Looking for Alaska
question
John Greene Isn't a Good Author
Kelseyc
(last edited
Oct 04, 2014 09:04AM
)
Sep 20, 2014 04:36PM
I'm going to get some serious hate for this topic post but here goes nothing:
The first John Greene novel I ever read was The Fault In Our Stars and I loved it! It's the first book that made me cry, the story idea was on point, and the characters were just a whole new breed. I couldn't get enough of it.
Well, I decided to read Looking For Alaska, another successful John Greene novel and I was so disappointed. The characters were very similar to the ones in TFIOS. I didn't like the progression (or should I say degression) of the main character's morals and found the novel, overall, boring.
Next is An Abundance of Katherines. To put it kindly I found the plot to be slightly odd, the ending to be so predictable, and the overall plot to be quite monotone.
Lastly, I just finished reading Paper Towns. Again, I was disappointed. None of the relationships were developed enough, I had no true desire for Margo to be found, and I felt like the clues were so far fetched that, in reality, no one would have found her.
I like John Greene as a person. He's funny, witty, smart, entertaining, and kind. However, if I'm judging from his literary skills, he just isn't good. His plots are off, his writing style and characters are exactly the same, and his novels as a whole aren't exciting or really interesting in any way.
What do you guys think?
EDIT: I just wanted to say that while I titled the thread "John Green* Isn't a Good Author' I didn't mean to a) state it like a fact and b) didn't mean for it to sound as harsh as it does.
There are things about John Green's writing that I adore. And let's be honest, he's quite quotable. When I said he's 'not a good author' I meant that IN MY OPINION I found thing after thing after thing that was wrong technically and by my own preferences. This is my opinion. Nothing else. If we didn't have opinions then nothing would be considered 'good' or 'bad' and no one would improve in anything that they do.
Thanks for all of the responses. I've loved reading them and let's keep 'em rolling in:)
*And thanks for correcting my spelling error. I always forget his last name is spelled like the color:)
The first John Greene novel I ever read was The Fault In Our Stars and I loved it! It's the first book that made me cry, the story idea was on point, and the characters were just a whole new breed. I couldn't get enough of it.
Well, I decided to read Looking For Alaska, another successful John Greene novel and I was so disappointed. The characters were very similar to the ones in TFIOS. I didn't like the progression (or should I say degression) of the main character's morals and found the novel, overall, boring.
Next is An Abundance of Katherines. To put it kindly I found the plot to be slightly odd, the ending to be so predictable, and the overall plot to be quite monotone.
Lastly, I just finished reading Paper Towns. Again, I was disappointed. None of the relationships were developed enough, I had no true desire for Margo to be found, and I felt like the clues were so far fetched that, in reality, no one would have found her.
I like John Greene as a person. He's funny, witty, smart, entertaining, and kind. However, if I'm judging from his literary skills, he just isn't good. His plots are off, his writing style and characters are exactly the same, and his novels as a whole aren't exciting or really interesting in any way.
What do you guys think?
EDIT: I just wanted to say that while I titled the thread "John Green* Isn't a Good Author' I didn't mean to a) state it like a fact and b) didn't mean for it to sound as harsh as it does.
There are things about John Green's writing that I adore. And let's be honest, he's quite quotable. When I said he's 'not a good author' I meant that IN MY OPINION I found thing after thing after thing that was wrong technically and by my own preferences. This is my opinion. Nothing else. If we didn't have opinions then nothing would be considered 'good' or 'bad' and no one would improve in anything that they do.
Thanks for all of the responses. I've loved reading them and let's keep 'em rolling in:)
*And thanks for correcting my spelling error. I always forget his last name is spelled like the color:)
"Good" in itself is an entirely subjective word. As is, for that matter, art (i.e., literature). What I'm saying is... someone is going to love and hate and something in between every single book ever. The author writes to a specific audience for a specific reason, and often that reason is completely polarizing. But if we're going to look at John Green as an author, let's look at the fact that he has a number of bestsellers published and is being optioned for movie adaptions right and left. That... that is a GOOD author... someone excelling at his career. If you're talking about his work, his literature, that's like looking at someone's brushstrokes and saying they should be wider here and more curved there. You are completely entitled to not love John Green's work, as with any piece of art. But that doesn't mean he's not a good author. I don't care for Picasso's artistic style, but he's a damn good artist.
I agree. Not fully, but for the most part, I agree with you.
I don't think you (people in general) get to decide if an author is 'good' or not. Everyone has different views.
TFIOS was fantastic. I loved it. Like you, it made me cry and laugh and want to read more. So I tried LFA, and while I did like it, it wasn't as good as TFIOS. I then read Paper Towns and I couldn't even finish it. It was dull, slow, and overall dead BORING! I couldn't care less about finding Margo, Q was an amazingly boring character, and I just couldn't get in to it. I then read chapter 1 of AAOK and I've never picked it up since. The same writing. The same characters.
John Green sure is a lovely person, but is he a good writer?
I don't think you (people in general) get to decide if an author is 'good' or not. Everyone has different views.
TFIOS was fantastic. I loved it. Like you, it made me cry and laugh and want to read more. So I tried LFA, and while I did like it, it wasn't as good as TFIOS. I then read Paper Towns and I couldn't even finish it. It was dull, slow, and overall dead BORING! I couldn't care less about finding Margo, Q was an amazingly boring character, and I just couldn't get in to it. I then read chapter 1 of AAOK and I've never picked it up since. The same writing. The same characters.
John Green sure is a lovely person, but is he a good writer?
I might be a little biased when it comes to John Green. In my opinion, He is the John Hughes of our generation, only he is a writer instead of a director. I think all of the books that I have read by him, (Looking for Alaska, Paper Towns, An Abundance of Katherines, and The Fault in Our Stars) are truly beautiful and moving pieces of literature. LFA and TFIOS are by far my favorite but all of them are gems. You have a right to your opinion but I don't agree. Just because you don't like a couple of his books or didn't find them interesting does not condemn him to being a bad writer. His stories are not epics, their is no revolution, no insane love stories, no one is immortal, and no one possesses some inhuman power. He writes about ordinary people. They are purely realistic. Life is boring and tedious and uninteresting at times. He writes about those times as well as the rare extraordinary events that happen randomly in life. What he writes could easily happen to you or someone you know or someone you distantly know. I am constantly highlighting the things he says because a lot of his quotes resonate with me. I even find myself saying out loud as I read that John Green is pure genius. All of his books resonate with me and looking at all of these responses in his favor, I'm sure some people will agree with me.
So, to answer your question, I don't agree. He's a fantastic writer.
So, to answer your question, I don't agree. He's a fantastic writer.
I absolutely agree with you. I too read TFIOS first and expected good things from the rest.
I found Paper Towns to be boring, but ok.
I hated Looking for Alaska, I felt like there was no plot.
As for me, I'm not reading the rest of his books, because, with the exception of TFIOS, I don't think his books are well-written at all.
I found Paper Towns to be boring, but ok.
I hated Looking for Alaska, I felt like there was no plot.
As for me, I'm not reading the rest of his books, because, with the exception of TFIOS, I don't think his books are well-written at all.
I do not think John Green is "good" author. While his writing is not "bad" per say, it definitely isn't the strongest. His books rely heavily on shock value to give impact to the plot. The first book I read was Looking for Alaska, and I absolutely hated it. I found it slightly vulgar for a YA book and, after the first half, the plot ended and the continuation of the book seemed pointless. I've heard is books referred to as "relatable" many times but, with two I've read (TFIOS and LFA), I fail to see how either story could be considered relatable to the average teen. I'm not saying his writing is horrid, but it definitely isn't for me and I don't understand the popularity of his books.
I think it depends on what your criteria of "good author" is. John Green's characters are often interchangeable but he seems to be good at writing about a very specific type of characters and stories.
Omg yaaaaas. Except I really did love this book. Looking for Alaska was the only good book out of all he has written. And how is Paper Towns even becoming a movie becuase that book kinda sucked and there are other writers who deserve a shot at having their book turned into a movie
I completely agree.It makes me feel slightly guilty to admit it, because John seems like such a lovely person,but i don't think he's a good author.Other than TFIOS,every single one of his books was a major disappointment.His characters are half baked and disturbingly similar.Its like he always sets out with a promise to make some great discovery or give us some amazing insight into growing up but he consistently fails to deliver on that promise.
Well, good is open to interpretation. But I would agree that John Greene is very over-hyped. Personally, I find all of his books OTHER than The Fault in Our Stars to be repetitive, not to mention vulgar.
Firsttttt of all. You spelled his name wrong. Second of all, he's the most relatable author for youth. Sure he doesn't use the biggest words, but that's so that we can relate. No teenager's going to be able to relate to adult-type talk. John Green is a genius. His stories are unique, and just because they don't have happy endings doesn't mean they're not quality.
I agree. His books seem so alike and his way of writing is so similar and the same. I even got bored of reading 'John Green books' for a while, I got bored from reading similar stories. I hated a bunch of characters from different books of his. The plots are kind of the same. I've read An Abundance of Katherine and although the ending was so predictable I found it really entertaining and couldn't put it down and it actually made laugh, like really laugh and not just laugh in my mind like Paper Towns. Looking For Alaska was horrible -in my opinion of course-. Will Grayson, Will Grayson was good. Not really a book I would ever recommend but it was good. I would say all in all, that he's an okay author but not that good.
I think John Green is an amazing author but I am into depressing books and you spelled Green wrong there isn't a e after it.
I totally agree, I liked tfios yes, but the other books wasn't as good as tifos.. you get bored somewhere before even finish half of the book, idk. John green seems like a good person and so funny, I like him. I hope he would make an interesting book, I would love to give it a try.
Kelseyc wrote: "I'm going to get some serious hate for this topic post but here goes nothing:
The first John Greene novel I ever read was The Fault In Our Stars and I loved it! It's the first book that made me cr..."
no hate from me. I like his books on one level but his writing is fairly awful. I very much dislike the redundancy of certain phrases used again and again and again. to be fair most YA authors are pretty horrible in their usage. I tend to audiobook things so the common "I say, he says, I say, he says" (incredibly grating in the hunger games books) is troubling both because it talks down to the reader and because a thesaurus is right there. why not "I ask, he replies, I state, he mutters"?
I think that TFiOS was a good book but was very poorly edited. I had serious issues with LfA but haven't read it recently enough to detail them (not offended by sex or substance abuse, offended by iffy usage and plot jumps). it definitely feels like many YA authors do a disservice to true YA audiences with lazy writing. I would offer up the original Sherlock Holmes stories as a counter example of a) vocabulary building and b) solidly written but very approachable.
there are several cringe inducing moments in TFiOS:
Hazel's use of "of insidious intent" only later to quote the poem it was borrowed from feels annoying. if the poem were quoted first then she used it, it would seem as if her reading had influenced her internal dialog, in reverse it doesn't work.
there are several points when answering a phone where "everything collapsed" *points to thesaurus*
the "capital S something" was perhaps only grating to audiobook people as the book was followed with an interview with Mr green in which he discussed writing as a "capital F female".
I very much liked TFiOS but I cannot forgive the lazy writing tropes. I read paper towns and looking for alaska and stopped on his other work. every book has a gem of an idea but it tends to be deeply buried in really bad prose, horrid plot devices and I lack the patience.
Mr green is a great vlogger but video is a one off take, I expect writers to reread what they wrote and fix it.
anyway, not trying to be mean, but wanted to let you know that you are not alone. keep seeking out great books. would recommend Blind Assassin.
The first John Greene novel I ever read was The Fault In Our Stars and I loved it! It's the first book that made me cr..."
no hate from me. I like his books on one level but his writing is fairly awful. I very much dislike the redundancy of certain phrases used again and again and again. to be fair most YA authors are pretty horrible in their usage. I tend to audiobook things so the common "I say, he says, I say, he says" (incredibly grating in the hunger games books) is troubling both because it talks down to the reader and because a thesaurus is right there. why not "I ask, he replies, I state, he mutters"?
I think that TFiOS was a good book but was very poorly edited. I had serious issues with LfA but haven't read it recently enough to detail them (not offended by sex or substance abuse, offended by iffy usage and plot jumps). it definitely feels like many YA authors do a disservice to true YA audiences with lazy writing. I would offer up the original Sherlock Holmes stories as a counter example of a) vocabulary building and b) solidly written but very approachable.
there are several cringe inducing moments in TFiOS:
Hazel's use of "of insidious intent" only later to quote the poem it was borrowed from feels annoying. if the poem were quoted first then she used it, it would seem as if her reading had influenced her internal dialog, in reverse it doesn't work.
there are several points when answering a phone where "everything collapsed" *points to thesaurus*
the "capital S something" was perhaps only grating to audiobook people as the book was followed with an interview with Mr green in which he discussed writing as a "capital F female".
I very much liked TFiOS but I cannot forgive the lazy writing tropes. I read paper towns and looking for alaska and stopped on his other work. every book has a gem of an idea but it tends to be deeply buried in really bad prose, horrid plot devices and I lack the patience.
Mr green is a great vlogger but video is a one off take, I expect writers to reread what they wrote and fix it.
anyway, not trying to be mean, but wanted to let you know that you are not alone. keep seeking out great books. would recommend Blind Assassin.
Warning: this is all opinion based and I recognize that my opinion is NOT everyone elses.
Personally have found that as a sixteen year old girl I am not a fan of John Green's writting. I understand he is a popular written and I am not looking to go against the grain. However I feel as though his books are held to such a high standard that when I read Paper Towns I thought it was simply okay. I find that many people my age like that his characters are relatable yet I do not like his characters and I feel like his character development (or lack thereof) is minimal and unrealistic. I could not connect to his characters in any sense and had no emotional attachment which is shocking for someone like me I usually fall in love with a few characters. I am not saying the characters can't be relatable to anyone because I am certain they can be to some. For me heither has too many cross overs between books like Looking for Alaska and Paper Towns at some points I felt like I was reading the same book. He seems to not have personality transitions in his characters between books, that is only my opinion though. I am all for an independent strong female character but John Green just doesn't do it the right way for me I get very irritated by them and they almost seem to be playing up a stereotype within themselves of the 'independent woman', I view myself as a feminist but these characters weren'the feminist to me, they were annoying. Then the main male characters are awkward semi-out casted boys in which I could find no different between except the name on the girl they liked and theven settingso they were in. Overall I cannot stand John Green's writting style or his characters with their lack of development or individuality. I dislike the 'relatablility' because not every teenager loves to swear and pull pranks. I feel like that in itself is almost promoting bad behavior and irresponcibility. Now to clarify I do not like John Green's BOOKS I love him as a person and he has had and is continuing to have a very successful career so in the sense of good he is good in terms of success yet in term of quality I will say he is not a good author.
Personally have found that as a sixteen year old girl I am not a fan of John Green's writting. I understand he is a popular written and I am not looking to go against the grain. However I feel as though his books are held to such a high standard that when I read Paper Towns I thought it was simply okay. I find that many people my age like that his characters are relatable yet I do not like his characters and I feel like his character development (or lack thereof) is minimal and unrealistic. I could not connect to his characters in any sense and had no emotional attachment which is shocking for someone like me I usually fall in love with a few characters. I am not saying the characters can't be relatable to anyone because I am certain they can be to some. For me heither has too many cross overs between books like Looking for Alaska and Paper Towns at some points I felt like I was reading the same book. He seems to not have personality transitions in his characters between books, that is only my opinion though. I am all for an independent strong female character but John Green just doesn't do it the right way for me I get very irritated by them and they almost seem to be playing up a stereotype within themselves of the 'independent woman', I view myself as a feminist but these characters weren'the feminist to me, they were annoying. Then the main male characters are awkward semi-out casted boys in which I could find no different between except the name on the girl they liked and theven settingso they were in. Overall I cannot stand John Green's writting style or his characters with their lack of development or individuality. I dislike the 'relatablility' because not every teenager loves to swear and pull pranks. I feel like that in itself is almost promoting bad behavior and irresponcibility. Now to clarify I do not like John Green's BOOKS I love him as a person and he has had and is continuing to have a very successful career so in the sense of good he is good in terms of success yet in term of quality I will say he is not a good author.
John Green is interesting author.
But, What is Good. Good is not meant to write classic words or do work as the rule suggest bur good mean to touch the extreme of your work.
John Green also doing it... I do not like John Green much after reading TFIOS but there are fans of him and that make him famous and prove that he is going towards his extreme. This is good.
But, What is Good. Good is not meant to write classic words or do work as the rule suggest bur good mean to touch the extreme of your work.
John Green also doing it... I do not like John Green much after reading TFIOS but there are fans of him and that make him famous and prove that he is going towards his extreme. This is good.
John green has won many arwards for his novels. He is a great youtuber and author
TFIOS and Katherine's blew me away! Alaska disappointed me so much that I didn't even bother with Paper Towns.
I agree his books are somewhat monotonous but just because you didn't enjoy his books doesn't mean he isn't a good author. It's all about preferences.
I wouldn't go so far as to say he's a bad author, although his characters are all very similar. He does have some excellent metaphors and some of the phrases he uses just send shivers down my spine. His characters are all carbon copies of one another but they're pretty damn relatable. I think he's really like any author - he's got strengths and weaknesses and things he could improve. He does have quite a knack for writing realistic teenagers and understanding them.
Personally I liked LFA waaaay more than TFIOS, but Will Grayson is definitely my favourite (probably because I love David Levithian so much, actually).
I also agree with the first statement about how he's such a funny, witty and clever person. He's definitely someone I'd like to meet and have a discussion with if I wasn't a two-dimensional, fairly stupid and average thirteen-year-old girl.
Personally I liked LFA waaaay more than TFIOS, but Will Grayson is definitely my favourite (probably because I love David Levithian so much, actually).
I also agree with the first statement about how he's such a funny, witty and clever person. He's definitely someone I'd like to meet and have a discussion with if I wasn't a two-dimensional, fairly stupid and average thirteen-year-old girl.
Have you read Will Grayson, Will Grayson yet? I think that and TFIOS are my favorite John Green books.
I do agree there are several similarities in many of his books, but to say he is a horrible writer wouldn't be correct. He is a beautiful writer. You just want a little more originality. I think Will Grayson, Will Grayson would give you that.
I do agree there are several similarities in many of his books, but to say he is a horrible writer wouldn't be correct. He is a beautiful writer. You just want a little more originality. I think Will Grayson, Will Grayson would give you that.
I've loved every single one of his books. I;ve read them all (besides Let it Snow) and I am proud to say he is my favorite author. But I think his books are something of a hit or miss. Some people (like myself) love them! But you shouldn't get too much hate on this topic because they are very hit or miss. But in my opinion he is a fantastic author and I look forward to any other books her writes :)
I kind of agree, although he is still one of my favorite authors.
Looking for alaska was not as good as i expected.
But i read will graham wil graham, and even though it confused me a bit, i liked the humor and the story was different, it wasnt about the wills but about Tiny.
Looking for alaska was not as good as i expected.
But i read will graham wil graham, and even though it confused me a bit, i liked the humor and the story was different, it wasnt about the wills but about Tiny.
Looking for Alaska is one of my favorite books of all time! Loved TFIOS, not so much Paper Towns or Katherines. John Green puts the "literature" in YA literature.
Don't forget that his books (except The Fault In Our Stars) are a fair bit older than TFIOS, so it can be said that he was developing his literary skills. Though I do agree, some of his earlier work isn't as good as TFIOS, but some of it is.
All in all, don't presume all his books are bad, just because you either like or dislike one book, always read others (you might just like it).
All in all, don't presume all his books are bad, just because you either like or dislike one book, always read others (you might just like it).
I don't think he's the worst ever, but he's not profound or prolific. He's very average with his stories and characters.
Based on how much the OP and others in this thread (me included!) love TFIOS, I'd say he's a good author. To create one work of such beauty and emotional impact is a huge accomplishment.
I've only read LFA and thought it was interesting, but less mature.
I've only read LFA and thought it was interesting, but less mature.
I agree, even though I've only read two of his books. I read Looking For Alaska first and I despised it, so I was reluctant to try TFIOS, but I did and now it's one of my favorite books. Even so, because of LFA, I'm super relucant to try any of his other published works.
Everyone has their own fugging taste. You can't like an author's every book equally! In my opinion, John Green is a great, great writer. Not the best one, or my favorite, but still, very good. TFIOS is his best novel and I guess that's because it's his latest one. LFA is his first one, and it's quite different than his other novels...and I think that's why people accept it so differently. I've never been through the stuff the charatcters in it are going through, so I didn't find it that close to my heart. Paper towns and AAOK are awesome, I don't really understand why people wouldn't like them. They have unique plots, in my opinion. Paper towns might have been a little boring in the middle, yes, but overall left the biggest impression in me, I think it's my favourite book of John's. AAOK was just lovely and reading it was a wonderful experience.
I disagree with the unrealistic argument. I find it very weak. Really. How is anything unrealistic? Everybody in this world is NOT going to have the same storyline. People find and will find love in any way or any sort of form. Romeo and Juliet: they fell in love at first sight. So what? Just because you don't believe in that does not mean it is unrealistic. Life happens. It might be different for most people, but it happens. The Fault In Our Stars was a great portrayal of how you can find light in the darkness. The main characters found love while they were in their darkest moments. Yes, it might seem unusual, but that does not make it unrealistic. The book would be boring if the love story was like any other story we have read or watched. All in all, saying TFIOS is unrealistic is just saying everybody's life is the same. Anything is possible.
Is John Green a good author? I think he is. I loved TFIOS so much, I just can't deal with all these feelings. LFA was really good I believe even though I disliked the characters.
Is John Green a good author? I think he is. I loved TFIOS so much, I just can't deal with all these feelings. LFA was really good I believe even though I disliked the characters.
My opinion and yours meet at some points, but I agree with Ruby. I liked LFA (despite the morals), I could actually finish it I could get it. But I never finished TFIOS or Paper Towns. Specially TFIOS, I couldn't understand why it got so popular when there are plenty of great romance that no one ever mentions!
But people have different styles and ways of getting their idea to the readers.
But people have different styles and ways of getting their idea to the readers.
The Fault In Our Stars is his latest novel and I think he has progressed a lot in substance.
I respect your opinion and I just wanted to say how I liked Looking For Alaska more then I liked The Fault in Our Stars. It's similar to my opinion on Romeo and Juliet and A Midsummer Night's Dream. Both The Fault In Our Stars and Romeo and Juliet are kind of nonrealistic views of love, despite the fact that the characters in TFIOS had cancer. In A midsummer Night's Dream and LFA, the love is dramatic and intense and realistic. Kids have sex, smoke, drink underage. That's realistic. That's why I like them more then Romeo and Juliet and TFIOS. But that's just my opinion
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Dec 26, 2014 10:24PM · flag