A literary confession topic

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Shakespeare should not, in my opinion, be read. It should be watched. I don't like reading Shakespeare myself, but I adore watching his plays.

Not read especially in school. They way they make kids read Shakespeare and what they makes kids do with it is a real turn off to them.

[chrisanthropic]

I love Matheson, Lovecraft, and horror in general but despise King and Koontz (and couldn't finish Dracula).

I tend to avoid anything on the best seller's list but love Jim Butcher's Dresden books.

I'm a huuuuuuuuuge nerd who has never read a page of Harry Potter.

I love Dostoevsky and Hermann Hesse but find most "classic" literature too long winded. How the hell does that make sense?

[unboggling]

Confession: As a dedicated speculative fiction reader for decades, I ignored romance and paranormal until last year. Now I'm a paranormal romance addict too. And not only that, I just love it when the unvamp woman gets bitten in the end by the silky smooth vampire love interest and gets cool superpowers. Or the supercool animal-shifter woman with guns shoots the human shifter-bounty-hunters.

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

*does super-special secret English/Literature degree wave at MrsJoseph*

I wish you'd been at MY school. I was the only female in the Eng/Lit department that didn't love Austen and the Brontes.

Me, too.

Discussions were always my worse moments: "He's so strong and passionate!"

Shoot me.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

School made me really dislike Shakespeare. It was awful when I read it. No idea if I'd still find his work awful to read. But I'm not going to risk it.

I love Shakespeare...especially his comedies. There are a few that I'm not too interested in but as a general whole I enjoy both reading and watching Shakespeare. Except Romeo and Juliet. I hated that one and I hated that the majority of my female professors taught it as a "romance." Really? A double suicide, multiple murders and a feud is romance?

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

Me, too.

Discussions were always my worse moments: "He's so strong and passionate!"

Shoot me.

I love Shakespeare...especially his comedies. There are a few that I'm not too interested in but as a general whole I enjoy both reading and watching Shakespeare. Except Romeo and Juliet. I hated that one and I hated that the majority of my female professors taught it as a "romance." Really? A double suicide, multiple murders and a feud is romance?

We would have been best friends, I can tell.

I do not find Darcy attractive; I think he will be an utter pain to live with and that Lizzy will regret the marriage. I do not find Rochester worthy of attention; I think Jane made a huge mistake going back. I do not find Romeo even remotely sympathetic; I think the point of the play is that he's a capricious idiot who falls in "love" every five minutes and that the whole "romance" would have fizzled out in a month's time if the families hadn't been so stupid.

These are heresies in the Eng/Lit departments, I know. Well, among the freshmen gals anyway.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by MrsJoseph

I love Shakespeare...especially his comedies. There are a few that I'm not too interested in but as a general whole I enjoy both reading and watching Shakespeare. Except Romeo and Juliet. I hated that one and I hated that the majority of my female professors taught it as a "romance." Really? A double suicide, multiple murders and a feud is romance?

Well, Romeo and Juliet did center around a love story. But to be honest, there was not one hair flip or shirt tear. So maybe not.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Well, Romeo and Juliet did center around a love story. But to be honest, there was not one hair flip or shirt tear. So maybe not.

Sure, but it's a love story between two teenagers, one of whom was five minutes before moping that the LOVE OF HIS LIFE wouldn't have him and I'M A GONNA DIE before a head-snap and OMG WHO IS THAT STONE FOX OVER THERE? And their entire romance is fueled by the heady delight of being rebellious and disobeying their parents.

So a lot of Eng/Lit people see it as a satirical tragedy: if the families hadn't forbidden the romance, it would have fizzled out right away, most likely.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I do not find Darcy attractive; I think he will be an utter pain to live with and that Lizzy will regret the marriage. I do not find Rochester worthy of attention; I think Jane made a huge mistake going back. I do not find Romeo even remotely sympathetic; I think the point of the play is that he's a capricious idiot who falls in "love" every five minutes and that the whole "romance" would have fizzled out in a month's time if the families hadn't been so stupid.

Not if Lizzy's smart, she won't. What were her alternatives? She hit the jackpot with Darcy. Think of living wih her mother in very reduced circumstances after her father died. *shudder* Even living with Darcy would be preferable. That said, no matter how Austen sugar-coats it, there is no forgiving him for his appalling rudeness at that first ball.

Jane, yes, she had enough money to be independent. Run, Jane, run. And not to the missions with her cousin, either.

I agree with you about Romeo and Juliet. Romeo would have moved on in another week or so and Juliet was just an addlepated 13-year old girl in love with love.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by issybird

Not if Lizzy's smart, she won't. What were her alternatives? She hit the jackpot with Darcy. Think of living wih her mother in very reduced circumstances after her father died. *shudder* Even living with Darcy would be preferable. That said, no matter how Austen sugar-coats it, there is no forgiving him for his appalling rudeness at that first ball.

Jane, yes, she had enough money to be independent. Run, Jane, run. And not to the missions with her cousin, either.

I agree with you about Romeo and Juliet. Romeo would have moved on in another week or so and Juliet was just an addlepated 13-year old girl in love with love.

OK, fair enough, if the choice is between living with Darcy and living with her mother, then MAYBE Darcy is better. (Except, you know, that a key member of Darcy's family hates her.) But I still think Lizzy could have taken a third option. Somehow. There HAS to be something better on offer than being a Bennett or being a Darcy.

And, yes, his behavior at the ball was inexcusable. You don't get to be a rude jerk to everybody just because you're richer than everyone else. I get that Austen had low tolerance for "silly" people, but there's a reason why it's not considered appropriate to be rude to people, silly or not.

I liked Sense and Sensibility a bit, but is it odd that one of my favorite characters is another of Austen's "silly" women, Mrs. Palmer. Austen suggests feeling sorry for Mr. Palmer for marrying such a silly woman, but I admire the courage of a woman who can be perpetually cheerful when her husband is such a rude and unsociable person all the time (honorable though he may be).

I LOVE the voice acting for Mrs. Palmer on the Sense and Sensibility and Sea Monsters recording. "Do you know, Mr. Palmer, that you are quite RUDE?"

[MrsJoseph]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

We would have been best friends, I can tell.

I do not find Darcy attractive; I think he will be an utter pain to live with and that Lizzy will regret the marriage. I do not find Rochester worthy of attention; I think Jane made a huge mistake going back. I do not find Romeo even remotely sympathetic; I think the point of the play is that he's a capricious idiot who falls in "love" every five minutes and that the whole "romance" would have fizzled out in a month's time if the families hadn't been so stupid.

These are heresies in the Eng/Lit departments, I know. Well, among the freshmen gals anyway.

I agree about Darcy and his horrible attitude...but not quite sure who she would have ended up with...other than the cousin? That could have been a good match for her.

Agreed with Jane. Ugh.

And Romeo? Jeez, wasn't he just a ball full of hormones, teenage angst, and drama? I just couldn't figure out who was the biggest drama queen between him and Juliet.

[anamardoll]

I just have to believe there was SOMEONE ELSE in the whole world that would have been a better husband than Darcy and who would have married Lizzy.

'Course, I'm not a huge Lizzy fan, either, but most of the things I dislike her for are tied to her liking Darcy, so....

[RDaneel54]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I have read - and enjoyed - several of John Norman's "Gor" books .

Oh, Harry, I'm so disappointed. Not really.

My sad confession is that I keep reading J. D. Robb's "In Death" series. No excuse.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by issybird

I agree with you about Romeo and Juliet. Romeo would have moved on in another week or so and Juliet was just an addlepated 13-year old girl in love with love.

This made me think of the R&H Cinderella musical:

"Falling in love with love is falling for make-believe;
falling in love with love is playing the fool..."

Sure it's a Villain Song, but it's one you can get behind.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

OK, fair enough, if the choice is between living with Darcy and living with her mother, then MAYBE Darcy is better. (Except, you know, that a key member of Darcy's family hates her.) But I still think Lizzy could have taken a third option. Somehow. There HAS to be something better on offer than being a Bennett or being a Darcy.

I dunno. Realistically speaking, was another eligible young man of independent means who was willing to overlook Lizzy's family issues going to show up in their neighborhood? Perhaps, just perhaps, Lizzy could have spent a lot of time with her aunt and with Jane and met someone that way, but I think it was a longshot and becoming increasingly longer as time passed. Eventually she might have come to envy Charlotte and regret her choice.

Otherwise, her alternative would have been to become a governess or a lady's companion. I'd much rather be mistress of Pemberley, myself. And while Lizzy would have to eat a lot of s**t from Darcy about her inferior origins, she could have taken some pleasure from a delicately arched eyebrow every time Lady Catherine offended.

I like Emma myself, for the social commentary, but I think Mr. Knightley is a creep of the pedophile variety.

[anamardoll]

You're probably right about Lizzy's prospects... but then it's almost a tragedy of a tale.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds Knightley creepy. I'm not particularly attracted to men who like to condescendingly lecture me, though.