SydLexia.com - The Forums :: View topic

Title: Alexz Aficionado Joined: May 21 2008 Posts: 2889

"A classic is something that everybody wants to have read and nobody wants to read." --Mark Twain

So, on the last play I worked on this semester one of the books used as props somehow got backstage. I found it early on and since I had never read it, opened it up and read it through the production. I DID NOT finish it, but I plan to.

That book was H.G. Well's "The Time Machine".

I haven't seen the original movie, but the book is laid out so different from the Guy Pierce remake. Fascinating book. It's definitely one of those that makes you wonder.

The Forward and Ependices were longer than the ACTUAL book :p Th book itself is about 150 pages. I got through about half before the show ended and the props went back to their owners homes. Funny how they added far more to the book than the book's actual size. Footnotes, cited sources, editorial pieces, another otherwise useless junk filled the nonstory part of the volume I read from, but it was helpful for older terms I was unfamiliar with.

But I digress....

I also tried to read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn for the heck of it as well while working as an Extra during downtime, but the language drove me nuts Smile

Anyone else pick up a classic and discover on your own why it was a classic? This is mainly since school's "force" that reading on you and you don't appreciate it.

I think it has to be done willingly to be effective.

Joined: Jun 10 2008 Posts: 172

I've read Moby Dick.
That is the only reason I read it; to say "i've ready Moby Dick"

Posted: Oct 26 2009 03:12 pm

Too many to count. Confused

That's not being a snob, its just because I love reading almost more than anything else, *especially* classics. So I break them out/re-read them all the time "just because," in the same way I go back to my favorite classic games time and time again.

Posted: Oct 26 2009 04:45 pm

i would say 'the great gatsby' but i had to do that for school.

robinson crusoe, i read just because. also, oliver twist, dracula, frankenstein. im sure there are more, but like soldierhawk, i just like to read.

Title: Hugh Joined: Sep 23 2007 Posts: 1591

Yeah, I'm like those two. Umm... I don't think I've ever read a classic book for the first time not just because...

And Ghandi, you son of a bitch, there's no "The" in Huck Finn, Twain very deliberately titled it Adventures of Huckleberry Finn!

Posted: Oct 26 2009 08:20 pm

I've got really old copies of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Can't remember how old but I wanna say early 1900s. They have Samuel Clemens as the author instead of his famous pen name.

Posted: Oct 26 2009 08:24 pm

Blackout wrote:

I've got really old copies of Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and The Adventures of Tom Sawyer. Can't remember how old but I wanna say early 1900s. They have Samuel Clemens as the author instead of his famous pen name.

That is SO effing badassed. If you ever want to unload them for a decent amount of money, CALL ME FIRST!

Posted: Oct 26 2009 08:27 pm

My Grandpa got them from some library that was closing in Salt Lake City, he paid like 50 cents a piece for em. Cool

I'll dig em out and see what year their from when I get home tonight.

Title: Hugh Joined: Sep 23 2007 Posts: 1591

Best I've got is a first edition Nineteen Eighty-four I bought for eight dollars.[/i]

Posted: Oct 26 2009 08:56 pm

Captain_Pollution wrote:

Best I've got is a first edition Nineteen Eighty-four I bought for eight dollars.[/i]

Offer goes for you too!

Title: Pretty Sweet Guy Joined: Oct 21 2009 Posts: 139

I've always wanted to read Moby Dick, but I figured it was probably a overly-pretentious "classic."

Posted: Oct 26 2009 10:14 pm

Danse Macabra wrote:

I've always wanted to read Moby Dick, but I figured it was probably a overly-pretentious "classic."

Part of it is. If you read the whole thing, you'll end up knowing more about whales and whaling than you ever cared to. My advice to to find a good abridged version that's all story, and cuts out the excess. If you really like it, you can always go back and get a full copy.

Title: Pretty Sweet Guy Joined: Oct 21 2009 Posts: 139

SoldierHawk wrote:

Danse Macabra wrote:

I've always wanted to read Moby Dick, but I figured it was probably a overly-pretentious "classic."

Part of it is. If you read the whole thing, you'll end up knowing more about whales and whaling than you ever cared to. My advice to to find a good abridged version that's all story, and cuts out the excess. If you really like it, you can always go back and get a full copy.

I may.

Posted: Oct 26 2009 11:34 pm

I currently hold the record of being the only guy in my high school that has read Bram Stoker's Dracula.

Also, I was big fan for Salinger's work the Laughing man and Catcher in the Rye

Posted: Oct 27 2009 03:12 pm

For whom the Bell Tolls by Ernest Hemingway

Posted: Oct 27 2009 03:20 pm

I've been worming my way through The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens. 1950s first Polish Edition as far as I know. I've been trying to get that book read for a year now and yeah...

It sucks. I don't know how it could have been popular back in the day.

I mean, it has a very strong beginning, but as soon as the main characters get to Manor Farm and all these romances start going on, I sorta... Lost focus. I'm going to start it again in November.

Posted: Oct 27 2009 09:43 pm

Nineteen Eighty Four- The most boring book AND we had to watch the movie. I fail to see what's so good about it, and why 1/4 of my friends think it's "AWESOME".

Posted: Oct 27 2009 09:46 pm

Nekkoru wrote:

I've been worming my way through The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens. 1950s first Polish Edition as far as I know. I've been trying to get that book read for a year now and yeah...

It sucks. I don't know how it could have been popular back in the day.

I mean, it has a very strong beginning, but as soon as the main characters get to Manor Farm and all these romances start going on, I sorta... Lost focus. I'm going to start it again in November.

Ugh, could not agree more. I love a lot of Dickens' shorter stuff--Christmas Carol, Tale of Two Cities, etc. But his longer, drawn out novels are simply...ugh.

Spra, really not a fan of 1984 eh? Confused

That's too bad. How long ago did you read it? And which version of the movie did they show you? The one actually made in 1984 is far better than the ridiculous 50s version. (Although, I can see where if you didn't already appreciate the story, the movie could be quite boring indeed.)

Posted: Oct 27 2009 10:03 pm

SoldierHawk wrote:

Nekkoru wrote:

I've been worming my way through The Pickwick Papers by Charles Dickens. 1950s first Polish Edition as far as I know. I've been trying to get that book read for a year now and yeah...

It sucks. I don't know how it could have been popular back in the day.

I mean, it has a very strong beginning, but as soon as the main characters get to Manor Farm and all these romances start going on, I sorta... Lost focus. I'm going to start it again in November.

Ugh, could not agree more. I love a lot of Dickens' shorter stuff--Christmas Carol, Tale of Two Cities, etc. But his longer, drawn out novels are simply...ugh.

Spra, really not a fan of 1984 eh? Confused

That's too bad. How long ago did you read it? And which version of the movie did they show you? The one actually made in 1984 is far better than the ridiculous 50s version. (Although, I can see where if you didn't already appreciate the story, the movie could be quite boring indeed.)

(I really need to elaborate more on my posts Wink

)

We saw the one made in'84, the movie was just too depressing. I understood the political elements and what it was trying to say, I just wasn't feeling it.

We read the book last year, it just didn't grasp my attention as much as I thought it would, the whole alternate historical timeline and newspeak/thought crime was the only thing that grabbed my interest for a bit.

But we never finished it through.

Posted: Oct 27 2009 10:11 pm

^ Well, I have good news for you: if that movie depressed you, then congratulations: you're human and you have a heart! Wink

1984 is one of those books I think you have to actively pay attention TO. Its certainly not exciting in the traditional sense, even towards the end when (spoiler Rolling Eyes

) the shit really hits the fan. I highly advocate you taking another look at in in a few months (or few years) and giving it another chance. I don't think you'll be sorry you did.

UsaSatsui's Youtube Channel · Posted: Oct 27 2009 11:27 pm

The Hobbit.

Man, that was tedious.

Posted: Oct 28 2009 12:37 am

SoldierHawk wrote:

^ Well, I have good news for you: if that movie depressed you, then congratulations: you're human and you have a heart! Wink

1984 is one of those books I think you have to actively pay attention TO. Its certainly not exciting in the traditional sense, even towards the end when (spoiler Rolling Eyes

) the shit really hits the fan. I highly advocate you taking another look at in in a few months (or few years) and giving it another chance. I don't think you'll be sorry you did.

I started it and stopped. It was almost fatigueing reading 1984, it just didn't hold my attention span and I got confused at times because I'd drift in and out while reading occasionally(reading but thinking of something else).

I want to finish it though, I'll just have to be dedicated next time and take your advice and really pay attention. It definately doesn't seem to be a casual read.

Posted: Oct 28 2009 12:39 am

1984 is indeed awesome. never saw the movie though.

Joined: Apr 09 2008 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 3112

Those god-awful stories they make you read just because they're old. If I have one more college class that makes me read Beowulf or Gilgamesh, I'll stab myself.

Or, drop the class.

Posted: Oct 28 2009 09:09 am

I started reading "Our Mutual Friend" because of its appearance on "LOST", but I didn't make it very far at all. That and if I ever finished it, I would have to die -- or never read another book again.