Why is this a literary classic? (not really a rant)

[Nechti_Visara]

I had to read The Lord of the Flies in class this year. I hated it. HATED. IT. It just made me cringe. I didn't like the way Golding wrote, none of the characters were in the least bit likable, and the ending wasn't even an ending -- it was like Golding realized that he only had one more page to write on and had to scribble something out. Horrible.

I'm not sure if this counts, but A Night to Remember also makes my list of bad books. It was boring and lengthy. I remember nothing about it, simply because I quite literally couldn't read it. I'd start to fall asleep whenever I tried.

Also, while not so much of a literary classic, Shakespeare's play The Taming of the Shrew was basically the worst thing I've ever had to see (we didn't read it in class, we just watched it). It was sexist and disgusting, and every single one of the characters was completely unlikable. Also, the plot ran away in the middle of the movie and they had to find a new one using different characters that all hated each other and that make the audience hate them as well.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

I found To Kill A Mockingbird to be just awful and boring as all hell. And Romeo and Juliet. I'm kind of hoping I don't have to read any more Shakespeare for the rest of my life.

Why not? Didn't like the language or the characters? You know, Romeo and Juliet is a play. It's better spoken, or live, than it is on paper. Did you at least watch the DiCaprio version? "Give me my long sword, ho!"

Hamlet's pretty fucking awesome. So is King Lear. I've heard good things about Othello too.

I saw someone reading a manga version of Hamlet somewhere. I'd be interested in reading that. "Swear by my sword."

When I first heard of manga Hamlet I was quite amused, to say the least. I wondered what other books and plays could be adapted into manga. I'm not even going to cite an example of something that would be hilarious, any book typically read in english class adapted into manga would make me lol.

Eh, I just like the idea of seeing the "actors" on "stage" in a form of media that you can flip through and refer to. Gives some context for the play.

I would like to see what a manga version of Waiting for Godot does with the stage direction "Vladimir uses his intelligence."

 

[Mother Yeti]

Almost literally every single book in this thread is part of the standard high school English curriculum.

What I'd be interested to know: (1) whether the posters in this thread actually read books for leisure (and no, manga/comic books/game guides don't count); and (2) what they consider to be worthwhile pieces of literature.

And if I hear "World War Z" I might have to reach through the internet and slap you.

 

[ThrobbingEgo]

What I'd be interested to know: (1) whether the posters in this thread actually read books for leisure (and no, manga/comic books/game guides don't count); and (2) what they consider to be worthwhile pieces of literature.

I'll just list some awesome books I've read fairly recently that I haven't read for my literature class:
The Stand
The Diamond Age
Darkly Dreaming Dexter
Snow Crash
Blaze

I'd also list Brooklyn Dreams, but you disqualified graphic novels. I'd argue that they should count.

There isn't much I don't consider literature. Worthwhile's just a matter of whatever you can manage to get out of it.

 

[Horticulture]

Almost literally every single book in this thread is part of the standard high school English curriculum.

It's as though people frequently avoid books that they dislike unless they're otherwise compelled to slog through them...

What I'd be interested to know: (1) whether the posters in this thread actually read books for leisure (and no, manga/comic books/game guides don't count); and (2) what they consider to be worthwhile pieces of literature.

(1) Yes.
For the most part, I prefer novels that are enjoyable to read in addition to presenting a compelling perspective or story. I'm quite fond of magical realism generally, Marquez and Allende in particular. Cormac McCarthy is another favorite of mine, though the first book of his I read was for a class, and I wasn't wildly fond of it (All the Pretty Horses).

What I admire so much about these authors is their ability to involve their audience in the setting of their books, despite their somewhat unrealistic premises. McCarthy, in particular, is capable of illustrating a very complete narrative and flesh out its characters while using very little dialogue.

Books like The Great Gatsby annoy me because they present the reader with seemingly intentional obstacles to immersion. Yes, the characters aren't supposed to arouse sympathy in the reader, but it really seems that no effort was made to pull the reader into the story, and the overall impact (as well as generations of high school freshmen) suffer because of it. If an author has a point to make but lacks the subtlety to incorporate it into a story, he should abandon the novel and deal in essays.

 

[Mother Yeti]

What I'd be interested to know: (1) whether the posters in this thread actually read books for leisure (and no, manga/comic books/game guides don't count); and (2) what they consider to be worthwhile pieces of literature.

I'll just list some awesome books I've read fairly recently that I haven't read for my literature class:
The Stand
The Diamond Age
Darkly Dreaming Dexter
Snow Crash
Blaze

I'd also list Brooklyn Dreams, but you disqualified graphic novels. I'd argue that they should count.

There isn't much I don't consider literature. Worthwhile's just a matter of whatever you can manage to get out of it.

I wasn't really worried about you, as you're the one generally defending literature in this thread. The question was more directed at the super-critics who are whining about The Great Gatsby and Catcher in the Rye (which I've always considered to be the most "teenager-friendly" of all the standard high school texts). As a teacher, I'm always trying to make these subjects enjoyable for my students, and I'd really like to know what these guys consider to be good reading.

 

[Mother Yeti]

Almost literally every single book in this thread is part of the standard high school English curriculum.

It's as though people frequently avoid books that they dislike unless they're otherwise compelled to slog through them...

How can you dislike a book you've never read? (Although a lot of posters on this forum seem to hate games they've never played, but my point still stands.)

 

[Syntax Error]

I'm probably the only person who liked "Watership Down". Ninja bunnies! What's not to love? Also, I liked James Michener's "Chesapeake." Sure, it's 1,000 pages, but it never gets boring. Whenever he finished with one character's arc, he'd kill 'em off and move on to the next one. He had a very brisk pace because of it (it was definitely more narrative that philosophy, unlike the other great works of literature)

Haven't read the book, but I've watched the movie. It was awesome! That is to say, even if it did star ninja bunnies, it's still NOT FOR KIDS. For one

Spoiler

You get to see a vision of rabbits dying from suffocation, probably while scratching their throats out.

once this one character meets up with the rest of the others. Oh, and the whole thing wouldn't have worked if the characters were not rabbits.

 

[NeutralDrow]

I have no trouble separating "literary classics" from "books I like." I came across only a few in school that I genuinely liked. Sorry to buck the trend a little, but I loved To Kill a Mockingbird...possibly because my English teacher never got hung up over symbolism, and never required his students to. I can almost count the others on one hand; let's see...Catch-22, Their Eyes Were Watching God, Bless Me Ultima, Death Comes For the Archbishop, Jane Eyre (seriously, and I don't know why), Joy Luck Club. Almost one hand.

On the other hand, I didn't like Catcher in the Rye, Animal Farm, The Giver, 1984, Brave New World, Tale of Two Cities, The Great Gatsby, The Scarlet Letter, The Grapes of Wrath, The Crucible, Frankenstein, Candid (though it was close), The Stranger (close), Lord of the Flies, Of Mice and Men...

I found To Kill A Mockingbird to be just awful and boring as all hell. And Romeo and Juliet. I'm kind of hoping I don't have to read any more Shakespeare for the rest of my life.

Why not? Didn't like the language or the characters? You know, Romeo and Juliet is a play. It's better spoken, or live, than it is on paper. Did you at least watch the DiCaprio version? "Give me my long sword, ho!"

Hamlet's pretty fucking awesome. So is King Lear. I've heard good things about Othello too.

I saw someone reading a manga version of Hamlet somewhere. I'd be interested in reading that. "Swear by my sword."

The manga Hamlet has terrible art, at least the one I've perused does, there are three others I know of. Hopefully you'll strike gold if you ever read one of them, and if not, you've got a one in three chance of getting a good one next time! Or something like that.

Clearly, it wasn't this one [http://amethyst-angel.com/hamlet_eng.htm], right?.

 

[Cliff_m85]

I loathed "Anna Karenina". I hate to be the neanderthal here, but the only interesting part out of 800 pages was when she threw herself under the train for that one paragraph. The rest of it was people whining.

I automatically remove Dickens from contention for being a great literary author since he was actually paid by the word and thus artificially inflated the lengths of his works.

I'm not a huge fan of any British Restoration authors. Before or after is fine. And I actually like Shakespeare but only after doing independent studies of his works (outside of the classroom). Admittedly, he is an acquired taste.

I'm probably the only person who liked "Watership Down". Ninja bunnies! What's not to love? Also, I liked James Michener's "Chesapeake." Sure, it's 1,000 pages, but it never gets boring. Whenever he finished with one character's arc, he'd kill 'em off and move on to the next one. He had a very brisk pace because of it (it was definitely more narrative that philosophy, unlike the other great works of literature)

May Frith bless you.

 

[Horticulture]

How can you dislike a book you've never read? (Although a lot of posters on this forum seem to hate games they've never played, but my point still stands.)

By starting it, finding it not to your liking, and then reading something else.

Or a careful analysis of the cover art.

 

[Mother Yeti]

How can you dislike a book you've never read? (Although a lot of posters on this forum seem to hate games they've never played, but my point still stands.)

By starting it, finding it not to your liking, and then reading something else.

But that's still reading it. I mean, if there were posters in this thread saying things like "Ugh, I only got 20 pages into Ulysses before I had to go vomit" that would be one thing, but really most of the posters are just saying "Romeo is unlikable, therefore Shakespeare sux nutz."

 

[Horticulture]

But that's still reading it.

I wouldn't claim to have 'read' a book if I'd only gone through the first few hundred pages. I've ninja'd my earlier post if you'd like to discuss something less semantic.

 

[Lissa-QUON]

I thought that The Great Gatsby was terrible.

If any effort to make the characters likeable was made, I probably would have liked that book.

I hate to sound pompous, but that's the point of the book.

Meh, still.

It's rather hard to get even enough gumption to finish the damn thing if you wish the entire cast of the book would die in a fire and take F. Scott Fitzgerald with them.

 

[SmartIdiot]

1984

I get it was awesome in the 40's and radical, but I got bored reading it D=

I haven't even read 1984 and I'm already bored of it. Everyone that I know who's read has told me almost everytihng about it.

Yeah... problem is 1984 is ok but it's been ripped off over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again so by the time you get around to it you've seen everything.

 

[CoverYourHead]

The other one is "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen. I suppose I'm a bit harsh on it, being the opposite of the target demographic, but it bored me to tears. It's supposed to be a tale of true romance and looking deeper into people to find themselves, and I suppose it was revolutionary when it was written. Problem is, it was written in the 19th century. I've seen the story too many times to be fresh, and outside of the "novelty", the book doesn't really have much going for it. The characters seem flat, with one-note personalities, and the plot moves way too slowly to hold my interest. However, that's just my opinion.

I had to read Emma by Jane Austen and it was just terrible for pretty much the same reasons you listed for Pride and Prejudice. The only book I actually liked that I had to read for school (so far) is A Tale of Two Cities.

EDIT: Post number 800, woo!

 

[neolithic]

not to put too modern a twist in this. But was I the only one who got a tad annoyed by Tolkien?

I mean damn.....I really don't need to know the piece of papers idealogical stance on something. It's a piece of paper....get over it.

My nerdness made me read his books...but damnit if there wasn't parts I was looking for the crash cart to bring the plot back to life.

Oh, but to put somethign out there, read the Iliad of Homer. Very cool, very intersting, but ya gotta kinda have a certain slant to the way you think to enjoy it I think.

 

[Cliff_m85]

In my High School we had to read "A Painted House" by John Grisham. Now I know that most books forced upon you you tend to end up not enjoying, which is very true I found after re-reading certain other books and finding them to be great rather than tedious.


Now this book was not one of those. It's horrible in every sense of the word. I'm going to spoil it for you right now....

A boy has to paint a house. A tornado comes and nothing happens at all. A Michigander comes down to Arkansas and falls for a prank involving a fake snake, because the north doesn't have any snakes. (Whaaaa?) The kid runs out of paint before he can finish painting the house and moves up to Michigan.

The End.

 

[j0z]

Never read Pride & Prejudice, but would like to read P&P&Z
Have read Catcher in the Rye. I agree with the OP, what is so great about that book? It is not even a coming of age story since Holden is still the snot nosed, foul mouthed dropout at the end. He is an elitist bastard who thinks that HE is the only person alive who isn't "phoney".

1984

I get it was awesome in the 40's and radical, but I got bored reading it D=

Thougyt it was awesome, and more deserving of "classic" than Catcher in the Rye