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.
i say jack kerouac is the most overrated
die! on the road
:banana:
Printable View
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.
i say jack kerouac is the most overrated
die! on the road
:banana:
okay not an autor but
Wilfred Owen
I hate that mans poetry I really really reallly do!
And I had a 3 and a half hour Literature exam yesterday on unseen texts from WWI and guess who was on it!!
Kerouac and Steve Allen did a music to reading.
Quite witty and humorous.
Kerourac is meant to be read aloud.
I like it.
I am not familar with Owens.
I cannot think of anyone who is overrated, trends are trends and classics are classics.
J.K. Rowling anyone?
I haven't read any Harry Potter books, because I try to avoid it. So I can't really say that she is the most overrated. Maybe the books are actually good and I'm missing out? But I just don't see why everyone is so obsessed over it!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Aubrey
ah, then read the first one! i felt the same - refused to read them/be part of the crowd. and then found out i liked them! though the 5th is rather dark. forget if there are 5 or 6 now, so if there's a 6th haven't read it, but the first few are just :) :).
I read the first one when I was in 5th grade, and decided that I didn't have much interest in Harry's adventures. And also, my teacher at the time told me that I could do better. :) Aren't complements great?
I tried reading one and just couldn't cope with her writing, it's so poor. Aparantly she gets better over the years. I still felt like I was reading a Mister Men book.
Oh, and too many people think that Dan Brown is a good writer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanderlust_ox
exactly my though! i cant persuade myself to do something that is fashionable to do...like that da vinci thing...the more it gets famous, the less it attracts me...
i agree on kerouac... and i really cant understand shakespeare but apparently that's my problem...
"and mine!" az added.
Thomas Hardy is over rated. On the other hand, J. K. Rowling is a very good writer. I had been hearing about Harry Potter for a few years, so I picked a copy of the first one; it was excellent. The writing was very good; characterization and plot were nicely done, and the theme is clear and worthwhille.
Kerouac's writing was variable. I don't like On the Road, but the Dharma Bums was very good. Some of his other writing was decent.
Steinbeck is also overated. He was a good writer, but not great. I would almost say the same of Hemingway, but he wrote a few great books.
What a painful thread to read! I realize, however, different people certainly have different tastes . . . sometimes very different tastes.
I certainly agree with J.K. Rowling and Dan Brown, but also I would like to add James Redfield, Dr. Phil, Gore Vidal, and Billy Collins. :p
I have read only On The Road by Kerouac; I did not enjoy the book (to say the least) and I still don't understand why it is considered a great read even though some of my more learned friends here tried to explain it to me very patiently on more than one occasion. However, I think Kerouac has a good style, which is what kept me reading.
I can say that the same thing for J.K. Rowling... I have read all the Potter books and even though I don't think that she is very creative with her ideas etc, I believe she is a good story teller and produces good page-turners... And I am glad that her books made many youngsters start reading.
As some of you might be expecting (*grins at Mono and Jay*) my suggestion is Virginia Woolf... I have read two of her books and left with the same feeling of 'and...?' and I didn't care much for her style either... I can also say the same things for Jeanette Winterson maybe but I have read only one book of hers.
ha I'd Forgotten about shakespear then theres Margret Attwood- Shudders at mmomry of HAndmaid's Tale. J K Rowling Well I have read all them so far and will read the next 2 though I think 5 was awful and 6 will probably be worse number 1 was Ok But I m just waiting to see her kill Harry :brow:
I think J. K. Rowling is a good author, but all her stories are the same, and as Harry Potter has become more popular, she's had to change the style to fit both adult and child, but she should remember ultimately that these books started out for children, and so they would be disturbed by the 5th book. This might just be me, but I personally saw MAJOR similarities between her books and the Lord of the Rings trilogys, and I was not happy! But yes, the Harry Potter books are good, just very predictible!!
Around the time the first Harry Potter book was published I can remeber telling my teacher that I didn't care for it, and to this day I remeber as if it was yesterday the way she looked back at me in utter disbelief. Whilst I admit that at the time I must have been in the minority I am unable to acertain for what reason she looked so horrifeid at my expression of literary preferance.
Annie Dillard. hated her short stories. *retches.
Good point. I really disliked her books I read... but then I can say the same of all post-modernist stuff, it just doesn't suit me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
(which kinda reminds me that I have big problems with Joyce too...I prefer writers who use grammar ;)... and I didnt even got much out of Dubliners...)
I feel the same way. I never go for the renowned books. There's something magical about enjoying an unheard-of book... it's like you discover it... it becomes your other world that no one else knows about but you, and that you can jump into any time you want. Anyone else feels that way? maybe it's just me...Quote:
Originally Posted by Koa
Eheh for me it's just a question of things that are cool at the moment... I read a lot of classics, so they are really famous and renowned... But if something it's popular at the moment it loses all its charm to me...
Most overrated writer eh? I would nominate Salinger. I just don't understand what the big deal with The Catcher in the Rye is. I find his writing cliche, redundant, and really boring. Woolf is a close second though.
It's not cliche if you're the first to do it.
first to do what? and give an example.
:banana:
Being very demanding nowadays aren't we? I'm not posting to stand up for the innovation of The Catcher in the Rye, but I enjoyed it. And 0I don't think anyone written before a story about the way a problematic cynical teenager sees the world in such an interesting way.
I think a big part of Rowling's appeal is the fact that she's given us a new fantasy world to play in with the vocabulary to boot. It's been a long time in children/adolescent literature since there's been one of those created. I also am glad that the issues she brings up follow the same trajectory that she has for Harry's development from an innocent through adolescence to maturity. I'd have been very disappointed if the 16-year-old Harry stayed within the confines of the 11-year-old Harry's mentalities. It becomes problematic and you can see a lot of this with many of the current run superhero comics.
I enjoyed Salinger's Catcher but I completely didn't get Nine Stories. I'd have to re-read both of them to find out how I feel because whatever I thought about the books I read while in high school is now worthless. How can anybody know anything during those years that would help you get the literature that they teach?
Dan Brown's fun to read, but not particularly deep.
She said his writing was cliche, and I said "not if you do it first." In my opinion Salinger's matter-of-fact writing style and nonchalant narration were revolutionary in the literary world. Salinger is up front with what he's saying through out most of the novel. I don't think I need to give an example if you've read the book. But knowing you, you probably didn't understand it and have sworn a vendetta against it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_noel_y2k
I wasn't overly impressed with Catcher in the Rye when I first read it, though I still enjoyed it and find a great many things to think about in there. But what really bowled me over were Nine Stories and Raise High the Roofbeam, Carpenter and Seymour: An Introduction.
She said his writing was cliche, and I said "not if you do it first." In my opinion Salinger's matter-of-fact writing style and nonchalant narration were revolutionary in the literary world. Salinger is up front with what he's saying through out most of the novel. I don't think I need to give an example if you've read the book. But knowing you, you probably didn't understand it and have sworn a vendetta against it.
ah jack, so eager to take anything anyone says as a personal insult. :lol:
i dont think salinger's "matter of fact writing style" is particularly original but then thats not a very good answer. hemingway wrote in a similar matter of fact way as did theodore dreiser (though dreiser is a dreadful writer in my opinion). as for nonchalant narration...well, by that do you mean holden caulfield is a apathetic narrator? or that the narration isn't particularly detailed and quite breezy? i think if you mean the former then perhaps you could read "the great gatsby" as nonchalant narration as nick carraway ignores many of the realities of his story in favour of a more romantic view of his experiences. or perhaps the character of mr stevens in "the remains of the day" could be seen as another such nonchalant narrator. but then ishiguro wrote that in the late 80s and so couldn't be said to be original, but fitzgerald on the other hand was writing in the 20s so perhaps he could be seen as an earlier influence to salinger, after all salinger did admire fitzgerald and hemingway's style as well as their short story techniques hence his desire to be the next great american short story writer before he wrote "catcher". as personal vendettas go, i don't really go after books unless they really tick me off like the ridiculous naked lunch but that arguments still raging in another thread. personally, holden is a brilliant character and salinger's first and only novel is one of my all time favourites. calm down jacky boy. :D
and as for you saying that "i didn't understand the book" well jack m'lad let me tell you that you didn't understand naked lunch either. you just repeated what i had said in an earlier thread and then said something banal about how "uh it makes you understand the mind of a heroin addict". well la de dah. i don't think your 16 year old mind understands the book or "the catcher in the rye" either, but then if i stand by my position that naked lunch as unreadable pap then theres really nothing to understand about it. check mate!
:banana:
Yeah, I'm 16 which according to you means I don't know ****. Well I'd rather stay 16 and not know anything and be sure about that, than be an anal old fart like you and pretend I know everything.
Please avoid turning literary disagreements into personal conflicts and attacks. Such incidents cause unpleasant atmosphere not only for you but for all the other users visiting the Forum.
I'd have to agree that Virginia Woolf is especially overrated. I do think that, more recently, Chuck Palahniuk is given much more credit than he's due.
Eh, no offense taken, Scher. Virginia Woolf seems someone either greatly admired or greatly not-so-admired, which I can see both sides of the debate, but cannot deny her. Jeannette Winterson, yes, I know, can seem a little dry and . . . in a way, cliché. I love both of the writers, their brilliant minds, but see others' complaints.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
That writers like J.D. Salinger and Ernest Hemingway made the list does not surprise me in the least; they, too, seem absolutely a blessing to the bookshelf to me, but I clearly perceive what others can dislike about them. I know, especially Salinger's Nine Stories, reads with much difficulty, but I cannot insult its pure uniquity.
Chuck Palahniuk also appeared with no surprise. Coming from the city that, I believe, he still teaches in, hearing always of his book reviews and raves, and even spotting him on the street now and then, I get a little tired of it. I adore his novels, their undeniably dark factor, but cannot quite connect to his short stories.
i like some of palahniuk's stuff like fight club, survivor and choke which were very imaginative and interesting but lately hes been writing pretty awful stuff though i hear his latest novel "haunted" is set to be a good one so i hope its a return to form for one of todays most original and interesting writers around.
(ps jack im not old, just older, ill be 21 on the 27 of june)
:banana:
Rowling is great, certainly not over-rated in my opinion.
Of the names listed so far I agree with Virginia Wolfe.
*Yawn*
My choices would be Shakespeare and Dostovesky.
Well. I guess I gotta respect someone with a controversial opinion.
I loved Fight Club and Survivor, but apart from those two I don't find much of his writing particularly innovative anymore. I tracked down "Guts" online out of curiosity — I believe it's in Haunted, but please correct me if I'm mistaken — and I wasn't even mildly impressed. It seemed written more for shock value than any other purpose. Though I think his writing style was innovative and original when he started out, it's quickly growing tired. I keep waiting for him to do something that snags my interest and seems to be something more than a repetition of all his other work. I can't help but wonder if the man is drowning in his success...Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_noel_y2k
I found Earnest Hemingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald to be overrated. I had heard a lot of good things about The Great Gatsby by Fitzgerald, but it failed to live up, and I wasn't overly fond of his writing style. The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway was just plain dull.
Though it looks like I'm in the minority, I actually enjoy Joyce, Woolfe, and Hemingway, but anyway...I would nominate Stephen King for this position. Now before any of his fans attack me (physically or verbally), allow me to explain: I've read several of his novels and I simply failed to find the characters interesting and the plots to be drawn out entirely too long. The Dark Tower for instance. I will admit that several of his short stories are worthy of merit though.