The Most Overrated Books Showing 5,251-5,300 of 5,680

[Raymond]

Matthew wrote: "Interesting comment by Raymond:

"Anything that involves the spirit of the age is often lost quickly no matter how good at the time."

And yet there are certain genres that are ageless. They seem ..."

I agree completely Matthew. In the early eighties there was a contemporary romance in which one of the protagonists dies of AIDS. It was a great book and sold well but as focus changed and medicine stepped in the whole Idea of the book sounded silly in the twenty first century. That made the book no less good nor notable but it became one that no one wanted to read anymore. Bestseller to non seller in twelve years. I believe it is more the reputations of Lee and Capote as well as many other notables rather than the validity of their novels in a more enlightened age that keep them selling. I do not mean there that they are terrible novels as they most certainly are not but rather that they were products of their time.
Stranger in a strange land and lord of the rings were two other great books of the sixties. Both were a phenomenal success and drew people to literature (both to be lauded for that) yet "Stranger in a strange land" (arguably the better book) pretty much disappeared with the sixties yet LOTR (set in no time period other than a fabled middle England) has continued to sell consistently.

[Petergiaquinta]

What is it that you think is dated in To Kill a Mockingbird? As someone who has read it every year for the last 25 or more years, I'd say Lee's story has not aged one bit, and it's message of tolerance and understanding is as true today as the day it was written.

Some specifics?

[Carrie]

I agree. TKAMB is timeless.

[Matthew]

Raymond wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Interesting comment by Raymond:

"Anything that involves the spirit of the age is often lost quickly no matter how good at the time."

And yet there are certain genres that are age..."

I would go back even further than Beowulf. A good translation of Homer is very readable even today. Also variations of the Faust Legend or the idea of selling your soul for worldly benefits is a genre that can always be rewritten to suit contemporary readers.

[Raymond]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "What is it that you think is dated in To Kill a Mockingbird? As someone who has read it every year for the last 25 or more years, I'd say Lee's story has not aged one bit, and it's message of toler..."

I agree with your statement to a great extent. "To kill" is most certainly a great book, no getting away from that fact, well written, well plotted and with great intentions. Yet I feel that it has become lost in a period of time that no longer exists. Populations have mixed, tolerance holds sway (I agree that the book we speak of may have had a hand in that later mixing) and there is little to none of the tension, once felt in sixties America compared to the comfortable coexistence of today.
I do not suggest for a second that it is not a great book, simply that It was a book of a different time and thought.

[Petergiaquinta]

Dunno, Raymond, if "tolerance holds sway" on your side of the pond, but over here little has changed. Gender and race are still issues tearing our country apart, and every day kindness is in scant supply. We all have much to learn from Atticus and Scout about walking around in another person's skin, or shoes if you prefer...

[Raymond]

I have not been in the US for a long time and so cannot really give an honest comment on the thoughts of your denizens. Here in Scotland most creeds and colours interact with little tension (though I admit to their being some on occasion) but in common terms never would I or most of my country men think of people as black or white but rather; people. There is still a religious bias here but it fades with every year that that passes much as the old black/white thing did. I must admit (sadly) to their still being a small but existing gender bias in favour of men, but we are trying to eradicate it and are coming close to doing so. Soon it also will be a thing of the past, I hope.

[Petergiaquinta]

Here in America, our police murder a black man like Tom Robinson once a week and nothing happens.

And the man with support from half the country spews hatred toward women, immigrants and religious minorities, and his popularity doesn't waver.

[Amanda]

I for one really loved Stranger in a Strange Land.
Please, let us leave politics out of this particular discussion. We're so inundated that I fear I'm going to scream if I see one more ad or another survey company calls. Living in Ohio is a burden!!!

[Petergiaquinta]

Why would we leave politics out of the discussion? These books are about the very things that are at the core of the evil in our country exposing its ugly head right now. Choosing to ignore it is being a part of it.

[Kallie]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Why would we leave politics out of the discussion? These books are about the very things that are at the core of the evil in our country exposing its ugly head right now. Choosing to ignore it is b..."

I agree, people here in the U.S. are too inclined to leave politics or anything over which they might disagree out of discussion. That is part of the problem here; not enough real analysis and discussion. I doubt this is true in Europe. Anyway . . . what great book does not have political implications? 'The Invisible Man' That would be my favorite about race, and it is political start to finish.

[[deleted user]]

Amanda wrote: "Another "Classic" I hated...Wuthering Heights. I know...shoot me. I could not stand Heathcliff OR Cathy. Simpering fools. I was straight up angry that I had to read that in high school. So many gre..."

I cannot get the Brontes, and many other 19th century classics. I loved Dickens as a child but not as adult. Thackerey's Vanity Fair and many Jane AUsten's books were an exception from my feeling that it is all too romantic - like chick lit.

Politics? Lots of my favourite books are about that- but I am of course a Central European...

[Carrie]

Politics? Animal Farm. Great book. 1984. Another classic. Loved them both.

[B]

What the hell does overrated even mean. It's strange how people love hating on popular works just to feel like they have some kind of unique, quirky, genius insight into how shit things actually are. It seems like such an unenjoyable activity.

[Matthew]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Why would we leave politics out of the discussion? These books are about the very things that are at the core of the evil in our country exposing its ugly head right now. Choosing to ignore it is b..."


Be careful what you wish for. What if it led to reactionary literature that promoted all of the evils that you are concerned about?

[Matthew]

Ressha wrote: "What the hell does overrated even mean. It's strange how people love hating on popular works just to feel like they have some kind of unique, quirky, genius insight into how shit things actually ar..."

Should everyone follow the group think? Why not let individuals form their own opinions? Isn't that what these discussions are all about?

[Petergiaquinta]

Not sure what you are talking about, Matthew...be a little more specific.

[Matthew]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Not sure what you are talking about, Matthew...be a little more specific."

I think that you spelled it out:

"These books are about the very things that are at the core of the evil in our country exposing its ugly head right now."

[Petergiaquinta]

Still not sure what you mean...I'm curious also what you mean by "reactionary literature."

Ridiculous people like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly pump out crappy books all the time, but it surely isn't "literature," is it?

[Matthew]

Well, yes, I wouldn't call those guys intellectuals, and we may not agree with a lot of what they say, but they do have a voice.

[Petergiaquinta]

Having a "voice " and writing "literature" are two very distinctly different things...

[Matthew]

Maybe not, but in these days of cultural relativism, who is to say what constitutes good literature?

[Petergiaquinta]

Really? Cultural relativism? That's a thing? Not sure what that has to do with defining good literature. And in response to your question, me, for one...and just about anybody with a brain who has read widely for many years.

But if that doesn't work for you, I'd suggest you turn to the folks with the credentials and the years of wisdom and experience to back it up, the critics and professors and experts who don't waste their time on Goodreads discussion threads.

Does cultural relativism determine best practices and treatments in medicine? Does it set standards in air traffic control or HVAC repair? Was your plumber influenced by it or the mechanic working on your car?

[Matthew]

Cultural relativism does impact what people read these days. Back in the old days colleges were much more Eurocentric, and there was much more emphasis on Western Civilization and Literature. Nowadays there is much more emphasis on discovering the literature of other cultures, and recognizing their value.

[Petergiaquinta]

It may impact what people read, but it doesn't impact the value or the quality of the literature itself.

For example, let's say, Their Eyes Were Watching God is a great piece of literature, no doubt about it. It was great when it was written; it was great when it was ignored by the general public and Hurston died in obscurity, and it is great today now that it has joined the reading lists of America's great books. But its "greatness," its quality and inherent worth did not shift or change over the years. It is not better today than it was in 1950 when it was ignored. We are better. The book remains the same.

The same cannot be said for 50 Shades, the YA flavor of the day, the latest book club favorite, or whatever schlock or piffle that Bill O'Reilly or Rush Limbaugh vomits out next.

[Matthew]

So why was it ignored in the 50's? Perhaps because the conscience of America was not in tune with the struggles of African Americans at the time.

[Matthew]

Regarding the 'latest book club' favorite. Well, that depends on the book club. Ours tend to focus on works that have stood the test of time. We are currently reading Lessing's Nathan the Wise which in my opinion is just as relevant today as it was when it was written in the 18th C.

[Karen]

Kallie wrote;
"I agree, people here in the U.S. are too inclined to leave politics or anything over which they might disagree out of discussion. That is part of the problem here; not enough real analysis and discussion. I doubt this is true in Europe. Anyway . . . what great book does not have political implications? 'The Invisible Man' That would be my favorite about race, and it is political start to finish."

I have no problem discussing the politics of a certain book, but personal discussion of politics I stay away from online, at work, etc. There are very few people I can talk politics with in a respectful manner. I can count on one hand these people- they are the ones who can respectfully disagree with me or I with them. There is very little tolerance out there.

[Kallie]

Karen wrote: "Kallie wrote;
"I agree, people here in the U.S. are too inclined to leave politics or anything over which they might disagree out of discussion. That is part of the problem here; not enough real a..."

We never learn what we don't practice out of fear of offending people. That is a problem here; we don't learn how to disagree. And that holds in the context of literature. A lot of times people's most vitriolic comments come from disagreeing with a books politics, though that is veiled in other attitudes and verbiage.

[Kallie]

Be careful what you wish for. What if it led to reactionary literature that promoted all of the evils that you are concerned about? "

But that is propaganda, not literature. As for cultural relativism, I will probably read Moby Dick again because I can relate to the masterfully written dynamic of well-drawn characters, adventure, a megalomaniac who endangers others, etc..

[Karen]

Kallie wrote;
"We never learn what we don't practice out of fear of offending people. That is a problem here; we don't learn how to disagree. And that holds in the context of literature. A lot of times people's most vitriolic comments come from disagreeing with a books politics, though that is veiled in other attitudes and verbiage."

Yep! I can argue politics with my husband daily, and we do. Perhaps because I know it would never come between us. Disagreeing can be fun and productive.

[Matthew]

I agree that one should be able to discuss ones political opinions openly without taking differences personally, but you have to be careful with whom you choose to have these discussions. There are certain individuals who can appear open minded and forbearing until you disagree with them on a minor point, and then they will take that as a declaration of war.

[Matthew]

Kallie wrote: "Be careful what you wish for. What if it led to reactionary literature that promoted all of the evils that you are concerned about? "

But that is propaganda, not literature. As for cultural relati..."

Propaganda? Maybe so, but doesn't all literature have an element of propaganda?

“There is no such thing as a good influence. Because to influence a person is to give him one's own soul. He does not think his natural thoughts, or burn with his natural passions. His virtures are not real to him. His sins, if there are such thing as sins, are borrowed. He becomes an echo of someone else's music, an actor of a part that has not been written for him.”


― Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray

[CD]

Matthew wrote: "Kallie wrote: "Be careful what you wish for. What if it led to reactionary literature that promoted all of the evils that you are concerned about? "

But that is propaganda, not literature. As for ...

Propaganda? Maybe so, but doesn't all literature have an element of propaganda?"

No. Propaganda is to harm, damage or otherwise degrade a concept or thought or group or country/nation etc. Propaganda by definition is always negative and isn't about a redeeming quality at all. It may bear a false flag of truth buried behind it's arguments while exploiting thusly a suspension of disbelief.

Dorian Gray sold his soul. Not a wise move and thus the moral of the tale. Wilde did something similar. The social whole of the era in which he lived was misjudged by Oscar Wilde. If anything this quote is a prophetic utterance by Wilde about what would be his unfortunate and sad end.

[Matthew]

"It may bear a false flag of truth buried behind it's arguments while exploiting thusly a suspension of disbelief."

Very well put, but it raises another question:
Outside of the the hard sciences, where things are more clear cut, are there are such things as universal truths?

[Raymond]

I suspect that this argument is my fault in a way. The UK is such a different proposition from the US. We are just as silly and will often cut off our nose to spite our face. I apologise for forming that argument. If politics is absent from your mind in any way at all then you are brain dead and we shall cover you in ice until we can harvest your organs and place them in someone that does think.
Sorry again, A mental person.

[CD]

Matthew wrote: "
Outside of the the hard sciences, where things are more clear cut, are there are such things as universal truths? "

"Science is the search for truth . . ." Linus Pauling

It's not a total answer and is Pauling really speaking about the quest for peace as much as science. An interesting 'truth' in itself!

I think every philosopher, intellectual, and all the rest of the great thinkers have weighed in on the topic of truth.

There is one universal truth I count on, Gravity.

[Matthew]

Well, yes, as I suggested earlier things are more concrete in the sciences, but the humanities are much more subjective:

"...To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again..."

John 18:37-38

[Petergiaquinta]

I'm not sure Pilate is the go-to guy in a discussion of truth and subjectivity...

[Matthew]

I suppose it depends on which version of Pilate we take to be most accurate.

The historic Pilate was a ruthless ruler who would not hesitate to slaughter the Jewish insurgents.

The Pilate of the Gospels was more of an enigma. He was ambivalent in his dealings with Jesus and Jewish population.

[Karen]

CD wrote;
"There is one universal truth I count on, Gravity."
Yep!

[Pam]

Anna Karenina
Anything except short stories by Ernest Hemingway
Emma
Anything by Kafka

Way too much about the farmer in "Anna Karenina." Maybe it was the translation but I didn't like the writing. Hemingway's books are so boring. I think I would have appreciated "Emma" back in its day; it was probably the equivalent of a series today. However, I just got frustrated with so much text devoted to dinner parties. I wanted to like Kafka so much, but I just didn't.

[Janis]

So agree about Hemingway and avoid "dinner party" books like the plague. Did like "Emma" though.

[Vickie]

Rest In Peace to the author, but I thought The Bridges of Madison County was highly over rated!

[David]

It did my heart some good to see some Catcher in the Rye as the topic starter. I "3 starred" the book but from the hype I was anticipating a 5 star book, what a let down. No disrespect to Mr. Salinger on this, but this book did not stir me what so ever. Maybe I'm just not the classic literature type : )

[Lewis]

I have to say that "Catcher in the Rye" was easily one of the worst books I have ever read, about a spoiled rich kid going to exclusive schools, convinced that everyone except himself is a phony.

I was forced to read this "classic" in high school in the 1960s, Somehow, as a cab driver's son, I was attending an expensive Catholic high school, and I was too busy trying to lift myself up by my bootstraps to be concerned about Holden Caulfield's phony angst. I just wanted to avoid pumping gas for the rest of my life.

He was the kind of guy that I would have enjoyed punching in the face. And if he lived in an environment where that happened frequently, he would have spent a lot less time feeling sorry for himself.

If you don't have to read this book, don't.

[Igor]

Lewis, that's a cool story.
Igor

[Gary]

Lewis wrote: "I was forced to read this "classic" in high school in the 1960s, Somehow, as a cab driver's son, I was attending an expensive Catholic high school, and I was too busy trying to lift myself up by my bootstraps to be concerned about Holden Caulfield's phony angst...."

Curious: have you read it since?

[Lewis]

Nope.

[Rodney]

"The Catcher in the Rye" is a great American novel, but it's not going to appeal to people who enjoy punching in the face anyone they find weak or inferior. Salinger had fought against just those kind of people in Germany in WW II. It's about feeling how you don't fit in when everyone tells you that you should.