Printable View
I put a disclaimer in my comment stating that it's all a matter of opinion and personal preference.
Orwell is a fine writer,and I love his essays Such,Such Were the Joys and Shooting an Elephant I just don't put 1984 on this pedestal that most others do.
Mein Krampht is over rated. The only truth in the book is trust no one.
lol. Don't think you'll be getting any arguments there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Flim-Flam
Jane Austen.
I've not been very impressed with Paulo Coelho so far, actually.
I had heard so many good things about his books and people that loved his stories and writings. So when I came around to actually read some of them, I was simply dissapointed. The stories didn't apply to me, the language didn't and the spirituality was a bit too much sometimes as well.
Maybe I need to read even more to get a hang of him, but so far.. not impressed.
Don't just name them. Support this with proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by kandaurov
On the Orwell bit, Stalin had already run his marathon before 1984 was penned. I think it a little silly to credit Orwell as a prophet since he clearly was just an observer. He is good, but Orwell certainly has taken a toll from his fans who make him out to be some sort of guru. The fact that he is so well known has contributed to his overrated nature, since now big-brother is in every high school text book, and every kid knows a few Animal Farm quotes, that they misuse and don't understand quite regularly.
Jane Austen. Shallowness. She lived in a world of her own, she made believe as if the world were that simple. She brought innovation neither in terms of writing style nor in terms of plot. She followed the same formulae over and over again. She did have wit, her sole redeeming feature.
Antiquarian, fair enough! I happen to think that she did indeed criticize what she actually also reinforced with her novels, the social conventions, but all this is only my opinion though, which I was asked to laborate upon.
Of all the authors I've read, Dan Brown was the most overrated. When I finished Angels and Demons, I thought it was complete drivel. I could barely get 1/3 of the way through The Da Vinci Code.
I agree with that. That's really what separates Huxley and Orwell. Orwell was always a journalist at heart, and even his novels are in some form journalism. He was extremely observant, and 1984 is showing the world what's already happened in Russia, but applying it to the rest of the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBI
I found Dan Brown's books entertaining in an intellectually devoid sort of way, a bit like watching the latest explosion-happy Hollywood movie.
Eh... she innovated Free indirect speech about 90 years before the modernists, and quite effectively, as many critics and readers would agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by kandaurov
That's pretty significant.
One of the reasons she is so highly admired is because she showed how complex her world was, mostly through irony and her sharp observation for social satire and commentary.Quote:
She lived in a world of her own, she made believe as if the world were that simple.
You're very right about the indirect free speech, I stand corrected. As for the satire component, I don't know how effective it is. What she did was to criticize social conventions, while at the same time acknowledging that they were necessary. I, at least, never saw a character actively rebelling against what she "criticizes". As I read her I remember sensing hypocrisy, but that may be just me. I mean, of course you can like her and think her wit was something else other than just adornment of her prose, I fully respect that, but now that I've explained my opinion I like to think I'm entitled to it.
Well said, Antiquarian! And it's not that I don't think Jane Austen was a bad writer, not at all!, I just wouldn't rank her among the best 5 novels of all time, like some polls did. By the way, this is interesting: you love Jane Austen and you think that the publishers should keep their standards high. Do you remember / have you heard of this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/ju...ooks.booksnews ? Terrible, I know!
Hilarious stuff :lol: :lol: :lol: Literally left me in stitches. I strongly believe that both music 'industry' and publishing 'industry' need dismantling by all means possible. The Guardian article above strongly confirms my notions.Quote:
Originally Posted by kandaurov
But she sells enormously, no? Every bookstore I go to there's an abundance of Austen novels, and everytime I turn on the TV there's a movie or a tv series with her name in the title. I find it insufferable. Such an overrated writer...Quote:
Originally Posted by Antiquarian
Hey everyone! I'm new, but I'm really excited about meeting you guys and jumping in on literature debates.
That being said, I agree with kandaurov. Jane Austen is overrated, and I always felt that what she claimed to disdain in society she sort of taught in her literature. I do think that she brought a lot to the "literature table," especially for women, but I don't think she was as much of a "feminist" as she claimed to be, and in that light many of her books seem to be, at least to me, self-contradictory to what she believed in.
I also agree that Dan Brown is largely overrated. I read Angels and Demons and almost got through it, and it was remotely entertaining in a "leave your brain at home" way, but it was cheesy. I started The DaVinci Code and couldn't get past the first few chapters.
The most overrated author in my opinion? I'd have to go with Hawthorne. I've probably made a ton of enemies right then and there, but honestly, I just don't like his work. It's stale and repetitive. But that's just my personal opinion.
Well, that's self explanatory. Every work of art, however universal, could not have emerged at any other time than it originally did.Quote:
Originally Posted by Antiquarian
It's not so much that she's late 18th century as it is the fact that all her novels are tedious comedies of manners with only the characters and order of events altered. For future Austen readers: read Pride & Prejudice and call it a day. Everything else is...well, it's flat out the same.Quote:
I don't personally find her at all overrated. I love all her books, but they are definitely late 18th century, which is part of the charm for me and part of the insufferability for others.
I've never read Diane Johnson, but I'll take this as a warning to stay away!Quote:
Originally Posted by Antiquarian
I wonder what future drivel Dan Brown is going to have published.
Hardy overrated? Jane Austen overrated? Would you please KINDLY leave the dead alone?
Well everyone, all I can say is that I love Jane Austen and the only reason she would not get published today is because all the publishers accept is romance crap. I don't mean to pick a fight, but they are, for the most part, just movies on paper. Jane Austen, Shakespeare, and all the rest are the real writers.
w00t!!! I just made post #200!!!
JK Rowlings. She's richer than the queen because she told the same story 7 times.
Here is the OP:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Bartholomew
This thread was made for the dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_noel_y2k
Hmm, I don't know that I'd say he's "overrated", in the sense that not everyone's talking about him and making film adaptations, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by moose gurl
If you mean in an academic sense, there is a very good reason that Hawthorne is An Author To Be Dealt With - namely, he is the first good American writer who, to paraphrase Henry James's argument, did not have to leave his country to find a subject. He's a foundation, of sorts.
Of course, there was Washington Irving - an author with whom Hawthorne shared a mutual admiration - but Irving didn't write very much fiction, and, from what I understand, he doesn't figure as strongly in American Studies because he wrote "like an Englishman".
Okay, I'll end my little history lecture now. Sorry...
Anyway, I sure hope he's good - I'm about to read all of his works. :(
I don't think it's fair to say that all of Jane Austen's heroines are the same, or the stories the same either. The themes often recur, but that's something you see with other writers (Look at Charlotte Bronte...unrequited love appears in all her books). You can't say for example that Northanger Abbey, which is a sparkling parody of Gothic novels, is the same as the rather subdued Mansfield Park, which deals with heavier themes like the subjection of poor middle class women. The comedy of Emma doesn't have the same tone as the more poignant Persuasion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morten
I have not read any works of Diane Johnson, but as a side-note it's interesting to know that she and Stanley Kubrick collaborated together to write the screenplay of the famous horror film The Shining.Quote:
Originally Posted by Antiquarian
I'm guessing Stanley Kubrick wrote most of it, if she is as bad a writer as you say! :p
Most overated in my opinion is Jules Verne. I'm all for fantastic adventures and whatnot but if the characters going on those adventures are unrealistic stereotypes who don't change at all throughout the book, then I don't care about them or their various trials that inevitably lead to a cheesy happy ending.
Seriously I just don't understand his popularity. I mean he was the first science fiction writer (along with Wells) but rather than make him popular I would think his writing would lead people to dismiss the genre as a failed experiment.
Jack Kerouac and the whole beatnik movement.. the worst thing that happened to poetry ever!
and hmm... I think Melville is overrated... and Poe... and Whitman is way overrated... Leaves of Grass... come on, besides the new style of poetry it is way to egocentric and in love with america, and quite mediocre compared to so many others..
-----
J.K. Rowlings, without a doubt. I don't really understand why people like her books.
I think Melville is overrated...
You think wrong.:D
and Poe...
As a poet, certainly.
and Whitman is way overrated... Leaves of Grass... come on, besides the new style of poetry it is way to egocentric and in love with America, and quite mediocre compared to so many others..
Mediocre in comparison to whom? Perhaps Dante and Shakespeare and a few others. Who are all these far superior poets? Looking at much of the vast array of 20th century poetry... not merely American and British but internationally... I would note that many of the greatest poets would seem to disagree with your dismissal of Whitman. Even T.S. Eliot, as much as he attempts to deny Whitman, is profoundly influenced by him. As much as I love and read poetry I would be hard pressed to name one poet since Whitman (American or otherwise) who surpasses him in influence or aesthetically.
Agreed, Dori. I can never get into her books.