Socrates is not known to have written anything that survived. Did you mean Plato? If so, then why? Or was it because of a particular translator?Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03
Printable View
Socrates is not known to have written anything that survived. Did you mean Plato? If so, then why? Or was it because of a particular translator?Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03
I am well aware Socrates never wrote anything. Heh. I guess I flubbed that attempt at a nonsensical/ironic joke. :blush:Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterL
We must be talking about a different Shakespeare. I always thought that the 'History Plays' were marvellous. Regardless of various historical inaccuracies. Some of the later plays are anything but dull. Mind you, I've never really rated his comedies, with the possible exception of The Merry Wives of Windsor. Although it's probably best to overlook the 'cheese-eating' jokes as they could be considered a tad racist now. Although Sir Hugh Evans probably deserved the cheese jibes. Many people don't even know why the Welsh are associated with eating cheese.Quote:
Originally Posted by dejosc
I find Orwell's work to be a bit overrated, along with Vonnegut. Now both these writers represent to me this flow of stiff excitement (a contradictory metaphor, eh? hehe) once lost when a reader discovers something of a different vision. The vision can be in multiples (and of different things) but with that said, I enjoyed Animal Farm, but not 1984, etc...
Leo Tolstoy is the worst author I have ever come across. He cannot write.
To each his own, but I can't bring myself to criticize authors when they've been translated, especially renowned ones like Tolstoy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathor
For me the most overrated would have to be Steinbeck - Mice and men had like four pages of back and forth with George and another ranch hand saying
"lenny's dumb."
"But he's got a good heart though."
"yeah if he wasn't so dumb." over and over. we get it, John. He's both good and dumb.
Other overrated writers - Pynchon, Joyce and of course, Steven King and JK Rowlings
I forgot Dickens! He's a decent story teller, but personally, I got nothing out of Great Expectations, and I had such great expectations for it.... Also Ayn Rand! I don't mind her ideas, but for an author who worships talent and ability, she doesn't have much.
Agree! I'm still reading Anna Karenina(I started it one year ago and still didn't finish it!) and I just think while reading it - Why people love it so much? Why it ever became a classic? I don't say there aren't any interesting parts, but Levine's "speeches"(that appear in every five pages, at least and last like 20 pages) have nothing to do with the plot - it doesn't add depth to the characters nor anything at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by breeze
Leo Tolstoy is the worst author I have ever come across. He cannot write.
I forgot Dickens! He's a decent story teller, but personally, I got nothing out of Great Expectations...
Other overrated writers - Pynchon, Joyce...
im 100% sure that the most over rated writer is William Shakespeare, i mean come on its so dull. i dont care that its the basic for all literature ITS DULL
:brickwall
luke, during my computer crash episodes and the infantile despair in between, I caught a series on Y Arts, Black Writers in America. One episode featured Ishmael Reed, and his critique of Harvard ran thus: "We all know the problem with these institutions; their curriculum is restrictive. I taught courses there, but I've also taught kids who know nothing of King Lear-- but they know Star Trek."
Maybe in contrast to this it would be interesting to examine Ross Douthat's sentiments.
im 100% sure that the most over rated writer is William Shakespeare, i mean come on its so dull. i dont care that its the basic for all literature ITS DULL
Julius Caeser isn't dull. Othello isn't dull...
Leo Tolstoy is the worst author I have ever come across. He cannot write.
I forgot Dickens! He's a decent story teller, but personally, I got nothing out of Great Expectations...
Other overrated writers - Pynchon, Joyce...
im 100% sure that the most over rated writer is William Shakespeare, i mean come on its so dull. i dont care that its the basic for all literature ITS DULL
Kelby... JoZ...Comments like these I quoted are surely on par with declarations by teenage boys raised on heavy metal and Batman comics that "Mozart sucks!" and "Michelangelo blows!" For that reason they are largely so inane that one rarely bothers to comment... excepting that I was a bit bored yesterday.:D
Funny, I read Batman and still like Mozart. And what reading a visual medium like comic books has to do with one's tastes in an auditory medium like music is beyond me. Considering the topic you seem surprised that people find Joyce and Shakespeare overrated. G-d forbid people should develop their own tastes.Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
Well, his popularity on Russia is partly due to the Soviet Union times, as he was considered as an opposition to bourgeois literature by Ministry of Culture.Quote:
Why people love it so much?
Don`t get me wrong, I can`t say that Tolstoy is a bad writer and only those who lack real taste and understanding can admire him. It`s just that he`s not my kind.
It’s one thing to say that you do not appreciate a writers style or how the convey themselves, it’s another thing entirely to vehemently lash out due to a lack of your own understanding for the works they produce.
I personally don’t care for Tolstoy but love Dostoevsky, others feel the opposite but that doesn’t make Tolstoy useless or over rated. Tolstoy can certainly write! He doesn’t write in a style that I care for though, that is far different than saying he “sucks” though.
For those of you who bash for the sake of bashing, has it ever occurred to you that what you may be reading is over your head? Probably not, I know, but hmmm, possibilities do exist now don’t they? That maybe your anger comes from your own lack of experience in the world or understanding the writers work and the era in which they were written? Age is the great equalizer and like me, someday you may come to appreciate what you currently don’t “get”, and then you may look in the mirror one morning and say, boy, I didn’t have a clue, did I?
Happy reading in what ever it is that you read and never apologize for liking what it is that you like. With that, never bash anyone for liking something different than you. We all started somewhere and elitists have done as much damage to literature as the bashing from those who feel like they ought to read something classic.
Considering the topic you seem surprised that people find Joyce and Shakespeare overrated. G-d forbid people should develop their own tastes.
Obviously you still have difficulty in discerning personal preference with statement of fact. But yes... yes... you've fully accepted the notions of cultural relativism so that there is no good nor bad, but thinking makes it so. I don't buy that crap. I have no problem with personal opinions. There are works of art and literature and music that undoubtedly have real merit and yet just don't speak to me. That is different than making objective statements of fact ("Tolstoy can't write." "Shakespeare is dull.") that are completely indefensible. Indeed, it would seem that common sense dictates that when one makes a value judgment that seemingly goes against the common thread it might do well do offer up some sort of proof in defense of one's position... or perhaps... rather than stating "Tolstoy can't write" the intelligent thing to do would be to state "I don't like Tolstoy. His work does nothing for me." The latter approach cannot be argued with as it is personal opinion and admits to such. The former suggests a statement of fact which succeeds only in calling the the person's abilities of judgment into question. The title of the thread, by the way, is "Who is the most over-rated writer ever?" This would seemingly demand an author whose reputation far exceeds his or her abilities. I would think that if one were to respond with the name of an author that has been somewhat admired for his or her abilities within the realm of serious literature (as opposed to shall we say an over-hyped contemporary novelist) that one might just wish to offer up some rationale... but that's just me.
No, I simply inserted "in my opinion" before the so-called statements of fact since the nature of the statements are clearly those of opinions without proof to back them up. If they had written "Tolstoy can't write because he constantly uses wrong punctuation here in paragraph 1, 2, 3, etc." I would've treated them as facts (you can't argue with a fact: the punctuation is either wrong or not). You can endlessly argue the quality and merit of an individual writer's prose or verse. Sure, the way they stated might make it sound like a statement of fact, but the actual content of the statements actually makes them opinion. Value-judgements are always subjective opinions. To put it another way, it's precisely that I can recognize the difference between an opinion and a fact that I understand when seemingly statements of facts are really just someone's opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
I am not a cultural relativist because I believe there are things in this world that are clearly bad and good. I am a practicing Jew, after all. Racism and discrimination is always bad for example. Nevertheless, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that Art by its very nature is subjective. In fact, for someone who goes on and on about your respect for elitists and critics, you fail to recognize why we have elitists and critics in the first place. They're not there simply to transmit the culture or sing the praises of art in perfect harmonius agreement, but rather to deliver educated judgements that challenge and criticize each other's educated opinions. In other words, even educated opinions are subjective, and the elite, despite your simplistic portrait that you consistently paint of such a group rarely agree on anything. After all, who is leading this charge of multiculturalism and so-called relativism anyway? It certainly isn't the unwashed masses.
The one thing I agree with in your rebuttal is that, yes, people could do a better job in offering rationales to support their "statements of fact" that are really just opinions.
Overrated implies that you are dealing with authors that are rated highly and already in good esteem with one group or another (it might be with the masses, it might be with the critics). So it should surprise no one that people are taking swings at Shakespeare, Joyce, and company; all authors everyone praises, but for these individuals didn't do much for them. It would seem to me that's the point of the thread, but, yes, they could back up those opinions with some reasons they think those writers are overrated. No disagreement there.
Well, I guess I should have started with the point that I personally do not think that any fiction has some kind of "impersonal" value. You either like a book or you don`t like a book. A writer can`t be useless in general, he`s always useless for somebody. If I don`t like Tolstoy it makes him an overrated writer in my opinion. That`s what I meant.
It`s pretty simple to accuse somebody who doesn`t share your opinion of misunderstanding, isn`t it? I can say as well that you don`t admire Charles Manson because of misunderstanding.Quote:
That maybe your anger comes from your own lack of experience in the world or understanding the writers work and the era in which they were written?
I did say "maybe" and people are welcome to their own opinions, I accused no one. I do not think misunderstanding is a bad thing, we all do it and if you don’t, then we have found the new prophet amongst us! :p My opinion is mine and I don't care who agrees with it, I don't need another’s validation to make it an edict and I reserve the right to change my mind at any time. I’m open to the fact that I don’t know what I yet don’t know.Quote:
Originally Posted by breeze
I have nothing against Charles Manson, I don't know him, never met him, and personally, I could care less. No wait! I do admire that he had the capability and charisma to pull off the psychological fiasco that he did. To think that people are so easily swayed by another, hmmm, who would have thought that people could be that gullible? Nah, couldn’t happen to the rest of us now could it? Not that I agree with him mind you, but then again, that is only my opinion. ;)
But Shakespeare's just one of those ones where you have to try harder than other books. If they were making the point that it failed as theatre/poetry, fair enough, but it just sounds like the person making the comment is unable to understand Shakey :)
Art by its very nature is subjective.
Yes... certainly it all comes down to opinions... but I'll say it again, some opinions are better than others.:D
In fact, for someone who goes on and on about your respect for elitists and critics, you fail to recognize why we have elitists and critics in the first place.They're not there simply to transmit the culture or sing the praises of art in perfect harmonius agreement, but rather to deliver educated judgements that challenge and criticize each other's educated opinions.
Do you honestly believe that? I mean did you seriously invest the time and effort in studying and learning about literature simply so that you could challenge the opinions of other academics? That sounds rather pathetic, does it not? Personally, I spent and continue to spend the time and effort in reading, listening, and looking... studying about literature, music, and art because they give me pleasure... and in the case of art... because I imagine I just might succeed at creating something of interest myself. Challenging others' opinions is just a byproduct of the pleasure I have gained from great works of art which leads me to offer up my opinions in support of what I believe is worthy of recognition.
In other words, even educated opinions are subjective...
Unquestionably... and I have admitted as much repeatedly in acknowledging that I do not always see eye to eye with JBI, Mortalterror, yourself, or others just as the big-name academic critics do not always see eye to eye... but they/we usually have the common sense to frame any opinion which challenges the accepted norms as an opinion... or to offer some solid reasoning for why we believe as we do. "Tolstoy is the worst author... he cannot write" just doesn't seem to cut it.
...and the elite, despite your simplistic portrait that you consistently paint of such a group rarely agree on anything. After all, who is leading this charge of multiculturalism and so-called relativism anyway? It certainly isn't the unwashed masses.
Arguably, they would be academics that are more concerned with social engineering and questions of race, gender, politics, and economics than they are with art would they not?:D
Well, I certainly didn't go to grad school to mindlessly regurgitate the wisdom of my professors. I believe I answered why I read like a bagillion times already.Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
I forgot Dickens! He's a decent story teller, but personally, I got nothing out of Great Expectations...
Other overrated writers - Pynchon, Joyce...
Kelby... JoZ...Comments like these I quoted are surely on par with declarations by teenage boys raised on heavy metal and Batman comics that "Mozart sucks!" and "Michelangelo blows!" For that reason they are largely so inane that one rarely bothers to comment... excepting that I was a bit bored yesterday.:D[/QUOTE]
I resent getting lumped in with those who said Tolstoy can't write and that shakespeare is dull. I said what you said i ought to say, that Dickens has talent but i dont care for him. AS for pynchon - I enjoy his style and absurdity, but I feel that even he can't control it. The way he ended vineland suggests to me, that he couldn't handle the fantastic world he created.
Joyce is obviously a great writer and a genious, but to have such great ideas burried under such impenetrable writing means that at least on some level he failed at his job as a writer. He wrote works that could be studied and cracked, rather than what could be enjoyed. That's an important aspect of fiction, so I say he's overrated. Great, but not as great as we want him to be.
Well now, I assume I can count you out, but I enjoy, more than enjoy, this bit of 'meaning under mass' which is what Joyce is at face value. His work is fun and more of a celebration of literature if anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchegan
I don't mean to attack you personally, for I am definitely not, but I say this to users who post absurdities about the Joyce, in the same vein of previous posters about Shakespeare!
Yeah, I notice that too. I thought it odd that St Lukes defended himself by saying he had no problem with people's personal reactions and it was only when they displayed it as statements of fact that it got on his nerves, which is why he highlighted those statement, when your comments about Dickens that he quoted clearly were worded as a personal reaction. He also did the same exact thing a few posts back with some guy sharing his personal dislike of Shakespeare. I think this pretty much indicates that the problem wasn't how you or anyone else said it (as he claimed in the initial post responding to me), but that you had the audacity to suggest it in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Manchegan
This conversation has been hilarious to read, and not because people are taking swings at some of the greatest authors ever, but because of the defensive almost paranoid responses to the people reacting in sheer disbelief of the choices. :thumbs_up
"Disbelief?" :lol: "Disdain", perhaps... but never disbelief. I'll never underestimate the opinions of those who have yet to outgrow their superheroes in capes and Speedos and WWF.:D Paranoia? You'd have to be far more than "paranoid" to believe that any opinions voiced on an internet forum are likely to undermine the reputations of Shakespeare, Tolstoy, Dickens... or even Bukowski for that matter (unfortunately).:rolleyes:
Thanks Drkshadow, I feel redeemed now. THis thread has been pretty funny...
All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others, right? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
Shhh, you're ruining the punch line!Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
Stephenie Meyer, Dan Brown, Nicholas Sparks honestly not woth the money. The entire Twilight collection costed 70€ that's a lot of money
Yes, but no one rates these authors very highly to begin with, so its a rather moot point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarai
I know you're probably joking - not that stlukes even said that all animals are equal - but I would argue that that is simply not the case. Equal in what? Strength, dexterity, vision? In the case of literary study: intelligence, ambition, an artistic leaning, a negative capability, so to speak, which are all qualities that are hardly given in equal portions to everyone. There's no reason to assume everyone is capable of the same things when approaching a text, and that's taking for granted that everyone involved is putting in the same amount of effort to get to the level to make perceptive critical assessments.Quote:
Originally Posted by kelby_lake
In the case of say, someone whose first literary series is Twilight, versus one who has read the entire Western canon; these opinions are certainly not equal.
I think Dickens is overrated. Sure, he wrote a lot of things and he wrote about the strife of the middle and lower classes of England, but his characters are so boring. There are good people who are simply good people without any serious character flaws, there are bad people who are bad, and there are people in the middle who have absolutely no personalities and are simply there for the good people to be nice to and the bad people to abuse.
For everyone who says J.K. Rowling is overrated, please bear in mind that the Harry Potter series is a series of children's books that were written simply to entertain children. If you go into them expecting incredible depth then, yes, you will be disappointed.
Speaking of having knowledge about literature . . . you do know Kelby was making an allusion to Animal Farm right?Quote:
Originally Posted by mayneverhave
Harry Potter has a lot of depth actually. It's fascinating to delve into all the literary criticism on Potter, which I've been doing to prepare for my Harry Potter post that I promised, and see all the different interpretations of the overall series (of individual books, of individual chapters, of individual characters), sub-textual readings, analysis of its motifs, discussions about its structure, its place in literary history, its place in fantasy literature, its place in children's literature, its place in pop culture. There is just so many angles to approach it from, so many little things to analyze, such fertile ground for scholarship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Reread
Hah. Missed the layup on that one. My point stands regardless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03
It's alright, neither can Turgenev. George Orwell might have something to say to you about that though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koa
http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/lear/english/e_ltf
Besides Melville? Ok, that Twilight writer. Those books are terrible. Maybe I should finish that novel. . .apparently is doesn't have to be good to sell. . .:angel:
Oh wow. I can agree that Grapes of Wrath was not as "GREAT" as I had been led to believe, but East of Eden was phenomonal in it's focus on man's ability to choose what rules him.
Speaking of having knowledge about literature . . . you do know Kelby was making an allusion to Animal Farm right?
I was making the allusion, in my geeky way ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by mayneverhave
The point of that quote, as I see it, is that in theory everybody's opinion is valid, but of course some are less valid than others. We claim democracy but really, we're not going to let a 9 year old's judgment on War and Peace be of the same worth as an English professor of 30 years- so let's just be openly elitest :)
Every name could be uttered as overrated and thats okay to some extend.But there is only one single name that I'm pretty sure that it's not overrated,and that's Shakespeare
Don't get me wrong. I love Harry Potter and I do agree there is a lot of depth. J.K. Rowling created a fascinating world with wonderful characters. I'm simply pointing out that if you look at Harry Potter and expect it to be comparable to something like War and Peace or Paradise Lost then, yes, you won't think it measures up. I think the entire question of what author is overrated depends entirely on your individual standards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drkshadow03