Printable View
Anything by Dostoevsky
The scarlet letter (worst book ever)
Pride and Prejudice
Of Mice and Men
Othello (worst Shakespeare play, hands down)
The great Gatsby
Prince Caspian. Entirely because it isn't the voyage of the dawn treader.
Terrible, terrible, terrible
AS I LAY DYING :mad2:
George killed Lennie to save him from the people who were going to kill him once they discovered what he'd done. It was merciful and done because it was the only thing George could do to save him. It was not because of how he was or what he did. :confused: Is that not understood?
I co-taught Of Mice and Men while student teaching, and that was the first time I had actually read it. I found it enjoyable, and it provided some good discussions with the class I felt. My interpretation is the same as Shorty's here, and I felt it was pretty overt that that was the case at the end of the book. Whether or not George was a good friend or was at fault for the circumstances Lennie found himself in are debatable, but George killing Lennie was meant to be an act of mercy and love really.
Not that I have a problem with people not liking Of Mice and Men. I find it more enjoyable and readable than any other Steinbeck I've read, but we all have different tastes :D
And to mention a story I don't enjoy that will give me flack: Romeo and Juliet. I always hated that it often seems introduced as some great love story when it really isn't. The actual characters of Romeo and Juliet annoy me quite a bit. Mercutio was a cool guy though.
All of you except krissy are incorrect. The Scarlet Letter is a horrible book about passionless passion.
And is also really smurfed up and depressed me something endless. If you like scintillating details about horrible crimes and the horrible and not so horrible people that commit them, read that book.Quote:
Originally Posted by I Took the Red Pill
The thing about Faulkner is that all of his novels have a completely different tone, and consequently some of his stuff is more difficult than others. Absalom, Absalom! , for instance, requires your complete attention and goes way off into absurd tangents of stream of consciousness. That was a difficult read. But, if you'd be willing to give him another chance, something like Sanctuary is a much less intimidating read, and is quite short.Quote:
Originally Posted by Del Murder
(SPOILER)Also, what was up with the masturbation scene? I mean he's essentially masturbating over his step-daughter, whose reputation he's been worried about so I guess it's like veiled jealousy about her sex life? And meant to demonstrate that even Benbow is a little evil?
All the people bitching about The Scarlet Letter just make me want to read it. >> Maybe I'll try to do that after I finish my current book.
I just can't see such a revered book being as terrible as some say.
Fahrenheit 9/11... does it still count if I've never read it?
I did understand this, of course, but it doesn't change the fact that I did not enjoy reading the book :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Shorty
Edit: I have not yet read Atlas Shrugged but I kind of want to. I have a feeling I won't like it but I don't like to criticize things I have not yet read (or played, or experienced, etc.)
Do you mean Fahrenheit 451?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mercen-X
I was home schooled and the only required reading I ever had to do was a bunch of children's books when I was younger and Harry Potter and the bible when I got older so I never read ANY of the books you guys are talking about.
If The Lord of the Rings count then that's my pick. Could only make it past the first chapter and that was it.
There are occasional passages in Dickens I enjoy (The first page of Bleak House being an especially good one), and I don't have a problem with his plots and themes, but god damn I can't stand to sit down and read him.
Atlas Shrugged is pretty atrocious. However, The Fountainhead is a pretty decent book - nothing amazing but still enjoyable and not 400000 smurfing pages long.
Great Expectations bored the hell out of me. That was ninth grade, though. I don't know how I'd feel about it now.
It's unfortunate that so many people seem to have gotten turned off to classic literature by high school courses. It's a really bad environment to try and explore the themes of complex novels, I guess, particularly since teachers frequently want you to walk away with their interpretation.
I'd encourage any of you who last read a classic in high school to try it again, especially if you're in your mid-20s or later. Most of these books weren't aimed at teenagers. They were the expression's of an author's hopes, dreams, and fears, and most certainly weren't written solely to be a source for begrudgingly-produced essays. I've found a lot of satisfaction in revisiting them in my leisure time, especially with projects like Gutenburg and LibriVox.
(It's not to say that you can't appreciate classics as a teen, but it's hard to appreciate anything when you're literally forced to read it solely for a grade.)
^That is the reason that I will (eventually) give The Great Gatsby another shot, that being the only book I can think of that would fit the bill of this thread's topic for myself. It was awful in HS, but everything is awful in HS. It might be different this time.
Yeah I didn't like Shakespeare at all in HS but now that I'm old enough to actually grasp all his filthy jokes and terrible puns and stuff, I recognize why he gets to be called The Bard.