AWKWARD ZOMBIE

I wasn't referring to 'professional' critics, I was referring to the everyday person. If they interpret a work one way and it doesn't match what the artist intended, then there's really nothing the artist can do about it. They can't beat their audience over the head and say "no, YOU'RE wrong, it's supposed to mean THIS".

That said, people are idiots and I can understand an artist's frustration when someone completely misses the mark.

I actually never read anything by a professional critic. Usually because about the only things I hear critics say are any good are boring. For example, I've 1984, and couldn't finish because it was too boring. I read the Twilight books, because everyone said they were great. I wanted to strangle most of the characters in those books.

But that's just me.

everyone said they were great

I think the issue is you're listening to the wrong people.



1984 is conceptually pretty great, especially considering when it was written. However I found the writing style a slouch to get through and never even attempted to read it myself.

Had to read it for school like everybody else. Interesting enough read at the time, mercifully short, but I think I can safely forget most of what happened in it.

I think it's not so much the events of the book as the ideas it presents and how you can see them in action in modern politics that matters. It changed the way I view the world. Bread and circuses, mandatory 20 minutes of hate, indoctrination through the media, government spying, idolatry, doublethink... you can find analogies or direct instances of all of those in the real world.

I think death of the author is a silly idea. Of course some ideas can be transmitted unbeknownst to the author, like their personal views on genders and society, but for the most part I think the author's version is the only one with any empirical value.

When I was in my teens, I made a point of reading through all the classics. I can say most classics have that designation for a good reason, only a scant few have actually aged badly. 1984 is great, its not fast paced or exciting, but its not supposed to be. Its a study into the psychology of a fascist system. Animal Farm is basically 1984 on a more basic level, how such a system grows because of the blind acceptance of the population who could easily prevent it.

The only classic story I've read that I didnt like was Moby Dick because its far too long. The ending is great, but the journey there is basically deadwood

Some of my favorite classics are To Kill a Mockingbird and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

But there are also a few classics I had to read for school that I hated, like All Quiet on the Western Front(Nuuuuuuuuh I hate war, war suuuuuuucks, I wanna go hooooooooooooome, I'm home now and it suuuuuuuuuuucks, I wanna go back to war, nuuuuuuuuuh), Catcher in the Rye(Everyone is fake and I hate everyone: The Novel), and Wuthering goddamn Heights.

I fucking hate Wuthering Heights so much.

Marcato wrote:Catcher in the Rye (Everyone is fake and I hate everyone: The Novel)

THIIIIIIISSSSSSSSS
GOD that book was awful, I have no idea why people praise it.

Lord of the Flies was really boring too.

The worst was The Curious Case of the Dog in the Nighttime though. Seriously, it seems like the whole book was just "THIS KID HAS AUTISM AND HIS MOTHER LEFT WITH THE NEIGHBOR BECAUSE THE FATHER WAS A DICK, FEEL BAD FOR HIM" and yes autism sucks and family conflicts suck but there was bodaciously NOTHING else the book had going for it
And now it's a play and it's making millions
W H Y

To Kill a Mockingbird was great, The Odyssey was great, Macbeth was great, When The Legends Die was great, The Good Earth was great, and there was a book I read going into 8th grade that I think was called Shane and it was a Western story and that was really great, but everything else that my public school district had us read was just awful

Protip for the educational system: We get it, these are classics, but that doesn't mean we'll automatically like them or care about the message you want to pump into our fried brains

Maybe offer some more diverse selections, for every educational level. If a kid can read something in 9th grade Honors then the tenth graders should be able to read it in the Regents (average) class. I missed out on several books that the other kids got to read because I wasn't an OverachieverTM.

And this is the part where I mention that I am apparently one of two dozen people in the U.S. that never read any of those for a class (except Macbeth and Fahrenheit 451, which I'd already read on my own time). Not a single one that anyone's listed so far. I've read a few others on my own, and I know the plot and literary themes of most of them, but for real. Everyone I know complains about at least a third of the books they're required to read for English, and I'm like "uhhhhh we watched a really shitty rendition of Romeo and Juliet where the dude playing Romeo looked like Zac Effron..."

i went to a religious school and our literature made us read religious books that ALL SUCKED SO MUCH booty OH MY GOD instead of ~proper lit books so i had to read the classics in college voluntarily

some are good, some aren't. i figured i'd give them a try though. it's nice to not be REQUIRED to read them though so if it sucks i just take it back to the library.

I hate the Great Gatsby and Catcher in the Rye so much. Other than that, I've liked most of the classics that I've read.

Yeah, my school didn't have most of that stuff as assigned reading. I did end up reading Fahrenheit 451 and "reading" To Kill a Mockingbird, but that's only because I didn't take English or Math at my normal school.

Also, A Separate Peace. I hate hate haaaated A Separate Peace.

And because of the above situation, I ended up getting assigned Beowulf and Hamlet in both freshman and senior year. I honestly don't think I read Beowulf either time. I know the plot (Dutch guy punches monsters, dies punching monsters), I just don't think I actually read it

Other than that it was just the odd Shakespeare here or there.

Riku wrote:and I'm like "uhhhhh we watched a really shitty rendition of Romeo and Juliet where the dude playing Romeo looked like Zac Effron..."

Same, but also the one with Leonardo DiCaprio

Riku wrote:"uhhhhh we watched a really shitty rendition of Romeo and Juliet where the dude playing Romeo looked like Zac Efron..."

Movie adaptations of Romeo and Juliet have been mediocre at best.
But you're not missing much, Romeo and Juliet is baaaaaad.

I've been trying to read more classics since I read some good ones in high school.

I'm like the only person I know that really liked Hemingway though. Though to be fair the only Hemingway novel we read in class was The Sun Also Rises, which is like the most boring of all his books. Even though the characters being bored was kinda the whole point of the story.

AquaBat wrote:

Riku wrote:"uhhhhh we watched a really shitty rendition of Romeo and Juliet where the dude playing Romeo looked like Zac Efron..."

Movie adaptations of Romeo and Juliet have been mediocre at best.
But you're not missing much, Romeo and Juliet is baaaaaad.

Well, yeah, it's about "goddamn motherfucking teenagers doing stupid teenage shit" and "hey, guys, don't be assholes to your neighbors, m'kay."
It was a play written for inebriated, semi-literate or completely illiterate audiences to amuse themselves with.