Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Overrated classics

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #31
    Hence the use of the term "most."

    Comment

    • #32
      Anything written by the Brontë sisters.
      "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


      "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

      Comment

      • #33
        Originally posted by ERCougar View Post
        Ooh yeah--this is on my list too.
        Moby Dick rewards the investment of time. I set it down for 6 months while reading it and am glad I picked it back up. William F. Buckley said, after he finished the book, that he shuddered to think he might have died before reading it.
        Last edited by LA Ute; 05-14-2013, 06:07 PM.
        “There is a great deal of difference in believing something still, and believing it again.”
        ― W.H. Auden

        "God made the angels to show His splendour - as He made animals for innocence and plants for their simplicity. But men and women He made to serve Him wittily, in the tangle of their minds."
        -- Robert Bolt, A Man for All Seasons

        "It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
        --Antoine de Saint-Exupery

        Comment

        • #34
          I hated Les Miserables because it was over dramatic and indulgent. My second least favorite book after Atlas Shrugged.

          Comment

          • #35
            Originally posted by Harry Tic View Post
            I got through Brothers Karamosov and enjoyed it, but not nearly as much as Crime and Punishment. I've read that one several times. I'm on a Dostoevsky kick right now and just started reading The Gambler.

            I slogged though the unabridged version of Les Miserables a year or two ago. The story is fantastic, but those hundred-page digressions just about did me in. Only sheer determination got me through it. I liked it and all, but geez, where the hell were the editors back then?
            Originally posted by ERCougar View Post
            I think creekster told someone on here they had to read the full version. Yes, you totally should, if you're a fan of obscure French military history; otherwise, it strikes me as particularly bad advice. I meant to ask him about that, but forgot about it. Creek?

            Even though Les Miserables is long, the story is fantastic, the characters sympathetic and even a little believable, the writing beautiful, and Hugo's asides are still packed with interesting philosophical ideas. Dostoyevsky, OTOH, has no particularly interesting or new ideas, his characters are completely wacko (when they're not stereotypical), and the story is boring. And the writing is choppy and awkward. I thought this might be a translation problem, but I'm reading the translation that everyone recommends. I'm trying to like this book--I really am. But meh. SU? Did you really like this book, or was it the NYT book review? Be honest.
            Put me in the Les Miserables is a great book categroy - even the 200 pages on the aftermath of the Battle of Waterloo (consider the source)

            I may be small, but I'm slow.

            A veteran - whether active duty, retired, or national guard or reserve is someone who, at one point in his life, wrote a blank check made payable to, "The United States of America ", for an amount of "up to and including my life - it's an honor."

            Comment

            Previous 1 2 3 template Next
            Working...
            X