The Worst Classics You Have Ever Read

Well, it's good if you like whales. If you aren't completely in love with whales, it can get a bit boring.

Yes, but the virtuosic prose more than makes up for it.

i agree with you on Catch 22, i can never fully get into it (even though ive read it thrice!!) i find the attempts at satire lethargic and drawn out.

Catch-22 is one of those books that I have read where I feel that the writer is admiring himself as he writes. One book that I didn't feel bad about picking apart.

Not good to see Da Vinci code mentioned here... people consider it a classic?

And speaking of rereading books, I still cannot see why Grapes of Wrath is considered a classic. Forget about historical significance, it's not a well written book.

Haven't read Grapes of Wrath but I thought Of Mice and Men was well-written

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelby_lake

Haven't read Grapes of Wrath but I thought Of Mice and Men was well-written

---

does anybody have an opinion on cannery row and tortilla flat? not read either but considering a purchase!

I just don't understand why so many people like Steinback. Someone said that his books are easy to read and that's why people like him and why critics don't think too highly of him but his books are just really boring to me. I guess I might give East of Eden a try but if I don't like that books then I am completely done with Steinback. (I have a strong dislike toward The Pearl, Grapes of Wrath, and of Mice and Man.)

East of Eden is pretty long. If you didn't like Of Mice and Men, which is tiny, then you probably won't like east of eden. Did you like the ending of Of Mice and Men?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Michigan J Frog

I just don't understand why so many people like Steinback. Someone said that his books are easy to read and that's why people like him and why critics don't think too highly of him but his books are just really boring to me. I guess I might give East of Eden a try but if I don't like that books then I am completely done with Steinback. (I have a strong dislike toward The Pearl, Grapes of Wrath, and of Mice and Man.)

---

I personally wouldn't bother, if you didn't like three of his books why read a fourth? There are far too many good things out there why punish yourself reading for pleasure if it is not bringing you pleasure. You may find that in time you may come to like Steinbeck, you may view him in a different light as you get older, but if not, so what.

Personally I am indifferent to Steinbeck though perhaps feel that he is a little overrated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jozanny

I would take this one step further Neely, although I agree with the sense of your post. The phrase worst classic is nearly an oxymoron--which is not to say that tastes do not change, or that an author may become overrated while lower stars rise--but a classic is a classic for various reasons. It may represent the epitome of its era, like Dickens "A Christmas Carol" can arguably be said to do--even though the tale makes me wince I can appreciate it for what it is, what Dickens hoped it would illuminate, even change, about Victorian society. Or it may be the pinnacle of a literary movement, such as Madame Bovary is to fictional realism, even a stepping stone to modernism, and so on.

Members should simply start five threads called "Books I want to trash!!!!" and we can keep Sche and Logos busy while they merge this and the *overrated* thread with it.:D;)

---

Jozanny,
This may be the best entry in any of worst/underrated threads. I'm probably some version of a sick puppy, but I get a kick our of how someone's opinion inevitably sets off a powder keg. Sometimes it's the way the opinion is expressed. Sometimes it's the work or the writer. (Ulysses or Joyce usually makes for lively debate.) My intention in provoking Froggy to take on James was to get the type of intellectual exchange that you've brought to this thread. Quite enjoyable. I don't dislike James, but The Wings of the Dove gave my nothing to cling to -- plot, character, style. I've enjoyed others of Henry James's works, but this one just bored the crap out of me.
What really entertains me is the lack of foundation behind why someone puts forth a work. I didn't like Moby Dick because I almost choked on a bone I found my fish sandwich in the cafeteria when I was 10. Sometimes these "negative" threads are like walking through a field of crap trying to find the pony, but eventually, an actual literary discussion arises.
Thank you for bringing it to this not just once (James), but twice (Melville). :thumbs_up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PabloQ

Jozanny,
This may be the best entry in any of worst/underrated threads. I'm probably some version of a sick puppy, but I get a kick our of how someone's opinion inevitably sets off a powder keg. Sometimes it's the way the opinion is expressed. Sometimes it's the work or the writer. (Ulysses or Joyce usually makes for lively debate.) My intention in provoking Froggy to take on James was to get the type of intellectual exchange that you've brought to this thread. Quite enjoyable. I don't dislike James, but The Wings of the Dove gave my nothing to cling to -- plot, character, style. I've enjoyed others of Henry James's works, but this one just bored the crap out of me.
What really entertains me is the lack of foundation behind why someone puts forth a work. I didn't like Moby Dick because I almost choked on a bone I found my fish sandwich in the cafeteria when I was 10. Sometimes these "negative" threads are like walking through a field of crap trying to find the pony, but eventually, an actual literary discussion arises.
Thank you for bringing it to this not just once (James), but twice (Melville). :thumbs_up

---

Like everything else, electronic interaction between individuals has its detractions as well as its virtues, and my love/hate relationship with online communities will probably never quite be resolved. The only reason the powers that be haven't had to lasso me and stick a bar of soap into my account, ahem, where the sun doesn't shine:D, is because I am a little too weary to wail and beat my breast daily for virtue of public display, and two, it has no real healing virtue, three, I've learned when not to push back, and four, won't allow myself to care--but posting about anything isn't all it is cracked up to be, and I am symptomatic of that as much as any other member, in not taking the time to make relatively invested arguments.

There is a difference between personal opinion and critical evaluation of merit--and that can often get lost on posting boards or comment threads--even in email groups--not that it is all bad, but it isn't all beneficial for continuing education either.

Hardy,Thomas. Depressing or Wot,mate. Brontes and ,another sacrilege, Grahame Green.

I've liked most of the classics I've read, which is not to say that a lot of them weren't pretty boring in parts. But I can put up with quite a bit of boredom to get what the book has to offer, and with a classic I'm rarely disappointed.

Some classics which I was never able to get through- Boswell's Life of Johnson, Dante's Divine Comedy, all George Elliot's novels except Middlemarch.

I didn't like Oscar Wilde's Dorian Grey, I found it totally pointless. I don't even know if it's a classic.

Les Miserables disappointed me a bit. I thought it was going to be really great, and I did like quite a bit of it, but on the whole I felt it was a big , huge, silly story!

Quote:
I didn't like Oscar Wilde's Dorian Grey, I found it totally pointless. I don't even know if it's a classic.

That's one of my personal favourite, favouritistist novels, of alllll time.::bawling:

<<<< that's a picture of Mr Gray there as my avatar.

Aww...Neely, I didn't mean to make you cry! If it's any comfort, some of my favourite novels like Jane Eyre and Wuthering Heights and Ulysses and Catch 22 have been listed here as 'worst classics'! :D