J.K Rowling.
though, as a children's author, she's quite good at it.
Printable View
J.K Rowling.
though, as a children's author, she's quite good at it.
I don't mind Rowling
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judas130
Any author who can get millions of children (and adults alike) excited about reading certainly cannot be overrated.
I certainly agree with you DM! Meyer is my pick for the most overrated author ever..Sorry for all those Twilighters..:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
"this is a thread for all the writers that we've been told are great and are in the classics range and constantly appear on 100greatestnovels lists and such like but we hate."Quote:
Originally Posted by eyemaker
Hmm but that was the original objective of the thread. I don't think Meyer's books have ever been classified as "great", neither have they achieved the status of classics.
They have by some tiddlywinks who think they are the epitome of literature
Im going with the cliched choice, Stephen King.
I said the same but have since realised such an opinion is unfair based on the fact I have only read Mansfield Park... I am reserving my opinion now until I have read a bit more of her work (have to read Northanger Abbey for Uni this term)Quote:
Originally Posted by Behemoth
I am sure he will be thinking about this while laughing his way to the bank!Quote:
Originally Posted by DeadAsDreams
:p
What has she written? I have never before heard of Stephenie Meyer. Obviously, I don't rate her highly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Muse
She has written this rubbish series called Twilight, which millions of girls have fawned over.
I always liked Rowling. Her attempt at grasping the readers' thoughts and imagination is successful. The stories are interesting. Her writing is excellent.
As for Woolf, I beg to disagree that she is a good writer. She seems more of confused and confusing to the readers. Her fans call her works challenging but, isn't a chalenging piece of reading something that could eventually be understood?
Christopher Paolini, by a long shot
Rowling is most certainly overrated--I'll agree with that.
I've been bored stiff several times when attempting V.S. Naipaul.
That Twilight female-soppy,pathetic,painful , Meg Cabot (aarrrrgghh) and Arundhati Roy (how could the supremely painful God Of Small Things win the Booker.
Eh, who is to say really, beside some academic establishment. Is Rowling supposed to hold some literary merit beside the hook that keeps her readers coming back? She is fine in her own right, but I've heard they're teaching her alongside Dickens and Shakespeare and if she is what will be recalled hundreds of years from now as great then, sigh...
dickens...
i like Rowling and the Harry Potter series... held off for a while, but had to read it for a college class, and got hooked.
i'd go with Lovecraft.
you read it for college? how interesting- do you mind if I ask what the course was?Quote:
Originally Posted by vnnegt-ology
Haven't heard that one before but that's very intriguing- I've always enjoyed Lovecraft's works but I've never been able to get into them the way I feel other people do.Quote:
Originally Posted by imperiex
He was a very insightful guy. It's too bad he didn't write more. His stuff was always well done.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellodolly
I read (where?) that Capote, when discussing Jack Kerouac once commented, "That's not writing. It's typing." - Or words to that effect.
I agree with his appraisal.
Kerouac dissapointed me so much that I stopped reading On The Road by chapter XIII. He's not big deal after all.
And even though I don't like Capote as a short story writter, I agree 100% with him in that commentary on Jack Kerouac quoted by HelloDolly.
The author of Da Vinci Code. But I'm judging him based on this one book...
I didn't read this 41 page thread but, in case no one's brought it up, James Joyce is THE MOST overrated writer since cuneiform. Seems everyone's afraid to say it's crap.
What, because you couldn't understand it?Quote:
Originally Posted by March Hare
Portrait of the Artist is a good book, maybe an important one, but I guess that Joyce wrote that before he decided that he was Joyce. In any case, noone can compete with Proust; as an early editor said, Temps Perdu begins with a thirty page description of someone turning over in bed. And it only gets worse from there.Quote:
Originally Posted by March Hare
Thanks.
C.
That's right. Neither can you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Etienne
I don't like Joyce but to say to Etienne that he can't understand is rude.
One sentence does not satisfy on this topic. If you are going to make a claim that a specific writer is overrated, back it up. Modern popular writers, like J. K. Rowling and Dan Brown are low hanging fruit, but when you take shots at the names on the first page of this site, you really need to back it up. In these discussion threads, nobody polarizes the conversation as much as Joyce. But you just can't throw him out the window. He is acknowledged as one of the greatest writers of all time by people who are for the most part smarter than us. Ulysses is commanly at the top of those 100 best Novel lists (not just on it, but at the top). There must be something there.
I've never read Joyce with the exception of a short story or two long, long ago. I have no opinion of his work one way or the other, but I imagine he has earned his reputation.
These threads are silly and get sillier when someone inevitably brings up Joyce or Shakespeare or Twain or Dickens or Austen. What you are saying is that you set a level of expectations when you sat down to read an author's work, but were dissatisfied with the experience. That in no way means that the writer did not earn his or her reputation as a great writer 100s of years after their death. The weakness is not the ability of the writer, it's on the reader.
Thus, I believe the ability of the typical reader to fully understand what he is reading is overrated. I know this to be true of myself. I assume it to be true of the majority of posts in that past 41 pages.:(
Please do not personalise your comments.
Inflammatory posts will be edited/deleted without further notice.
Feel free to ignore any posts that you don't find agreeable or "worthy" of your response.
I love James Joyce.. Ulysses, Portrait of the Artis as a Young Man are both amazing works.. and The Dubliners is in my opinion one of the best collections of short stories written in the english language.. even Finnegan's Wake is quite an amazing and enjoyable work to read through especially if you don't worry about understanding every single word, but I've read it twice, once without notes, and the other time with notes to the book that were longer than the book itself... :p and I still enjoyed it both times..
but as this is opinion, I don't really see the problem with anyone saying they think Joyce is overrated, or any writer for that matter.. if someone wants to say Dostoevsky is overrated in their opinion that is okay.. but if you are going to say you think a universally respected and for the most part considered "great" writer is overrated, give reasons why you think so.. :D
from what I have read on some sites regarding great books and great writers, I would have to say overrated writers are those like Stephen King, and John Grisham.. and JRR Tolkien.. but it all depends on who's opinion we are looking at, for I doubt most people who are seriously into literature, or who are lit critics, think King or Grisham are great writers.. maybe Tolkien in my opinion gets undue praise for his literary talent.. as his books are basically fantasy books written a little better than most others, but in my opinion that does not make them great literature.. they don't transcend genre writing which in my opinion is the only way a genre work can jump into great literature..
I'm still fuming over the fact that I was fooled into thinking that the "Twilight" saga was so good. It wasn't. It's just that the book was so hot in forums and in my school that I actually thought it was good but I was so wrong! Imagine my disgust when they compared Meyer to Anne Rice! So far, I consider Meyer the most overrated writer.
I beg to differ - the only thing wrong with Proust is that he has an unfair reputation for difficulty, which is a pity, because it means people are discouraged before even having started to read him. My boredom threshold is rather low, but I didn't once find the Recherche tedious. He tells a good story, honestly!Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassandra15
I envy you islandclimber for finding Joyce enjoyable though. I loved the Portrait, liked Dubliners, but trudged through Ulysses twice, finding him interesting to study, but on the whole rather yawn-provoking, except for a few chapters. I haven't tried Finnegans Wake yet but I suspect I will have the same type of reaction.
I can't think of any author whom I find overrated, because I generally go by the rates of academic circles, but I can think of some I find extremely boring (The Man without Qualities by Musil tops eveything else, for me) - that said, I wouldn't say they were overrated, just that my capacity for understanding has limits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitterfly
Yeah, I don't really see Proust as being difficult or tedious.. Mind you I have only read in translation but still.. I thought In Search of Lost Time was amazing.. One of my favourite books..
I agree with you though.. If you go by academic circles you really can't say an author is overrated, maybe you just can say you didn't enjoy that work, or understand it.. I know there are famous authors I don't like in the slightest.. but I still don't view them as overrated really, just not my cup of tea... ;)
She is without a doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by crystalmoonshin
I'm most likely the oldest person who posts on this site, so I probably have a different slant on all books mentioned so far.
The Catcher in the Rye: When it was published in the 1950's, it was groundbreaking, and opened the door to a brand new style of writing. It was so innovative and amazing at the time, that I can remember actually feeling thrilled! I can't even guess at how many times I've read it Those of us in college at the time were totally blown away by the book. However, since then, many hundreds of books have been written, using "Catcher" as a template. I believe they call them "Coming of age" stories or movies? Consequently, it's just become one of hundreds of teenage angst stories. "Catcher" was the first and the best . . . you had to be there!
Hemingway, is overrated, and has not stood the test of time. His books seem tedious and boring now. Anyone ever see a really good movie made from a Hemingway book? The only one that is watchable today is The Killers, with Burt Lancaster.
Steinbeck has endured because of his two masterpieces, "East of Eden", and "The Grapes of Wrath". Both still readable, and both made into classic movies, that still hold me spellbound.
I didn't know that was a condition for a book to be considered good? Going by that logic, The Brothers Karamazov is a horrible book, since it doesn't even have a movie based on it? (at least as far as I know, but you know what I mean)Quote:
Originally Posted by Vintage34
I agree Hemingway is overrated, but the reason you gave is just...wrong. Especially bearing in mind the fact that no really good book can ever be matched by a movie.
BK has more then 5 movie versions, so it's a great book! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by johann cruyff
Really, reason is...yes, wrong.
Tko bi glumio Ahmeda Nehrudina? Rade Šerbedžija?
Haha, who else? Maybe Josip Pejaković, but from a much younger age... And I really didn't know about the movie versions of TBK, never seen a single one... Huh, now you got me interested!Quote:
Originally Posted by bazarov
I'll second!Quote:
Originally Posted by NotWoodhouse
As far as other 'classic' literature goes, I'd say Orwell is overrated in my eyes.