Fans of Interracial Romance discussion
Archived Threads
>
Am I The Only One Who Doesn't Think...
date
newest »


Also, it's not that it's a classic. I love a lot of classics but not Catcher.

Danielle, I couldn't agree more. Some folks act like literature arrived and died with this book! Please.
Best Wishes!

For its time (the 50s) this book was the coming trend along with the Beat generation. It was more popular among young people than the older because of its rebellious nature. It speaks to young white boys. However, for now, the book is terribly outdated since there have been numerous other books and movies which cover teen angst. I could see where it could still be popular among suburban rats, but after reading a synopses and reading quotes from it, it says nothing to me that I haven't already read. To me, "Tropic of Cancer" by Henry Miller and "On the Road" by Jack Keroac are far superior as far as rebelliousness and adventure. And the quotes offer nothing profound. As far as drinking, smoking and such, I've always loved the book "At Swim Two Birds" by Flann O'Brien written in the 1930s about a college kid who spends too many days in the pub and he's writing a book about a character writing a book. It's first person and hilarious, but you have to have a bent sense of humor to get into it.
I don't mind first person as long as it's good. Some first person books, I do find annoying because if there's no humility at all in the character, it can make them seem too arrogant with an almost god-like belief to their personality. I don't mind arrogance, but the book has to say something to me.
Literature is so full crap because they are always a generation behind in what they consider great. It takes them usually 20 years to get over their initial shock of a piece to declare, oh it's great. One has to think that if the book hadn't been banned, would it have even received enough attention to have been read so widely.

Best Wishes!
http://www.stacy-deanne.net


One of the main reasons is because I don't like literary fiction (but read it because I was forced to in school). I like genre fiction and I also don't like long books full of narrative and description and don't like first person books. My preference to genre novels has gotten even tighter so that's why I don't think I'd even enjoy a lot of the old classics I once did.
I've been looking through the classic free ebooks and I can't get through most now, LOL. Tried to read Madam Bovary a few months ago and couldn't get past six pages. I don't see what's so great about that book.
Best Wishes!
http://www.stacy-deanne.net
message 12:
by
Danielle The Book Huntress , Sees Love in All Colors
(last edited Jun 03, 2010 05:39AM)
(new)
I'm not a big fan of literary fiction. It seems very pretentious most of the time. And usually, not much is accomplished. Mostly just character meanderings and a lot of depressing stuff when no big change comes out of it all. Just my opinion.
I prefer genre fiction, because you get a good story that's going somewhere, and character development, in the hands of a good writer.
I am downloading a lot of classic ebooks on my Kindle, but most in the genre categories. I would recommend Charlotte Bronte if you want a great classical writer. I also adore Crime and Punishment, The Scarlet Letter, To Kill a Mockingbird, and White Fang. These are some of my favorite classics. Also, The Good Earth, Song of Solomon, and The Color Purple.
I prefer genre fiction, because you get a good story that's going somewhere, and character development, in the hands of a good writer.
I am downloading a lot of classic ebooks on my Kindle, but most in the genre categories. I would recommend Charlotte Bronte if you want a great classical writer. I also adore Crime and Punishment, The Scarlet Letter, To Kill a Mockingbird, and White Fang. These are some of my favorite classics. Also, The Good Earth, Song of Solomon, and The Color Purple.

My mom and her sisters read it but couldn't get through the dialect either. Mom said it took her half the book to understand what they were saying. She said she didn't like how the book had most of the African stuff in their with Neti because it wore down the book to her. She said it got boring with that part of her in Africa. The movie cut that part out.
I loved the movie. Maybe I'll give the book another chance but doubt I could still get through it.
Best Wishes!
http://www.stacy-deanne.net
Song of Solomon is very surreal and magical. I quite liked it. I highly recommend The Good Earth. It was one of those assigned reads that I totally fell into and loved. For some reason, I didn't have an issue with the dialect in The Color Purple.
Lady Danielle "The Book Huntress" wrote: "I think it was overrated, and very little seemed to get accomplished."
Co-sign lol.
Co-sign lol.

Books mentioned in this topic
The Help (other topics)The Color Purple (other topics)
White Fang (other topics)
Song of Solomon (other topics)
The Good Earth (other topics)
More...
I don't know, I might be, LOL. But I am so tired of people acting weird when some folks say they didn't like or have never read Catcher in the Rye. I had to read it in high school and that's the only reason I read it. I wouldn't have otherwise. First off I don't like first person books, secondly I hated Holden Cauffield. I think he was arrogant and rude. While everyone else seems to love the "voice" of Salinger's writing for Holden, it only turned me off. I think Holden is the reason I don't like first person books to this day, because of the arrogance and how he was written.
Yeah but I wonder how did Catcher in the Rye become the so-called greatest American novel? I mean to me, it's just a book. And I don't even remember most of it. It wasn't interesting enough for me to read it twice. Yet so many people say it's the most wonderful book. Maybe it's just me and a few other people who think that way but I am sorry, I don't think Catcher is the greatest book and I don't believe Salinger was the greatest writer to ever live. He might have been good for folks who loved the book, but everybody doesn't have to like him, LOL.
Also, the man didn't ever write anything else did he? I know he wrote some short stories for The New Yorker and was a big recluse. Don't know much else about him but I don't remember him writing another novel. Am I wrong?
Anyway, just wanted to put this out there. Seems like every time someone's discussing great literature they bring up Catcher in the Rye and I just didn't find it as wonderful as most people say.
I prefer Lord of the Rings by William Holden. I loved that book. Gave me the creeps, LOL.
Anyway, any others agree? Anyone else know of books that they feel aren't that good but have gotten toted as great?
Best Wishes!
http://www.stacy-deanne.net