books with titles that don't fit

[cacian]

Have you ever come across a book with a title that you thought did not fit?
An example of mine:

The Sound and The Fury - William Faulkner

I still to this day cannot link or work out how this title ever fitted in the story.
I know that the title is taken from:

Macbeth's solliloquy in act 5, scene 5 of from MacBeth




"Tomorrow tomorrow and tomorrow
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day
To the last syllable of recorded time,
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."



The other question is how allowed is anyone from taking a quote from another author and using it as a title to their book?

[Gregory Samsa]

Boris Vian - Autumn in Peking.
The story takes not place in Peking or in autumn.

[KCurtis]

Yes, Martin Amis does this, I hate it, and I won't read his books.

[tscherff]

have you read the book?
it is an excellent title if you have read and understand the book
the book is about the sound and the fury of life in all its inanities. you need to read the whole quote, not just the the three words

[AlysonofBathe]

I'd focus mostly on these lines:

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Makes perfect sense in the context of the story.

[JuniperWoolf]

The Grapes of Wrath takes some figuring to connect the title to the novel.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

It's still an odd title, though. This isn't necessarily meant to be critical--I just think when most hear The Sound and the Fury, they think of a high-seas adventure. I did, at least.

Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake is a title that comes to mind. It's a perfectly apt title; it just sounds really stupid. At first glance, I thought it said "onyx and cake," and I always think of that.

[JuniperWoolf]

At first glance, I thought it said "onyx and cake," and I always think of that.

Haha, me too.

[cacian]

have you read the book?
it is an excellent title if you have read and understand the book
the book is about the sound and the fury of life in all its inanities. you need to read the whole quote, not just the the three words

yes I have I studied at university I still don't see how it links.
I did not like the book either I thought it was a miserable one to be given as a study reference.
PLus ir did it annoy me that the writer took somebody else's quote I am guessing without permisssion to write a story I did not think was worth reading.


The Grapes of Wrath takes some figuring to connect the title to the novel.

Yes that is another one and also isn't it a biblical reference of some sort?


I'd focus mostly on these lines:

It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.

Makes perfect sense in the context of the story.

Hi Alyson
with all due respect I can get into my head how an idiot/supposidely incapable can actually make any sound let alone express some kind of furiosity.
If one is an idiot one is incapable of tales for one would not make any sense let a put a sentence together.


There are no problems, only solutions.









J

what becomes of binary then?


I am reading Laura Day's How To Rule The World From Your Couch which is a book on how to develop one's intuition. I think she would say that the question, "problem", comes first and then the solution and the more specific the question is the better will the solution be.

Although that might be an obvious answer, probably one I would have given myself without thinking much on the topic, she does have an interest in the ordering of this: pose the specific question, put the question aside so one's conscious thinking does not get in the way, then wait for a solution from the subconscious.

To pose a question one needs specifis/someting to ask the question about or for.
a question comes because one realises something.
Substantialism is what I mean.
Then
should a question always indicate that there is a problem or could it be part of the solution?

[Whifflingpin]

"The other question is how allowed is anyone from taking a quote from another author and using it as a title to their book? "

I've long thought that one of Shakespeare's greatest gifts to literature is his provision of book titles. Pretty well any three consecutive words of his would make a great title, and for the exceptions just add the word on each side.

[PMLondonderry]

Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake is a title that comes to mind. It's a perfectly apt title; it just sounds really stupid. At first glance, I thought it said "onyx and cake," and I always think of that.

:lol:

[KCurtis]

The Grapes of Wrath takes some figuring to connect the title to the novel.
Something to look forward to - I'll try to figure it out while I'm reading it. It doesn't bother me with Steinbeck though, his stories are pretty clear.

[AlysonofBathe]

Hi Alyson
with all due respect I can get into my head how an idiot/supposidely incapable can actually make any sound let alone express some kind of furiosity.
If one is an idiot one is incapable of tales for one would not make any sense let a put a sentence together.

Take it up with Shakespeare.

[cacian]

Take it up with Shakespeare.

LOL
I won't I have made my mind up, I shan't believe in his poetic trials anymore.

[Desolation]

Hi Alyson
with all due respect I can get into my head how an idiot/supposidely incapable can actually make any sound let alone express some kind of furiosity.
If one is an idiot one is incapable of tales for one would not make any sense let a put a sentence together.

Being too literal is folly in the realm of literature.

I think that The Sound and the Fury is a great title for the book...Maybe one of the best titles out there. If we're taking issue with Faulkner titles, I'd put forward Light in August. There was neither light nor any indication that any of the events transpired in August.

[AlysonofBathe]

If we're taking issue with Faulkner titles, I'd put forward Light in August. There was neither light nor any indication that any of the events transpired in August.

That always bugged me too. :)

[Charles Darnay]

"...in August in Mississippi there’s a few days somewhere about the middle of the month when suddenly there’s a foretaste of fall, it’s cool, there’s a lambence, a soft, a luminous quality to the light, as though it came not from just today but from back in the old classic times. It might have fauns and satyrs and the gods and—from Greece, from Olympus in it somewhere. It lasts just for a day or two, then it’s gone. . .the title reminded me of that time, of a luminosity older than our Christian civilization" - Faulkner.

Now can we leave the poor man alone. Does every title have to be literal as "As I lay Dying"? :)

As for "The Sound and the Fury" - Macbeth's speech is quite relevant. The key is to take the word "idiot" as it is intended. The original meaning of the word idiot is "a private person" - this is the meaning 17th century audiences would have been familiar with, more than our meaning of the word which is synonymous with stupid person. So a tale told by an idiot can be a passionate tale, but there is no one around to listen, so it signifies nothing.

[cacian]

"...in August in Mississippi there’s a few days somewhere about the middle of the month when suddenly there’s a foretaste of fall, it’s cool, there’s a lambence, a soft, a luminous quality to the light, as though it came not from just today but from back in the old classic times. It might have fauns and satyrs and the gods and—from Greece, from Olympus in it somewhere. It lasts just for a day or two, then it’s gone. . .the title reminded me of that time, of a luminosity older than our Christian civilization" - Faulkner.

what does chrisitian civilization actually mean?
I there such a thing as a religious civilisation?

Now can we leave the poor man alone. Does every title have to be literal as "As I lay Dying"? :)
Yes because the definition of title indicates that it must correlate a meaning to its sense otherwise it should not be called a title. It is confusing the meaning of title and makes it extremely frustrating trying to get a focus on the story.
It is a bit like calling something a piece of news and showing someone playing a guitar. It undermines language and its words.


As for "The Sound and the Fury" - Macbeth's speech is quite relevant.

Therein lies the clue you just said yourself speech.


The key is to take the word "idiot" as it is intended. The original meaning of the word idiot is "a private person" - this is the meaning 17th century audiences would have been familiar with, more than our meaning of the word which is synonymous with stupid person.
What!!I never knew that!...so how does one word that means 'private person' moves onto signifying 'an idiot' as we know it?
It is then saying that a table will change into signifying a chair.


So a tale told by an idiot can be a passionate tale, but there is no one around to listen, so it signifies nothing
Well yes and no because a tale is usually a piece of material that is told to an audience in other words that is read hence the word tale.
The title is taken from a Macbeth piece and it is a speech played in a theatre and so is heard by an audience.
So where is the link between the title and 'a private person' saying something that no one is around to listen to. Where is the coherence in here?

Of Mice and Men - Steinbeck
I don't get how this title works in the story or how it has it anything to do it.

here is the the meaning for it I foundL
the most carefully prepared plans may go wrong.
and it is taken from Robert Burns poem

To a Mouse, 1786
It tells of how he, while ploughing a field, upturned a mouse's nest. The resulting poem is an apology to the mouse:

But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane [you aren't alone]
In proving foresight may be vain:
The best laid schemes o' mice an' men
Gang aft a-gley, [often go awry]
An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promised joy.

Yet again the similarities between Faulkner taking his title from a play and Faulkner from a poem is striking.

[Charles Darnay]

what does chrisitian civilization actually mean?
I there such a thing as a religious civilisation?

Christian civilization is a term used in historical study to distinguish the time pre and post the adoption of Christianity as a principal religion.


Therein lies the clue you just said yourself speech.

Yes, it's an allusion. The title is a signifier, the signified being Shakespeare's speech.



What!!I never knew that!...so how does one word that means 'private person' moves onto signifying 'an idiot' as we know it?
It is then saying that a table will change into signifying a chair.


Well yes and no because a tale is usually a piece of material that is told to an audience in other words that is read hence the word tale.
The title is taken from a Macbeth piece and it is a speech played in a theatre and so is heard by an audience.
So where is the link between the title and 'a private person' saying something that no one is around to listen to. Where is the coherence in here?

you are conflating so many meanings of words here that you are either 1. confusing yourself by over-reasoning or 2. desperately trying to find a hole to prove that the title doesn't work....take it as you will.

Meanings of words change over time. Furthermore poets distort words by use of metaphor or similar devices - thus, examining Macbeth's speech word-for-word is a futile Saussurian attempt.

[PeterL]

Have you ever come across a book with a title that you thought did not fit?
An example of mine:

The Sound and The Fury - William Faulkner

I still to this day cannot link or work out how this title ever fitted in the story.
I know that the title is taken from:

Macbeth's solliloquy in act 5, scene 5 of from MacBeth


The title indicates what a careful readin of that novel shows: it signifies nothing.

[Paulclem]

Of Mice and Men - Steinbeck
I don't get how this title works in the story or how it has it anything to do it.



I think the title works really well. The question: "Are you a man or a mouse?" could have been addressed by Curly to Lennie when he was menacing him. Then there's Lennie's obsession with furry/ soft things such as mice and rabbits and ladies hair, which does lie at the crux of the story.

[MarkBastable]

Yes, Martin Amis does this, I hate it, and I won't read his books.

Then you're missing out on probably the most inventive exponent of the English language currently working.



It is then saying that a table will change into signifying a chair.



Well, 'girl' used to mean 'young male'. Language changes.


Juniper - I guess you know that 'The Grapes of Wrath' is a reference to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_Hymn_of_the_Republic), and I'd say that, given the subject matter of the book, he's making a sly point about the aspirations of the Republic, and the pragmatic reality that might appear to contradict them.

[Veho]

Of Mice and Men - Steinbeck
I don't get how this title works in the story or how it has it anything to do it.

I thought the quote from Burns was an allusion to Lennie and George's plans, which they talk about throughout the book, to escape the ranch, get their own land and work for themselves. Obviously their plans go very wrong - so "the best laid schemes o' mice an' men, Gang aft a-gley" certainly applies for those two.

[KCurtis]

Then you're missing out on probably the most inventive exponent of the English language currently working.

Oh, I just don't like his novels! Even if his titles made sense, he is not for me. If I liked him, it wouldn't matter what he called his books.

[Palmer3]

The story takes not place in Peking or in autumn.http://www.subeducation.info/avatar2.jpg

Pretty well any three consecutive words of his would make a great title, and for the exceptions just add the word on each side.http://www.subeducation.info/avatar2.jpg

[Dark Muse]

Margaret Atwood's Oryx and Crake is a title that comes to mind. It's a perfectly apt title; it just sounds really stupid. At first glance, I thought it said "onyx and cake," and I always think of that.

OMG I am not the only one. That is what I used to always think.

I could never figure out what The Crying of Lot 49 meant. I tried to google it once but could not find an explination for that title.

[Charles Darnay]

OMG I am not the only one. That is what I used to always think.

I could never figure out what The Crying of Lot 49 meant. I tried to google it once but could not find an explination for that title.

The cry refers to the call of an auctioneer, but I haven't read the book so I'm not sure how that works out

[Dark Muse]

The cry refers to the call of an auctioneer, but I haven't read the book so I'm not sure how that works out

Oh that makes sense, at least in explaining what the title even means. Though I myself am still not sure how that fits in with the book, I did have a tough time with that one.

[cacian]

I think the title works really well. The question: "Are you a man or a mouse?" could have been addressed by Curly to Lennie when he was menacing him. Then there's Lennie's obsession with furry/ soft things such as mice and rabbits and ladies hair, which does lie at the crux of the story.

Interesting what you are saying and yes I agree that you personally would see it that way.
However the idea of soft and furry varies from reader to reader and from what I know of everyday life and people mice are the last thing to be a furry thing. In fact they are considered pests, so will all due respect I personally fail to engage in such a tilte. I would also imagine that a considerable audience would not read this book because of the title.

[JuniperWoolf]

Juniper - I guess you know that 'The Grapes of Wrath' is a reference to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Battle_Hymn_of_the_Republic), and I'd say that, given the subject matter of the book, he's making a sly point about the aspirations of the Republic, and the pragmatic reality that might appear to contradict them.

Haha, I didn't actually. I had this whole complicated reasoning laid out, I've been dwelling on it for years. I'm an idiot, I should have just googled it.

[Paulclem]

I thought the quote from Burns was an allusion to Lennie and George's plans, which they talk about throughout the book, to escape the ranch, get their own land and work for themselves. Obviously their plans go very wrong - so "the best laid schemes o' mice an' men, Gang aft a-gley" certainly applies for those two.

Thanks - I didn't know that link.


Interesting what you are saying and yes I agree that you personally would see it that way.
However the idea of soft and furry varies from reader to reader and from what I know of everyday life and people mice are the last thing to be a furry thing. In fact they are considered pests, so will all due respect I personally fail to engage in such a tilte. I would also imagine that a considerable audience would not read this book because of the title.

A considerable audience have made this book a classic, so I don't follow your logic.

As for mice - they feature in the book as one of Lennie's obsessions. I really don't think their status as vermin really has any bearing.

[MarkBastable]

I would also imagine that a considerable audience would not read this book because of the title.

No one would find fault with you when it comes to imagining things.

Credible support for anything you conclude from those imaginings might also prove quite difficult to find.

[KCurtis]

I think the title works really well. The question: "Are you a man or a mouse?" could have been addressed by Curly to Lennie when he was menacing him. Then there's Lennie's obsession with furry/ soft things such as mice and rabbits and ladies hair, which does lie at the crux of the story.

Yep!! That makes a lot of sense, you summed it up nicely.


Interesting what you are saying and yes I agree that you personally would see it that way.
However the idea of soft and furry varies from reader to reader and from what I know of everyday life and people mice are the last thing to be a furry thing. In fact they are considered pests, so will all due respect I personally fail to engage in such a tilte. I would also imagine that a considerable audience would not read this book because of the title.

But to Lenny They ARE soft and furry things! Since this novel is Steinbeck, and it is a classic and beautiful story, the title works just fine.


Haha, I didn't actually. I had this whole complicated reasoning laid out, I've been dwelling on it for years. I'm an idiot, I should have just googled it.

I would actually like to hear your reasoning- after I finish the book, so I will remember to ask you!!

[stlukesguild]

Being too literal is folly in the realm of literature.

Indeed. I fear some here have never made the least effort at reading poetry and exploring the realm of figurative language.

[Des Essientes]

T.E. Lawrence's "The Seven Pillars of Wisdom" an extremely interesting account of his military adventures, but never in the entire book is it's title explained. It turns out that Lawerence had written an essay, or planned to write one, with that title and he liked the sound of it so much he decided to use it for the title of his war memoir.

[Paulclem]

It's a bit like the 5 pillars of Islam. I wonder where he got it from.

[MarkBastable]

Possibly....

http://www.thetruelight.net/7pillars.htm

or


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

[PeterL]

The best misleading title that I can think of is "Trout fishing in America".

[Paulclem]

Possibly....

http://www.thetruelight.net/7pillars.htm

or


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

Yes - and I only thought there were 5. Everyday is learning.

Do you wonder about religious websites where it's not obvious what the religion is?

[MarkBastable]

Yes - and I only thought there were 5. Everyday is learning.

If you're a Sunni Muslim, there are only five.

I expect the other Muslims are saving up the extra two for a non-Sunni day.

[cacian]

No one would find fault with you when it comes to imagining things.

Credible support for anything you conclude from those imaginings might also prove quite difficult to find.

I believe that I might be quite right in imagining what I had said.
Just because a book has been declared a classic by some does not make it internationally popular.
Unfortunately there are no studies that indicate that some happen not to think much of it. It takes all sorts of readers as there are all sorts of books.
It would be naive to think that one classic book is worldly liked.

[AlysonofBathe]

I believe that I might be quite right in imagining what I had said.
Just because a book has been declared a classic by some does not make it internationally popular.
Unfortunately there are no studies that indicate that some happen not to think much of it. It takes all sorts of readers as there are all sorts of books.
It would be naive to think that one classic book is worldly liked.

There's a pretty huge difference between a book being a widely acknowledged classic and being "worldly liked." One does not entail the other.

[MarkBastable]

Just because a book has been declared a classic by some does not make it internationally popular.
Unfortunately there are no studies that indicate that some happen not to think much of it. It takes all sorts of readers as there are all sorts of books.
It would be naive to think that one classic book is worldly liked.

That's not the point I was responding to. I was responding to the completely unsupportable speculation that "a considerable audience would not read this book because of the title".

[kelby_lake]

If we're taking issue with Faulkner titles, I'd put forward Light in August. There was neither light nor any indication that any of the events transpired in August.

"Light" was/is Mississippi slang for "pregnant". And there were quite a few references to the August light. Lena is pregnant, and it's August.

[cacian]

That's not the point I was responding to. I was responding to the completely unsupportable speculation that "a considerable audience would not read this book because of the title".

Oops sorry.:blush:
Well I am assuming that on the basis of people's phobias and I know lots of people who are terrified of mice, which is a very common phobia, would not pick up nor read a book with a title that illustrate that phobia.
I am going with logic here.


"Light" was/is Mississippi slang for "pregnant". And there were quite a few references to the August light. Lena is pregnant, and it's August.

How interesting.
So a mississipian woman would says 'I am light' to mean that she is pregnant?

[MarkBastable]

Oops sorry.:blush:
Well I am assuming that on the basis of people's phobias and I know lots of people who are terrified of mice, which is a very common phobia, would not pick up nor read a book with a title that illustrate that phobia.
I am going with logic here.

I'm surprised that Fear of Flying sold any copies at all.

[cacian]

I'm surprised that Fear of Flying sold any copies at all.

Well of course it would but that is different in a way because flying is not natural to us humans and the fear of is more rationalised because one knows the dangers of trying to go against nature one might get hurt.
I would not say it is a phobia as such as oppose to say a phobia from animals that look slightely unpleasant to the human eye.
Lots of people have fear of spiders and you would not catch them watch spiderman, I am guessing and I might well be right.
It is easily researched.

[PoeticPassions]

I'm surprised that Fear of Flying sold any copies at all.

hahahah :cheers2:


Well judging a book by its title is just like judging it by its cover, Cacian... if it has come down to that, we might as well not read at all.

[Scheherazade]

I believe that I might be quite right in imagining what I had said.
Just because a book has been declared a classic by some does not make it internationally popular.
Unfortunately there are no studies that indicate that some happen not to think much of it. It takes all sorts of readers as there are all sorts of books.
It would be naive to think that one classic book is worldly liked.I am usually one of the first to argue that because a book comes along with a "classic" stamp, we should not feel obliged to be in awe of it. However, the opposite is also true: Just because we do not like a book, it does not stop being a good book or a classic.

As for the titles... When we look into them, most titles have a deep connection to the books (however obscure they might seem to us without some analysis). However, I feel, Cacian, that, in this particular thread, you are not seeking to find enlightenment on those titles but simply encouraging others to agree with you about the books you particularly dislike because they lack easy-to-interpret titles.

I often feel tempted to read the books whose titles I find intriguing... Like Of Mice and Men or The Sound and The Fury.

[Charles Darnay]

I often feel tempted to read the books whose titles I find intriguing... Like Of Mice and Men or The Sound and The Fury.

That's why I read "The Naked Lunch"

[MarkBastable]

That's why I read "The Naked Lunch"

The best novel I read last year I bought without knowing anything at all about it, simply because I was intrigued by the title: The Particular Sadness of Lemon Cake.

And this was despite my suffering from an ungovernable and crippling terror of patisserie.

[kelby_lake]

How interesting.
So a mississipian woman would says 'I am light' to mean that she is pregnant?

I think it's more likely that people would use the term to describe her rather than how she'd describe her pregnancy herself, as it's a slang term.

[stlukesguild]

Just because a book has been declared a classic by some does not make it internationally popular.
Unfortunately there are no studies that indicate that some happen not to think much of it. It takes all sorts of readers as there are all sorts of books.
It would be naive to think that one classic book is worldly liked.

Is there actually any book that you can name that is universally beloved? I think you are somewhat confused as just how a book goes about entering the pantheon of what is considered a "classic". By and large a classic is a book that has withstood the passage of time and fashion and remains recognized as important, influential, and/or of great artistic merit by that audience who has invested the most time and effort into the study, understanding, appreciation, and preservation of literature. This audience includes professionals (critics, academics, professors, etc...), subsequent generations of writers of real merit, and ultimately, the well-informed reader... or the not-so-common "common readers" as Virginia Woolf termed them.

The fact that you or I or anyone else likes or dislikes a particular book has no real bearing upon the status of that book as a "classic", although certainly we may always consider the opinions of others... yet with the full understanding that some opinions are better than others. Your willingness to repeatedly dismiss any number of acknowledged "classics" as not worth the paper they were printed on does not speak well in your favor when it comes to your critical opinions or insights.

[Charles Darnay]

]

Is there actually any book that you can name that is universally beloved?.

Green Eggs and Ham

[Desolation]

"Light" was/is Mississippi slang for "pregnant". And there were quite a few references to the August light. Lena is pregnant, and it's August.
That makes sense. However...


Being too literal is folly in the realm of literature.

...My comments on Light in August were meant as a joke, following the above statement. I think the title makes sense in a lot of ways, especially given the kind of feeling that that those three words evoke in relation to the book. Same with The Sound and the Fury.

[MarkBastable]

Originally Posted by stlukesguild Is there actually any book that you can name that is universally beloved?


Green Eggs and Ham

'Fraid not. This is a review from Amazon...


The "hero" of this tale spends the entirety of the book trying to force 'green eggs and ham' upon a nameless skeptic. The "villain" turns down the offer several times, but the hero refuses to respect the man's right to say no, and badgers him incessantly until he caves under the pressure.

What disgusts me most about the end of the story is that once the man gives in, he is simply another addition to a pool of addicts. The author's tragic allegory for the rising drug use among young people that plagued his time period is brilliant, but certainly not appropriate for young children. Sam is too easily twisted to become a hero, opening the antagonist's mind to new things, rather than a metaphor for Satan as I believe was originally intended.

[Charles Darnay]

what a terrible world we live in.

[Paulclem]

Originally Posted by stlukesguild Is there actually any book that you can name that is universally beloved?



'Fraid not. This is a review from Amazon...


The "hero" of this tale spends the entirety of the book trying to force 'green eggs and ham' upon a nameless skeptic. The "villain" turns down the offer several times, but the hero refuses to respect the man's right to say no, and badgers him incessantly until he caves under the pressure.

What disgusts me most about the end of the story is that once the man gives in, he is simply another addition to a pool of addicts. The author's tragic allegory for the rising drug use among young people that plagued his time period is brilliant, but certainly not appropriate for young children. Sam is too easily twisted to become a hero, opening the antagonist's mind to new things, rather than a metaphor for Satan as I believe was originally intended.

I had suspected this Mephistophilean aspect to the book. The images are there - the crazy landscapes, the near death rollercoaster, the magical way he keeps the eggs and ham on the plate, and of course the green eggs and ham themselves are merely a manifestation of corruption.

Insightful review.

[KCurtis]

I'm surprised that Fear of Flying sold any copies at all.


:lol: :rofl: :rofl:

[Scheherazade]

Green Eggs and HamIf "universally" is meant for the US...

[Charles Darnay]

If "universally" is meant for the US...

The Uk doesn't like Dr. Seuss?

[Scheherazade]

The Uk doesn't like Dr. Seuss?I was thinking more about the countries where English is not the first languages of the natives.

[Charles Darnay]

Ah. I am sure it exists in other languages.

But that is a very good reason why there can't be a universally liked book

[Paulclem]

I avoided Philip K Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep for a long time beause of the title. When I read it though, I found the title most apt for the story - a much better than Blade Runner, the film version, which I hadn't realised was the film adaptation. (Duhhh)

[MarkBastable]

I avoided Philip K Dick's Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep for a long time beause of the title. When I read it though, I found the title most apt for the story - a much better than Blade Runner, the film version, which I hadn't realised was the film adaptation. (Duhhh)

Sci-fi (in the broadest sense) is always good for titles. One of my favourite book titles is The Illustrated Man.

In fact, do we have a thread for favourite titles? I'll make one.

[Paulclem]

Good idea.

[cacian]

I think it's more likely that people would use the term to describe her rather than how she'd describe her pregnancy herself, as it's a slang term.

Oh of course..one would not refer to themselves in Slang you are very right especially when talking about pregnancy.
:smile5:

[PoeticPassions]

Ah. I am sure it exists in other languages.

But that is a very good reason why there can't be a universally liked book

It might exist in other language (I know where I am from it doesn't and no one would know who Dr. Seuss is), but I would suspect that Dr. Seuss would be extremely difficult to translate... I just can't imagine it making much sense in certain other languages... Green Eggs and Ham...? huevos verdes y hamon... ? Try making it all rhyme and make sense.

[cacian]

I am usually one of the first to argue that because a book comes along with a "classic" stamp, we should not feel obliged to be in awe of it. However, the opposite is also true: Just because we do not like a book, it does not stop being a good book or a classic.
Indeed you are very right. Classic does not mean approval of all and yes not liking something does not stop it from becoming a classic or reputable.


As for the titles... When we look into them, most titles have a deep connection to the books (however obscure they might seem to us without some analysis). However, I feel, Cacian, that, in this particular thread, you are not seeking to find enlightenment on those titles but simply encouraging others to agree with you about the books you particularly dislike because they lack easy-to-interpret titles
I did not realise I came across as not seeking understanding for that was not my intention.

I often feel tempted to read the books whose titles I find intriguing... Like Of Mice and Men or The Sound and The Fury.
True. I think titles are one way of attracting readers and ,one may also add, another way of detracting the few.

[cacian]

Just because a book has been declared a classic by some does not make it internationally popular.
Unfortunately there are no studies that indicate that some happen not to think much of it. It takes all sorts of readers as there are all sorts of books.
It would be naive to think that one classic book is worldly liked.

[QUOTE]Is there actually any book that you can name that is universally beloved? I think you are somewhat confused as just how a book goes about entering the pantheon of what is considered a "classic". By and large a classic is a book that has withstood the passage of time and fashion and remains recognized as important, influential, and/or of great artistic merit by that audience who has invested the most time and effort into the study, understanding, appreciation, and preservation of literature. This audience includes professionals (critics, academics, professors, etc...), subsequent generations of writers of real merit, and ultimately, the well-informed reader... or the not-so-common "common readers" as Virginia Woolf termed them.
I am not disptuing the value or the worthyness of a classic.
I am certainly not going to attain that power to say what makes a classic from another.
What I am trying to say is that there are thousands of modern writers who write on a daily basis who should get a much equal recognition if not more because they produce work that are as much a classic then others.
The object to a classic is that it seems to take over anyone else who attempts to equal if not to better an actual classic.
You may agree that one book is classic and yes I would not argue with you about it but it still does not stop from thinking that it there is a book born every second and well worth that stamp.
Time moves on do classic adapt to moving times?


The fact that you or I or anyone else likes or dislikes a particular book has no real bearing upon the status of that book as a "classic", although certainly we may always consider the opinions of others... yet with the full understanding that some opinions are better than others
Well that is where I do not agree. I think an opinion is as good as any.
Who is to say that one is better then other when people differ in many ways then none.

Your willingness to repeatedly dismiss any number of acknowledged "classics" as not worth the paper they were printed on does not speak well in your favor when it comes to your critical opinions or insights.
Well I am a reader and I am entitled to feel the way I do.
If I happen to dislike a book then I have my reasons although not acceptable to you they are to me.
In the same that I would not argue against your opinions of liking a book.
That would be wrong of me to do so because you are you and I am me.

[kelby_lake]

[QUOTE=stlukesguild;1123300][COLOR="DarkRed"]
What I am trying to say is that there are thousands of modern writers who write on a daily basis who should get a much equal recognition if not more because they produce work that are as much a classic then others.
The object to a classic is that it seems to take over anyone else who attempts to equal if not to better an actual classic.
You may agree that one book is classic and yes I would not argue with you about it but it still does not stop from thinking that it there is a book born every second and well worth that stamp.
Time moves on do classic adapt to moving times?

There may be modern books that we enjoy now, but will we enjoy them in thirty years time? The period they are set in won't be historical like the classics are- it will just be a long time ago.

One can't really equal or better a classic- the writer doesn't have the advantage of history that a classic has. History makes a classic.