to diverse viewpoints thanks to hyper connectedness likely make it possible to go deeper.
Re: How to Read a Novel
#10> But my admiration for Middlemarch and Bleak House goes beyond their portrayal of the psychological interiority of their characters. [...] Both novels succeed at something else: they invite us to think across multiple scales of experience—and to make causal and associative connections between those different layers. To toss another into the ring, I can't think of any novel I've read that could rival The Brothers Kar…
Lol I always laugh when I see people talk up Dostoevsky and any 19th century writer. It's 2025 now and literature has improved in depth and characterization as much as any other field.
I don't like Dostoevsky but this is an insane take. Art doesn't just "get better" over time and depth and characterisation isn't everything either. Homer's Odyssey is still an incredible and fulfilling read. Literature is not some kind of engineering discipline though a lot of new writers seem to be almost like analytic philosophers in that they think newer = better while having some kind of sterile and formalistic understanding of art