Crap books that you were forced to read at school

Post Reply New Topic

Aw, I'm just yanking you, dude. This is how I am with everyone, whether they're 15 or 115.

The Chysalids was horrible and badly written
I also read A Midsummer Night's Dream, which was so horrible and boring!

Wasn't it a joke because he has a laughing smiley face up there?

I disliked The Chrysalids when I read it as a kid, but I enjoyed Wyndham's other work. Midsummer Night's Dream did suck, except for Neil Gaiman's treatment of it in the Sandman comics a while back.

Standard problem on internet discussion boards. You post something intended as an innocuous gag, and end up triggering a flame war and forum meltdown - I've seen it happen more than once. Throw in the fact that most of the participants have Asperger's Syndrome and/or other personality disorders, and it's a nonstop eggshell marathon.

It's worse still when you have a strong compulsion to make wisecracks like I do

Macbeth was terrible

This thread reeks of stupid in many ways. I don't even know where to begin, and I don't think I'll bother. That is all.

can you people finish your argument in personal messages, loading 2 pages and reading 3 relevant posts is rather frustrating

I'm not scared - niccolo ammaniti, i never brought myself to read the whole thing, its meant to be a thriller but i would get drowsy after 2 pages

a man for all seasons -robert bolt, extremely pretentious way of making a half baked social statement, but then my class had a such a talented 'class clown' and inexperienced teacher that the preface went into more depth than 8 weeks of classes

that was just last year, i seem to have mentally blocked out the details of the stupid books i studied beforehand

het reservaat a dutch sf novella
boring

Silas Marner.

NOTHING HAPPENS.

I assume, based on your attack, that you are a fan of some or all of the books we are talking about not liking. You also seem to be operating on the belief that it takes a greater intellect to fully appreciate these books, and that we are stupid for not being able to. I don't know how the so-called classics acquired the label of intellectual, but I assure you that I am not lacking, and can still find no value in them. Sure, some of them may have things to say, like The Scarlet Letter or The Crucible, but that does not make them enjoyable to read. They remain popular because many of them were ahead of their time, and are read in classrooms today because of the lessons they teach. But the fact is there are plenty of modern day books that say it so much better, while managing to not be unnecessarily difficult to read.

None of the books mentioned here would be anywhere near the top of a list of my favorite books, so I am not a "fan" per se. I simply made the same level of 'argument' the OP made toward the authors, toward him. Regardless of other irrelevant factors, his statements showed that he essentially views books as mere entertainments to either be enjoyed or discarded depending on whether they meet his own standard of amusement. This is a view that very simple minded people often hold regarding any art form.

I can't speak for anyone else, but my dislike for the books on my list is motivated by a number of factors. Some are utterly pretentious, others are ponderous or dry as dust. About half of them are required reading solely because the authors were popular during their lifetimes, comparable to travelling 200 years into the future and finding Colleen McCulloch on the senior English reading list.

Lord Jim and Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad
Ulysses, James Joyce
An absolutely idiotic book called In Country.
Moby Dick-I couldn't get past the first chapter
Huckleberry Finn
Justine-by Lawrence Durrell
The Magus

It's funny; everyone includes Moby Dick on their list of hated books, but I loved it as a kid and still love it now.

Sure, I had problems with Shakespeare when I was in school. I have since learned to appreciate his language and literary skill. It takes revisiting and maturity and a love of language.