The Worst Classics You Have Ever Read

What about 'Waiting For Godot ' by Samuel Becket, clever yes, but enough to put you into a coma. How about ' Look Back in Anger ' hardly Burton's finest hour. 'The Lodger' by Pinter, how depressing was that?. Thought I would just inject a bit of levity into the argument. Even Hamlet got rid of his enemies with a bit of humour, though he came to a bad end. Literature is not always about the authors but, about the readers, sentimentality, tragedy, humour. Enjoying classics always always says more about the reader than the author. Love from Jocky.

War and Peace. It just doesn't do anything for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ksotikoula

The portrait of lady by Henry James. So wordy and perplexed for no apparent reason, without any meaning and with a pathetic and masochistic ending for a so called clever heroine.

---

I couldn't agree more. I thought I must be missing something, as I couldn't warm to the character at all, and really didn't care what happened to her. I liked Ralph though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wessexgirl

I liked Ralph though.

---

Yes! The men of this book were capital, the three of them (the businessman, the lord and the cousin)
which makes the heroine even more absurd for making that choice of hers. They were so wasted on her!

Now that I think of it Isabella Archer is in this respect even more stupid than Scarlett o Hara,
who couldn't see that Buttler was her man. At least Scarlett lost one, not the three of them. Lol!

Bleak house nearly drove me mad. Almost put me off dickens completely. Esther was so meek and insipid, Richard was a moron and Ava was pathetic. Dickens focused so much on trivial things like how foggy the fog was or how muddy the mud was i only made it to the end out of spite cos my mum couldnt finish it :)

ok. . . end of that rant.

The trial by Kafka was so irritating. i get where he was goiog with it and i suppose the point is that it should frustrate you but still i would never read it again. The same with 1984.

I can't say I was that fond of Jude the obscure. meh.

Like some, I'm surprised by a few of the books that people have listed.

For me I would have to say Dracula - super melodramatic and downright tedious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scheherazade

Who is this Austin you guys keep talking about? Related to Austin Powers by any chance?

:D

---

Why IS it that no one can spell Austen? Isn't this a literature forum? :sick:

Hands up Doctor Hill, spelled Austen wrong, however that does not detract from the point that the lady writes about absolutely nothing. Her literary talent is indisputable and I truly believe, were she alive today, she could scriptwrite for all the soaps. Why dont you answer the point? What has she contributed To English literature? I see by your Avatar that you are a Wilde fan, Oscar may have been a bit Quirky, but he dissected the class system effortlessly, humorously and ruthlessly. Ask yourself this, what is memorable about Jane? This is the literature channel, but a spelling mistake does not mean that the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater. Best wishes from Jocky. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jocky

How about ' Look Back in Anger ' hardly Burton's finest hour.

---

I like Look Back in Anger, although Burton was a strange choice as Jimmy teases Cliff about his welshness. Kenneth Branagh's Jimmy Porter was much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jocky

Hands up Doctor Hill, spelled Austen wrong, however that does not detract from the point that the lady writes about absolutely nothing. Her literary talent is indisputable and I truly believe, were she alive today, she could scriptwrite for all the soaps. Why dont you answer the point? What has she contributed To English literature? I see by your Avatar that you are a Wilde fan, Oscar may have been a bit Quirky, but he dissected the class system effortlessly, humorously and ruthlessly. Ask yourself this, what is memorable about Jane? This is the literature channel, but a spelling mistake does not mean that the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater. Best wishes from Jocky. :)

---

I don't think she contributed anything to literature.

"Catch 22".
Loved it. Page to page & could not put it down.
Classic in the formal sense? Perhaps not.
Heller at his solitary peak & the books he wrote after, not in the same league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jocky

Hands up Doctor Hill, spelled Austen wrong, however that does not detract from the point that the lady writes about absolutely nothing. Her literary talent is indisputable and I truly believe, were she alive today, she could scriptwrite for all the soaps. Why dont you answer the point? What has she contributed To English literature? I see by your Avatar that you are a Wilde fan, Oscar may have been a bit Quirky, but he dissected the class system effortlessly, humorously and ruthlessly. Ask yourself this, what is memorable about Jane? This is the literature channel, but a spelling mistake does not mean that the baby should be thrown out with the bathwater. Best wishes from Jocky. :)

---

While I do agree about the nothingness of her writing, I do think there is one thing Austen actually brought us: understanding about the system of courtship and marriage. It figures in other books, but is never dwellt on. The thing about Austen is that it is only about that and like that we have a better understanding of what happens in other books and what the issues are.

There is, in my mind, also an art as to writing about nothing... But I to have to say that I found her last book better than her first. Se died to early if Peruasion was anything to go by.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelby_lake

I like Look Back in Anger, although Burton was a strange choice as Jimmy teases Cliff about his welshness. Kenneth Branagh's Jimmy Porter was much better.

---

kelby_lake, can't tell you how many times I have watched this production starring Branagh; I own the DVD. I just love it. One hates and loves Jimmy Porter at the same time. I never read the actual play, but I would like to. It's fantastic. I heard Burton was good in it, but I have never seen that version, have you? The actor who played Cliff in the Branagh version is great, too and of course Emma Thompson is top-notch always. By the way, it was directed by Judi Dench. How can one go wrong?

Point taken Kiki 1982, she did point out the historical difficulties of human and social relationships in her musings about the period she lived in. Nothingness, is perhaps a hard thing to articulate, and Jane did it brilliantlly. Still prefer the Brontes though. Good observation.