The most overrated books of all time?

[K1052]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: K1052
I light my grill with first editions of the Scarlet Letter.

you were just jealous of Hester's whoring ways

5 seconds of pleasure, millions of hours of agony for schoolchildren across the English speaking world.

 

[zinfamous]

hmmm, I'm guessing the general readership of these forums tends to the Fantasy/Sci-Fi/King genres anyway....

as such, you would expect a thorough trashing of anything that ever had real merit

 

[Anubis]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
hmmm, I'm guessing the general readership of these forums tends to the Fantasy/Sci-Fi/King genres anyway....

as such, you would expect a thorough trashing of anything that ever had real merit

thats one of the worst genralizations ive ever heard, i like lots of books but i agree with that most of the " classics" are really "classic POS"

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: zinfamous
hmmm, I'm guessing the general readership of these forums tends to the Fantasy/Sci-Fi/King genres anyway....

as such, you would expect a thorough trashing of anything that ever had real merit

thats one of the worst genralizations ive ever heard, i like lots of books but i agree with that most of the " classics" are really "classic POS"

oh, I've seen worse...

I think the main problem people have with classics is that once they read one, they feel a bit disappointed. Especially in this day, when it's hard to experience something completely original and inventive. try to divorce yourself from this extremely literate age of piles and piles of books, and massive amounts of people who can read them. Classics are classics b/c they are generally excellent portrayals of well, classic themes. If they seem underwhelming, it's because these characters and stories have been cliche'd and spoofed in ways that you might not even realize. You become so familiar with them before you read them that the experience becomes a bit dry.

Sometimes the language seems a bit stilted, even though it was very original for its time. The funny thing, is that such work is often horribly misrepresented in highschool english classes. AP teachers seem to have a habit of removing humor and irony from this stuff. Oftentimes, that language seems stilted for a specific reason--"hey, I'm actually making fun of these people!" John Donne is a perfect example--a catholic deacon living in protestant England, burying explicit sexual metaphors in playfully devout poetry. Honestly, it takes a bit of time and attention to enjoy a good bit of this stuff--and I wouldn't imagine a typical highschool class to be up to the challenge. (and no, Hawthorne was not nearly as self-loathing as the majority would like to believe)

Detritus like the Da Vinci Code will never be a classic because it's nothing more than a cheap rip-off of Umberto Echo, written at a second grade level.

 

[alkemyst]

I think whoever goes and bashes the classics should provide their replacement literature.

Thing is these books are being assigned nowadays (if at all) without any discussion about it and are tested so lightly (if at all) that cliffs are more than adequate.

I wish I could go to high school now, there'd be no reason not to make straight A's...the homework (which is the only thing that cost me straight A's) is a joke now and mostly non-existant.

 

[Paktu]

The Scarlet Letter was unbelievably boring too IMO, didn't even think of that one. I have to disagree on the Great Gatsby...while it's not one of my favorites, I didn't mind reading it.

I think the thing that really pissed me off about Grapes of Wrath was not that it was merely boring but that it seemed like a big sob story. Just one tragedy after another.

 

[Oil]

A Tale of Two Cities

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Originally posted by: Paktu
The Scarlet Letter was unbelievably boring too IMO, didn't even think of that one. I have to disagree on the Great Gatsby...while it's not one of my favorites, I didn't mind reading it.

I think the thing that really pissed me off about Grapes of Wrath was not that it was merely boring but that it seemed like a big sob story. Just one tragedy after another.

Gatsby, bah! Thinly veiled whining with SYMBOLISM (read as - did you see how I did that? I was ACTING). Oh wait... that pretty much is the definition of transcendentalism.

 

[wkabel23]

i remember everyone complaining about grapes of wrath when it was assigned in high school. i wasn't exactly excited about reading it, but i really got interested in it and it remains one of my favorite books.

and i can't stand anything written by toni morrison. i'd rather read the classifieds.

 

[Steve]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus
Catcher is an awesome book.

I cannot stand anything by Steinbeck however.

Scarlet Letter sucks beyond what words can properly define... not sure how this is considered a classic by any stretch of the imagination.

spoken like a true Emo

Steinbeck is your daddy, you're just too afraid to admit it.

The only thing Steinbeck fathered was an immutable boredome deep within me. His writing is drawn out and it takes him 100 pages to explain what a child could in a stream of gibberish and the child would still make a more cogent sentence. The only writer who was worse at taking 100 pages to explain that a man walked down the street was Dickens, an overrated 'paid by the page' hack.

...so I take it you're not a fan of Faulkner, either?

Steinbeck is actually rather precise compared to many American writers. ...so how much Melville have you read?

Ironically I actually really enjoy William Faulkner. He's verbose but his words have a purpose unlike the aformentioned author... at least to me anyway. Melville I don't have much of an opinion on, I've read Billy Budd and Moby Dick. Other than having an unhealthy obsession with symbolism I can't fault him too much. Moby Dick did bore the shit out of me though except for a few moments.

Faulkner is 10x more verbose than Steinbeck. You do realize that he will go out of his way to talk about the history of a rocking chair's cross leg, don't you? And you admit to being a whore for symbolism and yet you trash Hawthorne? Scarlett Letter is nothing but bold, rich, and sometimes subtle symbolism (yeah, it wasn't until the 3rd time through that I actually dug it )

I am so not going out with you guys this week if you're going to argue about English Lit during trivia.

 

[Demo24]

I wouldn't say The Grapes of Wrath was a wonderful book, but I did enjoy it when it was assigned.

A farewell to arms was not a fun read however. Got really sick of reading about that character drinking alcohol all the time.


My real hate is Scarlet letter, which I had to read several times AND I had to watch a truly horrible film based on that book. I'd rather read the book 5 more times than be forced to watch that film again

 

[So]

The sound and the fury. Awful book.

 

[Turin39789]

Originally posted by: Paktu
What do you think are the most overrated books of all time?

I'm not talking about the actual worst books, I mean books that have received awards, critical acclaim, etc. despite sucking immensely. Two that come to my mine are both books I was required to read in high school.

The first is Catcher in the Rye. People act like it's one of the defining literary achievements of the 20th century. To me, it's an overprivileged white boy (Holden Caulfield IIRC) that whines constantly about how life is unfair. Just imagine what would happen to a douchebag like that when he finally gets released from prep school fantasy land and actually has to deal with real life. Sometimes I find myself on the same side as the nanny state crusaders who want to ban it (for language), except I just want to ban it for being a huge steaming turd.

The second is Grapes of Wrath. I probably would have just read the cliff notes for the exam, but I found it to be highly effective at putting me to sleep (not making that one up). The one thing that really got me about this one is we're supposed to feel sorry about this family of idiots that chooses to overfarm on some of the most infertile soil in America. And then we hear them boast about how they kicked the native Indians off their land, so somehow it belongs to them. So I should sympathize with the hicks, but no one needs to give a crap the people the stole the land from. The only sad thing about this story is that the entire family did not die a horrible, painful death.

/rant

Steinbeck FTW.

Paktu and platypus FTL

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Steve

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus
Catcher is an awesome book.

I cannot stand anything by Steinbeck however.

Scarlet Letter sucks beyond what words can properly define... not sure how this is considered a classic by any stretch of the imagination.

spoken like a true Emo

Steinbeck is your daddy, you're just too afraid to admit it.

The only thing Steinbeck fathered was an immutable boredome deep within me. His writing is drawn out and it takes him 100 pages to explain what a child could in a stream of gibberish and the child would still make a more cogent sentence. The only writer who was worse at taking 100 pages to explain that a man walked down the street was Dickens, an overrated 'paid by the page' hack.

...so I take it you're not a fan of Faulkner, either?

Steinbeck is actually rather precise compared to many American writers. ...so how much Melville have you read?

Ironically I actually really enjoy William Faulkner. He's verbose but his words have a purpose unlike the aformentioned author... at least to me anyway. Melville I don't have much of an opinion on, I've read Billy Budd and Moby Dick. Other than having an unhealthy obsession with symbolism I can't fault him too much. Moby Dick did bore the shit out of me though except for a few moments.

Faulkner is 10x more verbose than Steinbeck. You do realize that he will go out of his way to talk about the history of a rocking chair's cross leg, don't you? And you admit to being a whore for symbolism and yet you trash Hawthorne? Scarlett Letter is nothing but bold, rich, and sometimes subtle symbolism (yeah, it wasn't until the 3rd time through that I actually dug it )

I am so not going out with you guys this week if you're going to argue about English Lit during trivia.

well, let's let Plat stick to music, and I'll handle the Lit

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Paktu
The Scarlet Letter was unbelievably boring too IMO, didn't even think of that one. I have to disagree on the Great Gatsby...while it's not one of my favorites, I didn't mind reading it.

I think the thing that really pissed me off about Grapes of Wrath was not that it was merely boring but that it seemed like a big sob story. Just one tragedy after another.

....hmmm, sounds like you need a dose of "The Jungle"

 

[grrl]

Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
this thread saddens me : /

The OP's 'analysis' of Grapes of Wrath is beyond jejune.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: grrl

Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
this thread saddens me : /

The OP's 'analysis' of Grapes of Wrath is beyond jejune.

:beer:

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: ironwing
Death of a Salesman. The book would have been great had Willy committed suicide on page three, taking the whole pathetic lot with him.

The Metamorphosis. Whine, whine, whine.

Agree with those two, if you mean the metamorphosis where the guy turns into a giant beetle.

Wuthering Heights and The Cruicible were also really crappy works of literature.

Also, Augustine's Confessions - that book sucked. It was just him whining about how he was always facing away from god, blah blah blah.

 

[Steve]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Steve

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Platypus
Catcher is an awesome book.

I cannot stand anything by Steinbeck however.

Scarlet Letter sucks beyond what words can properly define... not sure how this is considered a classic by any stretch of the imagination.

spoken like a true Emo

Steinbeck is your daddy, you're just too afraid to admit it.

The only thing Steinbeck fathered was an immutable boredome deep within me. His writing is drawn out and it takes him 100 pages to explain what a child could in a stream of gibberish and the child would still make a more cogent sentence. The only writer who was worse at taking 100 pages to explain that a man walked down the street was Dickens, an overrated 'paid by the page' hack.

...so I take it you're not a fan of Faulkner, either?

Steinbeck is actually rather precise compared to many American writers. ...so how much Melville have you read?

Ironically I actually really enjoy William Faulkner. He's verbose but his words have a purpose unlike the aformentioned author... at least to me anyway. Melville I don't have much of an opinion on, I've read Billy Budd and Moby Dick. Other than having an unhealthy obsession with symbolism I can't fault him too much. Moby Dick did bore the shit out of me though except for a few moments.

Faulkner is 10x more verbose than Steinbeck. You do realize that he will go out of his way to talk about the history of a rocking chair's cross leg, don't you? And you admit to being a whore for symbolism and yet you trash Hawthorne? Scarlett Letter is nothing but bold, rich, and sometimes subtle symbolism (yeah, it wasn't until the 3rd time through that I actually dug it )

I am so not going out with you guys this week if you're going to argue about English Lit during trivia.

well, let's let Plat stick to music, and I'll handle the Lit

Yes, so he can expound on the superior musicality of Tracy Chaplin, compared to Bob Dylan :laugh:

 

[alkemyst]

based on the comments here, I now know why so many have a hard time understanding perfectly clear posts.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: alkemyst
I think whoever goes and bashes the classics should provide their replacement literature.

Homer's The Iliad

 

[tfinch2]

Apparently this one

 

[Legendary]

Wuthering Heights

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Apparantly this one

And this one!

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: her209

Originally posted by: alkemyst
I think whoever goes and bashes the classics should provide their replacement literature.

Homer's The Iliad

I liked the Iliad.