The Most Overrated Books Showing 5,101-5,150 of 5,680

[Karen]

Karen wrote: "What was she saying to it? Lol."

Monty wrote; "Sweet nothings. Baby-talk. A one-sided conversation as I recall. Nothing memorable. I fantasized a British accent."


Heidi wrote;
"Agreed. Being in a very conservative Greek American family, I hear those sentiments often"

Heidi, what are you agreeing with? Monty and I were talking about the contents of a book he picked up on a rack at a truck stop... ? What sentiments?

[S.W.]

Excellent points, Mocha. The language should reflect the POV character in either first person or FID. Bella's narrative voice is a good example: teenage girls can be THAT shallow and self preoccupied. I'm reading One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and the writing reflects the Chief's voice which is rather stilted and untrustworthy. I'll keep that in mind when reading 50 Shades. So far I've only read a few excerpts and was giggling about the dialogue tags and adverbs. Honestly, I enjoy a "bad read" almost as much as a "good read"---gives me confidence in my own feeble attempts to write.

[Victoria]

HAHAH this book is so controversial it’s unbelievable! Totally need to rename the thread to “50 shades of gray, the most controversial book ever”
Its simply one of those harlequin romance trashy reads that some find a guilty pleasure in reading. The author did absolutely NO research on the BDSM which ruffled feathers on people who are faithful to this kink. I think they are furious that some frumpy author wrote it instead of someone well established and has a vast knowledge of this specific kink world. I enjoy a bit of a trashy read sometimes, kind of to cleanse my brain palate in-between reading heavier true classic novels.
The film adaptation was absolutely awkward with parts intended to be serious but ended up HILARIOUS and stupid, and then it ends with a horrible abuse that left a bad taste in my mouth that I will be utterly shocked if there is anyone in the theatre for the sequel. There are great scenic parts to the film that would be better if the actors had their mouths duct-taped. I think, yet again, if they had chose actors that were in the kinkworld, they would have a better theatre adaptation. My hubby left the theatre saying…… what was the point of this story? Where was the action and the climax and the umph. He said it was utterly boring and doesn’t understand why everyone is in such a tiff about it. lol

[Mochaspresso]

Edward wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: ""Who knows what the average family will look like in another 50 years?"


There were segments of society that believed that interracial marriages would destroy the average fam..."

Theories abound about this and I can't attest to the validity of any of them. Personally, I just think it is harder for women because there are often other issues at play. For example, I'm not keen on the idea of being someone's flavor that they are curious about and want to try and at times, that is exactly what it feels like. Figuring out a guy's genuine intentions toward you is generally hard enough and throwing that extra thing into the mix makes it even harder at times.

Then again, I once had an asian male co-worker lament that I needed to quit my bawling because he has to compete with everyone on the planet for not just asian women, but all women. According to him, the asian male is the lowest on the totem pole when it comes to dating.

[Monty J]

Mochaspresso wrote: " According to him, the asian male is the lowest on the totem pole when it comes to dating."


Could this be perhaps because Asian women seem to be at the top? My limited experience bears this out, referring specifically to Japanese and Chinese, two cultures known for male dominance. Perhaps Asian men aren't challenged enough to perform because the women do all the work and take the risks.

Few things in life are as confusing and complicated as relationships and sex. There are some real creeps out there, of both genders. But for the courageous and creative individual, the rewards can be significant. You just have to be wary and alert and be willing to take some lumps.

Simple questions like: "What do you want?" and "What are you looking for?" can cut through the fog of stereotyping and mixed signals. Also, the firmness to say, "It ain't gonna happen."

In the end, each of us is an individual. And individuals change over time.

[Heidi]

Mochaspresso wrote: "I have a question about "poor writing". Is it technically "poor" if the writing is actually in line with the established character's traits and voice? In Fifty Shades, Ana is a bit of a silly nit..."

Oh I'm sorry I think I replied to the wrong post. I was agreeing with Mochaspresso

[Karen]

Heidi wrote:
"Oh I'm sorry I think I replied to the wrong post. I was agreeing with Mochaspresso"

That's okay, I was just confused, lol.

[Petergiaquinta]

Mochaspresso wrote: "In Fifty Shades, Ana is a bit of a silly nitwit. She's an educated one, but still very much an immature, naive and silly nitwit in most other ways....Regarding #3...this is the part that pertains to characterization, imo. Poor writing? Yes, but what if it is also in line with the established character?"

You're being way too kind by cracking open this door of possibility for a lightweight like E.L. James.

Molly Bloom is a silly nitwit. Charlotte Haze is a silly nitwit. Gertrude might even be a silly nitwit (although I disagree with that reading of her). But Joyce, Nabokov and Shakespeare never, ever make reference to their "inner goddess."

If I sound too dead-white-male here for your tastes, then how about this? Marianne Dashwood is a silly twit. And so is Lydia Bennet (and I'd add Emma Woodhouse to the mix while we're at it, who is educated, immature and naive, as well). But Austen never had Emma Woodhouse say "oh my" this often, and although Marianne does get rather flushed at times, not to the count of 117!

[Karen]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "In Fifty Shades, Ana is a bit of a silly nitwit. She's an educated one, but still very much an immature, naive and silly nitwit in most other ways....Regarding #3...this is th..."

Good point. 50 Shades is just a horribly written novel, with idiotic dialog. That's it. The inner goddess references were ridiculous and I don't even know what it means, but if anyone asks me if I acknowledge mine I'll clobber them.
I like Molly Bloom.

[Daniel]

Mochaspresso wrote: "I have a question about "poor writing". Is it technically "poor" if the writing is actually in line with the established character's traits and voice? In Fifty Shades, Ana is a bit of a silly nit..."

Also, adding a little bit to what Peter just said, how far can this argument really be taken? I mean, surely the fact that Ana says some silly stuff and repeats "Oh, my" too much can be somehow attributed to James adopting the lexicon of her character, but can it really justify instances where she uses pseudo-scientific mumbojumbo terms like "subconscious" even though she's supposed to be an English major (which I am, and can tell you involves knowing a good deal of psychoanalytic jargon)? Or being more plot-related: Can it justify her not reading a damn book for the whole time the novel lasts even though James obviously wants us to think she's SUCH A BOOKWORM OMG? (And I mean actually sitting down and reading a book, not vaguely referencing poor old Hardy) Or getting a job at a publishing house on account of nothing? Or her fascination at having an e-mail account in 20-freaking-11? I don't know, it's just too much flimsiness for me to defend.

Also, this is a weird aside, but did the actual sex in the sex scenes feel weirdly short to anybody else? By the third time it happened I actually started to think Christian might suffer from some sort of, ehm, stamina impairment...

[Petergiaquinta]

Well, Tess isn't a silly nitwit, although she does start the novel off rather naive. But that's an interesting reference. Too bad Ana doesn't stab anyone.

As for these "boring classics," all three mentioned are examples of how great authors can cross boundaries of accepted taste and morality to shock or even titillate the reader/audience and yet still write brilliantly and still have something to say about life at the core of their works that is worth reading and knowing. (And no, I'm not including Austen among the authors I mentioned who shock and tittilate...too bad!)

[Petergiaquinta]

Sorry, since you said referencing classics was boring, I assumed you also meant that word applied to those classics themselves. Apparently it's only the "referencing" that is boring you...ah well, I'll try to be more careful next time.

@Karen: I like Molly Bloom.

Me, too...but I'm glad I'm not married to her.

In Stratford, Ontario, there's a pub called Molly Bloom's!

[Karen]

Petergiaquinta wrote:
"Me, too...but I'm glad I'm not married to her.

In Stratford, Ontario, there's a pub called Molly Bloom's!"

I was born in Ontario. Molly is difficult, but she had her reasons- in the end I thought it a great love story.

[Victoria]

(quietly places fanny hill to the top of her reading list)

[Karen]

Victoria wrote: "(quietly places fanny hill to the top of her reading list)"

Hahaha! It does look interesting doesn't it.

[Mochaspresso]

Daniel wrote: "Also, adding a little bit to what Peter just said, how far can this argument really be taken? I mean, surely the fact that Ana says some silly stuff and repeats "Oh, my" too much can be somehow attributed to James adopting the lexicon of her character, but can it really justify instances where she uses pseudo-scientific mumbojumbo terms like "subconscious" even though she's supposed to be an English major (which I am, and can tell you involves knowing a good deal of psychoanalytic jargon)? Or being more plot-related: Can it justify her not reading a damn book for the whole time the novel lasts even though James obviously wants us to think she's SUCH A BOOKWORM OMG? (And I mean actually sitting down and reading a book, not vaguely referencing poor old Hardy) Or getting a job at a publishing house on account of nothing? Or her fascination at having an e-mail account in 20-freaking-11? I don't know, it's just too much flimsiness for me to defend.

Also, this is a weird aside, but did the actual sex in the sex scenes feel weirdly short to anybody else? By the third time it happened I actually started to think Christian might suffer from some sort of, ehm, stamina impairment...


See, this is my dilemma...while I know the book was poorly written, I also want to be fair and truthful about what I read. You mentioned that Ana is a bookworm and isn't depicted as reading a book. In all fairness, when book 1 takes place, she is in the midst of studying for finals and moving into a new apartment after graduation. I will be honest and say that I didn't read a lot for pleasure during those times in my life either. She is depicted as reading books 2 and in books 3, though. (I also think she spends some time in Christian's library while she is at his place. I'm not sure if this is book 1, though.) Getting the job at the publishing house would be improbable irl....but in the book, it ties into a storyline where the guy who hires her is an asshole who sexually harasses her. She didn't get that job on "merit" and it wasn't pure luck either. She got the job because the guy thought she was attractive, naive and desperate for a big break, thus easy to take advantage of AND more importantly, he had a very personal long standing beef with Christian. Her boss had been stalking Christian and knew about her connection to him when he hired her. In fact, she wasn't going to get the job. He is the one who pushed for her hire.

I agree about the other things you mentioned, though.

[Stephen]

Cemre wrote: "This referencing classics is kinda getting boring. Get original, people ! I can't believe she referenced Tess in her book. Maybe she acknowledges that it was rape."


Hear, hear.

[S.W.]

Literary allusions (referencing classics) is an important and IMO underused device in popular writing. It's like leaving hidden cookies or Easter eggs in a computer program that can unlock new worlds. When properly done it provides depth and greater meaning to one's writing; when improperly done it can seem pretentious like the author is showing off all their erudite and arcane knowledge which intrudes into the reader's enjoyment and immersion into the story.

Recently, I read Juno Diaz's Oscar Wao novel and there were several well placed and meaningful allusions: Proust, Conrad, Tolkien, and many Sci-Fi/Fantasy books that I recognized but hadn't read---yet.

[Monty J]

S.W. wrote: "...when improperly done it can seem pretentious like the author is showing off all their erudite and arcane knowledge which intrudes into the reader's enjoyment and immersion into the story."

Yup. A little bit of external referencing goes a long way for my tastes. It can be a crutch when a lazy or unskilled writer doesn't want to go to the trouble or doesn't have the skill to create their own symbols or metaphors. It gives a timid or reserved author an excuse do avoid probing his/er psyche and discovering and sharing more of True Self. It cheats the author and the reader at the same time.

A work should stand on it's own as much as possible. Emerson talks about this in "Self Reliance."

In Drown, I found Diaz somewhat self-indulgent, but at the same time he shared honestly and deeply. He was all over the map. I'm looking forward to reading Wao.

Fitzgerald's reference in Gatsby to Trimalchio pulled me out of the story. He may have impressed a few Princeton classmates and teachers, but he irritated me.

If I want to take a course in literature I'll sign up for one. Ideally, when I buy a book, I'm not subscribing to a series or a book club. I want a self-contained experience.

[Mochaspresso]

Edward wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Daniel wrote: "Also, adding a little bit to what Peter just said, how far can this argument really be taken? I mean, surely the fact that Ana says some silly stuff and repeats..."

Honestly, I thought Fifty Shades missed a huge opportunity with that story line. Instead of doing something more salient with the plot line of sexual harassment in the workplace, all that James does is use it as a device to make Christian jealous and possessive and to vindicate/justify his control and over protectiveness of her. "See, I told you that guy was a creep! I told you that you don't need that job. I'll take care of you." He buys the publishing house, fires the boss, promotes her and eventually gifts it to her to run.

From a purely "feminist" standpoint, I think I have more issues with that than the consensual sex that they have.

[Mochaspresso]

Monty J wrote: "S.W. wrote: "...when improperly done it can seem pretentious like the author is showing off all their erudite and arcane knowledge which intrudes into the reader's enjoyment and immersion into the ..."

Literary allusions cheat the reader and are indicative of lazy writing? Wow. I've never heard that argument before.

[Monty J]

Mochaspresso wrote: "Monty J wrote: "S.W. wrote: "...when improperly done it can seem pretentious like the author is showing off all their erudite and arcane knowledge which intrudes into the reader's enjoyment and imm..."


My words were "can be," not "are."

It's not an all-or-nothing proposition. It depends on the writer and the market addressed.

A piece intended for English Lit professors can have all the allusions you want. English Lit teachers really dig allusions. But that's a very small market. Beyond a point, the more allusions and other literary finery you have, the smaller your readership. The average Joe/Jane could care less (as 50 Shades and The Outsiders seem to prove).

The average reader just wants a good story. If you want to reach people, don't put logs in their path.

Having said that, a well-chose allusion or two can be extremely effective. In my current novel I reference, then allude to, Anne Frank's Diary and Catcher in the Rye because: a) they are so widely read and b) I want to strongly encourage teenage boys to read Anne Frank. As I indicated, I'm not against external referencing entirely; I've just seen them used in a self-defeating way, as I felt Fitzgerald did in that one case.

[Mochaspresso]

Monty J wrote: "Mochaspresso wrote: "Monty J wrote: "S.W. wrote: "...when improperly done it can seem pretentious like the author is showing off all their erudite and arcane knowledge which intrudes into the read..."

Fifty Shades and The Outsiders prove what, exactly? Both works contain allusions. "Stay Gold" was an integral theme and allusion in "The Outsiders". I'm not sure that I agree that it's commonly viewed as a log in the reader's way.

[Monty J]

Mochaspresso wrote: ""Stay Gold"."

I thought we were talking about allusion to other texts.

[Petergiaquinta]

Stay gold, Monty boy. Stay gold...

Allusion is one of the strongest tools a good writer has at his disposal. If there is nothing new under the sun (Solomon, anyone?), a truth insightful writers and readers understand, then allusion can be used in powerful and fascinating ways. Think of T.S. Eliot and James Joyce...and then consider that Chaucer and Shakespeare (our two greatest writers of the English language) used it to such extent they might be considered plagiarists today. Bob Dylan is such a smoothly effective user of allusion that most folks don't even know what he's doing in his lyrics. Vanilla Ice on the other hand...?

If anything, dropping Tess into the mix is the smartest thing about 50 Shades.

[Karen]

Peter did you read 50 Shades Of Grey? Just curious. I may read it for fun.

[S.W.]

I absolutely loved the Robert frost allusion in The Outsiders. Can You believe SE Hinton wrote that book in high school? Perhaps this helped her convey an authentic story in a genuine teenage voice. For once, Hollywood's adaptation did justice to the book and kudos to the casting director.

[Aamina]

with !! he wrote it in high schoooooool!!!

[S.W.]

She wrote it in high school...at least the first draft. It was published during her freshman year in college.

[Monty J]

S.W. wrote: "Can You believe SE Hinton wrote that book in high school?"

Started at age 16 as an English assignment and finished it at age 18 as a college freshman.

Aamina: "he wrote it in high schoooooool!!!"

Not "he," "she." Check out my review at: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

The link at the bottom of my review takes you to an interview with her.

[Petergiaquinta]

@Karen

I haven't read 50 Shades, which to me means I haven't read it from start to finish. I've flipped around in it and read a lot of it by reading about it. And that's enough for me. It's awkward and awful. And that inner goddess of hers sure likes to dance.

I haven't actually read Tess, either, although I've read far more of it than of 50 Shades. And one day I hope to actually read it start to finish. It's a good book, and Hardy is a great writer.

The links between 50 Shades and Tess have been documented fairly well online. There's a link to someone's blog that should pop up if you google it. And the Guardian has written a bit about it, as well.

I just read something online where somebody posted the 12 naughtiest bits from 50 Shades...I've read better material in Penthouse Forum. But I did find this awful allusion: "You beguile me, Christian...I feel like Icarus flying too close to the sun."

[Karen]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "@Karen

I haven't read 50 Shades, which to me means I haven't read it from start to finish. I've flipped around in it and read a lot of it by reading about it. And that's enough for me. It's awkwar..."

Oh, it is such an awful book, my inner goddess is hoping there is no Faulkner reference in it.
I read some funny parts too but not the whole book.

[Monty J]

Now to finish my boring point about allusions--and I'm talking ONLY about allusions to another writer's work.

In a nutshell, here's what I said: "It gives a timid or reserved author an excuse to avoid probing his/er psyche and discovering and sharing more of True Self. It cheats the author and the reader at the same time." I also said it depends on the situation. It isn't an all-or-nothing proposition. Incorporating someone else's work into your own can be quite effective and satisfying to a particular target audience (that I don't happen to be a member of.)

The writers that I admire most aren't known for how well read they are; they are known for the impact on the world of what they had to say: Steinbeck, Carver, Checkhov, Tolstoy, Hemingway, Harper Lee, William Golding, even Truman Capote. Other than Steinbeck's biblical referencing, these authors didn't borrow much from another author's creativity. It stuck out some with Fitzgerald, Kesey and Salinger did, but I like their work despite that, not because of it.

I can't think of another author who has had a greater impact on America than John Steinbeck. Except for his last book about King Arthur, which was slow in the making and he didn't actually finish, he looked to himself for his interpretation of life and the world profited handsomely. His biblical references appear in more than just East of Eden, but they don't count as heavily because of the Bible's varied authorship. Still, they count. Is he known for pretty prose? No. But his words made the world a better place. As did Golding and the rest. But the power in the offering was in the author's uniqueness, not their resonance with something written elsewhere.

The one exception that comes to mind is Steinbeck's allusion to Free Will in the book of Genesis.

Let's take The Odyssey--used heavily by James Joyce in Ulysses and the Cohen brothers in Oh Brother Where Art Thou. Joyce is considered some kind of literary god for Ulysses and OBWAT earned millions at the box office. I've only read part of the former so I'll use OBWAT to make my point.

OBWAT takes place in 1937, during the height of Jim Crow, a period during which Black Americans were being hung and conscripted into forced labor (see Slavery by Another Name.) How anyone with half a conscience could have made a film set in the American South during this time frame without seriously addressing the horrific social injustice that prevailed escapes my imagination. There was one scene depicting Klansmen burning a cross, but blacks were otherwise absent. The Cohen brothers made a very successful comedy by borrowing the plot structure from something Homer recited over two thousand years ago.

The major point I am driving at is that by recycling the same story elements century after century we are picking the low-hanging fruit of imagination while the world is going to hell. Yes, I know people need to laugh. But there ARE better ways.

The Power Elite has a vested interest in keeping us distracted with "bed-time" stories. They fund the arts that allow them to exploit and plunder. As long as writers do what the Cohens did, they can keep destroying the middle class, selling arms and using the poor as canon fodder.

Steinbeck stood up to them and had to carry a gun to protect himself. Hemingway, Lee, Kesey, Capote and Golding made them wince. Fitzerald made fools of them.

I signed up for a class in mythology and dropped after the first meeting. The text was Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces. I refuse to read it even today. Fairy tales have got us where we are, and it isn't a good place. What we need is realism. Real solutions to real problems.

Campbell had a painfully (to Steinbeck) public affair with Steinbeck's first wife, Carol. Steinbeck got even by parodying Campbell in Sweet Thursday, making him a cook in a brothel. His name: Joe Elegant. Joe typed stories on the side and preached symbols and myths. Steinbeck had little regard for Campbell's obsession with fairy tales.

Even the Christian Bible seems guilty of distracting people with fantasy while ignoring real problems. I did a word search, and "orphan" appears only four times, all indirect references. Orphans effectively don't exist as far as the Bible is concerned. There are millions of orphans all over the world, but they're kept out of sight by stuffing them away in foster care, and they're kept out of mind by the Bible. Hell, in 2010, they were even dropped from the census forms!

I'm aware of only two cases of child abandonment in the Bible--Moses and Ishmael--both of whom god had special plans for. Moses leads the Jews and Ishmael goes on to lead the nation of Islam. The message is clear: No need to worry about abandoned kids because god gives them special treatment. Put your mind at ease.

Biblical parables and fables function as propaganda to divert attention from social ills. They lull and dull the senses of the masses so they can be exploited and breed more canon fodder.

So I prefer to read authors whose eye is more on the road ahead. If they aren't distracted by what's in the rearview mirror, they're more likely to see what's right in front of them each day as they pull onto the freeway ramp. There's plenty happening right there.

Bottom line: if you had six months to live, would you pick up Hero With a Thousand Faces or would you pick up a pen?

[S.W.]

In Kesey's Cuckoo Nest, the title is taken from a nursery rhyme; Harding mentions Kafka, Twain and Freud; and McMurphy's satin underwear sported two white whales. I got the impression that Nurse Rachett was McMurphy's Moby Dick and that he was terminally obsessed with destroying her. BTW---loved the book once I got used to the Chief's narrative voice.

[Monty J]

S.W. wrote: "In Kesey's Cuckoo Nest, the title is taken from a nursery rhyme; Harding mentions Kafka, Twain and Freud; and McMurphy's satin underwear sported two white whales. I got the impression that Nurse R..."

Okay, you can move Kesey over with Fiz and Salinger.

Steinbeck had some biblical allusions in East of Eden, but otherwise he's pretty clean I think. I don't know if the Bible really counts though, because there's no single author he's borrowing from.

[Petergiaquinta]

Not to quibble, but let me quibble, Monty. Steinbeck's work is highly allusive, and he makes no attempts to hide this. Just look at the titles of his three most successful works: Of Mice and Men, The Grapes of Wrath, East of Eden...they are all borrowed from earlier texts, and both Grapes of Wrath and East of Eden take their characters and story lines directly from material out of both the Old and New Testaments. There's nothing wrong with that, but here's one of your favorites quite obviously doing what you reject in other authors.

Steinbeck has reworked the tales of King Arthur with his own socially progressive spin. Steinbeck has borrowed from contemporary media, popular culture, and advertising in some of those early chapters in Grapes of Wrath. He can be beautifully subtle when he's borrowing (Of Mice and Men?) and he can be heavy handed about it (East of Eden?), but he's a brilliant author who is constantly alluding to the stories of mankind that have preceded him. Steinbeck is no less a thieving magpie than any other great author, and he's a great more than many of them.

And just think of the wealth of material that Steinbeck has left for those who follow him to work with...Stone and Parker's South Park episode of Randy going out to California-I-yay, looking for some Internet that he's read about on flyer is mighty funny. And Bruce Springsteen's "Ghost of Tom Joad" is a haunting work. Authors build from the stories that have come before them. This is our shared humanity.

Don't get me started on Ken Kesey...

[Mochaspresso]

Monty J wrote: "OBWAT takes place in 1937, during the height of Jim Crow, a period during which Black Americans were being hung and conscripted into forced labor (see Slavery by Another Name.) How anyone with half a conscience could have made a film set in the American South during this time frame without addressing the horrific social injustice that prevailed escapes my imagination. But the Cohen brothers made a very successful comedy by borrowing the plot structure from something Homer recited over two thousand years ago."

I used to feel this way about "The Great Gatsby", (Jazz Age in NY with no Harlem) however I have started to back away from the mindset that it is a book or author's responsibility to tell stories that are not necessarily their own or that a book has to be reflective of everyone's story.

....wasn't there a bit about a foiled Klan rally in "Oh, Brother.." btw?

[Paul Martin]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "[...] but he's a brilliant author who is constantly alluding to the stories of mankind that have preceded him.

Authors build from the stories that have come before them. This is our shared humanity."

Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again, eh?

[Monty J]

Mochaspresso wrote: "....wasn't there a bit about a foiled Klan rally in "Oh, Brother.." btw? "


Yes, a slight nod in the direction of an overwhelming injustice. A comedy scene. A quickly forgotten five minute slice.

[Monty J]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Not to quibble, but let me quibble, Monty. Steinbeck's work is highly allusive, and he makes no attempts to hide this. Just look at the titles of his three most successful works: Of Mice and Men, T..."

Okay, I modified my post a bit to account for some of what you said. I have a hard time putting biblical allusion the same category as others, but as I say above, it counts.

Again, it's not an all-or-nothing proposition. Less is more. Authors have to be careful what they're perpetuating. The Bible is loaded with of bad or risky social commentary that is used to perpetuate social ills--the subjugation of women, capital punishment, slavery, war, abandoned children, etc. Torture is probably in there somewhere. And look at what's happened with The Koran--shared humanity gone off the rails.

(Gotta run. I'll be away from the Net for a couple of days, but will return to this. Maybe create a separate topic somewhere.)

[Michael]

Paul Martin wrote: "Everything that needs to be said has already been said. But since no one was listening, everything must be said again, eh?"

Could you repeat that, Paul? I was checking my email.

Oh, never mind...

[E.D.]

Yeah..., what he said. :}

[Karen]

Mochaspresso wrote;
"I used to feel this way about "The Great Gatsby", (Jazz Age in NY with no Harlem) however I have started to back away from the mindset that it is a book or author's responsibility to tell stories that are not necessarily their own or that a book has to be reflective of everyone's story."

Exactly, why include Harlem in TGG if that was not part of the story the author wanted to tell? It is not the authors responsibility to try and make all people feel included when writing a book. Nor is it necessary to have to identify with characters in a story, or have a novel contain an important "message".

[Victoria]

Karen wrote: "Victoria wrote: "(quietly places fanny hill to the top of her reading list)"

Hahaha! It does look interesting doesn't it."
I had a quick look at the goodreads shelves it is on.
Fanny Hill:
classics - check
banned books - double check!
erotica -
CLASSIC BANNED EROTICA? TRIPLE CHECK hahah :)

[Karen]

Victoria wrote: "Karen wrote: "Victoria wrote: "(quietly places fanny hill to the top of her reading list)"

Hahaha! It does look interesting doesn't it."
I had a quick look at the goodreads shelves it is on.
Fanny..."

Yep- love those banned books!

[Sarah]

deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated?

Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The..."

As far as the books I've read, I agree with this list. Well, for me the exception would be Waiting for Godot, which is a very impressive piece of drama.

I think that The Catcher in the Rye is probably one of the most overrated books I've read in a very long time, which is such a huge disappointment.

I think that books that are known to be very hard to read are hyped a bit too much sometimes. I read Gravity's Rainbow about a month ago and I think it was just designed to be difficult mumbo-jumbo. It's not that it's too hard to read, it's just that Pynchon puts very random facts in places they shouldn't be. I think it's an overrated book mostly because it's gotten such a reputation for people being "too scared" to read it.

[Laurie]

deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated?

Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The..."

I would argue The Da Vinci Code, also. I loved that book, and my attention never strayed from it. It was awesome!

[Laurie]

Laurie wrote: "deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated?

Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
..."

[Laurie]

I would argue about the Da Vinci Code, also. I loved that one.

Also, when I read Moby Dick, I expected to hate it. I read it while in college. However, I loved that book, too.

[Michael]

He's baaack...