Highly regarded but overrated in your opinion....

ThirdMan · 22-04-2012 4:10pm

Samuel Beckett's Molloy. Parts of the first monologue are laugh out loud funny, and I honestly felt I was reading something truly different. But it is almost entirely void of paragraphs, and has sentences that go on for pages (seriously!). Meaning I was very quickly out of my comfort zone. I'm sure if you 'understand' literature you could wax on about what it achieves, what it represents, etc. But for someone looking for an introduction to his work it's probably best to start with his plays.

hidinginthebush · 22-04-2012 4:20pm

When I opened this thread I was terrified I'd be shot for mentioning slaughterhouse 5 and catch: 22, good to see I'm not alone!
I recently went back to reread lotr, it kinda made me sad to see how much I've grown to dislike a book I used to love.

ViveLaVie · 24-04-2012 10:13pm

The Catcher in the Rye. I didn't dislike it, I was just a bit underwhelmed. Bit 'meh'.

Monkeybonkers · 24-04-2012 11:21pm

I think it's highly rated by some but I found 'Moby Dick' very boring indeed. I just could not get in to it at all. Long, meandering explanations of whales and the like just did not do it for me. Where was the battle of wills between Ahab and MD that I had heard so much about? Answer: There was none that I could see. One chapter interested me in the whole book, the final one, and I think that was because I was so happy to know that it was finally ending after spending a long time struggling through it.

Aenaes · 24-04-2012 11:25pm

"Of Mice And Men", I thought was overrated. It's quite a good story but just not a classic, which seems to be the consensus.

I've always been skeptical of "great" American authors anyway. I seem to think America being the new kid on the block regarding world culture, it wanted to lay claim to having great artists.

biohaiid · 25-04-2012 12:03am

The Great Gatsby.
The biggest load of crap I have read, tbh.

wilkie2006 · 25-04-2012 1:41am

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother Flann O Brien
At Swim-Two-Birds Flann O Brien

Pure shi*e!!

Absolute sacrilege!!

O Brien is amazing!!!!

Out Of The Night wrote: »

Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell. All of Jane Austen's work. Jodi Picoult. Anita Shreve. Ayn Rand.

Did you finish Cloud Atlas? I agree that it's hard to get into but it just gets better and better and better. Never have I read a more appropriate blurb:

"David Mitchell entices his readers onto a rollercoaster, and at first they wonder if they want to get off. Then - at least in my case - they can't bear the journey to end.' (AS Byatt, Guardian )"

Mahna Mahna · 25-04-2012 4:09pm

I really don't like Nick Hornby, all his characters are so unlikeable, but I have only read High Fidelity, How to be Good and A Long Way Down.
Everyone talks about how hilarious he is but I just don't see it, there are a few good one liners but he really does not impress me.

Monkeybonkers · 25-04-2012 11:19pm

wilkie2006 wrote: »

Absolute sacrilege!! O Brien is amazing!!!!

So everyone keeps telling me. I've read 'At Swim-Two-Birds' and 'The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother' and I hated both of them. Maybe I'm missing something so I've decided to give the honourable gentleman one more go with 'The Third Policeman' and if that doesn't do it then I'm afraid I'll forever be on the outside looking in at all the O Brien fans. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that this will be the one to open my eyes to his supposed brilliance.

Sorry this is a bit OT but what is the winking eye in your post supposed to signify? After the mis-spelling of the word 'lose' as 'loose', for me this has to be the most annoying thing on internet forums.

Edit: Not having a go at you particularly wilkie, I just find the use of that particular smilie very annoying and was wondering what was your purpose in using it? What are you trying to convey by putting it in your post?

wilkie2006 · 26-04-2012 7:27am

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

So everyone keeps telling me. I've read 'At Swim-Two-Birds' and 'The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother' and I hated both of them. Maybe I'm missing something so I've decided to give the honourable gentleman one more go with 'The Third Policeman' and if that doesn't do it then I'm afraid I'll forever be on the outside looking in at all the O Brien fans. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that this will be the one to open my eyes to his supposed brilliance.

Good idea. I think that "The Third Policeman" is far better than "At Swim..." or "The Various Lives...".

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

Sorry this is a bit OT but what is the winking eye in your post supposed to signify? After the mis-spelling of the word 'lose' as 'loose', for me this has to be the most annoying thing on internet forums.

Edit: Not having a go at you particularly wilkie, I just find the use of that particular smilie very annoying and was wondering what was your purpose in using it? What are you trying to convey by putting it in your post?

No worries. To be honest, I don't generally use smiley faces. The exception is on boards, where there's a culture of people calling on them to clarify the tone of a potentially aggressive post. The subtext of "that's sacrilege" could be read as either "you're a philistine" or as mock outrage. I agree it's lazy but it's also what a lot of people expect to see. So when in Rome and all that...

On the other hand, maybe I was just getting fresh with you. x

EDIT: If you're asking what a winking face means specifically, I don't really know. I assume it serves the same function as someone physically winking after teasing you. That's how I use them.

Monkeybonkers · 26-04-2012 2:08pm

wilkie2006 wrote: »

Good idea. I think that "The Third Policeman" is far better than "At Swim..." or "The Various Lives...".

Maybe I should have started with that one but what's done is done. I'll try not to let the others cloud my judgement

On the other hand, maybe I was just getting fresh with you. x

Oooh, Matron! (said in Kenneth Williams nasally whine) and as it's particularly relevant to this topic : :P

.

FishHook · 28-04-2012 7:47pm

The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown. I did not like it at all.

Achillles · 01-05-2012 7:09pm

FishHook wrote: »

The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown. I did not like it at all.

Could not agree more. Read four of his books and every plot follows the exact same formula. Easily predictable and poorly written, I should have given up after The Da Vinci Code.

Censorsh!t · 02-05-2012 9:37am

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad.
I just found it really tedious and boring. Everytime I read it I would find that I had taken none of it in and have to reread the passage.

I was disappointed with Jeffrey Eugenides' The Marriage Plot. I absolutely loved Middlesex and The Virgin Suicides, and this was just so...meh. Perhaps if I had read books that feature the whole marriage plot thing I would have enjoyed it more and 'got it' more, but I'm not so sure. I didn't really like any of the characters, and not much seemed to happen.

Toby Take a Bow · 02-05-2012 12:50pm

wilkie2006 wrote: »

"David Mitchell entices his readers onto a rollercoaster, and at first they wonder if they want to get off. Then - at least in my case - they can't bear the journey to end.' (AS Byatt, Guardian )"

That IS a good blurb. Very fitting. I remember thinking that at the beginning, but as I had loved his previous books, I was always going to finish it. I know some of my friends gave up during the middle section. By that point I was hooked. I'm kind of wanting to read it again now.

emeraldstar · 02-05-2012 1:26pm

Censorsh!t wrote: »

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad.
I just found it really tedious and boring. Everytime I read it I would find that I had taken none of it in and have to reread the passage.

I also detested it, and had the joy of having to do an assignment on it in college.

For such a short book it felt veeeerrrrryyy long.

meganj · 02-05-2012 4:52pm

Censorsh!t wrote: »

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad.
I just found it really tedious and boring. Everytime I read it I would find that I had taken none of it in and have to reread the passage.

I was disappointed with Jeffrey Eugenides' The Marriage Plot. I absolutely loved Middlesex and The Virgin Suicides, and this was just so...meh. Perhaps if I had read books that feature the whole marriage plot thing I would have enjoyed it more and 'got it' more, but I'm not so sure. I didn't really like any of the characters, and not much seemed to happen.

Off TopicI have The Marriage Plot at home, was going to start reading it over the next few weeks, from what I remember of the blurb it's set with the main character writing a thesis or something on the Marriage Plot is Austen's work?

Do you think having read and studied the likes of Austen, I might enjoy it more?

Just genuinely curious as there's a lot of books on my list and I could drop it down the list if it wasn't going to be enjoyable.

On Topic I loved Heart of Darkness, but only after I left college, I reread it without my English tutor breathing down my neck and enjoyed it much much more.

Censorsh!t · 04-05-2012 11:40am

emeraldstar wrote: »

I also detested it, and had the joy of having to do an assignment on it in college.

For such a short book it felt veeeerrrrryyy long.

I also had to write a paper on it for college - funnily enough I didn't mind doing the essay, as I was writing about it negatively

meganj wrote: »

Off TopicI have The Marriage Plot at home, was going to start reading it over the next few weeks, from what I remember of the blurb it's set with the main character writing a thesis or something on the Marriage Plot is Austen's work?

Do you think having read and studied the likes of Austen, I might enjoy it more?

Just genuinely curious as there's a lot of books on my list and I could drop it down the list if it wasn't going to be enjoyable.

I do think it probably would have been better had I read books with this plot. I think Austen, Eliot, the Bronte sisters etc. Has some here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_plot
But saying that, I couldn't be too sure that it would be a whole lot better to be honest. It was just nowhere near as good as his other novels, and almost felt like I was reading some chick-lit.

I think along with the main character writing a thesis on the subject (her thesis topic isn't even discussed very much), the whole plot is supposedly along the same lines as this 'marriage plot'...maybe? I couldn't be too sure.

emeraldstar · 04-05-2012 1:27pm

Censorsh!t wrote: »

I was disappointed with Jeffrey Eugenides' The Marriage Plot. I absolutely loved Middlesex and The Virgin Suicides, and this was just so...meh. Perhaps if I had read books that feature the whole marriage plot thing I would have enjoyed it more and 'got it' more, but I'm not so sure. I didn't really like any of the characters, and not much seemed to happen.

meganj wrote: »

Off TopicI have The Marriage Plot at home, was going to start reading it over the next few weeks, from what I remember of the blurb it's set with the main character writing a thesis or something on the Marriage Plot is Austen's work?

Do you think having read and studied the likes of Austen, I might enjoy it more?

Just genuinely curious as there's a lot of books on my list and I could drop it down the list if it wasn't going to be enjoyable.

Censorsh!t wrote: »

I do think it probably would have been better had I read books with this plot. I think Austen, Eliot, the Bronte sisters etc. Has some here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_plot
But saying that, I couldn't be too sure that it would be a whole lot better to be honest. It was just nowhere near as good as his other novels, and almost felt like I was reading some chick-lit.

I think along with the main character writing a thesis on the subject (her thesis topic isn't even discussed very much), the whole plot is supposedly along the same lines as this 'marriage plot'...maybe? I couldn't be too sure.

I wasn't really aware of the existence of this book – thanks guys

I wasn't very keen on Eugenides' Middlesex though, but The Virgin Suicides was okay. I love novels à la Austen and the likes so I'm going to give The Marriage Plot a try.

Edit: although if it comes across as very chick-lit like, then it'll be dropped pretty rapidly...

LenaClaire · 04-05-2012 6:00pm

emeraldstar wrote: »

I also detested it, and had the joy of having to do an assignment on it in college.

For such a short book it felt veeeerrrrryyy long.

That is funny, I loved it and one of my favourite papers I ever wrote was comparing Heart of Darkness with Dante's Inferno

One book I thought was over rated was Walden by Thoreau, I could never get past the first 10 pages without falling asleep. Another one that I just never got into was A Brave New World; for some reason the whole book just made me angry.

apsalar · 04-05-2012 10:32pm

jujibee wrote: »

Another one that I just never got into was A Brave New World; for some reason the whole book just made me angry.

Someone else finds "Brave new World" a damp squib..yay! I couldn't get past 15 pages...just couldn't. Zero interest, found it very hard going.

I also tried "The Sound and the Fury" two years ago. I found it very convoluted for no good reason I could see. Someone recommended it with a lot of praise...I just thought Faulkner tried to hard. And the story left me cold.

Aidan_a · 04-05-2012 10:48pm

I found George Orwell's 1984 to be overrated, I also expected more from The Catcher in the Rye. And Wuthering Heights was pretty boring at times too. It's seems that there is infinitely more overrated classics than good ones...IMHO

aegisisc · 10-05-2012 2:41pm

I can not understand the love for Gatsby as I found it a highly tedious read. catcher in the Rye I have been told has to be read during adolescence so perhaps I missed the boat.

Kinski · 10-05-2012 8:35pm

Heart of Darkness, Wuthering Heights, 1984, The Sound and the Fury, and The Great Gatsby...in an "overrated" thread? Really?

ViveLaVie · 10-05-2012 8:37pm

Aidan_a wrote: »

I found George Orwell's 1984 to be overrated, I also expected more from The Catcher in the Rye. And Wuthering Heights was pretty boring at times too. It's seems that there is infinitely more overrated classics than good ones...IMHO

Wow, I'm really surprised by this. 1984 and Wuthering Heights are two of my favourite books. I agree about Catcher in the Rye falling a little flat. But the other two? Incredibly powerful books with very powerful messages.

emeraldstar · 10-05-2012 9:53pm

Kinski wrote: »

Heart of Darkness, Wuthering Heights, 1984, The Sound and the Fury, and The Great Gatsby...in an "overrated" thread? Really?

Why not? Each of the above is highly regarded, and each individual is perfectly entitled to have an opinion that doesn't align with this regard.

Kinski · 10-05-2012 10:54pm

emeraldstar wrote: »

Why not? Each of the above is highly regarded, and each individual is perfectly entitled to have an opinion that doesn't align with this regard.

Because they're all short and, with the possible exception of the Faulkner, relatively accessible, having memorable characters and/or plots - exactly the qualities typically prized in popular discourse around novels.

Of course, these sorts of discussions always revolve around subjective assessments, but while I can understand why some find, say, Ulysses too dense, or Pride & Prejudice too dull, or Moby-Dick too long-winded, the above-mentioned works are ones which I'd readily recommend to anyone who enjoys reading fiction.

emeraldstar · 11-05-2012 12:04am

Kinski wrote: »

Because they're all short and, with the possible exception of the Faulkner, relatively accessible, having memorable characters and/or plots - exactly the qualities typically prized in popular discourse around novels.

Of course, these sorts of discussions always revolve around subjective assessments, but while I can understand why some find, say, Ulysses too dense, or Pride & Prejudice too dull, or Moby-Dick too long-winded, the above-mentioned works are ones which I'd readily recommend to anyone who enjoys reading fiction.

Exactly; it is subjective. If a book is not to your taste (whether that be plot, characters, the author's style, whatever) then you're not going to enjoy it, pure and simple – no matter its extent or its level of accessibility.

Plus, the "hype" (not exactly the word I'm looking for but it's late and I can't think) that can surround a book by virtue of its being highly regarded can lead to false expectations, which adds an extra element of disappointment when someone gets around to reading for themselves when it doesn't live up to this perceived impression of how they expect it to be.

PurpleBee · 11-05-2012 12:08am

Yeah speaking of Pride and Prejudice, a classics sections that is constituted mainly of Jane Austen books does not make a classics section, someone should make the likes of Easons aware of that fact. I thought Bridget Jones's Diary was way better than Pride and Prejudice.

Kinski · 11-05-2012 11:02am

emeraldstar wrote: »

Exactly; it is subjective. If a book is not to your taste (whether that be plot, characters, the author's style, whatever) then you're not going to enjoy it, pure and simple – no matter its extent or its level of accessibility.

You're now casting it in purely subjective terms; saying you didn't enjoy a book is not the same as saying it's overrated.

emeraldstar · 11-05-2012 11:17am

Kinski wrote: »

You're now casting it in purely subjective terms; saying you didn't enjoy a book is not the same as saying it's overrated.

But you don't read a book purely in objective terms either. Your own enjoyment of it cannot but come into play. Yes, it's entirely possible to objectively appreciate individual aspects of a book and to understand why other people may value it, but if a person doesn't enjoy the experience of reading the book one's self then they're just not going to number among those who rate it highly.

Kinski · 11-05-2012 12:14pm

emeraldstar wrote: »

But you don't read a book purely in objective terms either. Your own enjoyment of it cannot but come into play. Yes, it's entirely possible to objectively appreciate individual aspects of a book and to understand why other people may value it, but if a person doesn't enjoy the experience of reading the book one's self then they're just not going to number among those who rate it highly.

Most people would probably prefer to listen to The Beatles than J. S. Bach; does it follow that they think Magical Mystery Tour should be more highly-regarded than The Goldberg Variations? It would be pretty solipsistic to dismiss the reputation of any artwork generally considered to be "great" solely on the basis of how much you personally enjoyed it.

emeraldstar · 11-05-2012 12:51pm

Kinski wrote: »

It would be pretty solipsistic to dismiss the reputation of any artwork generally considered to be "great" solely on the basis of how much you personally enjoyed it.

I agree. But considering a work overrated does not have to mean dismissing it entirely. In fact, it's possible to enjoy a work and still think it overrated.

Monkeybonkers · 11-05-2012 8:08pm

Was going to thank all emraldstars posts until I realised that you two had continued arguing ad infinitum.

The thread title contains the words '....in your opinion...' so no matter what anyone else thinks of the works or of your opinion of the works the fact that it's your opinion means no one can ever tell you that you're wrong. (I confused myself a little bit there but I think you get the jist)

mountaingoats · 12-05-2012 1:41am

I dont want to sound like a book snob but... is dan brown regarded highly by anyone? like dont get me wrong I've read two of his books but as an example of good writing?
I'm a big Vonnegut fan so maybe against the grain here as he seems an unpopular choice. Catch-22, within a few chapters i had got the jist of it, seemed to be hitting me over the head with the concept (though quite enjoyable for a while).
In Irish terms I'm going to go with John McGahern, not a fan.
A Confederacy of Dunces is going to top my list. I generally don't like "funny" books but HATED this.

emeraldstar · 12-05-2012 12:00pm

mountaingoats wrote: »

I dont want to sound like a book snob but... is dan brown regarded highly by anyone? like dont get me wrong I've read two of his books but as an example of good writing?

God, no. He's a pretty terrible writer, but I think (hope?!) most people recognise this.

Isard · 12-05-2012 4:05pm

emeraldstar wrote: »

God, no. He's a pretty terrible writer, but I think (hope?!) most people recognise this.

Well, he's a commercial writer, not a genius of course, but I think some of his ideas are not uninteresting...

emeraldstar · 12-05-2012 7:25pm

Isard wrote: »

Well, he's a commercial writer, not a genius of course, but I think some of his ideas are not uninteresting...

As do I – but it's his prose not his ideas that I was referring to.

PurpleBee · 13-05-2012 12:08am

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

The thread title contains the words '....in your opinion...' so no matter what anyone else thinks of the works or of your opinion of the works the fact that it's your opinion means no one can ever tell you that you're wrong. (I confused myself a little bit there but I think you get the jist)

In my opinion I can tell you that you're wrong in my opinion. We're talking about highly regarded here anyway which necessitates a certain disregard for the sanctity of personal "opinion."

16-05-2012 11:45pm

Anyone here ever read William Burroughs? I tried to read Naked Lunch but couldn't get into it at all. Forced myself through about ninety pages before admitting defeat. Anyone else baffled by it?

christmas2012 · 16-05-2012 11:47pm

cecelia ahern ps i love you,and some book by jackie collins totally overrated,i think the more hype the book has the more of a let down it can be its like deflating a baloon..

emeraldstar · 16-05-2012 11:51pm

christmas2012 wrote: »

cecelia ahern ps i love you,and some book by jackie collins

Highly regarded?

HalloweenJack · 17-05-2012 4:14pm

I don't know how highly regarded it is but it's something of a cult book. Anyway, I read Naked Lunch before and was actually pissed off with it after.

It was all disjointed (I know it's part of the style) and really confusing. I don't think I could tell you exactly what happened in it. It wasn't a book that impressed me whatsoever. I can't remember the name of the main characters, just that there was some people called mugwumps (or something like that) and there was lots of drugs in it.

It really felt like a waste. I couldn't find any point to it (in an allegorical sense).

norrie rugger · 17-05-2012 4:22pm

Stephen King's The Dark Tower series.
I did enjoy it right up to the very end.

King basically shíts all over every one of his previous books and chickens out of actually making an ending

PurpleBee · 17-05-2012 8:15pm

68508224 wrote: »

Anyone here ever read William Burroughs? I tried to read Naked Lunch but couldn't get into it at all. Forced myself through about ninety pages before admitting defeat. Anyone else baffled by it?

I read Naked Lunch as Burroughs making us feel what it's like to be a hopeless junkie, its not so much a story as a series of impressions that build up to one impression of horror and nausea.

Queer and Junkie were really good I think.

Monkeybonkers · 21-05-2012 4:45pm

PurpleBee wrote: »

In my opinion I can tell you that you're wrong in my opinion. We're talking about highly regarded here anyway which necessitates a certain disregard for the sanctity of personal "opinion."

Who decides what's 'highly regarded'? Highly regarded by some can be viewed as rubbish by others.

PurpleBee · 23-05-2012 10:58pm

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

Who decides what's 'highly regarded'? Highly regarded by some can be viewed as rubbish by others.

Yeah that's a fair enough point.

But from the responses alone its clear that there is some sort of consensus about what is highly regarded generally, whether it deserves to be or not is the point of the thread.

I'd say more generally what makes something highly regarded or not can be partly attributed to whether Penguin considers it a classic or not and what awards the author has won.

robbie7171 · 17-06-2012 8:43am

meganj wrote: »

For me it was Catcher in the Rye.

I really did not enjoy that book, thought Holden was a detestable little shit who needed a slap.

For me it was a personal thing, I found the protagonist completely un-relatable.

I do realise the importance of the book though from a literary sense and I think that's important for people who love literature to remember, just because you personally thought a book wasn't enjoyable, doesn't mean that that book doesn't deserve to be held in very high esteem.

I agree, I thought it was a hugely disappointing book

robbie7171 · 17-06-2012 8:52am

Also....On the road, got about half way through before asking myself "why on earth am I reading this drivel!!"

amymak · 19-06-2012 12:32am

Lord of the Rings for me.

I love fantasy, so I made a major effort to like them, but I found reading the series torturous. I forced myself to read at least two chapters a day and it was the longest few months in my literary life. At the end, I was so drained, I found it such a shock to actually enjoy books. I've also never been so delighted to finish a book.

I'm not saying that they're bad books. Tolkein was an extremely important author in providing legitimacy to the fantasy genre and he's provided inspiration for so many contemporary authors. His skill at world-building is undeniable.

However, I read books primarily for the characters. I found the characters in the book to be pretty two-dimensional with little development. There was no 'spark' in them that brought them to life. It's hard to read a book if you don't really care what happens to the characters.

I also can't seem to get into Stephen King. I should be able to, but I can't. It's not a reflection on his books though, it's just me personally.

In terms of Dan Brown. I'm not saying he's skilled as a writer, but I found most of his books to be reasonably enjoyable. (Angels and Demons is better than the Da Vinci Code in my opinion.)
However, he seems to get worse, as I thought that The Lost Symbol was TERRIBLE. He recycled the plot from the other two in the series. (Why can Langdon never keep a girl?) As a result the plot was so formulaic and it seemed that there was no conviction in the story. Also, there's no reason for a writer to use the words "male sex organ" so many times unless they're writing a book on the reproductive system or writing bad erotic fiction.

Highly regarded but overrated in your opinion....

Comments