Literary Studies, Bullshit Much?

[fruckert]

Yeah.
I love reading and analyzing though, I must be *gasp*...weird.

[Rahl]

Wait...you're saying Jane Austen isn't relevant?
You do realize that she is one of the most famous authors of her time, correct?

I never said Jane Austin wasn't relevant, I just merely wish her eternal damnation in the firy pits of hell. She is relevant, while not to me, she is.

PS Did I metion I just want to her to burn, along with every copy of pride and predjudice ever made, not such a big wish. A more than practical one also...

[Archem]

Wait, I'm starting to piece something together.

You want to be an author.

You loathe this literature.




This is inconsistent. I don't think you deserve to have an opinion.

[Rahl]

Wait, I'm starting to piece something together.

You want to be an author.

You loathe this literature.




This is inconsistent. I don't think you deserve to have an opinion.

So by rights, if I wish to be an author I have to love every piece of literature ever made?

[Bluhman]

Either that, or be fuckin' brilliant.

And if you WERE brilliant, you could pass this class!  

_{End logic fail}

[Archem]

That, or at least be willing to not be such an *** over learning from those that came before you.

It's a little bit important to everything worth doing. Respect or something. Mebe more words properly describe it.

[Rahl]

I do appreciate works of those that came before me, very few of them but some none-the-less. I actually enjoyed some of the things in my american lit class. British lit is just pointless though, absolutly pointless. I could care less if they came before me or if they came at all. Respect is earned and a vast majority of these things for me do not deserve it. People for some reason may have liked it back in thier day, but today its nonsence.

[Archem]

Well, my thoughts on the matter still stand.

But, apparently, so do yours. What a lame stalemate.

[Darkfox]

Hm? Oh right, I passed a course like this, with an A. Mine wasn't that hard. Maybe your being a bit overdramatic and suffering from test anxiety?

[Valiere]

I don't think you need to like everything that they manage to squeeze into the lit curriculum. I haven't read any Jane Austen, but I was forced to read "A Farewell to Arms," an awful, awful book that taught me nothing significant except for how not to write a novel, and that "Hemingway is a talentless hack who is in no way deserving of the ridiculous praise mounted on him." (Though I will admit I haven't read anything else of his.)

Seriously, I would have had a better time reading the phone book, or maybe a stock ticker. Or the Nutrition Facts on the back of a cereal box.

Point is, a lot of stuff that was a big deal back in the day is nigh-unreadable to modern audiences. Five-page-long descriptions of buildings have fallen out of vogue. Modern audiences like every page to keep them in thrall, with ongoing action or at the very least interesting dialogue, whereas in the past writers seemed to get away with a lot of mundane transition. Some old works survive (I think "Don Quixote" is still pretty amusing despite being 400 years old), and some just don't.

[Darkfox]

True, there were pieces that I just didn't like too well, but I still loved Don Quixote. It was one of my favorites we had to read in class. Now if you excuse me, I'm going to go slay a windmill. =D Also, I don't think the movies did Beowulf justice.

[Rahl]

I don't think you need to like everything that they manage to squeeze into the lit curriculum. I haven't read any Jane Austen, but I was forced to read "A Farewell to Arms," an awful, awful book that taught me nothing significant except for how not to write a novel, and that "Hemingway is a talentless hack who is in no way deserving of the ridiculous praise mounted on him." (Though I will admit I haven't read anything else of his.)

Seriously, I would have had a better time reading the phone book, or maybe a stock ticker. Or the Nutrition Facts on the back of a cereal box.

Point is, a lot of stuff that was a big deal back in the day is nigh-unreadable to modern audiences. Five-page-long descriptions of buildings have fallen out of vogue. Modern audiences like every page to keep them in thrall, with ongoing action or at the very least interesting dialogue, whereas in the past writers seemed to get away with a lot of mundane transition. Some old works survive (I think "Don Quixote" is still pretty amusing despite being 400 years old), and some just don't.

I really couldn't have said it better. But a phonebook is way to interesting in comparison, maybe watching rust formations.

[Archem]

Don Quixote

Don Quixote

Wake up, people! There are more interesting stories out there!

Like anything Jules Verne. Favorite author since I was 4 (yeah, I've been reading at a college level since I was a toddler. What of it?), and I still find his works amazing. I mean, he was basically the creator of proto-Jetsons. That's, like, proto-proto-current.

Which is just ridiculous.

[Valiere]

I just used Don Quixote as an example because it's really, really old and therefore shouldn't be as readable as it is.

[Archem]

I know. I'm just starting trouble.