Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2017 21:15:18 GMT
I thought this short story was rather forgettable and obvious. Why the fuck-puddings is this crap considered a classic of literature?
The writing is a disjointed mess and the characters utterly uninteresting.
What the fuck?
|
|
|
Post by marianne48 on Aug 2, 2017 23:01:20 GMT
What are you missing? Well, the "r," for one thing. Oh, there it is.
My guess is that, even though the book was a flop when it was first released, it became a major classic as a result of being a staple of high school lit classes for decades, because--
1. It's fairly short. Any high school American Lit teacher who attempts to assign Moby Dick to his short-attention-span students is going to have a full-scale mutiny on his hands once the kids start whining about how they can't possibly slog through hundreds of pages on the processing of whale sperm. Their parents, who sometimes wind up doing the homework assignments for their kids, don't want to read it either. But Gatsby is less than 200 pages long, so that makes it popular.
2. It's full of obvious symbolism and allegory and all those other devices that lit teachers and students alike love, making it easy for the kids to concoct a quick essay about the green light at the end of the dock bit or some such thing, which the teachers can easily grade in their sleep, having seen thousands of variations on the same theme before.
3. Because something has to be designated as the "Great American Novel." And The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, a better contender for the title (and it's more entertaining, too) has that word in it, so it's often banned from high-school reading lists.
4. Cliff notes, reading guides, and several movie versions have made this a popular choice for those who prefer to skim through the book as well.
The best thing about the book, IMO, was when the late comedian/performance artist Andy Kaufman read the book, cover to cover, to an audience expecting a comedy performance. After he read the first few pages, they waited and waited for him to stop and get on with the rest of the show, but he never did. The show ended several hours later, when he finally came to the end of the novel. That Andy, what a kidder.
|
|
mmexis
Sophomore
@mmexis
Posts: 860
Likes: 732
|
Post by mmexis on Aug 3, 2017 1:05:59 GMT
Paintbow: I don't get it either. I thought they were all spoiled brats.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,672
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by The Lost One on Aug 3, 2017 12:47:35 GMT
I like it... but then I also quite enjoyed Battlefield Earth so what do I know?
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Aug 3, 2017 14:33:14 GMT
A promising beginning and wonderful closing lines, but the middle is dull soap-opera fare. Dynasty or Dallas set in the Jazz Age.
|
|
|
Post by Jep Gambardella on Aug 3, 2017 16:26:47 GMT
I thought this short story was rather forgettable and obvious. Why the fuck-puddings is this crap considered a classic of literature?
The writing is a disjointed mess and the characters utterly uninteresting. What the fuck? I wouldn't go as far as calling it "crap", but I share your puzzlement over its high position in the ranking of great works of American literature.
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Aug 3, 2017 22:40:39 GMT
I like this passage and think of it when I hear someone go on about his war service, dubious or not:
“Then came the war, old sport. It was a great relief, and I tried very hard to die, but I seemed to bear an enchanted life. I accepted a commission as first lieutenant when it began. In the Argonne Forest I took two machine-gun detachments so far forward that there was a half mile gap on either side of us where the infantry couldn’t advance. We stayed there two days and two nights, a hundred and thirty men with sixteen Lewis guns, and when the infantry came up at last they found the insignia of three German divisions among the piles of dead. I was promoted to be a major, and every Allied government gave me a decoration — even Montenegro, little Montenegro down on the Adriatic Sea!”
Little Montenegro! He lifted up the words and nodded at them — with his smile. The smile comprehended Montenegro’s troubled history and sympathized with the brave struggles of the Montenegrin people. It appreciated fully the chain of national circumstances which had elicited this tribute from Montenegro’s warm little heart. My incredulity was submerged in fascination now; it was like skimming hastily through a dozen magazines.
He reached in his pocket, and a piece of metal, slung on a ribbon, fell into my palm.
“That’s the one from Montenegro.”
To my astonishment, the thing had an authentic look.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 0:48:36 GMT
So we're agreed; total crap.
But seriously, there's some wonderful prose in there and I like the exploration of the broken American dream, exemplified in the image of Gatsby's lonely funeral attracting none of the party goers who had previously frequented his house when times were good, but none of that is enough to elevate the book into the office of classic. It's rather average in truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 21:55:02 GMT
I didn't get anything from it either. It was boring.
I didn't like Catcher in the Rye either. You mad, bro? You and 50 million other guys.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2017 23:15:08 GMT
I didn't get anything from it either. It was boring. I didn't like Catcher in the Rye either. You mad, bro? You and 50 million other guys. I actually loved Catcher in the Rye. It didn't try to be something it wasn't. There was something beautifully sorrowful about it.
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Aug 6, 2017 0:51:07 GMT
Perhaps we now know why there's never been a very good film version: for all the aura around the book, there's not much there.
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Aug 6, 2017 14:15:32 GMT
I get irritated whenever I run across a thread where someone pronounces a classic film or book to be "crap" and demands that its status be explained to him/her. If you really wanted to know why The Great Gatsby is held in high regard you could easily find out simply by reading its Wikipedia article. That would get you better insight than from some random people who happen to click on your thread. How does a half-dozen replies saying, "I didn't like it either," answer your question. Was your real purpose simply to appear to be iconoclastic? To say, "Look at what a rebel I am!" If you really wanted a discussion of the book you wouldn't have posted "crap" and "what the fuck" as if Gatsby had actually made you angry. Using a little more maturity might have actually got your question answered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2017 18:52:18 GMT
I get irritated whenever I run across a thread where someone pronounces a classic film or book to be "crap" and demands that its status be explained to him/her. If you really wanted to know why The Great Gatsby is held in high regard you could easily find out simply by reading its Wikipedia article. That would get you better insight than from some random people who happen to click on your thread. How does a half-dozen replies saying, "I didn't like it either," answer your question. Was your real purpose simply to appear to be iconoclastic? To say, "Look at what a rebel I am!" If you really wanted a discussion of the book you wouldn't have posted "crap" and "what the fuck" as if Gatsby had actually made you angry. Using a little more maturity might have actually got your question answered. I'm guessing by the transparent butthurt that you liked it. Then why not explain why rather than take offence at those who don't. As for reading Wikipedia to assess a book's perceived qualities, that's perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I would receive far greater insight from those who have read it than from a static overview. I'm more than happy to have my mind changed but the idea that I should simply accept a book's place in the pantheon of greats simply because it's the conventional wisdom is as retarded as the notion that you should take offence at liking a book others find wanting. Perhaps a greater degree of maturity would resolve that.
|
|
|
Post by mikef6 on Aug 6, 2017 19:05:56 GMT
I'm guessing by the transparent butthurt that you liked it...the idea that I should simply accept a book's place in the pantheon of greats simply because it's the conventional wisdom is as retarded as the notion that you should take offence at liking a book others find wanting. Perhaps a greater degree of maturity would resolve that. Nobody said anything close to those quotes. In the first place, as I originally said, butthurt - as you have over the torture you had to endure in the pages of Gatsby - is an inappropriate response. I never said I like Gatsby, either. I can't say I did, but neither did I DISLIKE it. It didn't move me or shake me but I understood what the author was trying to do and how it could be perceived by others. It doesn't take an empath to do that. You should have figured it out for yourself. As for the defensive reaction to the horror, the horror, of thinking that you are being forced into accepting a pre-existing list of classics, that is just paranoid nonsense. I will say, however, that even if you don't like so-called classics, at least you should have some respect just for its staying power and for the reason of that staying power. It should mean something to you that several generations of readers have appreciated the book and that it is pretty egotistical of you to come along at this point to inform everyone that it is crap. And "retarded"? Really? Anyone using such a junior high school hallway insult is the one who lacks maturity.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2017 19:20:02 GMT
I'm guessing by the transparent butthurt that you liked it...the idea that I should simply accept a book's place in the pantheon of greats simply because it's the conventional wisdom is as retarded as the notion that you should take offence at liking a book others find wanting. Perhaps a greater degree of maturity would resolve that. Nobody said anything close to those quotes. In the first place, as I originally said, butthurt - as you have over the torture you had to endure in the pages of Gatsby - is an inappropriate response. I never said I like Gatsby, either. I can't say I did, but neither did I DISLIKE it. It didn't move me or shake me but I understood what the author was trying to do and how it could be perceived by others. It doesn't take an empath to do that. You should have figured it out for yourself. As for the defensive reaction to the horror, the horror, of thinking that you are being forced into accepting a pre-existing list of classics, that is just paranoid nonsense. I will say, however, that even if you don't like so-called classics, at least you should have some respect just for its staying power and for the reason of that staying power. It should mean something to you that several generations of readers have appreciated the book and that it is pretty egotistical of you to come along at this point to inform everyone that it is crap. And "retarded"? Really? Anyone using such a junior high school hallway insult is the one who lacks maturity. Yup, that's some precious butthurt there. Perhaps read my post before last where I openly admired the prose of the novel before wildly screaming like a fruit salad banshee in possession of an infantile and insipid faux outrage as such transparent hysterics might be more convincing had you done so in the face of such egregious criticism of your favourite tome. And while you endeavour to appreciate the book with a lack of any insightful nuance, instead choosing to fetishise classics for reason only a half-hearted secondary school teacher might grasp, I would also encourage you to be of a more critical mind when confronted by literature otherwise you may find yourself nodding like a catatonic poodle, eager to please the unthinking and uninspired minds with empty and ill-considered praise (this means be less retarded).
|
|
Seto
Sophomore
@seto
Posts: 313
Likes: 230
|
Post by Seto on Jan 12, 2018 2:24:45 GMT
Because it's a perfectly written, succinct allegory about the failure of the American dream, written at a time just before the great depression. Anyway thats my answer to your question. Can I just say Painbow and Mikef6, as far as internet arguments go, yours is pretty run of the mill, but the fact that your avatars are Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart, make it awesome!!! The movie world has been waiting decades for this duel!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2018 4:05:31 GMT
I don't get it either. As someone else already said, I thought Catcher in the Rye was similarly overrated. Somehow Gatsby is at the top of most critical lists, so I must be wrong.
I've exposed myself to many of the other classics and classic authors that compose these critical lists, and, with a few exceptions, I've generally said, "yep, I understand why this book is on the list."
With Gatsby, I neither liked it, nor did I consider it critically-great. At least with a book like To The Lighthouse, I can understand why critics rated it highly, even though I didn't care for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2018 4:07:20 GMT
I get irritated whenever I run across a thread where someone pronounces a classic film or book to be "crap" and demands that its status be explained to him/her. If you really wanted to know why The Great Gatsby is held in high regard you could easily find out simply by reading its Wikipedia article. That would get you better insight than from some random people who happen to click on your thread. How does a half-dozen replies saying, "I didn't like it either," answer your question. Was your real purpose simply to appear to be iconoclastic? To say, "Look at what a rebel I am!" If you really wanted a discussion of the book you wouldn't have posted "crap" and "what the fuck" as if Gatsby had actually made you angry. Using a little more maturity might have actually got your question answered. I'm guessing by the transparent butthurt that you liked it. Then why not explain why rather than take offence at those who don't. As for reading Wikipedia to assess a book's perceived qualities, that's perhaps the dumbest thing I've ever heard. I would receive far greater insight from those who have read it than from a static overview. I'm more than happy to have my mind changed but the idea that I should simply accept a book's place in the pantheon of greats simply because it's the conventional wisdom is as retarded as the notion that you should take offence at liking a book others find wanting. Perhaps a greater degree of maturity would resolve that. Ha, that sounds like this:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2018 4:09:07 GMT
Because it's a perfectly written, succinct allegory about the failure of the American dream, written at a time just before the great depression. Anyway thats my answer to your question. Can I just say Painbow and Mikef6, as far as internet arguments go, yours is pretty run of the mill, but the fact that your avatars are Cary Grant and Humphrey Bogart, make it awesome!!! The movie world has been waiting decades for this duel!!! I was thinking something similar. I rather enjoyed the whole process.
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 12, 2018 20:48:17 GMT
I guess something about the "American Dream" being achieved through criminal means just resonates with people? It's kinda why Breaking Bad became so popular.
|
|