Anyone else hate this Diary Showing 1,051-1,100 of 1,245

[deedee]

Also this book's existence is not for the entertainment of the public. The fact that you hate it... is a little unjustifiable.

[Belle ~carry on my wayward son~]

Gil wrote: "Belle wrote: "Why dont you just shut down the the thread Anamika. Its only caused trouble, and out of the 24 pages of comments, there probably has been only about two people who agree with you. You..."

yeah, that i can't say

[Dusty Bibliophile]

Paul Martin wrote: "Belle wrote: Paul, how was her behavior insulting?

Her use of the term "research" is, for example, an insult to all who actually do real research, and her reasons for "hating" the book is an insul..."

I'm not sure about that last statement. I don't understand how hating a private diary is an insult to the writer and everyone who experienced what the writer experienced.

...

Okay, I think I follow the logic. Sorry, but I had to look up definitions to make sure I wasn't on shaky ground. (I really wish I felt I had a better grasp of the semantics of language):

insult - (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictio...)
: to do or say something that is offensive to (someone)
: to do or say something that shows a lack of respect for (someone)

respect - (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictio...)
: a feeling of admiring someone or something that is good, valuable, important, etc.
: a feeling or understanding that someone or something is important, serious, etc., and should be treated in an appropriate way
: a particular way of thinking about or looking at something

Following the definitions, I can appreciate the stance that Anamika appears insulting. But is the appearance the intent?

Anne Frank's diary is a record of the tribulations of a single girl and her immediate clan during a dark period in modern history and it has been given stature, not as a piece of literature, but as a piece of history. Where/when do you move from a literary analysis to a historical one for something like this? Can you separate the two in a piece of work like this? If you can, then can you investigate and discuss if a diary can be considered literature? These are questions that should be asked, I think. They can keep the discussion worthwhile and hopefully useful.

[Paul Martin]

Where/when do you move from a literary analysis to a historical one for something like this? Can you separate the two in a piece of work like this? If you can, then can you investigate and discuss if a diary can be considered literature?

Those are good questions. I'd say that there is nothing, absolutely nothing, wrong in saying that one did not like the style in which this diary was written. If Anamika had made some sort of disclaimer that she did in no way intend to downplay the role of memoirs of the Holocaust in general, none of this would have happened. Alas, she didn't, and her so-called "reasons" for "hating" it seemed to be more focused on the content and person rather then the style and form.

I did not, for example, like Malala's biography. The prose was not to my liking, the writing was sensationalist and some unfair generalizations were made.

[Sara]

Dusty Bibliophile, you make some excellent points! Thank you for bringing up some things that are relevant to the topic and not being harsh to anyone. (also, I appreciated your post on research last week, but didn't have anything to say in response to that, other than agreeing)

I believe it is possible to separate a writer and their experience from their work, even if their work is as personal as a diary. I think it is possible to respect Anne Frank and the experiences she had, and sympathize with her, and still dislike her diary for one reason or another.

Historically, I appreciate Anne Frank's diary.

As a literary piece though? It was okay, not great but not bad. Well-written for someone her age. There were some particularly poignant points and lines she wrote. As a whole, I liked it but didn't love it.

I am choosing not to participate in the harsher aspects of this thread. This response has been written from an emotionally neutral place :)

[Gil]

Laura, whilst your comments often seem well thought out, the endless repetition of the same statements doesn’t actually make them any more impressive. Your only contribution to this thread has been to point out how badly every one else is behaving - it doesn't occur to you that that, in itself, is a form of bullying. Your pitying other people comes across as sanctimonious and priggish.

The suggestion that Anamika doesn’t actually exist has been raised by one or two people – and Laura, I think you missed the point that was made earlier; I don’t think anybody would necessarily feel “so much better to think it’s not a human being at the receiving end of the mockery and insults” Your comments are supercilious, and, once again, inflammatory

The fact still remains that a child, rather foolishly, started a thread which has swerved here, there and everywhere, sometimes bringing out aggression and rudeness in people, sometimes making really interesting and valid points. Anamika's vague and evasive answers have not only NOT helped the situation, but have helped fan the flames. She's known the answer to her question for a long time now, and despite several requests to shut down the thread she won't. Why? That's the other question, isn't it? Having got her answer to the original question, why doesn't she shut it down and go quietly away to analyse the results of her "research". She started a similar thread back in March regarding The Lord of the Rings; it didn’t bring forth the vitriol that this one has done – why? My guess is the subject matter of the book. I think she knew exactly the reaction she would get by posing the same question about a book which is held in such high regard by so many people. She (or it) is enjoying the attention this discussion has attracted and that is why she won’t shut it down.

[Laura]

Gil, I partly agree with you that her attitude may seem infuriating and frustrating to many people, especially if they have strong feelings for the journal.

However, I repeat because I feel strongly about this, there are ways of expressing disagreement without insults. Besides, I never (you can look it up) said that "every one else" was behaving badly. And you can think whatever you like, but calling someone mentally challenged over a book is not as cool as you may think.

Let's say that Anamika actually wanted to create a little chaos, for whatever reason (which we don't know). That says something about her. Now, the insults and other stuff that I keep repeating, that says something of the people who made it. You know which of both attitudes bothered me more.

I am not trying to make my comments impressive. I want to express my thoughts, like everyone else is doing. In fact, I did state my opinion about the journal as well, and I also said whether I agreed with Anamika or not. I guess everyone missed that post, focused on fighting and feeling offended.

I will say it again: I agree that, on one side, this journal is more of a historical document than a piece of literature. I acknowledge its value as such. Now, as a matter of taste, that is another matter. I remember hating a particular history book that I had in high school, without that meaning that I hated the history within or any of the personalities in the book, etc. I didn't dislike my history book, I hated it. I don't hate the journal (feel free to see my rating), but I believe that anyone is entitled to find it awful, boring, bad or you name it, without that meaning that they feel anything against the victims of the WWII.

Oh, and I also feel that publishing it was kind of a violation of Anne's privacy. But that's done and now we all read it.

[Mary]

See Laura..what you just did there? You discussed the book, intelligently and with a well thought out explanation of your opinion. This is something Anamika has never tried to do or even wanted to do.
This is a site dedicated to the discussion of books and that's what most people come here to do. Anamika, in my opinion, is a young girl who was given an assignment and said something like " I hate this book" and her teacher dared her to find anyone else who felt the same way.
She's playing games on a site meant for adult discussion. People get angry at the foolishness. And of course her choice of book raises many suspicions as well, some schools have banned this book, and there is still the chance that Anamika is not a child at all but someone who likes to rile people up.
This site is not the place for the discussion she says she's looking for ( which is essentially a poll where only one response is tabulated).
As to bullying etc? This site is mild compared to many out there. It's par for the course when you engage online. Most adults are aware if that possibility.

[Gil]

Yes, Laura, I take your point – but as I said – and here I’m guilty of the same thing – endless repetition of those opinions just serves to make you appear inflexible and aggressive, and I’m sure you’re not really like that. I know you feel strongly about this, but it has been hammered home so much now it’s becoming tedious; time to just accept that you’ve stated your feelings many times and we all get it. If people want to continue hectoring and goading they will do so despite, or maybe in spite of, what you say. You will not stop it, that's the way forums work.

I think the problem was actually right there, at the beginning. The question should never have been asked the way it was. How can someone express hatred for a diary? Someone right back at the beginning wondered if she had chosen the wrong word in “hate” – Anamika assured that person (I forget who it was) that she chose it deliberately, This opened up a valid debate about the nuances of language….so we’ll not go there again. She does the same thing in the LOTR thread, choosing the word “worship”; when it is suggested that that choice of word is wrong, once again she declares that she chose it deliberately! What is one to do about a person like this who has such dogmatic views?

I have been fascinated by this thread because of the different emotions it has aroused....all of which is inevitable in a public forum. It's the little snidey one liners, or one word replies that get up my nose - they achieve nothing. I’ve also been frustrated – and continue to be so – by Anamika’s attitude, for want of a better word. If this had been the first discussion she had started I could perhaps forgive her - but it's the second. So what are we to make of that? Either she's a child and doesn't know what she's doing, or she's cunning and sly and knows exactly what she's up to.

[Laura]

I know and fully understand what bothers or infuriates people on this thread. And yes, I know people can be worse in other sites and forums and I've seen it. Again, not an excuse! But, Mary... see what you just did there? You expressed your opinion, collected and without insulting or calling names. That's it. Anyone can do it!

[Mary]

Laura wrote: "I know and fully understand what bothers or infuriates people on this thread. And yes, I know people can be worse in other sites and forums and I've seen it. Again, not an excuse! But, Mary... see ..."

I'm glad you got my point.

[Duane]

Monty J wrote: "Duane wrote: "Has anyone considered the possibility that Amanita is an AI experiment?? "

This idea has been raised before, and it is plausible that A. is an automaton troll programmed to pump up the traffic with meaningless drivel so Goodreads can charge more for advertising."

This one thread would be a drop in the bucket though as far as advertising goes - they'd have to spawn
a LOT of Amanita copies to harvest any serious money.

But if I were Homeland Security I would definitely be developing trollbots that would start dicsucsions
about stuff so I could harvest responses from the threads that it got on. It would just have to be smart enough to keep a thread going. They don't have the resources to assign humans to do that. If you were developing one, an innocuous site like this one would be a good development platform...

The real question is how did the Amanita (or the AI programmer?) pick THIS book to hate? I mean, that's a stroke of genius - it's totally the boundary condition for inflammatory effect. Like I said earlier, I hope it was just an accidental choice, or I'm gonna feel totally upstaged in my Disruptus Magnus milieu...
<< sigh... >>

I mean, really - can anyone think of any other book that Amanita could hate, that would cause MORE of a kerfuffle??

[Linda]

Well Duane, I suppose if she said she loved Mein Kampf?........

[Belle ~carry on my wayward son~]

Duane wrote: "Monty J wrote: "Duane wrote: "Has anyone considered the possibility that Amanita is an AI experiment?? "

This idea has been raised before, and it is plausible that A. is an automaton troll program..."

dude. Anamika. A-N-A-M-I-K-A
is it really that hard or are you trying to spell her name wrong just to make a point that you can't be bothered to spell it right because she's not important enough?

[Belle ~carry on my wayward son~]

Well she was undermining me so I undermined her... i dont see the problem. If she thinks its okay to use a condescending tone and insult me like that, than I have a right to react. But fine.

[Laura]

Linda wrote: "Well Duane, I suppose if she said she loved Mein Kampf?........"

Anamika, I apologize for doing a follow-up on a comment about another book, which will probably cause strong reactions again. If you wish, after this comment I will leave.

Mein Kampf (MK from now on) is a good reverse example of what happened here. That is a book that I never read. It would be fair to say that I hate it even without reading it, much like Anamika claimed to have felt about this journal even before she read it. I have the strong preconception that MK is evil incarnate. I was curious for a very long time to glimpse inside the mind of the monster, but I never did it because I never thought I could actually stomach it.

However, in spite of the content, it is as much a historical document as this journal and it would be, theoretically, unfair to pre-judge its quality before having read it. In fact, it makes part of the same piece of history that this journal and it could, theoretically, help understand even further what victims like Anne went through and, mostly, why. What made the book and the doctrine so popular back then? Is it wonderfully written, with great choice of words? Is it demagogic? Is it not possible that someone can love reading MK because of its historical value, regardless of their feelings for the author, the subject or the events it put in motion?

Personally, my preconceptions about MK are still stronger than my curiosity, so I will keep pre-hating it for a while longer at least.

That said... Just in case this is my last comment, I want to thank all the people who were polite, either agreeing or disagreeing and I want to also ask the others to relax a little. Before writing an insult, just ask yourselves if this is really worth the anger. I will also apologize, not for all the quotes, but for the ones who were taken out of context.

[Laura]

I'm really really sorry. Do you want me to remove that comment? Say the word.

[Linda]

Just wanted to let you know Anamika that I had no intention for Mein Kampf to be a discussion point. Just used it as an example of another book which causes such a controversy and divided opinion......I could easily have said The Bible, The Joy of Sex etc etc. No offense intended.

[Sara]

I find it interesting and a little funny that my comment about the diary as a historical vs literary document, including my opinion on it, were largely ignored in favor of more comments about Anamika. do we really need to peer into Anamika's personal life? I don't think so. Especially when she asked us not to. Note, I'm not the bending her, just trying to keep us at least vaguely on topic. Some of the tangents have been very interesting, of course.

[Belle ~carry on my wayward son~]

Yeah, Sara. That happens sometimes. So many people comment and all of them dont get taken into cosideration. sooryyyy. I agree. Its her business and hers alone.

[Tytti]

Sara wrote: "I find it interesting and a little funny that my comment about the diary as a historical vs literary document, including my opinion on it, were largely ignored in favor of more comments about Anami..."

But Anamika doesn't want to discuss about the book. She answers only to comments about her. (For that she seems to have time.)

[Sara]

Oh, I'm not talking about Anamika, just in general. No worries, I like giving my opinion even if people don't reply to it, haha.

[Gil]

Anamika wrote: "Thanks for the correction Belle.I was going to tell the same thing.

I'm not some AI experiment.I'm a normal girl who lives her life like normal people.

I don't want to create chaos.And Gil,I had ..."

I have already told how I feel about AF's Diary - as to LOTR, I don't care much for that genre and as I haven't read it I will not comment other than to say it doesn't appeal to me. I saw the first of the films and that was enough to put me off the book. But as this thread is about AF's Diary - shall we go back to that?

[Dusty Bibliophile]

Anamika wrote: "No offense but I didn't ask for personal opinions here.There are a few other who would grab the chance and start talking about it."

I'm having a hard time following your logic, Anamika. You expressly asked for opinions. Anyone's liking or hating a book is an opinion. You're thread title, "Anyone else hate this Diary," is a solicitation for opinions.

Were you referring to Linda's comment of "Just used it as an example of another book which causes such a controversy and divided opinion?" If so, then I am really at a loss for what you are after since you are basically contradicting yourself.

Perhaps you meant "No offense but I didn't ask for other books being mentioned here?"

[Jenny]

I read this book years ago when I was a teenager. I thought it was boring and I was not enthralled with it. I understand saying you "hate" it from that point of view I guess.
But intelligent consideration provides a different view of what was written.
You say in your review of the book that it lacks originality which I find laughable since that is all it is. It wasn't rough drafted and rewritten. It was written once with total disregard as to audience. To use that as a reason for hating the book is invalid. That is not opinion, that is fact.

In your review you also say that you find her thoughts infuriating to avoid using the word stupid then say you respect her struggle. If you had any respect for her struggle then you wouldn't hate the book. You would be able to see through the boring days and petty fusses she writes about to a girl in hiding for her life. That was the entire point.
You also state in your review that the book should never have been published. You are correct. If Anne hadn't been killed by the Nazis it wouldn't have been. I will assume you were smart enough to reason that on your own.
So I am left with the impression that you hate the very fact that the diary was published. You hate the existence of these words. You don't care what happened. You don't even want to know what anyone thinks. You want "the same opinion as me (hate). No further than that."

[Mae]

Jenny wrote: "I read this book years ago when I was a teenager. I thought it was boring and I was not enthralled with it. I understand saying you "hate" it from that point of view I guess.
But intelligent consi..."
Brilliantly said.

[Laura]

I started reading this journal already predisposed to like it, for obvious reasons.

However, one thing is to respect and even feel for the struggles of the victims of this horrible war, and another, totally different thing, is to like this journal. They are not one and the same and they don't need to be dependent on one another. Whereas the journal has an undeniable historical value as a document, nobody should feel obliged to enjoy it.

I will say more: not liking Anne's personality (or what you presume of it while you read) does not mean that you don't respect the ordeal that she and other victims went through. Being a victim of a horrible crime doesn't automatically make you perfect. We all like different kinds of people. The girl I find clever may sound petty to others. It's not fair to make it all about acknowledging the horrors of WWII. This is about loving, liking, disliking, hating... a book.

As side note, I happen to think, as I said before, that Anne's wishes to keep those thoughts private should have been respected, even in the circumstances of her death. I imagine that her father wanted to keep her memory alive and known to the whole world. But still, those were her secrets.

[Mae]

Laura, with all due respect… the diary is about the horrors of WWII!! It is the life of a family, who was hunted and hid in an attic. It is about the people who risked their own safety to protect a family condemned for the sole reason of belonging to a religious group. It is about humans trying to survive the genocide going on. Whether it is the "secret"or personal diary of a jewish teenager or a soldier or a politician… it is about the horrors of the Second World War. Day by day, in a smelly uncomfortable attic, with the fear of being caught everyday. Its a humanist document! The documentation of a valuable life, that ended horribly in a concentration camp. I hate that this diary had to be written, I hate that she could not be here to keep it as a personal secret. I hate that she was a victim of the genocide promoted in Mein Kampf. But to me it is inconceivable to hate such a document, even if it was written on toilet paper and in broken language! Its a testimonial of the most poignant kind. This is why we are appalled! Anamika is a very talented young person, but she needs to see that the mere question is abhorrent to many of us. I may not be rude, I don't insult, but I cannot, will not defend or rationalize why someone is allowed to hate the diary of Anne Franke. I cannot even agree to disagree on this issue.

[Gil]

Anamika wrote: "Jenny wrote: "I read this book years ago when I was a teenager. I thought it was boring and I was not enthralled with it. I understand saying you "hate" it from that point of view I guess.
But int..."

Anamika - you wrote this review over a month ago! To leave is standing as it is and then use the excuse that you "still have to edit it" is just plain silly and immature. Surely you know to edit a review before publication? Also, a review is not the place to give a lecture about how to write a review. If you don't know these two fundamentals then you should not participate in the review writing process.

I have to agree with several other commentators on here and say that your statements don't make a whole lot of sense. I see, though, that thread has turned full circle but we're still back at square one with you looking for people who share your opinion and your disinterest in any other opinions. So after all this time you're no further forward.

[Mae]

Gil wrote: "Anamika wrote: "Jenny wrote: "I read this book years ago when I was a teenager. I thought it was boring and I was not enthralled with it. I understand saying you "hate" it from that point of view ..."
the circle of life!

[Jenny]

Anamika wrote: "Jenny wrote: "I read this book years ago when I was a teenager. I thought it was boring and I was not enthralled with it. I understand saying you "hate" it from that point of view I guess.
But int..."

Please elaborate on the point where I am wrong. The book was completely raw and original, not meant for anyone to read. The point of publication was to humanize the suffering, not because great thoughts were conveyed. It was only published because she died.

You stated yourself that it should not have been published and that you only wanted to know who hated it.
I only make one other point in my response to your post. Is that where I am mistaken?
Also note that you make lots of typos, that you type on the fly, you have used that excuse in several of your responses. Maybe that leads to lots of misunderstanding.
Your passion for hating the diary just seems over the top, kind of like criticizing a small child's artwork. Your lack of justification for your hatred makes it difficult to understand your point view.
Tell everyone in a meaningful way what it is you hate about this book.

[Laura]

Mae, I completely understand your point of view. In fact, I can honestly tell you that I like the fact that you feel so strongly about Anne Frank's story, that you find it necessary to like her diary. It's great to be passionate, in itself.

We humans are all different from one another. Not all of us like the things that we read for the same reasons. Some like it because of the story, some because of the narrative, some because of its transcendental meaning (as it is the present case), and there must be different reasons to like/dislike what we read almost for each one of us.

[Monty J]

Gil wrote: "I have to agree with several other commentators on here and say that your statements don't make a whole lot of sense."

This is because A. is a bot troll designed to stimulate (or simulate) traffic so Goodreads can charge more for advertising. Bots are created by computer programmers, who are not known for imagination and intellect. They have to be told what to program for it to make sense. Toss them a banana every now and then and give them a dog and a case of Pepsi and they'll write anything. Personal hygiene isn't one of their strengths though, so you have to bring them fresh clothes when they start to smell.

The Troll Bot project has been going on at Goodreads for a couple years now. The Troll Bot profile is characteristically brief, no real photo, young female feigning innocence, often a student; Doesn't contribute much in their post; Asks open-ended controversial questions designed to arouse emotion and /or controversy.

It's a fraud. And you, my fellow innocents, are the target.

[Mae]

Monty J wrote: "Gil wrote: "I have to agree with several other commentators on here and say that your statements don't make a whole lot of sense."

This is because A. is a bot troll designed to stimulate (or simul..."
Unfortunately for you, she is not a bot. If she is one, its a very complicated one, because I have been messaging her and she is a member of our GR group, along with her friends.

[Mae]

Laura wrote: "Mae, I completely understand your point of view. In fact, I can honestly tell you that I like the fact that you feel so strongly about Anne Frank's story, that you find it necessary to like her dia..."
I don't find it necessary to like the diary, I find it unnecessary to hate it.

[Monty J]

Mae wrote: "...I have been messaging her and she is a member of our GR group, along with her friends."

Just part of the masquerade. The programmer writes the messages. If A. is not a bot, let her prove it. Provide a picture. Put some meat in "her" profile.

A. has one friend, Sudiksha, someone in India who has only one friend, Anamika. S. another empty profile and no photo. A. has five photos, all of which are cartoons, as are two of the six "people" she follows.

Where's the beef?

[Dusty Bibliophile]

Puts on a White (cowboy) Hat and pushes the brim down so only their chin is visible. "How's the troll hunting today?" (http://sockpuppettheatre.com/faq/)

Serioulsy, why does someone have to disprove the opinion that they are one thing or another? Wouldn't the burden of proof lay upon the accuser? Anything less than that is a logical fallacy.

EDIT: I see you've added more details, Monty J.

Monty J wrote: "A. has one friend, Sudiksha. One. Another troll with an empty profile and no photo. She rates hundreds of books she hasn't read. She has five photos, all of which are cartoons, as are two of the six "people" she follows."

And those details pique my curiosity. Would you be willing to continue a discussion about this in another thread?

[Mary]

It doesn't matter how many intelligent, adult responses this thread gets. Anamika, whether a kid, a troll or a bot, does not want to engage in honest discussion. I think this is what frustrates so many.

[Dusty Bibliophile]

Mary wrote: "It doesn't matter how many intelligent, adult responses this thread gets. Anamika, whether a kid, a troll or a bot, does not want to engage in honest discussion. I think this is what frustrates so ..."

I can drink to that. :-)

[Jenny]

Mae wrote: "Laura wrote: "Mae, I completely understand your point of view. In fact, I can honestly tell you that I like the fact that you feel so strongly about Anne Frank's story, that you find it necessary t..."

Exactly.

[Jenny]

Monty J wrote: "Mae wrote: "...I have been messaging her and she is a member of our GR group, along with her friends."

Just part of the masquerade. The programmer writes the messages. If A. is not a bot, let her ..."

Interesting, I am completely unfamiliar with that, very interesting.

[Carmen]

Jenny wrote: "Monty J wrote: "Mae wrote: "...I have been messaging her and she is a member of our GR group, along with her friends."

Just part of the masquerade. The programmer writes the messages. If A. is not..."

Yes Monty, very interesting and it makes perfect sense.

[Gil]

I tend to go along with Monty's theory. With all due respect Mae, the fact that she is in your group, along with her "friends" proves nothing.

There is no consistency to any of her "speech" patterns; the only consistent thing about her is her evasiveness, which has now worn way too thin.

[Laura]

I think Monty and Gil are being overly optimistic regarding what they believe a bot can and can't do.

I have seen bot accounts in action, mostly in Tumblr, and I can assure you that this is not the kind of interactions that they offer.

Anamika is a person. A person whose thoughts may be difficult to relate to for several people, but that doesn't mean she's not a person. Do you really believe that anyone who doesn't think like you is not human?

[Sara]

I recommend that people stop debating whether she is a bot or person. It's quite rude, in my opinion (and a lot of this thread has been). How about we all go under the assumption that everyone on this thread is human, and therefore deserves to be treated as such, with at least a little respect? I'm all for friendly debate, but respect is paramount. Just a thought.

[Rao]

Sara wrote: "I recommend that people stop debating whether she is a bot or person. It's quite rude, in my opinion (and a lot of this thread has been). How about we all go under the assumption that everyone on t..."

Agreed!

[Laura]

Sara wrote: "I recommend that people stop debating whether she is a bot or person. It's quite rude, in my opinion (and a lot of this thread has been). How about we all go under the assumption that everyone on t..."

Exactly. Thank you.

[Dusty Bibliophile]

Sara wrote: "I recommend that people stop debating whether she is a bot or person. It's quite rude, in my opinion (and a lot of this thread has been). How about we all go under the assumption that everyone on t..."

I apologize for any disrespect I've exhibited.

[Gil]

Group hug time?

[Mae]

Gil wrote: "Group hug time?"
wow talk about circular conversations…. Popcorn anyone?