Literature (1 Viewer)

[nedzelic]

a place for discussion for real books - not stuff like Harry Potter and Da Vinci Code
if you want to read pulp that's fine just discuss in the other 50 threads
anyway, what are you all redaing at the moment
i am so happy to begin reading again and remove the shackels of extension englsih which has constriced me to crime fiction
anyway, i just started reading "Island" by Aldous Huxley

I will get back to any who have read this

also, if you want to post your reading journals here, if you have them (just a list of what you've read) so they can be discussed

yeah, enjoy this

 

[arooshika...]

books are books, if its got words in it then its a book, no such thing as real books even 'the rabbits' is a book and its a picture book and i can start talking about it cause there is depth, it represents things metaphorically but mostly throuh pictures

 

[PaleReflection]

Wow, you're so sophisticated - you read REAL books! Because popular culture is for the uneducated masses...

 

[nwatts]

books are books, if its got words in it then its a book, no such thing as real books even 'the rabbits' is a book and its a picture book and i can start talking about it cause there is depth, it represents things metaphorically but mostly throuh pictures

Nope. There's trash, and there's literature. Nedzelic is perhaps a little elitist, but it's obvious he enjoys material written by talented writers, rather than the pulp that is churned out to make money or to be intentionally provocative.

 

[duckofdoom]

well I read little women by louisa may allcott when i was 12. I didn't really find it exciting but it did have a good story line - if that makes sense.

I began reading wuthering heights but i fell asleep. lol

can anyone reccomend any books from period eras such as 18 or 19th century, the whole bronte sisters period.

I've become interested in that whole romantic period.

So any reccommendations would be appreciated.

 

[nedzelic]

like i said, if you enjoy pop fiction that's fine - go to the other 50 sections on it
cheers nwatts for the support


and sure p and p counts as literature - it's in most cannons i thought
i read it in year 11 and while as a text in itslef it may well be of a high value, i didn't think it is justified to be on the year 11 reading list as it's not relevent enough to contemporary australains high school students. also, my main qualm with austen and some other writers of that era is that - she especially - only writes about her elite upper middle classes and not the masses. she tends to turn her nose up at the "commoners". this is one reason why i like dickins - though probably not literature - his works were some whst defining and he generally wrote about all classes

yeah

anyway, my knowledge of literature, and exposure to it, is very limited but i will post my thoughts on the 10-15 books or so which are considered literature

oh, and as well, i find it interesting that in ext eng in year 11, we studied far more davnaced stuff - at a higher and more literate level - than we did this year - DAMN you crime fiction

 

[nedzelic]

Wow, you're so sophisticated - you read REAL books! Because popular culture is for the uneducated masses...

i'm not dissing pop culture, i just think to expand one's mind - a graet way is to read a novel of a hgih quality that can be interpreted in varying ways...

anyway, how many 'uneduacted' people to you see reading proust? - none
how many 'educated' people do you see reading proust? - very little
nobody reads anymore, we are becoming more gullible and dummer by the minute -maybe one reason is b/c when people finally begin to raed again, it's harry potter and dan brown's trash, or if they still don't read, they listen to DMX or watch a steven sea-gull movie. now tell me, how can you expand your mind with that?

 

[ishq]

I disliked P&P. Immensely. So very domestic and so very petty. Yes we may all argue that its a portrayal of nineteenth century British society and their itty-bitty issues, but seriously, its torturously slow. A few well placed sarcastic remarks, yes, but otherwise, no.

But, that's merely my opinion.

And yes!! to whoever said that crime fiction absolutely sucked any intention we had of reading this year. Watching endless episodes of CSI, Law&Order and Medical Investigation; reading pulp fiction by John Grisham and P. D. James.

I do disagree with the whole 'pop culture is trash' outlook. The Da Vinci Code has been exploited by the media too much. It is a good book, backed by some extensive research and passion by the author. Personally, I preferred Angels and Demons, but meh. And don't diss Harry, he's been with us since we were eleven

What am I currently reading? Saving Fish from Drowning by Amy Tan....

 

[nwatts]

I disliked P&P. Immensely. So very domestic and so very petty. Yes we may all argue that its a portrayal of nineteenth century British society and their itty-bitty issues, but seriously, its torturously slow. A few well placed sarcastic remarks, yes, but otherwise, no.

But, that's merely my opinion.

I share this opinion. Austen's writing is dry and tedious, and has pushed feminist values throughout literature, which I'm hardly going to praise. Her writing is offensively verbose and pretentious.

I am not a fan of older prose, though. Anything written more than a hundred-or-so years ago doesn't tickle my fancy as much as contemporary material. I love the poetry of the canon, love it to bits. Dante, Shakespeare, Keats.. they'd be favourites. Prose just isn't my style unfortunately.

I'm re-reading Jeffrey Eugenides' The Virgin Suicides at the moment. He's such a fantastic writer, and this is such a compelling novel.

 

[PaleReflection]

And don't diss Harry, he's been with us since we were eleven

My thoughts exactly.

And nedzelic, just because a text isn't a part of the canon, it doesn't mean it can't expand your mind. Saying that nobody reads anymore and that we are 'becoming more gullible and dummer by the minute' is a huge and inaccurate generalisation.

 

[nwatts]

I do disagree with the whole 'pop culture is trash' outlook. The Da Vinci Code has been exploited by the media too much. It is a good book, backed by some extensive research and passion by the author. Personally, I preferred Angels and Demons, but meh. And don't diss Harry, he's been with us since we were eleven

I'm sorry, I totally disagree. Dan Brown's works are very mediocre. He displays extremely limited control over his language (often incredible lapse in tense, inexcusable for a published writer of such acclaim, very poor and contrived structure, badly drawn and clichéd characters), is vastly lacking in his research (much of what is presented is simply fabricated, he miscounted the number of glass bricks in the Louvre, come on) and surmises the term "pop trash" perfectly. It's a cheap book, written in an instantly forgettable style from an author with very little creative talent. His fame oddly has come from a topic of significant heritage, which has since been thrust into the spotlight of the world as if it's breaking news.

Harry Potter is fine though. It doesn't aim to be anything more than fun. Brown's pretentiousness is his essential downfall.

 

[malkin86]

Since year 11, when we had to read "The Miller's Tale" as 'literature', I have had a deep suspicion of anything labelled as such. (when the line that sticks in my head after three years is 'he kist her naked erse', can you wonder why?)

I used to read a lot when I was younger, though. Would "The Scarlet Pimpernel" series count as 'literature' in the canon? Or myths - where do they fit in?

I also, however, haven't read Dan Brown, (I tried to, but had to put it down because I saw it as peddling hatred.) nor am I wild about Harry, since the fifth book.

 

[nwatts]

Don't confuse literature with the Western canon. Literature is simply anything that's well written.

 

[nedzelic]

My thoughts exactly.

And nedzelic, just because a text isn't a part of the canon, it doesn't mean it can't expand your mind. Saying that nobody reads anymore and that we are 'becoming more gullible and dummer by the minute' is a huge and inaccurate generalisation.

yes it is a generalisation but i was just exagerating. of course "nobody reads anymore" is not a seriuos comment. but the fact is alot less people read now than previously. and seemingly when peop[le do read, generally, as evidenced by the top sellers list, it is stufff like harry potter and the da vinci code. fair enough about harry potter, but like nwatts said, the da vinci code claims to be factfull when it is NOT. it is FICTION and should not portar itslef as anything else. if the uathor portrayed it as merely a work of fiction the ok, who cares. but it this deceit and lying attmepting to show the book as something that its is not. and it is claerly just a marketing ploy b/c w/o it, the sales wouldn't been and upteenth of what they have been. it's all BULLSHIT

 

[xXeMoxXxCoRexX]

But in hsc english, a pub coaster is a text, with equal value to shakespeare, so that doesn't count.

 

[nwatts]

First thing you do in Extension 1 English in Year 11 is discuss "what is literature". You eventually come to the conclusion that everything is literature, from Matthew Reilly to The Seventh Samurai and Gravity's Rainbow, Tolkein and Austen to Mills and Bloom.

It's all literature.

Which is pretty much the accepted response for an exam/assessment question.

Accepted, but not praised. I define literature differently. But right now, I should be defining modern art! Toodles.

 

[azzie]

at the moment im reading agatha christie. im a fan of poirot, and im currently getting though "the mysterious affair at styles" and after that ill read "sad cypress".
i really should read some william faulkner soon-ish, ive been told by many people he's brillaint. and i should finish some more tennessee williams plays.

 

[nedzelic]

i'm affraid your piorot, and probably marple as well, doesn't belong in this section.

chrsite is the epitome of pop fiction. i ebeliev her play the mouse trap has run continually in london theatres since it's inception in 1960 something - just a bit of trivia

but each their own eh

 

[azzie]

no need to be snobbish- i just said what i was reading! after a year of 19th century novels the size of two bricks, i think im allowed to indulge. chill pill darlin'.

 

[nwatts]

Christie is pretty trashy. Lotsa people love her though. She's the queen of cheap detective fiction. I'm no fan, but there are many of them. Azzie is one. I have another friend who loves her books too.

There's better in the crime genre, but most is more postmodern (which fits into my tastes). I enjoyed Lisa See's 'The Flower Net' and of course Ondaatje's 'Anil's Ghost' which was a set text for ext1. Hoeg's 'Miss Smila's Feeling for Snow' is also good, but has a stupid last quarter, very well written though.

Eco's 'The Name of the Rose' is a masterpiece, but is very difficult to get through if you aren't used to reading such heavy material. I actually recommend people often watch the film first, to get a handle on the story, so they can appreciate the writing (esp character development - Eco is the master of building character). Have you read this nedzelic? If not I recommend it.