I hope you were thinking in sonorous tones as you read the title. That's how it rang in my head.
Doing some research for a little idea of mine, I found a few Top 100 books lists. I would like to know if any of you truly like any of these books.
- The Great Gatsby (You'll have to work hard to convince me that it's worth much. I do concede, however, that Fitzgerald is a fantastic writer.)
- The Catcher in the Rye
- The Grapes of Wrath
- The Color Purple
- Ulysses
- Beloved
- The Sound and the Fury
- Lolita
- The Sun Also Rises
Etc... Okay, so do you truly like any of these books? Why are they considered such good books? I know people have different opinions about lots of things. For example, I really do enjoy most vegetables and I know a lot of people gag over them. But my personal opinion is that most people consider themselves smart for reading and "liking" these kind of books. I read a lovely essay by Shannon Hale. So what do you think?
P.S. This is not my opinion of ALL classics and popular books. I find many of them delightful. I honestly did enjoy "Les Miserables." The unabridged version. In addition to being a classic, it was a beautiful book.
Best Auto Claims Management Services
1 year ago
25 comments:
I think the only book I've read on your list is "The Great Gatsby". In the 9th grade I didn't like it and I don't really plan on seeing if that has changed. I read the essay you posted here (so funny and true). It makes me feel less guilty about the "classics" I always meant to read, but didn't. I'm not exactly picky as far as being a "literature snob" as long as it initially grabs my attention, but there are some books that I have to put down because the writing is so painful that I can't even get to the story. Caleb and I occasionally discuss what books we read in high school, college, etc. that should be left off the reading list entirely because the author/book is famous, but we can't figure out why. Recently I finished "David Copperfield". I have to admit I'm not a big Dickens fan (I've read "A Christmas Carol" and that's about it), but I really enjoyed this one. He is a talented writer because if my future self had told my past self "Its about a guy's life" I never would have picked it up. Maybe that's why I haven't read it until now. I admit that (when I can find a good book) I still read into the wee hours. :)
Deb - I haven't read most of those books, either. But I know enough about them. I really enjoyed "A Christmas Carol" too. I haven't read "David Copperfield," but it's on my list. Morgan and I have the same kind of conversations as you and Caleb about why books/authors stay famous.
Just as a general note, I realize that one doesn't have to enjoy a book or like a book for the book to be good. But I'm just trying to say that neither should you have to hate a book for it to be good. :)
I skimmed "Color Purple" when I was in 7th grade because I'd seen the movie a few times. It was a bit more disturbing than the movie, but I was still...intrigued? It was a world very unfamiliar to me and while it was sad, tragic, and a bit worrisome, it still left me with a "hmmm" at the end. Again, I skimmed it.
The rest of your list? I've never read. Well, I did read the first few pages of "Beloved" and thought I'd fall asleep. And my teacher let us watch "Grapes..." instead of read it. Still depressing of a story and I'd rather not endure the book.
Of course, you and I have had this "classic" conversation a lot. :-)
Heidi - Yes, we have had that conversation a lot. :) Thank you for being the one to pass the Shannon Hale essay on. :)
I loved the Grapes of Wrath--depressing yet their is still kindness and human decency found in the family. I really liked Beloved, but it is weird. I didn't like the Catcher and the Rye, and find it hard to accept that it an be apart of High School curriculum because the main character is so disturbed. I also read The Color Purple--well written, but the law of chastity is warped. They don't always show evil as being evil. The only James Joyce that I have read is Portrait of an Artist. Have you read The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society? I really loved the book--read it in about two days and couldn't put it down. Lately I tend to read children's literature because it is well written with good morals. I also read a ton of education books!
The Great Gatsby - eh. The Sun Also Rises - wasn't that one mostly about a guy who lost his HmmmHmmm during the war? I don't remember much else about that book. You want to know another terrible book: Tess of the D'urbervilles.
I agree with you on so many levels. One of my friends told me that after getting his Masters it took him years and years to want to read again because of all the reading he had to do for school. (but then I can't say much - I'm a now a self confessed non-reader - I'm hoping once we move out to NC I can get a library card and go to work on getting my groove back)
I really enjoyed the essay you linked. Thanks!
Svedi Pie--I know what you mean. Just a BA in English and I still find trouble getting back into reading the "classics"--even the ones I did like!!!
You're moving to NC!! We must chat and see if you'll be nearby!
Kaylynn - I hate when morality is warped so evil isn't evil. I'm much less picky about bad things if at least it is shown as such. But I agree with you. "The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society" was FANTASTIC! I couldn't put it down either. What a great read! And so interesting.
Shara - I hope you get back into the groove with reading. You should come down and visit MY library. I'll give you all sorts of books that will make you into a reader again.
To all - I just read a wonderful little story last night. It's VERY short. Called "In Our Strange Gardens." The first book dealing with WWII I've liked since "And There Was Light." It's very short and very sweet. Watch out for a little language, though.
-I've read The Great Gatsby three times (every time for a class). It was only this last time I really got anything out of it. I find it profoundly tragic. How many times have you wanted something (like Gatsby wants Daisy), and you never knew what a waste it was, because you were so enamored with it? Plus, writing Nick as the narrator was brilliant, and first of it's kind.
-Don't tell, but I've never read Catcher in the Rye.
-The Grapes of Wrath is so heartbreaking, macabre, and brutal I've only finished it once. I definitely believe it is a Great American Classic. It illustrates the Dust Bowl culture in a way no other work has captured it.
-I've only read the Color Purple once. I see the point, because the main character must overcome so much in order to become the strong woman she is by the end. Nevertheless, I found the book overall, tangential. It never stays focused for too long, and I don't appreciate the pornographic descriptions.
-I can't stand James Joyce. I can't stand stream of conscious. I can't stand Ulysses.
-Beloved is a bitter pill. It took me a long while to see the point. I'm still not sure I get it.
-The Sound and the Fury has one of the first successful multiple narrations in Modern literature. That's why it's "Great."
-Lolita? Jury is still out on this one. I'm not sure the ends justify the means.
-I hated the Sun Also Rises. But I loved the Old Man and the Sea and For Whom the Bell Tolls, so I partially forgive Hemingway for being a misogynist pig.
Becky - I appreciate your perspective. I know we have widely differing tastes in books, but I always love knowing what you think about something. :)
Oh, oh--but we all agree on Austen and Montgomery, right?!?! :-)
Wahoo! Absolutely!
Sara Lyn, I always write my response to a book on the inside cover as soon as I have read the last sentence. In a recent reading, which I would not recommend because you would surely add it to this list, I wrote: "Though I read with some trepidation, discomfort and often distaste, this story of cynicism and spoiled lives is written by a thrilling pen." That's why they are considered "great" in my opinion. As Elder Eyring asked the BYU chair of Humanities: why do we teach The Great Gatsby?...the answer this academic discovered is that we need to experience the lives of many people, to know their souls, their stories and their "whys" if we are to resist the temptation, when we are gods, of thunder-bolting into oblivion, all of the obviously stupid people. :)
Mona - We've talked about this before. I really would like to read that talk by Elder Eyring. I thing it's interesting that you write your opinion on the cover when you read something. I still find my opinions changing enough that I am not brave enough to put something in ink about a lot of things. I keep learning things to change my mind. :) Does this improve with experience or am I just flighty? :) Out of curiosity, which book were you reacting to?
Sara Lyn-Not to budge in on your discussion with Mona, but I'm like you: I reevaluate as I grow and learn. I'm inclined to believe, unless it has something to do with my core beliefs (Gospel & Personal Constitution), it only benefits me to analyze my thought processes and conclusions. I've discovered my original thoughts were either brought into a sharper focus or I had more pieces to play with when they shattered. I don't feel it's being flighty to change your mind, when there's a well thought out reason. The alternative is upholding beliefs for which you have no conviction. To me that's worse than lying. It's lying about lying.
Heidi-We will always agree about Austen and Montgomery! Absolutely!
Whew! What a relief!
Mona--weren't you reading "Reading Lolita in Tehran" recently?
I would like to read the Elder Eyring talk, too. I know I've heard about it. I agree with him in what he said, for that is one reason I read some of the things that I do. It's a way for me to learn of other perspectives and lives and views out there which are not my own and do not require me to change who I am or what I believe to try to broaden my knowledge and perspective. Reading "Annie on My Mind" is one example. I don't want to read other books of that kind, but I am still grateful for the perspectives it gave me. And you should SEE the comments I have gotten on my GoodReads review. Many of them have required prayer on my part before I could respond, but it has been doing what Elder Ballard said we should with tools of technology.
I think this quote by Dallin H. Oaks sums up my feelings:
"During my lifetime I have seen a strong trend to set aside entertainment that builds up and dignifies the children of God and to replace it with portrayals and performances that are depressing, demeaning, and destructive. The powerful idea in this contrast is that whatever builds people up serves the cause of the Master, and whatever tears people down serves the cause of the adversary. We support one cause or the other every day by our patronage and by our thoughts and desires. This should remind us of our responsibility to support what is good and motivate us toward doing this in a way that will be pleasing to Him whose suffering offers us hope and whose example gives us direction."
I think, however, SOMETIMES we disagree on what builds and what destroys, what depresses and edifies. Yes? No?
Hey, I'm pretty sure I left a comment here the other day. How come it didn't show? *sniff* I see what's going on here. Your blog just doesn't like me!
Yes, I agress. I know there are things that tear me down that have built others up and vice versa. I could think of some examples between just you and me! I know some books that just didn't do it for you, and they did me (like "Kite Runner"). I like that it can be personal that way. Another great thing about reading!
As long as we are aware of what is building up and what is not, and then act upon it. I became aware of that when I was a teenager. I could sense that my life was starting to get agitated if it was a book that was tearing me down. This could definitely be seen in my piano playing. Even I have to learn my own piano signals.
Jury's still out on whether or not it's because "Jacob Have I Loved" did not build me up, or I did not allow myself enough time afterwards to contemplate before jumping into the next book, or because the next book I started was screaming "NO!" from page one. I know I didn't like the book. I just wish I could tell if I gained something that was uplifting. I have my doubts on that. And I know how you feel about it! :-)
Serene - I like you even if my blog doesn't. Sorry! I'd like to hear what you have to say.
Heidi - Serene I think is the one who used to be able to tell my mood from my piano playing. I still can't do that. :)
Wow, I don't have much to say after all those good comments. Yet, I must say something. :) I remember not enjoying "Great Gatsby" much, but thinking it was (comparatively) one of the best books I read in high school. Maybe that's because despite not really liking it, I felt I actually learned something.
I don't think I've read any of the others.
As a side, I love finding gems that are not mainstream or popular (though I also enjoy some mainstream and popular as well). "Les Miserables" was one of my all-time favorites, and it was TOTALLY worth reading the unabridged, though it took me 3 years.
Seth - What did you learn from "The Great Gatsby?" What are some of the gems you've found? I know you liked "Three Cups of Tea." I started reading "Stones into Schools" and then had to return it to the library because other people had it on hold. I need it for a longer time. :)
I don't remember all the specifics of "The Great Gatsby", just that I learned something. :) But it was interesting to learn some of the habits of the time period and prohibition (tell me if I have the story all wrong), and I believe it had a good theme or two to it. I think I'd have to go back and read it sometime.
I feel like Seth, in that I don't feel like I have much to add to the conversation. I really did enjoy going through some of the "classics" in high school and college, but hated others.
I just wanted to say that I agree most with the comments about evil being portrayed as evil. I can put up with any number of twisted, foolish, or immoral characters, just so long as the author's morality is clear. I think a lot of good, and a lot of empathy, can be developed from reading into the minds of people who don't live as they should. It's when the authors who are immoral or amoral (which is, in my opinion, even more dangerous) try to pass off such behaviors as acceptable or worth emulating that I get a foul taste in my mouth and need to find something else.
I know I'm late on the discussion but I wanted to post a quote for your thoughtful digestion - I'm going to write about it on my blog when I get a free moment to be creative.
"It is only fair to warn you that literature can be seductively engaging, so engaging as to become a substitute for life. What thoughtful readers seek from literature is just the opposite--not a flight from reality, but an illumination of it, a new vision of things as they are. Good readers seek not to escape life's problems, but to examine them more closely. Be warned, on the other hand, that literature can be grueling. Though you read it slouched at a desk or lying in the shade of a tree, literature will demand the best of you: it will assail your emotions; it will badger your mind; it will threaten your assumptions about your world and even about yourself." -- from one of my syllabi :)
Post a Comment