Classics worth reading and those not worth the time - (Popular but not classics books are okay to include too, forgot about them)
- Iniciador del tema Zaryiu2
- Fecha de inicio
-
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack).
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Registrado
- 2 de Ene, 2023
The Time Machine by H.G. Wells is a really good book.
The german translation of the Dante's Inferno is such a slog to read through that I barely got out of limbo before I gave up.
The german translation of the Dante's Inferno is such a slog to read through that I barely got out of limbo before I gave up.
- Registrado
- 2 de Nov, 2020
- Registrado
- 22 de Jul, 2020
All of the CS Lewis Narnia books are worth your time. Most pulp fiction writers are also worthwhile. Hard boiled detective writera like Hammet and Chandler are also fun.
I'd say that the vast majority of SJW approved literary works are just not worthwhile. I read fucking Handmaid's Tale and 100 Years of Solitude for a class. Not worth the time, but the latter book had some lulzy moments.
I'd say that the vast majority of SJW approved literary works are just not worthwhile. I read fucking Handmaid's Tale and 100 Years of Solitude for a class. Not worth the time, but the latter book had some lulzy moments.
skykiii
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Jun, 2018
Worth reading: The Three Musketeers. Its first sequel, Twenty Years After, was actually an improvement.
Everyone knows about Sherlock Holmes, but Arthur Conan Doyle's other book The Lost World is also pretty great. I haven't gotten around to the rest of the Professor Challenger series yet.
Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House was somehow a book I hadn't heard of (outside of it being the basis of a movie) and so it was a welcome surprise.
Luo Guanzhong's Three Kingdoms (aka Romance of the Three Kingdoms) is the best book of all time, of all time.
Frankenstein is really really good. Dracula is too, but I find Frankenstein the more satisfying experience (for some reason I often find these two together in collections, often accompanied by Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde).
Oh, and anyone who criticizes Tolkien is a leftist. This Are Fact.
.............
Not Worth Reading:
Unfortunately I found Alexander Dumas' other well-known book, The Count of Monte Cristo, kind of a slog.
I mentioned that for some reason I often see Frankenstein compiled with Dracula and Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Now, Jekyll is not bad reading, but.... thing is its kind of a proto M. Night Shyalaman movie where the whole story is leading up to a twist, but the thing is the "twist" is one of those that, thanks to pop cultural osmosis (and adaptations not even preserving it as a twist) everybody goes in knowing: That Rosebud gets stabbed by Sephiroth, who also killed Dumbledore, who was the sled. Because of that, reading it now is kind of a slog because you keep thinking that once that point comes up, the story "actually begins," but actually that's when the story ends.
(Okay, non-joke spoiler: The twist is that Jekyll is Hyde. Literally the whole story is a detective trying to figure out how they're connected and this is what he ultimately discovers, via Jekyll leaving a suicide note. I figured it wasn't worth revealing because I mean, everybody knows.... but just in case....)
Also on the "not worth reading" pile: Anne of Green Gables--I have no idea why I was forced to read this in school. Same goes for to Kill a Mockingbird. That latter I at least understand that it probably had some proto-SJW (I went to school in the 1990s) attitudes backing it. The thing is though, the trial of the black guy is actually just one part of the book... both it and Green Gables are basically "here's some random shit some kids got up to." Anne particularly pissed me off with how spineless she was, easily bowing down to everyone's whims no matter how unreasonable. Seriously some teacher starts crying because she read Ben-Hur and that makes Anne stop.
I'd say "fuck Anne" but you know some people back then probably wanted to.
On that note, I tried to read The Phantom of the Opera and absolutely could not stand it.
Everyone knows about Sherlock Holmes, but Arthur Conan Doyle's other book The Lost World is also pretty great. I haven't gotten around to the rest of the Professor Challenger series yet.
Shirley Jackson's The Haunting of Hill House was somehow a book I hadn't heard of (outside of it being the basis of a movie) and so it was a welcome surprise.
Luo Guanzhong's Three Kingdoms (aka Romance of the Three Kingdoms) is the best book of all time, of all time.
Frankenstein is really really good. Dracula is too, but I find Frankenstein the more satisfying experience (for some reason I often find these two together in collections, often accompanied by Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde).
Oh, and anyone who criticizes Tolkien is a leftist. This Are Fact.
.............
Not Worth Reading:
Unfortunately I found Alexander Dumas' other well-known book, The Count of Monte Cristo, kind of a slog.
I mentioned that for some reason I often see Frankenstein compiled with Dracula and Dr. Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Now, Jekyll is not bad reading, but.... thing is its kind of a proto M. Night Shyalaman movie where the whole story is leading up to a twist, but the thing is the "twist" is one of those that, thanks to pop cultural osmosis (and adaptations not even preserving it as a twist) everybody goes in knowing: That Rosebud gets stabbed by Sephiroth, who also killed Dumbledore, who was the sled. Because of that, reading it now is kind of a slog because you keep thinking that once that point comes up, the story "actually begins," but actually that's when the story ends.
(Okay, non-joke spoiler: The twist is that Jekyll is Hyde. Literally the whole story is a detective trying to figure out how they're connected and this is what he ultimately discovers, via Jekyll leaving a suicide note. I figured it wasn't worth revealing because I mean, everybody knows.... but just in case....)
Also on the "not worth reading" pile: Anne of Green Gables--I have no idea why I was forced to read this in school. Same goes for to Kill a Mockingbird. That latter I at least understand that it probably had some proto-SJW (I went to school in the 1990s) attitudes backing it. The thing is though, the trial of the black guy is actually just one part of the book... both it and Green Gables are basically "here's some random shit some kids got up to." Anne particularly pissed me off with how spineless she was, easily bowing down to everyone's whims no matter how unreasonable. Seriously some teacher starts crying because she read Ben-Hur and that makes Anne stop.
I'd say "fuck Anne" but you know some people back then probably wanted to.
On that note, I tried to read The Phantom of the Opera and absolutely could not stand it.
- Registrado
- 19 de Feb, 2020
Not really a classic tbh, just a thing that happened to remain famous in pop culture. In my edition even the footnotes are pretty snarky about it.
- Registrado
- 6 de Feb, 2018
Crime and Punishment is an excellent read, very concise and especially for young, disaffected men, incredibly relatable.
Anna Karenina, on the other hand, is the exact opposite. Its bloated, bombastic, and spends way too much time fellating Tolstoys philisophy of Christian pacificism without actually saying anything. There is one chapter, I shit you not, that spends a solid chunk talking about sauces.
Anna Karenina, on the other hand, is the exact opposite. Its bloated, bombastic, and spends way too much time fellating Tolstoys philisophy of Christian pacificism without actually saying anything. There is one chapter, I shit you not, that spends a solid chunk talking about sauces.
- Registrado
- 5 de Jul, 2022
Shakespeare, as taught in high school, is largely a waste of time. This is for two reasons.
First, Shakespeare wrote plays. They are meant to be performed by someone portraying a character, not some midwit English teacher picking different students to read different lines in a hesitant monotone. Any number of Shakespeare characters can be understood in several different ways. How that character is presented to the audience is an artistic choice on the part of actor and/or director; otherwise you might as well just use a fucking text-to-speech device.
Second, teenagers literally do not have enough life experience for them to "get" something like Romeo & Juliette or Hamlet. They're still in the stage of life where they don't have an appreciation for the folly of the characters. A 14 year old who has never been head over heels in love is just going to find R & J pointlessly irrational, or worse yet, get it in their empty little heads that self-destructive acts are how one demonstrates love. R & J is a fine play for an older audience, with the experience of more mature forms of love, to look back and say, "Yeah, that was a crazy time, being a teenager, I had no idea what I was doing when I was that age either."
(For the folks in the cheap seats: I am not saying cast aside Shakespeare; I am saying see it performed, as an adult.)
First, Shakespeare wrote plays. They are meant to be performed by someone portraying a character, not some midwit English teacher picking different students to read different lines in a hesitant monotone. Any number of Shakespeare characters can be understood in several different ways. How that character is presented to the audience is an artistic choice on the part of actor and/or director; otherwise you might as well just use a fucking text-to-speech device.
Second, teenagers literally do not have enough life experience for them to "get" something like Romeo & Juliette or Hamlet. They're still in the stage of life where they don't have an appreciation for the folly of the characters. A 14 year old who has never been head over heels in love is just going to find R & J pointlessly irrational, or worse yet, get it in their empty little heads that self-destructive acts are how one demonstrates love. R & J is a fine play for an older audience, with the experience of more mature forms of love, to look back and say, "Yeah, that was a crazy time, being a teenager, I had no idea what I was doing when I was that age either."
(For the folks in the cheap seats: I am not saying cast aside Shakespeare; I am saying see it performed, as an adult.)
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 9 de Mayo, 2017
Everyone should read Lord of the Flies at least once. It contains everything you need to know about human nature.
The Divine Comedy, on the other hand, is the exact opposite of that. It's basically self insert Bible fanfiction where all the author's enemies inexplicably end up in hell.
The Divine Comedy, on the other hand, is the exact opposite of that. It's basically self insert Bible fanfiction where all the author's enemies inexplicably end up in hell.
- Registrado
- 5 de Jul, 2022
I actually think very little of the Narnia books (Except for Horse and His Boy) but I'll credit them for inoculating me against any desire to read any of the Harry Potter books when they came out. "British schoolchildren? To hell with 'em!" (Probable PL: I have revealed I am George Washington )
- Registrado
- 27 de Sep, 2019
Ethan Frome is such a bore. There’s plenty of wonderful classics to get middle and high school aged kids interested in, this garbage drove quite a few of them off, and for good reason.
If you want a great little story focusing on women of the time, Gilliam’s The Yellow Wallpaper is creepy, wonderfully written and makes interesting points
Unless you’re into cetology on an autistic as hell level, Moby Dick is quite dull and difficult to get into as well.
Hawthorne’s short story “Young Goodman Brown” remains one of my favorite short stories ever written
Flannery O’Connor is an absolute must if you’re the least interested in Southern Gothic
Jane Eyre is the best work from all the Bronte sisters
If you want a great little story focusing on women of the time, Gilliam’s The Yellow Wallpaper is creepy, wonderfully written and makes interesting points
Unless you’re into cetology on an autistic as hell level, Moby Dick is quite dull and difficult to get into as well.
Hawthorne’s short story “Young Goodman Brown” remains one of my favorite short stories ever written
Flannery O’Connor is an absolute must if you’re the least interested in Southern Gothic
Jane Eyre is the best work from all the Bronte sisters
Última edición:
Shart Attack
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 14 de Mar, 2022
Agreed. If I was trapped on a desert island with only one book, I'd want it to be The Three Musketeers. It's not my favorite book, but it's the one that offers a little of everything you could want in a story: adventure, romance, action, comedy, political intrigue, and buckled swashes.
A few worth reading:
-Edith Hamilton's Mythology. I think it's fair to call it a classic. It's still one of the best no-bullshit overviews of Greek and Roman mythology around.
-Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. I'm a huge Jane Austen fan, but Jane Eyre is vastly superior to anything Austen ever wrote. One of the best books I've ever read.
-Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad. Thunk-provoking indictment of Europe's scramble for Africa.
Not worth reading:
-Middlemarch by George Eliot. Boring as shit, and that's coming from someone who adores stuffy Victorian dramas.
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Carroll. It's just aggravating nonsense. Wonderland is fine, but the sequel is all but unreadable.
-Shakespeare, as Reticulan Joe so deftly explained.
skykiii
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Jun, 2018
@Shart Attack If there's one thing I dislike about Three Musketeers, its the ending. I don't quite get what Dumas was going for with Milady being put on a sort of impromptu trial. Though I now realize I've got to finish reading the series someday (fun fact: not only is Man in the Iron Mask part of the Musketeers series.... its actually just one section of a larger book called The Vicomte de Bragelonne. That Iron Mask keeps being printed just on its own is strange, sort of like if Return of the King was the only part of Lord of the Rings that ever saw consistent print).
@No Memory So which Frankenstein did you read, the 1818 print or the 1831 print? (If your copy didn't specify then it was likely the 1831 print)
@No Memory So which Frankenstein did you read, the 1818 print or the 1831 print? (If your copy didn't specify then it was likely the 1831 print)
- Registrado
- 19 de Feb, 2023
I have no idea, my copy is still up at my parent's house.
skykiii
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 17 de Jun, 2018
Its more just out of curiosity than anything. I have both. Some fans will absolutely insist that the 1818 version is better (Shelley revised the text for the 1831, though mostly she made the book slightly longer and I honestly don't feel like she did any damage).
Junji Ito also did an excellent manga adaptation of the story. It's accurate to the novel up until the halfway or two-thirds point (Junji's new ending kinda makes me feel like he was running out of paper).
- Registrado
- 22 de Oct, 2021
I'd argue the work of H P Lovecraft should be considered classic literature. In particular stories like The Call of Cthulhu or The Color Out of Space. As for literary classics I don't like honesty it's a tie between Shakespeare and Of Mice and Men.
Esquilax
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 4 de Ene, 2021
The Barsoom novels by Edgar Rice Burroughs are great little stories. Disney bastardized some of the plots in John Carter but don't let that hold you back.
I'll be the asshole that says Slaughterhouse 5 is good, just enjoy the ride.
And Shakespeare is decent when you read it for pleasure or with the right context. Titus Andronicus is a crazy fucking story and I will recommend it to anyone that can take the time to read a medieval play. Othello is also pretty good and lol black cuck.
Shogun by James Clavell for the weebs.
Not worth: everything they made you read in high school
I'll be the asshole that says Slaughterhouse 5 is good, just enjoy the ride.
And Shakespeare is decent when you read it for pleasure or with the right context. Titus Andronicus is a crazy fucking story and I will recommend it to anyone that can take the time to read a medieval play. Othello is also pretty good and lol black cuck.
Shogun by James Clavell for the weebs.
Not worth: everything they made you read in high school
- Registrado
- 14 de Feb, 2023
Moby Dick is an interesting read unabridged, because huge sections of it are dedicated to discussing, in detail, how whaling works and how the whole process goes, down to every little detail. Depending on how you view it, this is either really interesting background info that adds to the book, or bone dry filler that is best axed.
Also, Upton Sinclair's The Jungle is one where I'd read the first half and ignore the second. It's initially a pretty interesting and graphic period piece for Chicago of its time. But then when he tries to couch it into making points about Socialism, the books gets really dull and super author tracty. It's telling how everyone remembers the gross meat packing sections and not the Socialist rants the make up the back half of the book.
Also, Upton Sinclair's The Jungle is one where I'd read the first half and ignore the second. It's initially a pretty interesting and graphic period piece for Chicago of its time. But then when he tries to couch it into making points about Socialism, the books gets really dull and super author tracty. It's telling how everyone remembers the gross meat packing sections and not the Socialist rants the make up the back half of the book.