Classics you seceretly can't stand

[jkazoolien]

Not a "classic", per se, but I found "American Psycho" impossible to read. Not for its graphic depictions of violence, but that the book takes for-flapjacksing-ever to go anywhere. I got about halfway through, and all I read was page after page of boring, annoying description. Apparently, Ellis did this intentionally, so, good job! You bored and annoyed me, and I have no intention of ever reading anything else you've ever written ever again! If that makes me an uncultured imbecile, so be it!

[Joker]

Babbitt by Sinclair Lewis. I had to read this for a U.S. History class in high school and it was terribly boring.

[Malek]

I have to read Lord of the Flies for school, and I think the best way to describe it would be that reading it is like walking through treacle (which would be fun, and tasty, but very very difficult). I'm halfway through, and nothing has happened yet, and I'm just not patient enough to get through all the description to the part when something good happens. I swear the whole thing so far has been looooong descriptions of the beaches, and the trees, and the island. I might just skip to the bit where they start killing each other. I think The Simpsons did a parody of the book in one of the Treehouse of Horror episodes, maybe I'll just watch that.

I know it's very well written but it's just so painful for me. Damn my short attention span!

[mummifiedstalin]

Sept 13, 2009 5:48:20 GMT -5 Malek said:

I have to read Lord of the Flies for school, and I think the best way to describe it would be that reading it is like walking through treacle (which would be fun, and tasty, but very very difficult). I'm halfway through, and nothing has happened yet, and I'm just not patient enough to get through all the description to the part when something good happens. I swear the whole thing so far has been looooong descriptions of the beaches, and the trees, and the island. I might just skip to the bit where they start killing each other. I think The Simpsons did a parody of the book in one of the Treehouse of Horror episodes, maybe I'll just watch that.

I know it's very well written but it's just so painful for me. Damn my short attention span!

Plenty starts to happen soon. Don't worry. Plus, it's a VERY short book. You won't have to wait long.

[Malek]

Sept 13, 2009 8:22:53 GMT -5 mummifiedstalin said:

Sept 13, 2009 5:48:20 GMT -5 Malek said:

I have to read Lord of the Flies for school, and I think the best way to describe it would be that reading it is like walking through treacle (which would be fun, and tasty, but very very difficult). I'm halfway through, and nothing has happened yet, and I'm just not patient enough to get through all the description to the part when something good happens. I swear the whole thing so far has been looooong descriptions of the beaches, and the trees, and the island. I might just skip to the bit where they start killing each other. I think The Simpsons did a parody of the book in one of the Treehouse of Horror episodes, maybe I'll just watch that.

I know it's very well written but it's just so painful for me. Damn my short attention span!

Plenty starts to happen soon. Don't worry. Plus, it's a VERY short book. You won't have to wait long.

Ah thank god, guess I'll keep going for now. Thanks ;D

[crowschmo]

I just got a copy of the Wizard of Oz for cheap. Never read it when I was wee bairn, so I decided to get caught up in all the whimsy and fantasy and what not. Um...BORING!!!

I know it's a kid's book, but with all the hype of it being a classic, and the first really American fantasy, and all the movie versions made, I thought SURELY there would be something to it all.

Nope.

It's - well, this happened, and that happened, and, gee we're in a fix, and well, we solved it in the very next paragraph.

Blech! I got no enjoyment from it at all. My inner child was majorly let down. I even read another book in the series, (The Emerald City of OZ) just to see if anything would be added to it, and make it more interesting. Nada. Oh, isn't Dorothy so precious. Oh, isn't Princess Ozma so pretty and good and perfect. I hate that BS. (I never wanted to be a princess when I was little - I don't get the appeal to all that sugary schlock). It was just, well, STUPID.

I have no desire to read any more in this series. It sucks.

[mummifiedstalin]

It was also written over 100 years ago. Kids' literature, especially in turn-of-the-century U.S., was a lot more cut and dried than we're used to. Especially compared to British Victorian kid's lit of the period, which was way more risk-taking than the standard "adult Victorian novel" was, the style often appears incredibly stilted.

If you're really interested in GOOD early American fantasy, read Hawthorne or Washington Irving. There's some really weird stuff in there. (And don't judge Hawthorne if you only know him from _A Scarlet Letter_. His short stories, especially the "fantasy" ones, are amazing and very, very different.)

[doctorz]

Ulysses by James Joyce - Stream of Consciousness is not literature it's torture.

[inlovewithcrow]

Nov 3, 2009 13:57:14 GMT -5 doctorz said:

Ulysses by James Joyce - Stream of Consciousness is not literature it's torture.

I loathe Joyce. I always think of the Parker quote, alas, not about this novel but it applies: "This is not a novel to be tossed aside lightly. It should be thrown with great force."

[Continuing Legend]

I agree with most of the above:
can't stand Catcher in the Rye, Scarlet Letter, or Great Gatsby. And loved TKAM. So glad I'm not alone there.

I hate the Crucible, too. And because I'm female, when I was younger I would go to various summer camps, and if I took a theatre class I would inevitably get stuck playing one of the girls in The Crucible, and it was always the SAME SCENE, where the girls run around panicking about how they might get caught being witches or something, and it's not even an EXCITING scene, it's just stupid, and the whole play is such an anvilicious metaphor anyway.