SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic - Books you are told are good that end up pissing you off

Posted: May 23 2009 05:31 am

The Grapes of Wrath is the only story I was forced to read in high school I absolutely hated. To me it is not genius to put chapters between the story that add nothing to it. It is just annoying and I hated reading it. Now I love to read, but honestly it is no thanks to high school. I didn't pick up a book for enjoyment again until I was about 26. High school had the opposite effect it should have for me. To be balanced I think English and literature should be balanced so the student reads 50% what they want to read and 50% what they are required. There should be some choice. If not I think it can permanently turn people off to reading altogether, which is not what school is about. Yes, it is important to learn about the classics, but it is equally as important to keep reading an enjoyable exercise.

Title: Titlating Joined: Dec 17 2007 Posts: 5042

I really liked wicked

Posted: May 23 2009 03:31 pm

jackfrost wrote:

The Grapes of Wrath is the only story I was forced to read in high school I absolutely hated. To me it is not genius to put chapters between the story that add nothing to it. It is just annoying and I hated reading it. Now I love to read, but honestly it is no thanks to high school. I didn't pick up a book for enjoyment again until I was about 26. High school had the opposite effect it should have for me. To be balanced I think English and literature should be balanced so the student reads 50% what they want to read and 50% what they are required. There should be some choice. If not I think it can permanently turn people off to reading altogether, which is not what school is about. Yes, it is important to learn about the classics, but it is equally as important to keep reading an enjoyable exercise.

Yeah, I agree totally, although I was lucky because I an literally a reading addict so it didn't ruin as many books for me as it could have. I discovered "Of Mice and Men" in high school, for example, and that made Steinbeck (along with Mark Twain) my favorite American author.

As for Wrath, though, I totally agreed at the time. My friends and I spent the entire unit making fun of chapter 3, in which Steinbeck spends 25 pages discussing the intricacies of a turtle crossing the road. I understand its a metaphor for the Joads and all that, but holy god it was painful to read at the time. Going back to the story years later, though, Grapes of Wrath has become my second favorite book of his, extra chapters and all. It really is a beautiful and well told story.

Random English-geek trivia: you may already know this, but one of the reasons Wrath is so long is that Steinbeck was paid by the word. The more he wrote, the more he got paid. It took publishers a while to see the error of this way of calculating salary lol.

Posted: May 23 2009 03:58 pm

Don't get me wrong, I love many classic novels and my book collection is very extensive. I have every book Charles Dickens ever wrote, the complete works of Edgar Allen Poe, almost all of Mark Twains work, every play ever written by Shakespeare, the Odyssey and the Iliad, and many others I cannot think of to list at the moment. I haven't read them all obviously, but when I get the urge to read I pick one at random and have at it. Some I enjoyed, and some I did not. Still, I have the ability to pick what to read though. I'm not saying that a student should be able to pick from any book ever written, but if a unit focuses on the work of a particular author then I think it is best to let the student decide what work to choose. One of my professors in college took this philosophy and I thoroughly enjoyed her class.

Posted: May 23 2009 04:20 pm

A facebook quiz told me to read Crime and Punishment. This may very well end up being on topic, but what are some opinions on it? Because I'm willing to give it a shot.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Ross Rifle wrote:

A facebook quiz told me to read Crime and Punishment. This may very well end up being on topic, but what are some opinions on it? Because I'm willing to give it a shot.

Almost everything Dostoevsky wrote was brilliant, but Crime and Punishment was his best work - but then again, I just love existentialism with a religious base instead of the atheistic base that early 20th Century Western European existentialism had.

Posted: May 23 2009 08:51 pm

I freaking hate Paulo Coelho.
Seriously, read anything made by this self-called prophet and cringe in disgust.
How can this guy be called a literary genius?

Posted: May 23 2009 09:03 pm

Cattivo wrote:

Ross Rifle wrote:

A facebook quiz told me to read Crime and Punishment. This may very well end up being on topic, but what are some opinions on it? Because I'm willing to give it a shot.

Almost everything Dostoevsky wrote was brilliant, but Crime and Punishment was his best work - but then again, I just love existentialism with a religious base instead of the atheistic base that early 20th Century Western European existentialism had.

I second this. Crime and Punishment is probably the best, but Brothers Karamazov is my favorite. I'm not a huge fan of Russian Lit as a rule, but its hard to go wrong with Dotsty. Any collection of his essays/short stories are great too, and might be a better place to start if you've never read them before. His novels are amazing, but they are beasts.

Catti, since you're an existentialism fan, have you read Camus? The Stranger is one of my favorite books. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it if you've read it.

Title: Hugh Joined: Sep 23 2007 Posts: 1591

I just finished re-reading Crime and Punishment. Wonderful, wonderful book.

Anyway, back on topic. I love Morley Callaghan, he's probably my favorite author ever. Such is My Beloved was an extremely good book most of the way through, and the ending was very nice, but how he transitioned into it pissed me off considerably.

Also, War and Peace. I like a lot of Russian lit, and Tolstoy's generally no exception, but I just found this book to be uninteresting and boring. I thoroughly enjoyed Anna Karenina, but fuck War and Peace.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

SoldierHawk wrote:

Catti, since you're an existentialism fan, have you read Camus? The Stranger is one of my favorite books. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it if you've read it.

Read the Stranger in college, I believe it's the only Camus I've read. I liked it, and it is one of the best 20th Century existential novellas (certainly doesn't beat Sartre's Nausea though). However, I of course vehemently disliked Camus' diatribe against religion at the end, through the framing of the conversation with the priest.

Now, on a related note, time for me to go to mass for the first time in six weeks or so.... Laughing

Posted: May 24 2009 02:18 pm

You know, I actually forgot about the part with the priest. Re-reading it a few minutes ago, I seem to recall it was one of my favorite parts of the book. Not because its anti-religion (I'm not religious myself; pretty ambivalent on the issue) but because it felt like the character was finally standing up for himself. I can see how Camus would kinda cheese off a person of faith though, lol. I didn't even think about that.

I LOVE Nausea, though. I can't say I'm a huge fan of Sarte (he gets a little too obtuse for my taste), but that was an amazing book. He really deserved that Nobel Prize he didn't accept. (But, I guess there is some irony that he wrote a book railing against materialism etc, and ended up getting that kind of award for it.)

Posted: May 25 2009 03:41 pm

Hey, I just read The Stranger a few weeks ago!

Posted: May 25 2009 06:10 pm

Syd Lexia wrote:

I'm going to go with James Joyce's "classic" novel Ulysses. It is absolutely terrible.

What a terribly terrible coincidence, Syd. I'm reading this for Literacy in college and heck, it's bizarre to the core.

Posted: Jun 07 2009 02:38 am

I'll throw in and say the Iliad, granted it's not utter crap, but it kind of dragged for me at the beginning of the Iliad, which starts in the middle of the Trojan War with Achilles throwing a bitchfest to his mommy begging her to have the gods intervene because Agamemnon takes his war prize in the form of Briseis, because he's throwing his own crybaby rant about having to give back his woman prize because he pisses off Apollo.

Many of these ancient stories operate on the premise that the reader already knows quite a bit of background story. It's interesting how many "facts" get filled in as you read various ancient writings, like the fall of Troy starting with the story of the Trojan Horse mentioned in Virgils Aeneid. Some of these stories lost through the ages with only a few surviving sentences . I would probably say it would be highly frustrating if I had NO knowledge of the backstory prior to reading it.

Posted: Jun 07 2009 03:58 am

TheThunderThief wrote:

I'll throw in and say the Iliad, granted it's not utter crap, but it kind of dragged for me at the beginning of the Iliad, which starts in the middle of the Trojan War with Achilles throwing a bitchfest to his mommy begging her to have the gods intervene because Agamemnon takes his war prize in the form of Briseis, because he's throwing his own crybaby rant about having to give back his woman prize because he pisses off Apollo.

Many of these ancient stories operate on the premise that the reader already knows quite a bit of background story. It's interesting how many "facts" get filled in as you read various ancient writings, like the fall of Troy starting with the story of the Trojan Horse mentioned in Virgils Aeneid. Some of these stories lost through the ages with only a few surviving sentences . I would probably say it would be highly frustrating if I had NO knowledge of the backstory prior to reading it.

The trick to stuff like the Iliad, Odyssey, and The Tales from the Thousand and One nights is the translation you get. I've read some versions that were excellent reads, and others that were either nerve taxing exercises in deciphering defunct syntax or watered down modern versions for morons. I'd suggest the 70's 80's era Penguin Putnam translations myself, they're not incomprehensible but they're also not dumbed down to an XTREME FAITH MODERN ENGLISH bible level either.

Posted: Jun 07 2009 06:28 am

I just finished reading my third translation, this time it was a translation done by Robert Fagles, it was decent, but was swept up in artistic meandering and dramatization rather than keeping as close to Homer while still being readable, though by no means was it an "idiots guide to the Iliad" affair, it was a rather engaging read actually, but it wasn't as true to the original as something like the Lattimore Translation was/is, which isn't really a bad thing in this case. Although I will say that even though it seems like an insignificant thing, I hate it when they use the Latin/Roman character names, but that's just me.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Part of it may be that the Iliad and the Odyssey are really books in an entire "series" called the Trojan Cycle, and the collection that began the story has been lost through the ages. Taken from an old handout I have in my computer room from my college course on Classical Mythology:

1. Cypria - Causes and First nine years of Trojan War (Lost)
2. Iliad
3. Aethipis - Death of Achilles and Dispute over his armor (Lost)
4. Little Iliad - Trojan Horse and Fall of Troy (Lost)
5. Iliou Persis - Madness of Aias, Arrival of Philoctetes and Sack of Troy (Lost)
6. Nostoi - Return home of Agamemnon, Menelaus and the other heroes (Lost)
7. Odyssey
8. Telegony - Death of Odysseus and its aftermath (Lost)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Cycle

Title: Titlating Joined: Dec 17 2007 Posts: 5042

And also there is a possibility that someone else wrote the illiad instead of Homer which may explain how different the stories are.

Posted: Jun 08 2009 03:38 pm

Cattivo wrote:

Part of it may be that the Iliad and the Odyssey are really books in an entire "series" called the Trojan Cycle, and the collection that began the story has been lost through the ages. Taken from an old handout I have in my computer room from my college course on Classical Mythology:

1. Cypria - Causes and First nine years of Trojan War (Lost)
2. Iliad
3. Aethipis - Death of Achilles and Dispute over his armor (Lost)
4. Little Iliad - Trojan Horse and Fall of Troy (Lost)
5. Iliou Persis - Madness of Aias, Arrival of Philoctetes and Sack of Troy (Lost)
6. Nostoi - Return home of Agamemnon, Menelaus and the other heroes (Lost)
7. Odyssey
8. Telegony - Death of Odysseus and its aftermath (Lost)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_Cycle

Aww they lost a bunch of it? That's weak. Sad

I wonder if any of it was lost when the Library of Alexandria went up in smoke. Confused

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

That's probably a big part of it, as that's usually the culprit when there's a missing piece of classical literature. Damn marauding muslims.

As the wikipedia article says though, excerpts that were referenced in other works that were not lost, are still available, which is why we know the general gist of what happened in the story.

Joined: May 22 2008 Location: Goshen, VA Posts: 6544

Honestly dude, don't blame the loss of your precious Odyssey on Muslims, that makes you pretty laughable to the rest of the real world. I know your political stance, but jesus christ, (no pun intended) grow up. I'm not the biggest fan of muslim religion but I guarantee there are more threats to the US of apple pie and ford trucks than just broke ass terrorists feeding their families bread and sand.

This really isn't directed towards you personally Cattivo, as a 30% Lib, I agree with a lot of your statements. And I realize that invading muslims did cause a lot of text loss over the years.

I really like this quote from Kurt Loder*, to sum up how I feel about government. Obama, Bush, Clinton, Reagan, whatever. They are all rich people with a hunger for power that won't be sustained till the public opinion has wavered towards them. Good luck, most of you. For the rest, well, Rest in Peace is the only thing I can hope for.

"The ascendance of such values - the values of political domination and death - in that part of American culture heretofore shaped by rock and roll humanism can only seem ominous to those who remember the ocean of patriotic gush upon which we floated our southeast asian adventure back in the sixties, who recall how short a step it is from "can do" to "will do" and how little connection there ever has been between loving ones country and dying for ones government" Kurt Loder

Uhh...discuss?

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

Josh, considering that Arab hordes were responsible for the destruction of many western wonders such as the Great Library, the remnants of the Colossus of Rhodes, and much of the Parthenon, I think I'm allowed to hold a grudge over it, especially as a lover of history and its preservation. The expansion of Arab power in the 600s AD was brutal; they forced their new subjects to convert at the edge of a blade, and destroyed the artistic accomplishments of millenia. You have no idea of the amount of literature and historical records that were lost with the Great Library alone. Its loss was tragic to our understanding of our past. We are just lucky that the Catholic Church was able to preserve as much as it could in monasteries.

Also, as a person of Serbian ancestry, I also hold a grudge for the almost 500 year long Ottoman occupation of the Balkans, where the Turks tried everything to erase our culture and Orthodox Christianity. Their rule was barbaric.

So, if you have a problem with my stance, I really don't care. And my viewpoint has nothing to do with my conservatism, but with my ethnicity and historical studies.

Joined: Oct 12 2007 Posts: 821

Cattivo wrote:

Josh, considering that Arab hordes were responsible for the destruction of many western wonders such as the Great Library

There is actually conflict on whether or not the Muslims destroyed the Library of Alexandria, being argued since 1713 starting with Eusebe Renaudot, and is more likely the source of propaganda than being factual. In fact, we have very little knowledge on what really destroyed the library, and the current generally accepted idea is that fire over time and people's indifference was the cause of its destruction.

Edit:

Quote:

Colossus of Rhodes

Wrong, they may have stolen the already destroyed statue, but had nothing to do with its destruction. It was already destroyed by an earthquake several hundred years earlier, and by the time the arabs came, all traces might have been long gone. Still, they did take pieces they believed to be the statue home and sold them.

Joined: Apr 14 2006 Location: Lake Michigan Posts: 3332

nihilisticglee wrote:

There is actually conflict on whether or not the Muslims destroyed the Library of Alexandria

But most of the evidence, while not totally conclusive, points to the Muslims. If they didn't conquer the territory anyway, there would still be evidence from that era that would allow us to know definitively what happened.

nihilisticglee wrote:

Quote:

Colossus of Rhodes

Wrong, they may have stolen the already destroyed statue, but had nothing to do with its destruction.

Hence my use of the of word "remnants." Read entire posts before firing off half-cocked.

Posted: Jun 08 2009 05:57 pm

Don't forget that Muslims were also responsible for the preservation of most of Western history, culture and literature during the Dark Ages though. If it wasn't for them and what they kept, the Renaissance would never have happened.

Not saying you're incorrect Catti--although I think you're being a little absolutist for the amount of evidence there is--but just throwing some other stuff out there.