Multaniette Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 *shrugs* You don't have to look farther than the opening sentence of Pride & Prejudice (Emma and Sense and Senibility are funnier) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guarneri Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a single man in possession of a good fortune must be in want of a wife." Oh, yeah, that's so witty and ironic that I am on the floor laughing. Wait, I'm not, my bad... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ebenstone Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Dickens for sure. Edith Wharton The Brontes JD Salinger And fantasy wise: Erikson just escapes me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Multaniette Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Senshou, Too bad. I'd like to interpret it as playful and incredibly tongue-in-cheek. Accessing it from a modern prespective makes it seem cutely quaint. Saying it out loud makes me laugh. Your mileage may vary, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CryHavoc Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 I've read several Austen books for various classes. I don't think she's all that bad for most of the book, but she invariably goes into turbo-summary mode at the end to tell you who each character married, which annoying person(s) ended up as spinsters, etc. It's a little like the end of Deathly Hallows, but with several gallons of Red Bull included. As for books I should like, but just don't, I'm going to go with anything by Herman Melville. I've tried, and in a couple cases even made it through the book, but it's just so...ugh. Dune also got boring after a while, though I enjoyed it at first. For fantasy, count me in on the Erikson front. I got about two-thirds of the way through Gardens of the Moon, having been told that the second half would be significantly better than the first, and just couldn't keep reading. I tried it again when I went home for the summer and gave up once more. My friends keep saying it's great, though, so I'm trying to muster up the strength to give it another shot while I'm home for Christmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falagar Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Can only remember Dostojevsky's Crime and Punishment at the moment. Only got half-way into it - the story was compelling, the psycological evolution of the character well done, and the description of city-life in 19th century Russia interesting, but just couldn't get into it. Might have been the prose, somewhat long-winded... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhaduum Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 I don't know why I take that Dune critics so personally.... Maybe it was just because it was the first SCIFI I ever read. The plot and characters in my mind, have not been topped in any story. The setting (10K years in the future). A reborn mesiah. Great supernatural battles, The most original idea ever on futuristic space travel. Besides Herberts fantastic writing style. What more can anyone ask for... I guess a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guarneri Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 To be fair I don't think Herbert was a writer-writer, if you know what I mean. His skills when it came to prose were pretty minimal, and it seemed that the story was created for his ideas, so that his ideas and concepts took the center stage, the story just a backdrop for them. In that, I think a lot of his ideas were very fascinating, such as the gholas, the Bene Gesserit, the spice, space travel, and of course mentats. Dune is my favorite sci-fi book, and if all the ideas and the world itself were given to a writer with tremendous story telling talent, such as GRRM, then I think it would've been phenomenal. But it seems rare for a story to have both depth and superb story telling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 I don't know why I take that Dune critics so personally.... Maybe it was just because it was the first SCIFI I ever read. The plot and characters in my mind, have not been topped in any story. The setting (10K years in the future). A reborn mesiah. Great supernatural battles, The most original idea ever on futuristic space travel. Besides Herberts fantastic writing style. What more can anyone ask for That the bolded part were actually true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saskganesh Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Cormac McCarthy. Each time, I start with the best of intentions, and am defeated by disinterest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guarneri Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 That the bolded part were actually true? Hey, at least it isn't as bad as the shit his son and Kevin Anderson are doing to pervade his father's legacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 Hey, at least it isn't as bad as the shit his son and Kevin Anderson are doing to pervade his father's legacy. They could smear Frank Herbert's cremated remains onto a sheet of paper, slap a cover reading "Dune 2" on it and it would still be a better book then whatever shit those 2 are putting out now. Seriously, read the plot summary type thing on Wikipedia for Sandworms of Dune: SPOILER: some Quotes from it ...to create "advanced" sandworms able to produce the melange they so desperately require. He accomplishes this by altering the DNA of the sandtrout stage and creating an aquatic form of the worms, which are then released into the oceans of Buzzell. Adapting to their new environment, these seaworms quickly flourish, eventually producing a highly concentrated form of spice, dubbed ultraspice!!!. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guarneri Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 *Gasp* Not the ultraspice! *Darth Vadar "Noooooooo"* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Silenus Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 I'm Norwegian, but have to say that most of our nations "great" authors are either so boring or writes about themes so mind-numbingly boring that I suddenly get the whole Emo deal. But since I don't expect many of you to know their names (thank your god for that), I'll just list SFF authors. You gotta respect the writer. Henrik Ibsen's a tough dude. Eat all your greens! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falagar Posted September 6, 2007 Share Posted September 6, 2007 There are lots of authors that I loath, but thankfully I tend to repress them, 'causing me to have a Vietnam flashback every time someone say they like their work. I'm Norwegian, but have to say that most of our nations "great" authors are either so boring or writes about themes so mind-numbingly boring that I suddenly get the whole Emo deal. But since I don't expect many of you to know their names (thank your god for that), I'll just list SFF authors. Not a huge fan of most Norwegian authors either, but there are some good ones - try Bjørneboe. I highly recommend having a go at Frihetens Øyeblikk (Moment of Freedom) or Haiene (The Sharks) or something. Admittedly pretty emo, but great literature usually is. Also, Hamsun isn't that bad, iirc. And Olav Duun ownz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 I feel the need, at this juncture, to just point out that Dickens is the greatest novelist in the history of the English language. My reading life would be MUCH emptier without him. I understand the hate and all, but it makes me sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guarneri Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 I feel the need, at this juncture, to just point out that Dickens is the greatest novelist in the history of the English language. My reading life would be MUCH emptier without him. I shudder at the thought of what the worst novelists in the history of the English language would be like then. It'd have to be form of torture that even the likes of Terry Goodkind are forced to stand back and go, "Woah, I got served." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonus Nesha Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 For the people who said they found The Sillmarillion very boring and hard to get through, I will give a simple explanation of why is is written so: It's a history book. That's it. It wasn't written to be super intriguing. It was written to inform readers of the history of Middle-Earth. Also Tolkien never finished The Children of Hurin. On-topic, I agree with the Jane Austen bashing, but not so much with the Herbert bashing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guarneri Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 For the people who said they found The Sillmarillion very boring and hard to get through, I will give a simple explanation of why is is written so: It's a history book. That's it. It wasn't written to be super intriguing. It was written to inform readers of the history of Middle-Earth. Also Tolkien never finished The Children of Hurin. On-topic, I agree with the Jane Austen bashing, but not so much with the Herbert bashing. History and interest don't have to be seperate. He did try and tell stories in the Sillmarillion, and as such it could've included devices for interest, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tears of Lys Posted September 7, 2007 Share Posted September 7, 2007 Senshou, There are stories that are told and there are stories which are shown. Jane Austen is awesome, because, well, I haven't read a funnier author than her (in english language). I agree. Unfortunately, Austen's "voice" is foreign to many people currently, as is Dickens'. I'm crazy about both authors, as i am about Frank Herbert - and you couldn't get more different styles if you tried. I've said before and I'll say it again: Different styles of writing appeal to you at different times of your life. If I had read Tolkien at a certain stage of my life, I would have considered LotR a boring travelogue too. I thank all the gods that be that I decided to give it a go when I did. The Silmarillion gave me more of what I craved and I grew to love it more than LotR. It may be that being forced to read certain books while in school sets up a situation where people develop an animus toward anything too different. People should be allowed to choose their own books and come to things in their own manner and time. And if not, so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.