Anthony’s Comments (group member since Nov 21, 2012)

Anthony’s comments from the Classics Without All the Class group.

My favorite book when I was a kid was White Fang. I must've read that book five or six times. Also just about anything by Mark Twain, but my favorite book of his when I was a kid was beyond doubt The Adventures of Tom Sawyer.

Andrea wrote: "I just finished A Little Princess by Frances Hodgson Burnett and Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontë. Both I've been meaning to read for a while."

I just read Wuthering Heights a few months ago, great book. The scope and emotions were beyond most other books I'd read.

I would add A Tale of Two Cities to the list. This book represents apex-plotting to me.

Adam wrote: "The Classics in the Horror genre would definitely include:
Frankenstein
Dracula
At the Mountains of Madness and Other Tales of Terror"

I just finished Dracula. o_O
Off the chain.

I don't know why but this line always makes me laugh, Mr. Lockwood, speaking of Heathcliff's dogs: "The herd of possessed swine could have had no worse spirits in them than those animals of yours, sir."

edit: Actually, now that I think about it, I was just impressed at the comparison. I'd never seen dogs described that way.

Another line that made me pause in that book was this, Catherine to Miss Linton about Miss Linton's feelings for Heathcliff: "I know he couldn’t love a Linton; and yet he’d be quite capable of marrying your fortune and expectations: avarice is growing with him a besetting sin. There’s my picture: and I’m his friend—so much so, that had he thought seriously to catch you, I should, perhaps, have held my tongue, and let you fall into his trap.’"

That line made it into a blog post (http://ambjr.com/item/128-how-classic...).

Kiss-koczka wrote: "The whole time reading it I felt that it would much more easier to just kill her and make it look like an accident, or something. You have all the power to do that."

That is rule number one in my list of annoying story traits lol http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...

"I can't stand when:
--- a villain is created so strong that at the end of the story I think, "Well all he had to do was ... and the main character would've been sent to the presence of God for judgment.'
..."

As for the movies, my vote would have to go to Jurassic Park. This is judging strictly on the merits of the movie itself without taking into account differences from the book. The movie blew my mind when I first saw it. Of course I was a kid, still in mind-blowable state, and that's what happened in the theater when I saw those dinosaurs.

Another good one to add to the list would be The Pelican Brief. That would be a close second in my book.

I thought Howl's Moving Castle was fantastic up until the end. I was left with the impression that Miyazaki had painted himself into a corner with the various conflicts and just whipped out a series of quick-fix solutions that shocked me in their simplicity compared to everything leading up to them. The artwork and animation are so outstanding that I re-watch it every now and then anyway though :D I haven't read the book, I'll have to check it out.

Donna wrote: "A good narrator is essential, someone who can do justice to the work. ...."

Totally agree. I had no idea how much of a difference the narrator could make; I thought the book is what counts and it speaks for itself. Yes, the words are the words, but a good narrator can add something to it dramatically and give you a good pace through the book.

I remember starting on A Tale of Two Cities in college and not getting very far in it. If anyone had problems with that book, give Paul Adams' recording of it a shot. He did a free LibriVox recording of it and it's fantastic.

A Tale of Two Cities read by Paul Adams

I'll add Micheal Yorke's reading to my list.

Kiss-koczka wrote: "Well i didn't know die hard was a book too, but Rambo is based up on this:

http://www.amazon.com/First-Blood-Dav..."

Incredible. I've got to read that. For years I thought Stallone wrote Rambo. Guess I was lumping it in with Rocky.

Tanya, Karena, agreed, The Other Boleyn Girl was off the chain. I cannot think of any other movie adaptation that disappointed me more than that one.

Donna, I've read a few in the fantasy/paranormal genre and what I'm seeing is trends in various story elements trumping style. Skillful or creative use of certain story elements is commercially viable. That is, as I read YA reviews I often see praise for popular elements and certain types of characters; rarely do I see praise for language usage or depth of writing style.

I prefer writing that goes beyond cliche, but I am beginning to think that just doesn't matter much to the average YA reader. For example, I read a book recently in which characters with black hair were repeatedly described as having "jet-black" hair. I felt bad to think this way, but I thought, that's not good writing. "Jet-black hair" is such a common phrase - it could only come from a first thought description.

I know what it's like to put down those first thoughts, and a writer can certainly overwrite trying to go back and replace them all. But too many first-thought-descriptions ruin a book for me.

In my own book I faced that exact same black-hair challenge. I wrote "she had hair so dark it could make the night jealous", or "hair the inky black taken from nightmares" or something along those lines. Description with multiple purpose, a little richer, I hope, and a little more flavorful for the reader than just "black" or "jet-black".

There's a dangerous line between "enriching" and "purple prose" though, and it could be that some YA authors avoid it entirely by focusing their creative efforts on use of the story elements. At least, that's what I'm seeing. I can remember "wow" moments from the language in Dracula, or Wurthering Heights, or A Tale of Two Cities, but not so much from modern YA. Then again, those are all high marks for comparison and unfair in that respect.

I would be very interested to hear what others think on this.

Angie, you definitely aren't the only one. The writing is awesome, the pace and tension building, the multiple view points and distinct characters... as I'm reading it taking this all in I'm thinking, yes, this is a classic. :) I was actually planning to use some examples from the book in a blog post about depth of descriptions. Stoker's descriptions of certain scenes show them to me with an imaginative precision that most modern books I'm reading do not, particularly YA books. I'm enjoying it a lot.

Currently reading Dracula (so far it's off the charts), Oliver Twist (so far I'm a bit disappointed), and an indie book I received for free in exchange for a review -- The Moon Dwellers

Lots of interesting posts. I will add MHO to the mix. "Contemporary Classic", to me, means the standout book of a recent era that is likely to continue to represent either the era, a particular wave, a movement, or an impact. When future generations look back, there will be literally millions of books completely forgotten, especially as we proceed deeper into the self-publishing forest. There will also be the few, the proud, the ma -- I mean, classics. In that light I would consider a book like Harry Potter to be a contemporary classic. I would still say we need to wait at least ten years or so before determining whether a book defined at least the decade before calling it a contemporary classic, so I would say the jury is out on 50 Shades. Will it be defining or merely a 10-minute occupant of the ever-moving spotlight? That remains to be seen.

Rachel wrote: "I started Jules Verne 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. DO NOT start with that. I can't get through 2 pages without falling asleep. Apparently his other books are better though."

I didn't finish that one either. I too, am only recently getting into the classics, mainly through audio books. I wrote a blog post about the experience (http://ambjr.com/item/121-the-classic...?) I found Treasure Island to be a fun listen. Pride and Prejudice was another easy listen. I particularly enjoyed A Tale of Two Cities.