Smart Books. . When you read some smart books expectation. Read 1984, Brave New World and A Clockwork Orange and you'll wish you could set the world on fire. expectations Reality
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (114)
[ 114 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
User avatar #1 - whiplasher
Reply +92 123456789123345869
(09/05/2013) [-]
Read 1984, Brave New World and A Clockwork Orange and you'll wish you could set the world on fire.
#2 to #1 - anon id: 03a82205
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/05/2013) [-]
I would also recommend Fourth Realm trilogy by John Twelve Hawks.
User avatar #3 to #1 - broale
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/05/2013) [-]
some of my favorite books.
User avatar #9 to #1 - higaphix
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I still think of the scenes between Obrien and Winston, and It drives me ******* insane trying to come up with an argument against Obrien's statements
#26 to #1 - anon id: 21a0da71
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Read Fahrenheit 451 for instructions on how to do just that!
User avatar #35 to #26 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I've never read it, but I heard it's a good book, I will give it a go!
#106 to #35 - anon id: 21a0da71
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Yes it is a little slow but I personally enjoy Ray Bradburys style, but if you want truly boring read The Marshin Chronicles. Also the story Harrison Bergeron is great in my opinion
#79 to #35 - swiggityswooty
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
i had to do a book report on it, due today, its not really that worth reading in my opinion, its just kind of boring.
User avatar #80 to #79 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Oh, what a shame. Well, I already downloaded it on my phone, so I'll still read it, it's only 77 pages.
#81 to #80 - swiggityswooty
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
read the first 30 pages and i think youll see what i mean.
User avatar #40 to #1 - deliciousdee
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
1984, awful ending at its finest.
User avatar #60 to #1 - bitchesdigcelestia
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Brave New World was awful. I couldn't bring myself to finish it, when it got to the part where the children were diddling each other in the playground I closed the book and failed that part of English class since it was required reading
User avatar #61 to #60 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Heh. Mate, it gets worse. Far worse, trust me. Out of all 3, Brave New World is the hardest to bear.
User avatar #70 to #1 - darksideofthebeast
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
1984, I need to read that, I believe my brother has it.
Isn't it about the government taking over the world with technology or something?
User avatar #71 to #70 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
It's about the government spying on everybody...legally. That's the first idea you get from the book. Later, more themes appear. Try it, it's an amazing book.
User avatar #74 to #71 - darksideofthebeast
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Dude, he was definitely assassinated.
I just looked it up, the book was published in 1949, he died in 1950.

Strange coincidence or something...
User avatar #72 to #71 - darksideofthebeast
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I will
I've also heard that he was an ex navy seal or something, and he knew ****.
And he got assassinated I believe?
User avatar #73 to #72 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Who, the autor or the main character?

Either way, it's not true. Well, both of them know ****, but none of them were navy seals.
User avatar #76 to #73 - darksideofthebeast
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Nevermind, he had tuberculosis for 3 years.
So it couldn't have been an assassination...
User avatar #78 to #76 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Heh, who knows!
User avatar #75 to #73 - darksideofthebeast
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
The author.
I've heard conspiracies that he was assassinated by the government because it actually displayed what was going to happen in the future and is happening.
User avatar #77 to #75 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Hm. I don't know what to say about that. His work was surely controversial. but I have never heard of him being assassinated. From what I remember reading somewhere, he died of tuberculosis.
#85 to #1 - anon id: b50ecca7
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
If you like those I deffinately recommend the Captain Underpants series, really interesting and controversial, the author is very intelligent.
User avatar #87 to #85 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Indeed, very thought provoking.
User avatar #37 to #1 - traelos
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Or, you know, you could read a book that's more than 100 pages and wasn't written by a pessimistic lunatic in the 1940's who was terrified of soviet Russia.

Seriously, there are millions of books, why does the internet only consider 4 of the shortest and least intellectual books to feature a modern day allegory to represent all "smart books".

I mean C.S. Lewis makes a better case for God than Orwell did for anything.
User avatar #98 to #37 - kolsinder
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Why is the length relevant? I'm currently reading 'Candide' and think it's brilliant, and couldn't give a toss about how short it is. What about 'Catcher in the Rye', is it also undermined by its length?
User avatar #100 to #98 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Yes.

You can do more than 7 times as much with 700 pages than 100.

I haven't read Catcher in the Rye, but if it's anything like any of the other mid-1900's novellas that they make you read in high school than it's pretty **** too.

I'm not sure why those books are considered classics, maybe because they're the only ones short enough to get the entire population to read that still technically "have a point".
#103 to #100 - kolsinder
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
That is a very brazen claim, hasn't anyone ever told you the saying 'quality, not quantity'? What does "do" insinuate? Granted it does match your description, you haven't read the book and therefore aren't entitled to judge it. Load of bollocks again, I had to read 'Jane Eyre', 'My Name is Red' and 'Norwegian Wood' during my last year of school, the shortest of which was 350 pages long. If you're suggesting that the so-called classics' short length is an attempt to pander to people's laziness, you're simply deluded. The length of a book is completely immaterial; you wouldn't judge a person by how long they had lived, right?

The reason they're deemed classics is because that happens to be the general consensus amongst the chattering classes. If you don't approve of the books, that's absolutely fine, but you've got to understand that your viewpoint is inferior for the time being.
User avatar #105 to #103 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
1000 characters*
User avatar #104 to #103 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
A book isn't a letter, or an essay. You have the luxury of making it a bit longer.

Of course a decent author doesn't take that as a luxury, they write 200,000 great words instead of 400,000 good words. And maybe Catcher in the Rye is an exception, but 1984, Brave New World, and A Clockwork Orange are all 60,000 slightly-better-than-average words.

Congratulations on having a high school that makes you read actual books, but you can't honestly claim that was similar to the average American educational experience, or even the average European one, claiming otherwise would be simply deluded.

I certainly would judge a person by how long they lived. Ever heard of "respecting your elders"? Living longer gives you more time to learn about life, being a longer book gives you more time to speak about life. That's why minimum page counts go up in college, not because they just want you to work more, but because they want you to make a more intelligent point.

I mean, I know theoretically word count doesn't matter, brevity is the key to wit and Salinger could write more in 10 pages than I could in 100, but he could also write more in 100 than he could in 10, and the average published writer could do more in 25 than he could in 20.

Think I'm wrong? Try responding to this post in less than 1000 words.
User avatar #107 to #104 - kolsinder
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Honestly, most people view it the other way round, in that indulging in a succinct, crisp book is better than a dreary, monotonous one. I'm not saying that all books must be concise; rather, they don't have to be long in order to be considered great.

I wouldn't know, I graduated in England and did the IB. Assuming you aren't familiar with it, it is an international programme, so the books I read would've been chosen by other teachers across the globe. Regardless, I can recall studying 'Animal Farm' in Grade 9 - one of my favourite reads, as a matter of interest. So no, not particularly deluded as far as I'm aware.

So you would value a 80-year-old hobo more than Martin Luther King purely on an age basis? Thought not. 'Respecting your elders' is a maxim that refers to acquired wisdom, which does not necessarily go hand in hand with age. You've mentioned time, yet you've ignored the notion of most people handling it inefficiently.

It all ultimately boils down to what is being written. Something like 'Catcher in the Rye' (basically about a teenager's introduction to hedonism) would be awfully boring if it were a long read, in the same way as something as profound in wisdom as 'War and Peace' merits many, many words.

Challenge rejected, this is just FJ after all. Obviously I could dedicate more time to trimming down superfluous bits here and there, but I don't see the point, sorry. As a bit of trivia, everyone who applies for university in the UK has to write a document that categorically can't be more than 5,000 characters in length.
User avatar #108 to #107 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
The first half of your last line counters this one, making the same piece of work shorter is a matter of revision, ie it takes longer and more work.

So what you're saying is that it's not deluded to think that your admittedly top of the line education is comparable to an average one? Seriously?

I would value an 80 year old MLK over a 40 year old MLK.

I disagree. I've read some very interesting books about nothing. It's about how you write it, not what you write. For instance I've read an entire page in The Name of the Wind about why you should always eat the entire apple and loved it. I read a paragraph about a forest in LotR and was bored out of my mind. I like forests.

As a bit of trivia: that's because they have 200,000 essays to read through and only 2,000 people to read them. I had to write a 500 word essay to get into my college, because they literally only had 100 people to read 25,000 applicant's essays.
User avatar #110 to #108 - kolsinder
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/07/2013) [-]
Generally, yes, in fact this is why I posted Pascal's quote originally. In the UK, certainly; what you call "average" is the English, A-level curriculum and I can confidently state that their repository of examined texts isn't inferior in any regard (I know they study Shakespeare and Dickens, for example). The IB really isn't that much grander, it only mandates more work on behalf of the student.

If he manages to achieve more thanks to his prolonged age, then by all means I would also rate him higher. That said, the age factor would not be taken into account, just like a book's length should have no bearing whatsoever upon its contents. Writing is most authors' sole occupation and while I don't like tossing the word 'expert' around, you've got to admit that the overwhelming majority know what they're writing and how much to write.

I see your point, having read 'The Old Man and the Sea' myself and enjoyed it to some extent, but content and style aren't mutually exclusive. Consider a PowerPoint presentation, the delivery obviously has to be bold and captivating, yet it all crumbles if the content is insipid and meaningless. One page really isn't a lot; had the whole book been about eating apples, I'm sure it wouldn't have induced the same response. Likewise, I'm fairly certain no one would appreciate 'The Old Man and the Sea' if it were 600 pages of the same plot.

Not really, by that logic no one would mark high school English exams (I wrote about 8.5 pages). I highly doubt that most universities receive more than 40,000 applicants per annum, and that's only the elite ones. Besides, each personal statement (that's what they're called) gets sent to a department, of which there are decent number at any university, to reduce the numbers further. I suppose I didn't make myself clear enough - the personal statement is essentially a CV for high school graduates.
User avatar #111 to #110 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/07/2013) [-]
One does not often "indulge" themselves in the tedium of revision.

I'm not overly familiar with the U.K.'s schooling system, but I'll assume "A-level" would be like AP (Advanced placement) classes in America? As in above average? As in A level classes aren't a valid comparison to the average education of the nation? And besides, Shakespeare isn't that complex of a read anyway as long as you have somebody translating for you.

Of course an 80 year old MLK would have accomplished more than a 40 year old one, just living to 80 is an accomplishment. More importantly, he has 40 more years of knowledge and experience to impart on me, because he's had 40 more years to gain it. Just like an extra 400 pages would add that much more to a book.

For one, that powerpoint example isn't true. Easily the best powerpoint I ever saw was about a type of bolt. My high school shop teacher knew his ****. And no, I don't care about bolts. Or at least I didn't then, now I hate them with a passion but that's a long story.

You can write an 8.5 page paper in high school because there's one teacher for every 20 students. Universities have 1 teacher for every 200 students. And more students apply than get accepted, and not every teacher reads admission essays. I'm really not joking here, it's not some mind game to get you to write the best essay of you're life, they just don't have time for that. Like seriously, I even talked to one of my professors about it once and I was like "well shorter essays are harder to write right?" and they were like "Who cares, I don't have time to read 8,000 pages of ********, 1,000 is bad enough."

And yes, they know you're entrance essay was a load of ****.
User avatar #112 to #111 - kolsinder
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/08/2013) [-]
The author may find revising texts tedious, but it ultimately pays off for the reader's delectation. I've definitely heard of the AP and I think it is the American counterpart. Actually, it's not just a good estimate, it is the estimate of educational standards across the country as it is the only sanctioned sixth-form curriculum. Talking of Shakespeare, I studied some of his sonnets last year. Needless to say, they're short by definition and once again, they are so overflowing with linguistic devices, which are condensed superbly, that studying them is incomparably more challenging than what you'd extol as a "long book".

True, but look at what you've ascertained as the most impressive attributes: "knowledge and experience", not the age per se. Of course living to be 80 is quite praiseworthy in absolute terms, but relatively speaking it is almost meaningless if you haven't used your extra time on this planet efficiently.

Your bolt example isn't quite what I meant as I'm certain they are appropriately fascinating to some contingent of people. By "best powerpoint", I think you're only talking about the execution. What about an extremely flashy PowerPoint, handled with conviction and done by an articulate speaker, that is about a horrendously wrong business idea? I learnt this lesson the hard way when I got a mid-low C for a 24-page essay that I had genuinely dedicated too much time

You write a personal statement as part of the admissions process. It is the only document that gets sent off along with your predicted grades, so the admissions department is simply forced to give it some consideration. I didn't get into a university because "the academic department felt that your personal statement was not as sufficiently compelling when compared to the Personal Statements received from other similar applicants."
User avatar #113 to #112 - articulate
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/08/2013) [-]
That sucks bro.
User avatar #115 to #113 - kolsinder
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/08/2013) [-]
Oh, it's fine, I wasn't devastated by my other choices. Cheers.
#114 to #113 - kolsinder
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #57 to #37 - hektoroftroy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Brave new world is pretty long
User avatar #101 to #57 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
You're joking right?

Brave New World isn't even technically a novel, it's 6,000 words short.

Harry Potter and The Chamber of Secrets is 30% longer and it was written for 11 (12? Whatever year you get your letter from hogwarts) year olds.
User avatar #38 to #37 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I didn't say that those 3 books represent all "smart books". I just reccommended those books to the ones who liked the picture. If you don't like them, that's alright.

And I fail to see how those books are "the shortest and least intellectual books". I understand that you don't like the books, but let's not exaggerate.
User avatar #102 to #38 - traelos
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I kind of messed up the wording there. Obviously they're not the shortest and least intellectual books, there are a lot of books and some of them are really bad.

I meant they were the shortest and least intellectual books that could be considered "smart".

They're part of the group of novellas that they tend to make you read in high school that I hate because:

a) People think having read a 60,000 word droll about Soviet Russia counts as being well read

b) Because they're some of the only **** short enough to get everybody to read, they spawn a generation of pessimistic alarmists who think that because it happened in 1984, it's going to happen in America

c) They were really really boring and pointless, and I had to read them

I don't know, maybe I'm wrong. I also think the LotR books (Excepting the Hobbit) are ****, since Tolkien the younger was a terrible writer and if this post was still on front page, 9,001 kids who have only seen the movies would come screaming at me about how he was "the best writer ever" , and I'm not into Game of Thrones because they only catch it has is that it kills members of the cast on a regular basis.

For me, I feel like I learned more, and certainly enjoyed more, series like The Name of the Wind, or the Shannara books, or anything that takes place in Midkemia, or even Oedipus Rex or The Most Dangerous Game, than I did from Animal Farm.
User avatar #11 to #1 - rakaka
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
could've made that sentence a lot shorter by saying "attend high school"
User avatar #34 to #11 - whiplasher
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
It depends where you live, I guess. In Romania, where I live, not a single one of them is required.
#96 to #34 - anon id: e1d46906
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Salut ma
User avatar #99 to #96 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Bafta
#22 to #11 - anon id: a12a99e3
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
And you could have made that sentence a lot shorter by saying "I'm pretentious."
User avatar #19 to #1 - captainpatters
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I read 1984 when I was 10. Made me into sad apathetic bastard. Curse you Orwell you glorious bastard
#12 - TARDIS
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
<< This is what these kind of posts are like.

Yes, the wold has its problems, but when you compare it to the rest of human history you'll find that IT IS PRETTY ******* GREAT.

QUIT YOUR BITCHING, the world is fine. It is a LOT better then what is was, and is still getting better.
And all "horrible bad thing that are going the end the world" are being resolved, bit by bit we are fixing them. And humanity has endured far worse.
#43 to #12 - doddythechef
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
you do realize this is the 2nd closest time the world has come to nuclear war right?
also having wars with swords was alot better than drone strikes

and also plenty of people are starving by the huge greed that technology has caused
User avatar #44 to #43 - ricketyrackety
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
people have too much faith in technology and science.
and when I say science, I mean **** like cloning and whatnot. things that should be left alone.
User avatar #49 to #44 - doddythechef
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
robotics and cloning are the next step

and i really hope they take it, imagine old specials re-created (not T-rex's this isn't jurassic park)
User avatar #21 to #12 - guiguito
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
thing is, it has potential to be more, MUCH more, and if we don't bitch we don't get it.
#24 to #12 - princessren
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #36 to #12 - whiplasher
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
No, it's not. The world is not fine. Read some "smart books" and you will see why. Especially Brave New World. In that book nobody complained, they were all happy and contained. Try it, it's a great read.
User avatar #39 to #12 - daentraya
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
The world will adapt and repair itself, and humanity may face a small wakeup crash before we'll all start to adapt to the future in sufficient amounts. Unless the whole bitching thing actually raises enough cares to make people actually start working and preparing a ******* in the next 50-100 years. Bitching and some halfarsed attempts at 'saving the planet' won't do much. I think the new campaign should be 'ease your wallet and save your ass - Care for the environment and use renewable energy!'

So yes, i agree. Do you know George Carlin, by any chance?
User avatar #53 to #12 - thedippestofshits
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
It didn't become better because of people who ignore everything, dickweed.
#84 to #12 - anon id: 1b1ddd3a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
pretty ******* great?
we reached the peak oil production last year
we have the power to literally destroy the earth with nuclear weapons
the fukushima power plant is contaminating continuously the pacific ocean irreversibly and the new stations are not telling you
do you know that oil peak production I mentioned?, our whole society is based on petrol, not just your country, ALL THE WORLD
but of course, you will never hear people speak about this because people enjoy having your mentality
"oh, I shouldnt worry, sure someone somewhere will find a way to solve this before it is too late" guess what,maybe they find a solution
MAYBE NOT, WISHY THINKING HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN TO STOP **** FROM HAPPENING
User avatar #14 to #12 - masdercheef
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Except for overpopulation. We really don't have any sort of sustainable solution for that, yet.
User avatar #15 to #14 - masdercheef
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
And before anyone says it, genocide is not a solution, damn it.
User avatar #28 to #15 - ilovehitler
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
********.
Genocide is the final solution.
User avatar #16 to #15 - toadkillerdog
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
actually overpopulation is solving itself. First world countries across the board are reaching zero population growth, and countries that are in the process of industrializing (India, for instance) have a sharp drop towards zero. Western Europe and Japan are actually negative in population growth, with the US just barely positive.
#47 to #16 - grandogger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
i think Italy's population is actually in decline (think I read that somewhere) india is slowing down? weird to think that since they're so heavily populated
User avatar #20 to #14 - Crusader
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
We really don't have overpopulation, in an ideal world the Earth can sustain far more than 7 billion people.
It's the fact that we have a bunch of people in healthy, verdant areas where there's tonnes of food, and it gets wasted, and then we have even more people in impoverished areas where they go hungry and without basic supplies.

It's not overpopulation, it's a balance issue.
User avatar #32 to #14 - coolcalx
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
overpopulation is not a problem. we have enough food to feed every person on Earth, it's just that the foods stays in only certain areas.
#45 to #14 - grandogger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
we need a new plague
#23 to #12 - doctordalek
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Bad things today aren't as bad as bad things years ago, therefore never complain about anything ever again.
#18 to #12 - tomahawkit **User deleted account**
Reply +57 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
ignoring the worlds problems wont solve them.

at least bitching about them raises awareness.
#54 to #18 - Sampsy
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Yeah all these posts are "raising awareness".
#62 - acksl
Reply +17 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Those are two completly different pictures with different intentions.
1. Books can let you flee reality for a few hours
2. If you know more you can see past the "everything is fine" images the media presents

#83 to #62 - mymissiondaytwo
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
<clarification>

I don't know what sort of media you have, but where I come from, media would have you kill every single stray dog and would have you never going out with your toddler so it stays out of danger. Furthermore, in Romania, some TV posts are often under the influence of one or more political parties and they always have dirt on every single politician out there (the more important ones, at least).

Petty crimes, murders, suicides ? **** it, show the brains of people covering the floor - there are also media companies that have uncensored (to some extent) websites.

Positive stuff ? Well, you have some 10-15 minutes in the morning where they talk about technological advances (mainly computers, phones, video games). Of course, there's always the weather channel, but due to our crappy infrastructure in rural areas they almost always announce floods in various areas during rainy seasons.

</clarification>
#97 to #83 - anon id: 9f1121e5
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
<*******>
Smartass
</*******>
#109 to #97 - mymissiondaytwo
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/07/2013) [-]
Aaand we have found the Romanian.
User avatar #66 to #62 - spacesword [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Actually the the picture you posted is not quite the same as the one you see here. instead this picture talks about the effects of reading a book that one would think helps them escape but sadly the outcome is just not thus. Consequentially the act of reading the aforementioned book has now rather opened the viewers eyes to an alternate perspective off the world and the attention it and its problems need. While its does not suggest that this is the worst moment in human history helps to amplify the crippling problems around ones self.
User avatar #88 to #62 - highfocus
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
the media is all about "everything is fine"?

are you talking bout pokemon or what
#92 to #62 - anon id: 7c0b4864
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Honestly acksl for you to actually say these are two completely different things makes me think you are mentally retarded. We all know they are two different opinions, its like you just wrote.

1. Apples are fruit.
2. Carrots are vegetables.

... the fact you explained this means you think your smart, when in fact, you are the slowest one here...
User avatar #93 to #92 - spacesword [OP]
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
your kinda doing the same thing. honestly the only reason this comment has i high rate i cause i stuck it to the top as a social experiment.

honestly i think hes narrow minded

User avatar #68 to #62 - syrenthra
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
I agree with you but with how this was made it is fine.
I see the 2 pictures as
1) a child trying to escape the rough world in his imagination with novels and such
2) an adult reading informational books to get a better look of life and realizing how **** it truly is
#59 - thechosentroll
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
You don't need books to see reality. You just have to get your head out of your ass. Or just not stick it in there in the first place.
User avatar #91 to #59 - pwoneill
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
or you could read books as well as not having your head up your ass, and see from other perspectives. and maybe learn something new.
#27 - dwarfman
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
Books are like reality: Full of millions of flavors, emotions, stories, hopes, dreams, good, bad, shades of black, white, but mostly grey. They reflect all our fears, and hopes. Really they are humanity trying to grasp at what they cannot have, and exorcising their inner demons. Yeah some are depressing, they're a darker side of human existence, while some are the good in our day to day lives.

Pig 100% unrelated.
User avatar #55 to #27 - radamski
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
How many shades of grey, exactly?

50?
User avatar #86 to #55 - mrmask
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
42, now get a towel, were going hitch hiking
#41 to #27 - mvtjets
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
#4 - AnonymousDonor
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(09/05/2013) [-]
i....don't agree with this at all

and i mean it's fair i can see how others might but... i dunno i guess i've just been 'lucky' enough (or unlucky enough) to know from a very young age that the world is **** layered under more **** with a decadent sprinkling of **** on top
and that people are bastards - bastard-coated bastards with bastard filling

which is why it makes complete sense that 2nd+ rate literature always has a happy ending, while only the greatest 1st-rate authors can not only see the horrendous truth of the world, but show the beauty in it as well....

because there are no happy endings in real life. just less sad ones
#82 to #4 - anon id: 7a3cc514
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
3edgy5me

Stop being so edgy. You'll scare the children.
User avatar #46 to #4 - iamkagji
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
This picture reminds me of Iron Maiden
#63 - repugnantpug
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
You could say the child had it right at the start, but didn't know why. One supposes a child being filled with optimism and imagination by books in a world he can already see, unbiased by worldly pressures/expectations, but only able to explain it through his own imagination.  Eventually, with more experience, he must choose whether to loose his optimism for knowledge or to live happily blind.    
   
Do you live forever young, or accept responsibility?
You could say the child had it right at the start, but didn't know why. One supposes a child being filled with optimism and imagination by books in a world he can already see, unbiased by worldly pressures/expectations, but only able to explain it through his own imagination. Eventually, with more experience, he must choose whether to loose his optimism for knowledge or to live happily blind.

Do you live forever young, or accept responsibility?
User avatar #33 - stultum
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
********! Every time I open my biology books, I see how great our world is, how strong and sturdy nature is.

Sure, we are killing of entire ecosystems. But nature will recover. And one day, we will find a way to live in harmony with nature.

That, or we become extinct. But that's fine too. Life will always find a way. Here, or somewhere else in the universe.
User avatar #17 - blastoiseboy
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
The Kite Runner.
User avatar #29 to #17 - bthebigoldb **User deleted account**
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
is for retards.
User avatar #51 to #17 - brrigg
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
i wish i had a gif of peter griffin singing "oh sodomaaheee!" because that would be the most relevant thing i could think of right now. either that or jake gyllenhall rammin heath leadger in brokeback mountain, that's also relevant.
User avatar #7 - SuitUp
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
As humans we naturally have a negativity bias - where we remember and put much more weight behind bad things and events than good. Thats why the news is always depressing, and why everyone thinks the world is such a terrible place, despite us living in the most prosperous time in human civilisation. Throw into the mix just how jaded we become being surrounded by technology every day and it becomes really difficult to tear away the guise of awfulness.

You have to find your own methods to give yourself a reality check and see that actually, we're pretty ******* awsome and the world is getting better - little by little - every day.
#10 to #7 - mrbongo
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(09/06/2013) [-]
this post made me feel better. I was having a bad day till I read that. thanks man.