The most overrated books of all time?

[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

 

[jagec]

Great Expectations. It's an OK story, but it's about 10x the length that it needs to be, and it's not that amazing. Yet everyone who's never read it thinks that it's the standard by which all other novels are measured.

 

[Ns1]

Catch 22. The text/value ratio was horrible.

 

[giantpinkbunnyhead]

every book I had to read in school:

Starting with Wuthering Heights. Followed by Pride and Prejudice, the Crucible, Old Man and the Sea, and the host of others I was fortunately able to forget. The only book that remotely held my interest was Lord of the Flies.

Not really sure how I feel about all the Shakespeare they forced down my gullet. Never understood the funny talk so I can't say if I think the works suck or not.

 

[Locut0s]

Though I never read it I hear that James Frey's "A million little pieces" true or not true is suposed to be a literary piece of trash, and boy did it receive praise at first. I disagree with Grapes of Wrath, it's a fantastic book though not the very best I've read.

 

[MasterOfKtulu109]

Fight Club (movie included; maybe the most overrated movie I've seen)

 

[PepePeru]

i disagree w/ you completely on the Catcher in the Rye.
That book did a terrific job of depressing the hell out of me, since I could empathize with Holden.
I think its a great summary of teen years / teen angst / depression.
So I am 'with Holden' (sorry) judgment on the Grapes of Wrath, since I havent read it.
I just know the plot.

 

[Locut0s]

Originally posted by: giantpinkbunnyhead
every book I had to read in school:

Starting with Wuthering Heights. Followed by Pride and Prejudice, the Crucible, Old Man and the Sea, and the host of others I was fortunately able to forget. The only book that remotely held my interest was Lord of the Flies.

Not really sure how I feel about all the Shakespeare they forced down my gullet. Never understood the funny talk so I can't say if I think the works suck or not.

In some ways it's a shame they force us to read some of the classics in school becuase no matter what we almost all end up hating the books we were forced to read in school. This despite the fact that some of them are indeed literary masterpieces which would be far better enjoyed if not "assigned" as work but "chosen" to be read.

 

[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.

 

[JS80]

books suck...i cliffed my way out of those in AP english

 

[GagHalfrunt]

Anything by James Joyce.

Honorary mention to The DaVinci Code. A juvenile piece of tripe masquerading as actual literature.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: MasterOfKtulu109
Fight Club (movie included; maybe the most overrated movie I've seen)

YOU'RE OVERRATED


fuck I want to go home and watch that movie now

 

[zinfamous]

you, sir, are incredibly wrong about Grapes of Wrath.

while I think Catcher in the Rye is good, it isn't great. ....A highschool read, at best.

My vote goes for The Jungle. Important in its day, for sure...but the writing is horrendous. Sure, the muckracking was intentional; but significantly overwrought imo.

 

[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.

 

[Platypus]

Originally posted by: zinfamous
you, sir, are incredibly wrong about Grapes of Wrath.

while I think Catcher in the Rye is good, it isn't great. ....A highschool read, at best.

My vote goes for The Jungle. Important in its day, for sure...but the writing is horrendous. Sure, the muckracking was intentional; but significantly overwrought imo.

HOMICIDE

 

[DanTMWTMP]

well, the thing about grapes of wrath was that the author did a terrific job imo to describe the scenery and backdrop. Steinbeck (sp?) is by no means a horrible writer/storyteller. I liked the story, but of course it's by no means the best book in the universe. I enjoy most everything I read. I thought Catcher in the Rye was very well paced. Of course the character was some whiny douchebag (and of course, I also related a bit to him), but it was great that people of about 1-2 generations ago were really no different from teens from the modern era.

both books were good in their own right, and explained their backdrop flawlessly. Their stories might of been overrated, but to me, the descriptions of the scenery and backdrop of each scene is VERY important. Some authors like Dan Simmons are HORRIBLE at that, and I always have to read a good classic literature so I can create clear pictures in my head. I'd like to be very involved with the book....

Anyways..that's my 2 cents...

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Platypus

Originally posted by: zinfamous
you, sir, are incredibly wrong about Grapes of Wrath.

while I think Catcher in the Rye is good, it isn't great. ....A highschool read, at best.

My vote goes for The Jungle. Important in its day, for sure...but the writing is horrendous. Sure, the muckracking was intentional; but significantly overwrought imo.

HOMICIDE

it's not my fault you read at a highschool level

 

[rocadelpunk]

this thread saddens me : /

 

[zoiks]

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.

I actually really like Steinbeck. The guy was so eloquent in his literary words (such as in the 'Log from the sea of cortez') yet his portrayal of hill billies and other characters was spot on. He also had a really great way of telling something amusing in his stories.
He absolutely deserved the nobel prize in literature IMO.

 

[BeauJangles]

I liked a lot of books assigned in high school, but I'd have to say that I hated Catcher in the Rye. It's either a book you love or hate, no in betweens.

I think a lot of people tend to hate books that are assigned to them because they never give them a chance.

edit: on second thought, Da Vinci Code is mindless trash.

 

[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.

 

[her209]

Pride and Prejudice

/thread

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Anything by James Joyce.

Honorary mention to The DaVinci Code. A juvenile piece of tripe masquerading as actual literature.

in what level of hell is the Da Vinci Code considered literature in the first place?

oh, and James Joyce is more your daddy than Steinbeck is Platypus's

Ireland has easily produced the greatest number of writers per capita than any other country.
Beckett, G B Shaw, Yeats, Joyce (aka: God), Swift, Heaney.....

 

[rocadelpunk]

I can't remember when I read it...probably freshman year, but I didn't really care for "their eyes were watching god."

 

[Steve]

The Adventures of Huck Finn, if only for the letdown ending.