A literary confession topic - Page 5

MrsJoseph · 08-24-2011, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sweetpea

A confession by me: I still love children's books... And I'll still read any I can get my claws (virtual) on.

Have you tried The Darkangel Trilogy by Meredith Ann Pierce? I loved that series!

ProfCrash · 08-24-2011, 11:43 AM

I can't multi quote at work, no idea why, so I am not going to quote anyone but reference posts.

I think everyone should read John Dos Passos USA trilogy. It is a classic piece of American literature that hardly any one looks at. He was more skilled author then Hemmingway and Fitzgerald and is the equal of Joyce. I love Hemmingway and Fitzgerald, I had a great class in college on the Paris in the 1920's and read a good amount of their work. It was all good but Dos Passos blows them out of the water.

Harry Potter 1 and 2 are ok. The books get significantly more complex and dark starting with the third book. I did not like the seventh book. It was far too long and I really didn't need to spend so much time reading about Harry and his friends camping issues. I wanted the book to occassionally show us what was going on at Hogwarts and thought that the Epilogue was poorly written.

I think that the Bronte sisters wrote some of the worst books I have ever read. They were boring, tedious, and there were hardly any likeable characters. The movies were not much better.

I too love young adult books. The Christian Science Monitor just had an article on the five young adult series that kids should be reading and I bought the first book for all the series. Well not, Hunger Games, I already read that one. Robert Cormier is a genius. The books he wrote are amazing and I think it is a shame that kids do not read more of his work.

Jim Butcher's Codex Alera series was far better then Dresden. The characters were more complex, the environment was more dynamic, and the over all story line moved along at a much better pace. The first book was slow but builds a nice bit of background knowledge that make the rest of the books that much more enjoyable. My Kindles are all some varient of the main characters names.

I have not read anything by Jane Austen. I have no idea how I got through high school without reading her but I did. I read a lot of other stuff though.

Babylon 5 is better then any of the Star Trek series.

I own every James Bond novel.

MrsJoseph · 08-24-2011, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

Babylon 5 is better then any of the Star Trek series.

Anarchy!!!!

elizilla · 08-24-2011, 02:38 PM

I guess that Austen resonates for me, because it seems like the only relationship examples I ever had, growing up, were couples where one is rude and the other is silly. Austen makes comic hay of that dynamic, and I enjoy the chance to laugh at it instead of just crying. There's a whole chicken and egg question there which is interesting. Is the silly a coping mechanism for the rude, or is the rude a coping mechanism for the silly? Austen seems to think they both exist alone, and find each other somehow. Is this true? Also, am I personally a silly person or a rude one? I detect both of them in myself, at different times, and I'm not sure which one I dislike the most.

Also, I like Lydia the best. I know she's supposed to be the bad example, but she's also the one that refuses to be constrained. I wish they all had the strength to run away and get laid.

Daithi · 08-24-2011, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Most old (now public domain world wide) classics are awful. They are dull and dated and not fun to read. As a category, classic is meaningless.

I agree 100%. I have to say that I really like the stories, and I have enjoyed film adaptations of Shakespeare, Austen, Dickens, Melville, and many others. I just don't enjoy reading their stories. The only author that comes to mind who is over 100 years old and that I enjoy reading is Edgar Alan Poe.

I'm also of Irish heritage, and I have to admit, I can't stand James Joyce. Actually, I don't care for a lot of "literary" books, although I do enjoy some -- Steinbeck is one of my favorite authors.

As far a Stephen King: I really liked Cujo and Dolores Claiborne, but I didn't care for The Stand. I also despise Koontz.

Another confession: I really like a lot of the books written for young adults, including the Twilight Series (well, except for the last book).

One more confession: I enjoyed the Hobbit, but could only make it half way through the rest of the LOTR series. It got very monotonous after awhile.

anamardoll · 08-24-2011, 04:25 PM

Ooh! That's a good one. Lord of the Rings confession: I can't stand all the poems and songs and excessive world-building. I don't care about the elf heritage. Just get back to the ring stuff, stop telling me what everyone sits around and eats and talks about in Rivendell for freaking forever.

ProfCrash · 08-24-2011, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Ooh! That's a good one. Lord of the Rings confession: I can't stand all the poems and songs and excessive world-building. I don't care about the elf heritage. Just get back to the ring stuff, stop telling me what everyone sits around and eats and talks about in Rivendell for freaking forever.

LOL I loved the books and enjoyed the world building in them but I was going nuts during the third movie. They could have cut out about half of the Sam/Frodo stuff and I would have been fine. I skipped through most of it in the books.

MrsJoseph · 08-25-2011, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ProfCrash

LOL I loved the books and enjoyed the world building in them but I was going nuts during the third movie. They could have cut out about half of the Sam/Frodo stuff and I would have been fine. I skipped through most of it in the books.

All my male friends lament about the "love scene" between Frodo and Samwise, lol.

ProfCrash · 08-25-2011, 09:55 AM

The Sam Frodo stuff just screwed with the pacin of the movie. It dragged as soon as you went to the two of them. I dragged the pace in the books as well but I could skim through it easily enough.

elcreative · 08-25-2011, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Ooh! That's a good one. Lord of the Rings confession: I can't stand all the poems and songs and excessive world-building. I don't care about the elf heritage. Just get back to the ring stuff, stop telling me what everyone sits around and eats and talks about in Rivendell for freaking forever.

At least J R R can't be blamed for that... it's Christopher that dredges up every last squiggle to publish from his notes and background creation... and a certain group of fans (in the very real fanatic sense) that encourage Christopher by buying every single thing that can be forced into print... started with the Silmarillion and went downhill from there...

Mind you, even J R R could have done with a bit more editing... Tom Bombadil...

ProfCrash · 08-25-2011, 11:17 AM

GRR Martin could stand some serious editing as well.

I liked Tom, maybe a bit long but I liked that part of the book.

crash1211 · 08-25-2011, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Tom Bombadil...

blasphemer I tell you.

He was one of my favorite characters. I understand but, was so disappointed he wasn't in the first movie.

elcreative · 08-25-2011, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crash1211

blasphemer I tell you.

He was one of my favorite characters. I understand but, was so disappointed he wasn't in the first movie.

Now that was one of favourite points in the movie... when I realised we'd passed the Bombadil point without his presence...

anamardoll · 08-25-2011, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crash1211

blasphemer I tell you.

He was one of my favorite characters. I understand but, was so disappointed he wasn't in the first movie.

I'll never understand why people like him. But I don't like over-powered characters in any 'verse.

Noah98 · 08-25-2011, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Most old (now public domain world wide) classics are awful. They are dull and dated and not fun to read. As a category, classic is meaningless.

Now onto something lighter.

Star Trek is better then Star Wars!

This is a really fun topic by the way

1. Love Star Trek but...like Star Wars more! Babylon 5

Firefly is awesome though

2. To address the "classics are meaningless" comment: Some books are not read for entertainment, but enlightenment or information. While the classics may be dull and no longer fun, some serve an important purpose in educating the populace. Someone mentioned Orwell's 1984 as being boring. While I vehemently disagree (I couldn't put it down), I respect the opinion on its "entertainment value," but I hope we can all recognize how profoundly important that novel was and still is as a warning to mankind. Once you give up your personal freedoms and liberties, good luck getting them back!

3. I do agree that unlike 1984, some classics just don't hold up when viewed in a modern lens. For example, Catcher in the Rye is very much a "so what" book now.

Anyway, just my two cents.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Unutterably Silly Corrupt-A-Topic (anymore off-topic and it would be on-topic)	RWood	Lounge	6227	08-18-2023 10:58 PM
Confession	Andrew Kaufman	Amazon Kindle	14	09-11-2010 03:53 PM
Confession	kwjones	Alternative Devices	1	09-10-2010 01:04 AM
Confession.... (I can't believe I did it.)	Stitchawl	Lounge	77	11-07-2009 11:50 AM

08-24-2011, 11:43 AM	#62
ProfCrash Tea Enthusiast Posts: 8,554 Karma: 75384937 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Somewhere in the USA Device: Kindle1, Kindle DX Graphite, K3 3G, IPad 3, PW2	I can't multi quote at work, no idea why, so I am not going to quote anyone but reference posts. I think everyone should read John Dos Passos USA trilogy. It is a classic piece of American literature that hardly any one looks at. He was more skilled author then Hemmingway and Fitzgerald and is the equal of Joyce. I love Hemmingway and Fitzgerald, I had a great class in college on the Paris in the 1920's and read a good amount of their work. It was all good but Dos Passos blows them out of the water. Harry Potter 1 and 2 are ok. The books get significantly more complex and dark starting with the third book. I did not like the seventh book. It was far too long and I really didn't need to spend so much time reading about Harry and his friends camping issues. I wanted the book to occassionally show us what was going on at Hogwarts and thought that the Epilogue was poorly written. I think that the Bronte sisters wrote some of the worst books I have ever read. They were boring, tedious, and there were hardly any likeable characters. The movies were not much better. I too love young adult books. The Christian Science Monitor just had an article on the five young adult series that kids should be reading and I bought the first book for all the series. Well not, Hunger Games, I already read that one. Robert Cormier is a genius. The books he wrote are amazing and I think it is a shame that kids do not read more of his work. Jim Butcher's Codex Alera series was far better then Dresden. The characters were more complex, the environment was more dynamic, and the over all story line moved along at a much better pace. The first book was slow but builds a nice bit of background knowledge that make the rest of the books that much more enjoyable. My Kindles are all some varient of the main characters names. I have not read anything by Jane Austen. I have no idea how I got through high school without reading her but I did. I read a lot of other stuff though. Babylon 5 is better then any of the Star Trek series. I own every James Bond novel.

08-24-2011, 02:38 PM	#64
elizilla Addict Posts: 271 Karma: 610286 Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Michigan, USA Device: Kobo Elipsa, Kindle Paperwhite, Kobo Sage, others	I guess that Austen resonates for me, because it seems like the only relationship examples I ever had, growing up, were couples where one is rude and the other is silly. Austen makes comic hay of that dynamic, and I enjoy the chance to laugh at it instead of just crying. There's a whole chicken and egg question there which is interesting. Is the silly a coping mechanism for the rude, or is the rude a coping mechanism for the silly? Austen seems to think they both exist alone, and find each other somehow. Is this true? Also, am I personally a silly person or a rude one? I detect both of them in myself, at different times, and I'm not sure which one I dislike the most. Also, I like Lydia the best. I know she's supposed to be the bad example, but she's also the one that refuses to be constrained. I wish they all had the strength to run away and get laid.

08-24-2011, 04:25 PM	#66
anamardoll Chasing Butterflies Posts: 3,132 Karma: 5074169 Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: American Southwest Device: Uses batteries.	Ooh! That's a good one. Lord of the Rings confession: I can't stand all the poems and songs and excessive world-building. I don't care about the elf heritage. Just get back to the ring stuff, stop telling me what everyone sits around and eats and talks about in Rivendell for freaking forever.

08-25-2011, 09:55 AM	#69
ProfCrash Tea Enthusiast Posts: 8,554 Karma: 75384937 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Somewhere in the USA Device: Kindle1, Kindle DX Graphite, K3 3G, IPad 3, PW2	The Sam Frodo stuff just screwed with the pacin of the movie. It dragged as soon as you went to the two of them. I dragged the pace in the books as well but I could skim through it easily enough.

08-25-2011, 11:17 AM	#71
ProfCrash Tea Enthusiast Posts: 8,554 Karma: 75384937 Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Somewhere in the USA Device: Kindle1, Kindle DX Graphite, K3 3G, IPad 3, PW2	GRR Martin could stand some serious editing as well. I liked Tom, maybe a bit long but I liked that part of the book.

Advert

Advert