What Not to Read

"Books? You want books?! Ha! We've got books on hairy otters, on onions and on mars! All the fungus you could care for, plus, three triple zillion stars. We've got books on flossing teeth, plus three books on tossing sheep. If we spent our lives just counting books, we'd never get to sleep!" -Leopold the Librarian ("The Great Wishy Woz")
User avatar
ric
Isaiah 6
Posts: 6801
Joined: April 2010

Post by ric »

JMoriarty wrote:Most hated book: Alice in Wonderland.
And why would you say that is?
User avatar
Caswin
Found
Posts: 302
Joined: June 2009

Post by Caswin »

ric wrote:And why would you say that is?
It's hard for me to say I hated it, but I didn't like it, either.

'cept for the Dormouse.
Novacom transmission... one, two, three... testing, one, two, three...
User avatar
Carrie Ingalls
An original
Posts: 6503
Joined: April 2005
Location: Exit Slide

Post by Carrie Ingalls »

The Red Pony!! That is immediately what came to mind. One of my all time most disliked books! It was horrible! I honestly don't remember too much of the book, I probably 10 or younger when I read it (or had it read aloud). All I remember at this point is that it was horribly depressing and this horse/pony gets sick (or maybe it was the mother of the pony) and you get a vivid description of the beast being bludgeoned to death with a sledgehammer...and my mom gave the book to me thinking it was going to be a cute story about a red pony...we both laugh about it now. I think it must have been read aloud, because I remember listening to that scene horrified and just wanting to throw up. Yeah, I wouldn't recommend it.

Also, not worth it: 20,000 Leagues Under the Seas. I honestly knew every single important thing that happens, just from looking at the pictures (10+ yrs before I actually read the book) in a copy of the Great Illustrated Classics version...so get that if you want :D

The Things They Carried...blech, so much foul language thank you English 102, I could have done without that.
In the darkness, my thugs silently protect the girls from sketchy Bostonians
Image
Thirteen is a prime number. I hate prime numbers. ~Trent DeWhite
OrigamiKid= Is seen working with square pieces of imported paper. ~Sarai
User avatar
Steve
No way I broke the window
Posts: 3341
Joined: October 2010
Location: IA
Contact:

Post by Steve »

I'll be honest and lay it out there: I can't stand Fellowship of the Ring: Being That Which The First Of The Three Which Makes It A Trilogy The Lord Of The Rings Which Is Not An Allegory. Based on that, you can probably figure out why. If I really wanted to experience characters walking and walking and walking... I would probably seek a guidance counselor to get me through that sad condition.
Image
he/him | a little stinker.
User avatar
ric
Isaiah 6
Posts: 6801
Joined: April 2010

Post by ric »

lol dude, Lord of the Rings definitely is an allegory. I suppose the books could be seen as somewhat boring though...
User avatar
Steve
No way I broke the window
Posts: 3341
Joined: October 2010
Location: IA
Contact:

Post by Steve »

Haha. I know it's an allegory, but all the die-hard fans freak out because Tolkien "didn't intend it to be an allegory." I'm just poking fun at the fans. \:D/

And yes, it's extremely boring.
Image
he/him | a little stinker.
User avatar
TigerintheShadows
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Posts: 4171
Joined: August 2009
Location: Guess. I dare you.

Post by TigerintheShadows »

If the writer didn't intend for it to be an allegory, it's not an allegory. Just because the events in LotR are comparable to real events--and I have no idea if they are because I couldn't get past The Two Towers--does not mean that LotR is an allegory.

I will agree, though. Maybe I'm just biased because I tried to read it in the fifth grade and I wasn't really that into it, but Tolkein's writing style is very slow. I'm not really into high fantasy anyway, and high fantasy that's written like a nineteenth-century history textbook just exacerbates that dislike.
Image
"Death's got an Invisibility Cloak?" "So he can sneak up on people. Sometimes he gets bored of running at them, flapping his arms and shrieking..."
"And now the spinning. Thank you for nothing, you useless reptile."
"It unscrews the other way."
AIO tumblr sideblog
User avatar
ric
Isaiah 6
Posts: 6801
Joined: April 2010

Post by ric »

Ginny Weasley wrote:If the writer didn't intend for it to be an allegory, it's not an allegory. Just because the events in LotR are comparable to real events--and I have no idea if they are because I couldn't get past The Two Towers--does not mean that LotR is an allegory.
"Allegory: A story, poem, or picture that can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one." Tons of things are allegories, not just A Pilgrim's Progress, and not just those in which the author consciously intended them to obviously reflect an aspect of real life.
User avatar
Steve
No way I broke the window
Posts: 3341
Joined: October 2010
Location: IA
Contact:

Post by Steve »

Wether or not it was allegorical was not the point of my post. And that debate already happened in another thread. The point is... LOTR is really boring. So don't bother reading it. Watch the movies. But not the extended versions. Unless you're home schooled. Then you're allowed! \:D/
Image
he/him | a little stinker.
User avatar
TigerintheShadows
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Posts: 4171
Joined: August 2009
Location: Guess. I dare you.

Post by TigerintheShadows »

I think LotR is for certain types of readers--it's really not easy to sit through. I definitely wouldn't recommend reading it just so you can feel good about having read the book before seeing the movies. I tried that once...it didn't end well. :p
Image
"Death's got an Invisibility Cloak?" "So he can sneak up on people. Sometimes he gets bored of running at them, flapping his arms and shrieking..."
"And now the spinning. Thank you for nothing, you useless reptile."
"It unscrews the other way."
AIO tumblr sideblog
User avatar
bookworm
ToO Historian
ToO Historian
Posts: 16248
Joined: July 2006
Contact:

Post by bookworm »

ric wrote:Tons of things are allegories ... not just those in which the author consciously intended them to obviously reflect an aspect of real life.
Yes and no.

Linguistically, for something to truly be an allegory every part of it must directly relate to a part of whatever it is an allegory for. This is why, as an example we seem to be using a lot of late, the stories about Narnia, though definitely and intentionally filled with aligorical parts, are not allegories, because every point doesn’t correspond. So in this sense, it is easy to say what is and isn’t an allegory, regardless of author intent.

On the intent side then, it is true that something can indeed be allegorical ‘on accident’ as it all depends on what the reader sees in it. I would find it very hard for something to be a full allegory without meaning to be one though. So minor point perhaps, but for this discussion I think it’s important to state that no, LoTR is not an allegory. Because that’s a side subject for nitpicking here.

The real focus is whether the stories contain allegorical elements. Tolkien was adamant that they were not written that way, and he would know, so what we can say for certain is that LoTR is not intentionally allegorical. However as I said, that doesn’t mean it’s impossible for it to still be so, it all comes down to the individual reader and what they each find parallels with in their own minds.
Image
User avatar
ric
Isaiah 6
Posts: 6801
Joined: April 2010

Post by ric »

bookworm wrote:Linguistically, for something to truly be an allegory every part of it must directly relate to a part of whatever it is an allegory for.
I wasn't aware this was the definition for an allegory...well, whatever.

Back on topic, somewhat: I'm currently reading The Giver, and it's reminding me of why I don't like contemporary stuff. It's not very well-written, and kind of...cliche, naive, what have you. It's ok though. We'll see.
User avatar
Shennifer
Random sister
Random sister
Posts: 5774
Joined: June 2009
Location: norcal
Contact:

Post by Shennifer »

ric wrote:
bookworm wrote:Linguistically, for something to truly be an allegory every part of it must directly relate to a part of whatever it is an allegory for.
I wasn't aware this was the definition for an allegory...well, whatever.

Back on topic, somewhat: I'm currently reading The Giver, and it's reminding me of why I don't like contemporary stuff. It's not very well-written, and kind of...cliche, naive, what have you. It's ok though. We'll see.
I happen to have liked The Giver.
Image

Till the end of the line.
User avatar
TigerintheShadows
Ignorance of the law is no excuse
Posts: 4171
Joined: August 2009
Location: Guess. I dare you.

Post by TigerintheShadows »

It was okay, but it was pretty standard issue dystopia. It doesn't help that we've read it about a billion times for no apparent reason, one of those times being the third grade when we had no idea what was going on.
Image
"Death's got an Invisibility Cloak?" "So he can sneak up on people. Sometimes he gets bored of running at them, flapping his arms and shrieking..."
"And now the spinning. Thank you for nothing, you useless reptile."
"It unscrews the other way."
AIO tumblr sideblog
User avatar
Knight Fisher
I fish in the darkness
I fish in the darkness
Posts: 5322
Joined: May 2011

Post by Knight Fisher »

I would rather watch an episode of Barney over reading The Giver series again.
To LGBT ToOers: The world is so much wider than your family and church. There are accepting people out there.
Image
User avatar
jelly
A Truly Great Noob
A Truly Great Noob
Posts: 9278
Joined: May 2008
Location: Western Canada
Contact:

Post by jelly »

Even though I don't read nearly as much as I should, I love this thread. We need more rics in the world, defending cultural and artistic integrity to the bitter end. \:D/
Fallacy of false continuum. // bookworm
Any cupcake can be made holy through being baptized in the name of the Butter, the Vanilla and the Powdered Sugar. // Kait
User avatar
darcie
darcietastical
darcietastical
Posts: 7106
Joined: April 2006
Location: Northern California
Contact:

Post by darcie »

Echoing Sherlock on the first page, The Old Man and the Sea. For a rather short book, it goes on way too long. I mean, drown that guy already. I didn't love Grapes of Wrath either. And the play adaptation does NOT make it any better. Ugh, Depression Era fiction is depressing.
"I know nothing about internet dating sites other than the ToO." - Baragon
User avatar
ric
Isaiah 6
Posts: 6801
Joined: April 2010

Post by ric »

Jelly wrote:Even though I don't read nearly as much as I should, I love this thread. We need more rics in the world, defending cultural and artistic integrity to the bitter end. \:D/
Indeed we do, although I certainly wouldn't put forth myself as the ideal. :p
darcie wrote:Ugh, Depression Era fiction is depressing.
That must mean it's effective. \:D/
User avatar
Astronomer
Catspaw Rocks!
Posts: 808
Joined: March 2012
Location: Dark Town, Ri'an

Post by Astronomer »

ric wrote:
darcie wrote:Ugh, Depression Era fiction is depressing.
That must mean it's effective. \:D/
Yeah, it's effective, but that doesn't mean we have to like it. Both The Jungle and The Grapes of Wrath weren't books I liked, but they both showed the reality of the times during which they took place.
My blog: http://www.jessericebooks.blogspot.com Where I talk about stuff and the book(s) I've published.
User avatar
Stop Wooton' Around
Wooton rocks!
Wooton rocks!
Posts: 1682
Joined: August 2009
Location: College

Post by Stop Wooton' Around »

Astronomer wrote:
ric wrote:
darcie wrote:Ugh, Depression Era fiction is depressing.
That must mean it's effective. \:D/
Yeah, it's effective, but that doesn't mean we have to like it. Both The Jungle and The Grapes of Wrath weren't books I liked, but they both showed the reality of the times during which they took place.
I actually liked "The Grapes of Wrath" because it brings up amazing talking points. We had to read it for 10th grade English, many good discussions ensued from that book.

I find it painful for someone to suggest not reading a classic.
Image
Post Reply