The Great Gatsby
discussion
worst book ever!
Joe- yes, I did mean overrated. How embarrassing, but I'm glad the point was taken.
Vanessa wrote: "Joe- yes, I did mean overrated. How embarrassing, but I'm glad the point was taken."Vanessa, you can go back to your comment and change the word by editing.
I agree with Rachael. I read this book in High School and it made no impression on me what so ever, I actually kept getting it confused with "The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz", my worst book ever. So I read "Gatsby" again about a year ago, and really enjoyed it. I think F. Scott wanted us to think about how the rich are perceived, that their lives are so superficial until tragedy hits, then they think that no one has gone through what they have. The panic and complete loss of control is astounding to them because you cannot fix human nature with money. People will be who they WANT to be no matter whether they have money or not.
I don't understand why this book was essential reading in school. It takes a few years on the job to realise that Fitzgerald's characters are real people you might have met as an adult. Even if Fitzgerald lived, dined and partied with the rich just before or while writing this book, it felt like it had been written by someone belonging to the middle class. The simultaneous admiration for the glitz and glamour, disillusionment with a perceived lack of sincerity among the rich and contempt for the Tom's and Daisy's who use wealth as a convenient shock absorber seem like real feelings of the working class. To me, this book mirrors the lives of Page 3 regulars, seen from the eyes of a working class individual who typically values emotions above all else.
I actually rather enjoyed it. I take it you've not read Mansfield Park then. Tedium in print...
For anyone who found this book to be too slow or boring, there's a new version - The Late Gatsby - a mashup which combines the original story with a vampire narrative. adds a lot of humor and suspense to the original (though I must admit I loved the original too)
Shay wrote: "For anyone who found this book to be too slow or boring, there's a new version - The Late Gatsby - a mashup which combines the original story with a vampire narrative. adds a lot of humor and suspe..."I'm certainly not looking for a more fast-paced version, I loved The Great Gatsby, but that sounds pretty cool...thanks Shay.
I hope the vampire ate all the characters after sucking the life out of them. No seriously, so many of the characters in the original were "vampires" why add a real one.
Let's face it, people, Great Expectations is the worst book ever (by Charles Dickins) and the fact that you have to read it in high school is appalling. The Pearl by John Steinbeck easily takes second.
I loved this book when I read it in high school but I also understood later that this book is not fully accessible to someone in her teens. It repays rereading over the years but literary tastes change also. Fitzgerald is a great stylist and writing teachers often use passages from Gatsby to illustrate great writing. But there are passages and features of Fitzgerald's writing that wouldn't make the grade today. One of the main points about Fitzgerald is his deep class consciousness, and the failure of people in different classes to understand each other.
The worst book ever is Moby Dick by Herman Melville.
I definitely feel this book is overrated. It isn't necessary that I love the characters of a book, but I need to respect them or at least understand their motivation. I felt as if I were wading through descriptive paragraphs with a promise of something interesting around the corner which never arrived. I can't understand how a movie was made from this. There is no substance, just characters arranged in scenes where nothing happens.
I can't believe all of these classics with exceptional writing, imagery, and themes are being suggested as the worst books ever, and yet, Fifty Shades of Grey and its copycats are in existence with people raving over them. All of the books here are some of the best examples of American literature. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy it, but really there are far worse books.
I totally agree with you Vanessa. Unless you try and say anything good about Great Expectations
I just caught this discussion and had to give my 2 cents. My Book Group read it several years ago. I really disliked it because it was about people who seemed to be so self absorbed and selfish! Now it is a family joke...Hey -( to one of my kids,) did you ever read The Great Gatsby? We all laugh! If I could compare it, I would do so to the TV show, Seinfeld. But I am sure I will touch nerves with that thought too.
Isn't it funny how we like and dislike things? Our group read Wuthering Heights. It was my choice. Now the group groans when my turn comes up! In truth, I skipped out after about 100 pages and watched the movie. There are times when the movie version sure is better than the book. Not often, but once and a great while, the movie wins! LOL.
I disliked it so much back in high school that i feel as though it doesnt deserve my attention now. That may seem a bit harsh lol But i thought about what some had written, regarding maybe a re-read now as an adult. However i felt like if i was reading Shakespeare, Hawthorne, Frost, and Steinbeck back then, my tiny little high school brain would have been able to pick up on whether or not i liked this book, and i did NOT =) Sorry guys just my opinion
Why does liking or disliking matter when applying our febrile minds to literature? Are we learning in our schools how to read, use, and comment upon stories? How do we learn such through our own experience and practices?Almost inevitably, my f2f book group discussions start with whether the members "liked" the book. Increasingly, I ask, is that relevant or even interesting, other than perhaps as a signal as to whether the discussion can be reinforcing or perhaps needs must be exploratory of different findings and insights from the book.
As I look back on the few book groups I've been in, I do recall that we inevitable began talking about the book with an admission of how we each felt about it. That did get the conversation going and it often led to more in-depth discussions of why one or another disliked the book. We certainly never ended the conversation because someone didn't like a particular book.Saying you liked or didn't like a book seemed to me to be an easy way to get things going. In none of my book groups did we anoint anyone the leader to begin discussion with a pertinent question. One of my colleagues used to begin her classes with questions like, "Why is there so much rain in this story?" I don't think I would have cared for that style of opening.
If readers were open about their feelings they were more likely to modify their initial views as the conversation progressed. There's nothing worse than a discussion group where people feel they "should" like a book and they really don't.
Anna-Kathrin wrote: "Saying you liked or didn't like a book seemed to me to be an easy way to get things going...."What do English teachers do these days when they teach literature?
A friend has basically dropped out of Goodreads because he perceives people basically don't understand how to discuss literature. I was trained in technical fields, not literary ones, so I am not in a good position to judge, but I do observe that a lot of the discussions here are about "liking" or "disliking." So, what should and could they be about?
You are absolutely right. It is not the worst book of all time. I did not enjoy it at all and would never recommend it to someone, but saying it's the worst book of all time is a huge exaggeration. For me, it is the contrast between how the book is seen as a 'timeless classic' and is on most 'Top 100 books you must read' and how little I cared for the book which made me comment in this thread. I actively disliked or felt ambivalent to all the characters. I found no redeeming qualities in Daisy at all, which means Gatsby's devotion to her came across as incomprehensible. The actual writing, while at times very very good, obviously did not make enough of an impact to overcome the drawbacks of character and plot (in my opinion, of course). After reading the comments here, I am determined to read another book by Fitzgerald before I give up on him.
Anna-KathrinExcellent point. GG is on my bad list but I wouldn`t say it`s the worst book out there, no matter how much I dislike it. It`s writing is highly polished, the style exquisite, but that is only one aspect of a novel that gains its merit. I find it highly deficient in other respects, and I have repeatedly made my points on this message thread.
Yes, it is a bit harsh. There`s 10`s of thousands out there that are worse but among the list of "masterpieces" I would put it at the bottom or close to.
Moby Dick is the worst by far and is the foundation for all the other classics that shouldn't be, like Ulysses.
I read it independently, an was really impressed with Fitzgerald's character and setting development, as well as his sensational use of imagery to develop emotion within me. However, I found the ending lacking, an it really ruined the book for me. It felt like more of a lazy ending, one that I certainly didn't expect from Fitzgerald.
Anna KathrynYes,I would put ULYSSES at the bottom of the classic masterpiece list. I havee tried to read it twice and the second time around was for an Irish Literature course in college. I got as far as a 100 pages into Molly Bloom`s soliloquoy and gave up.
I suppose it could be argued that a book need not to be entertaining to be a masterpiece. That`s the prevailing wisdom among the literary pundits. Rather it`s the complexity and depth of the novel, its artistry, character development, etc. Otherwise, THE LITTLE ENGINE THAT COULD, my overall favorite children`s book from my own childhood would beat out ALICE IN WONDERLAND.
It is on my 'not the worst book in the world, but overated'.I think thiat is why i place it so low, the writing style is okay, but I find no connection with the characters, worse I cannot dislike them, they are just self centred and boring, not even hateful?
No, NO, NOOOOOOOOO. You can't take the book so literally and just dispose of it because it was "boring." You have to dig deeper to a new meaning, rather than just concluding that it was about some rich guy named Gatsby. Every book has something more than a plot, it's a lesson that only some may understand.
I agree with James that some books demand more of us than others as readers. I always admired Fitzgerald for his social commentary. Gatsby is a pretty harsh judgment of a particular social class presented in such delicate and beautiful language that it's easy to miss the underlying views. I also think rereading books at different stages in one's life gives us a chance to see how much we've grown and changed by our different responses to the book.
Deprived or Depraved?
Michael wrote: "I first picked up this book, my freshman year in high school. I found myself bored with the characters and didn't understand why my friends liked it? I just couldn't take the overuse of explaining ..."read it again, as you grow up, your view on books can change
I have read the book 2-3 times over the course of 40 years. My views on the book have certainly changed, I can now intelligently argue why it`s not such a great book.
Geoffrey wrote: "I have read the book 2-3 times over the course of 40 years. My views on the book have certainly changed, I can now intelligently argue why it`s not such a great book."Go for it :-)
I think it's time to re-read this one after reading everyone's comments. I read it as a sophomore and remember loving it! There are always books you go back and read only to realize it meant something different to you at another time in your life.
Agree with you? Never. I could probably argue your statement for 2 years before having to repeat arguments. I can understand one not liking the book, but it could never be called a badly written book, and certainly not the 'worst book ever.'
I agree with both sides, those that loved it and those that hated it. I think it deserves credit for being well done, in terms of writing style and craftsmanship. In my personal opinion I agree with comment 20, "who cares" the story to me was dull at points. It is the amazing writing style and other finer points that kept me interested but for the most part if I had an idea what I was getting into before I read it I would have know it wasn't my cup of tea. Some people hate watching horror films, while others hate comedies. I guess what i'm saying is interest is relative and the reason this is a classic is because there is greatness hidden inside. There is a difference between finding it and enjoying it. I didn't enjoy the book but it is a classic.Side note: worst book ever, The Road by McCarthy. Great writing during most of the book but man I hated that book with every ounce of my soul just because the story was so boring to me. haha So my point above carries over. You can have a great book that others believe to be great and actually love, while still hating it at the same time. if you want to read some great reviews of that book go to amazon.com and read any 1 or 2 star comment. Some classics haha
I think you are taking it in wrong way .The characters such as Daisy and Tom are definitely apathetic and self-centered, but this book has some of the best quotes i have ever read like " careless ppl,they smashed up things and creatures &then retreated back into their money of their vast carelessness,or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made"
Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"Yes I agree whole heartedly Laura, I hated it.
My son had to read it for O level and I thought I would give it a go at the time for a little moral support!!
He hated it, I hated it.
I couldn't engage with any of the characters, they seemed to live puerile, hedonistic lives, which I found extremely boring to read about.
I know this is supposed to be a great literary work, it just did not do a thing for me!
I didn't love this book, but I feel like it's a staple book "to have read" so I did it. I also had it as assigned reading in high school, so I don't know whether I would actually have chosen to read it, or if I just had a good teacher who wanted to make sure we had a breadth of understanding of modern literature.I actually enjoyed David Copperfield more than this, and that book is 800+ pages long.
Yes, Laura, 672, that was my favorite line as well. I thought not only memorably written, but succinctly sums up the book. However, I wish his societal perspective were much better developed than the silly soliloquoy we`re stuck with at the books end. Give me a break. "Orgiastic Future"!!!!
668, KarlI made countless criticisms of the book. In fact, I`m probably the most nitpicking of the whole lot and I haven`t even run out of ammo. More will come out later.
I find it so incredibly depressing that a discussion thread such as this even exists on a website devoted to the avid reader. Fitzgerald is not for everyone. In the wise words once uttered by Mitch Hedberg:
"You can't please everyone all the time; and [right now] all of those people [are in this room]."
If the thought of Gatsby's tale has left that bad of a taste in your mouth, I suggest that you ought to move on to another book. A different author. Try something new. Don't stop searching until you've got it in your hands—the book that you don't want to put down or rest your head atop. Go find it: the Fante to your Bukowski.
Perhaps, then, you might be struck with inspiration and the desire to share your new-found admiration for this author and their work with others — to express exactly what it is that resonates with you, the reader, as being meaningful.
Hopefully, no other GR-members create a discussion thread and collectively give poor reason after poor reason as to why they consider it to be the "worst book ever!" — But then again, you could always remind them that they could be doing more constructive things with their spare time.
Have we not read Watership Down or The Sound and The Fury? Graham Greene? Any schlocky romance? The Great Gatsby may be boring, but is not is the worst book ever, by far. Not even the worst book acclaimed as "great."
It was really exciting for a part, but then,, it got increasingly disappointing.....
MichelleIf that is your feeling why are you even bothering reading this message thread. Don`t waste your time- got out and read other books by SF. You`ll be happier and you won`t need to be grouchy.
You're right Anna-Kathrin.
Geoffrey wrote: "MichelleIf that is your feeling why are you even bothering reading this message thread. Don`t waste your time- got out and read other books by SF. You`ll be happier and you won`t need to be grouchy."
I wasn't aware that I was projecting an ill-tempered position on the matter.
I appreciate both your concern regarding my happiness as well as your suggestion. Unfortunately, I don't know that there have been any new editions within the "SF" collection for me to "got out and read".
I read it because of all the hype. There was nothing I liked about it - the characters were either pathetic or insufferable and the story was quite ordinary. Even the writing was not enough to forgive the poor storyline. I do not understand what made it so big in its time and why it continues to draw readers. I just don't get it.
Many of the reviews make me realize how differently literature was taught when I was in school. I knew it was different when Stephen King's books were added to the reading lists and Moby Dick was removed, at least temporarily, because it contained references to scripture. My lit teacher extracted so much from Gatsby it was amazing. I guess looking at what the same reviewers have as the "best book ever" will balance the comments. I have a friend who writes for The Examiner and does reviews. Her philosophy is to rarely give a one or two star review because she knows the power those reviews have to both discourage the author and bring downs ratings; so unless there is a valid (not subjective) reason, she will not give them. The Great Gatsby has endured decades and rightly describes a slice of America cultural history; a shallow slice of time depicting shallow people that it was easy to hate. I, too, hated them and was bothered by the book. I think that is exactly what Fitzgerald intended, and perhaps, why it endured.
And yet it did not succeed as a crowd mover until 25 years after it was published. And there are so many of us disgruntled readers who feel the book falls flat and have concrete reasons for saying so.Take for instance character development. Sure we know that the narrator, Nick, is erudite. Yet he displays this only at the very end. What ever happened to the literary rule of thumb of developing a character`s strengths by intimating by example earlier in the novel?
And what about such extraneous material as the director and the starlet? That scene was an impertinent one, one of many cases in which SF dabbles with extraneous material that is of no consequence.
What is the point of Nick`s soliloquey at the end. The theme of America`s nascence never comes up at all in the novel, but SF throws it in the end to give the novel a "significance" beyond the tawdry tale as Mahita points out, (significantly this was exactly Mencken`s point when the book came out)
As for Michelle`s comments, I was not aware that you had read everything that SF wrote. Congratulations! I sincerely hope the rest was better conceived. And I am glad you appreciate my concern for your welfare!
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Rabbit Angstrom: The Four Novels (other topics)
The Bridges of Madison County (other topics)
The Bridges of Madison County (other topics)
The Time Keeper (other topics)
More...
John Updike (other topics)
Mitch Albom (other topics)
Books mentioned in this topic
The Things They Carried (other topics)Rabbit Angstrom: The Four Novels (other topics)
The Bridges of Madison County (other topics)
The Bridges of Madison County (other topics)
The Time Keeper (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Tim O'Brien (other topics)John Updike (other topics)
Mitch Albom (other topics)
Vanessa, at the end of your 1st sentence, you meant to say "overrated", right? Again, I agree with you...