|
Travic posted:
Who's to say the author isn't making an interpretation? I'm afraid all you're left with are more or less convincing interpretations. Maybe the teacher was trying to get you to form an argument based on textual evidence, as they tend to at school level. But yeah, read The Odyssey if you like adventures, The Iliad if you like war. You've had loads of good suggestions. If I might add an easy translation of The Canterbury Tales like Peter Ackroyd's latest version, because they're great fun as stories. Hardly a version a lit prof would recommend, but if you're just after the stories, knock yourself out. I just hate this idea that in order to be 'cultured' you have to punish yourself, and then people get annoyed that they aren't enjoying themselves. Put in the effort where required, yeah sure, but only do it if you want to.
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 16:07
|
|
Who's to say my interpretation is incorrect?
The author?
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
J_RBG posted:Who's to say the author isn't making an interpretation? I'm afraid all you're left with are more or less convincing interpretations. Maybe the teacher was trying to get you to form an argument based on textual evidence, as they tend to at school level. Oh I intend to read a lot of the suggestions in the thread. It has just always bugged me tearing apart someone else's book and having the gall to tell the author what their book is about. Earwicker posted:What you are talking about sounds like a sort of parody of a stereotype of an incompetent lit professor. While it's possible that all of your teachers were that ridiculous, it seems more likely that in at least some cases they were probably talking about symbology and subtext that was actually there, or at least some for which there are reasonably arguable grounds, and of which you were instinctively dismissive. Just a hunch. That was an actual exchange between myself and a professor. I pulled Little Women out of the air because I couldn't remember the exact book in question. I'm sure some of them meant well, but the general consensus was, "Re-writing classical lit is how you enjoy it." I'm happy to learn there is more to it than I was led to believe. It's hard to enjoy literature when you're looking for angles to re-write it like a Terminator movie. Bundt Cake posted:Ok guys my professor suggested that the author thought about the choices they made when writing, anybody got some suggestions that avoid this nonsense This is not what I'm saying. I'm saying it bothers me that someone will read, say, The Jungle and tell me its not about working class conditions in the early 20th century. It's actually about The American Revolution. This is not an actual example, but it is about the level of disconnect I'm used to. I'm looking forward to reading these stories now. Thanks 
Travic fucked around with this message at 16:56 on Nov 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
Travic posted:Oh I intend to read a lot of the suggestions in the thread. It has just always bugged me tearing apart someone else's book and having the gall to tell the author what their book is about. Yes, but some books really do have subtext and may actually be about things that, superficially, it doesn't seem like. Pointing that out isn't really "re-writing". Since none of the examples you've cited reference any of the actual books you've had these arguments about, and your method of relating this seems designed to make the teachers look as absurd as possible, it's kind of hard to figure out what exactly you are talking about. Again there's nothing wrong with simply enjoying a story for the story's sake and ignoring all of that stuff, but your attitude suggests there is something you are missing and I still doubt it's purely because you somehow managed to have nothing but teachers who made up a bunch of disconnected nonsense about the books they were teaching. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 17:01 on Nov 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 16:59
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:What you are talking about sounds like a sort of parody of a stereotype of an incompetent lit professor. While it's possible that all of your teachers were that ridiculous, it seems more likely that in at least some cases they were probably talking about symbology and subtext that was actually there, or at least some for which there are reasonably arguable grounds, and of which you were instinctively dismissive. Just a hunch. i think we've found supermechagodzilla's day job
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:Yes, but some books really do have subtext and may actually be about things that, superficially, it doesn't seem like. Pointing that out isn't really "re-writing". Since none of the examples you've cited reference any of the actual books you've had these arguments about, and your method of relating this seems designed to make the teachers look as absurd as possible, it's kind of hard to figure out what exactly you are talking about. Oh, I realize that. Reading between the lines opens up a whole new world. I really am sorry I can't remember actual examples. It's just been so long. You'll just have to believe me when I say I was not exaggerating. I think I'll just leave it at I've had a rough history of reading classical literature and I look forward to giving it another chance. Travic fucked around with this message at 17:19 on Nov 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 17:12
|
|
|
Travic posted:
Then read their argument and argue against it? If their interpretation isn't convincing, then show why - it's not as if there is anyone who would say an abundance of interpretations means every interpretation is equally sound or convincing. Also, a lot of authors are dead. Can't dig up Virgil and ask him whether Eclogue 4 is actually about Jesus' resurrection, like medieval theologians wanted to say. To make a convincing biographical/intent-based interpretation you have to have a LOT of contextual information that itself needs further interpreting. Furthermore, the business of 'doing' literary analysis is something that people, this thread included (probably), find fun. When I read Ulysses I like all the connections I can make with the word 'key' or 'potato' in the novel (seriously try it), and it's great fun to interact with something in the way you're thinking of. It's not necessarily saying x = y or whatever, sometimes it's simply asking the question "What is this text doing?" and that throws up a lot of different answers, and types of answers, than "the colour of the room = his mood". Basically, not to be rude, but you have a very limited conception of what people in this thread are doing and finding enjoyable when they read books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
J_RBG posted:Furthermore, the business of 'doing' literary analysis is something that people, this thread included (probably), find fun. When I read Ulysses I like all the connections I can make with the word 'key' or 'potato' in the novel (seriously try it), and it's great fun to interact with something in the way you're thinking of. It's not necessarily saying x = y or whatever, sometimes it's simply asking the question "What is this text doing?" and that throws up a lot of different answers, and types of answers, than "the colour of the room = his mood". Basically, not to be rude, but you have a very limited conception of what people in this thread are doing and finding enjoyable when they read books. That's totally fine. However you enjoy the books, go for it. I just don't enjoy it. I just read for the story. The promise of higher level reading excites me. I just wanted to do a little research before diving back in. But yes, I did know that Shakespeare is dead and we can't ask him about his work.  I guess I just personalize it (never a good idea) that if I wrote something and someone else told me what it was about I'd be pretty miffed. And it's not rude at all. No offense taken. There are lots of ways to experience reading. I just wanted to make sure there was something for me and my extremely literal brain. Travic fucked around with this message at 17:46 on Nov 20, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
Travic posted:I guess I just personalize it (never a good idea) that if I wrote something and someone else told me what it was about I'd be pretty miffed. Why? I don't write books, but I write music, and usually the music I write is about specific things in my mind. In many cases I've seen people who enjoy the music talk about what they think it's about, and it's almost always a very different interpretation then my own. I find that really fascinating. I don't see why one should get angry about it, people interpret art through their own experiences and emotions, and always will.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
What's funny about the idea of searching for a subtext in classical lit. is that many of these authors made their agendas clear in plain language. I can think of more than a few classical authors who filled out their books with their political, philosophical, and ideological ramblings. Tolstoy, Hugo, and Fielding come to mind. There is no need to guess their meaning, because you'll be reading an essay about it every chapter. Of course, there is also subtext within the story itself, it's just funny to think of anyone reading these books and feeling the need to "guess" the author's intent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
If I had to pick a book to kick Travic out of this bizarre high school mentality I'd choose Saramago's Blindness. It is absolutely blatantly not only about blindness.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:If I had to pick a book to kick Travic out of this bizarre high school mentality I'd choose Saramago's Blindness. It is absolutely blatantly not only about blindness. I actually own that book and I adore it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 18:24
|
|
|
I just finished reading Little Women and I'd have to say the subtext is that you should be a good Christian woman. Good book though, despite the heavy moralizing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
Travic posted:I actually own that book and I adore it. Cosmic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
The point of college courses on literature isn't to correctly interpret everything its to practice your skills and there's a reason to go overboard with analysis because its a way to apply whatever critical framework you're learning about to a text. Its the same as any discipline. There's a beginning point where you do a bunch of poo poo you won't have to do later.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 18:57
|
|
|
Travic posted:I still remember reading The Metamorphosis and I absolutely love it. I personally preferred The Penal Colony, but I'm aware I'm in the minority.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 22:03
|
|
|
I thought the Metamorphosis was dull and every other story was great in the collection I read
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 22:33
|
|
|
I'm reading The collected Father Brown mysteries by G K CHesterton and they're really cool because if there's ever an atheist in the story you know he did the crimes because he has no morals to stop him from murdering wantonly. Also they're a lot better than Sherlock Holmes and Arthur COnan Doyle drools, while Gilbert Keith Chesterton, rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
CestMoi posted:I thought the Metamorphosis was dull and every other story was great in the collection I read It helps if you're already depressed. EDIT: Actually The Metamorphosis is another book with tons of subtext. Cercadelmar fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
I like the book where he's a nervous little mole-man worrying about things trying to eat him. The Burrow, that's it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 10:05
|
|
|
CestMoi posted:I'm reading The collected Father Brown mysteries by G K CHesterton and they're really cool because if there's ever an atheist in the story you know he did the crimes because he has no morals to stop him from murdering wantonly. Also they're a lot better than Sherlock Holmes and Arthur COnan Doyle drools, while Gilbert Keith Chesterton, rules. If you ignore the fact that he was an antisemite & hated pretty much everything that both existed & wasn't also beer, England, or Catholicism(ex: Germans, Continental Philosophy, Voltaire, Marx, Protestantism, cats, the Japanese, people who opposed toll roads, Socialists, Spiritualists, Baptists, Darwin, Queen Elizabeth, Anarchists, Capitalists, Atheists, Pacifists, heretics, boring people) then GK Chesterton's oeuvre becomes a bottomless well of some of the finest prose that the English language has to offer. CARL MARK FORCE IV fucked around with this message at 11:43 on Nov 21, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 11:38
|
|
|
I like how The Man who was Thursday reads like he kind of made it up as he went along with increasing absurdities like an improvised kid's bed time story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 11:46
|
|
|
Travic posted:Oh I intend to read a lot of the suggestions in the thread. It has just always bugged me tearing apart someone else's book and having the gall to tell the author what their book is about. There are many ways to approach analyzing a piece of literature. People certainly do criticism that takes the author into account to varying degrees(depending on how much information there is, of course). If you wanted to say something about Pride and Prejudice you might look at some of Jane Austen's letters for example, or maybe just look at historical details of the time period the book was written for insight. If an author says "My book means X" it's not like you are obligated to disbelieve it or disregard it, it's just not absolutely authoritative. It's not as radical (or new) of an idea as it might seem - just think about anything you've ever wrote. Are you intentions always perfectly delivered? Not to mention that the author could be dead, or lying, or say contradictory things about a work, and so on. There are a lot of other things to consider as well, like how to account for the readers response, etc. Just don't let yourself get fooled by this idea that english departments are full of people just randomly assigning any meaning to anything.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
If you want some good period mysteries that work counter to the ideology of Chesterton's and also contain some great prose and great humor, I highly recommend Georgette Heyer.Otto von Ruthless posted:There are many ways to approach analyzing a piece of literature. People certainly do criticism that takes the author into account to varying degrees(depending on how much information there is, of course). If you wanted to say something about Pride and Prejudice you might look at some of Jane Austen's letters for example All of James Joyce's books are about farting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
.
whatevz fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Apr 25, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:08
|
|
|
A Rambling Vagrant posted:If you ignore the fact that he was an antisemite & hated pretty much everything that both existed & wasn't also beer, England, or Catholicism(ex: Germans, Continental Philosophy, Voltaire, Marx, Protestantism, cats, the Japanese, people who opposed toll roads, Socialists, Spiritualists, Baptists, Darwin, Queen Elizabeth, Anarchists, Capitalists, Atheists, Pacifists, heretics, boring people) then GK Chesterton's oeuvre becomes a bottomless well of some of the finest prose that the English language has to offer. The best Father Brown stories are the ones where someone is explicitly one of these things, and it is later revealed they secretly are another as well and that is why they did the murder. Eg when the guy tricks a woman into falling down a lift shaft and it is because he has invented his own sun worship religion and also because he is secretly AMerican. Also the murdered person's sister tried to steal all her money because she's a woman.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
LaughMyselfTo posted:I personally preferred The Penal Colony, but I'm aware I'm in the minority. No, you had the correct opinion. Penal Colony is Kafka's best story.
|
|
#
?
Nov 22, 2014 02:21
|
|
|
I like A Hunger Artist and A Country Doctor more, but In the Penal Colony is really great in its own way. There's apparently a chamber opera adaptation of it, which I'd love to see.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
The best Kafka story is the one where the orangutan can talk and it uses this skill to do nothing of interest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2014 22:05
|
|
|
I'm currently struggling to get through Savage Detectives by Bolano. Has anyone read this? Any thoughts or encouragement to offer?
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:I'm currently struggling to get through Savage Detectives by Bolano. Has anyone read this? Any thoughts or encouragement to offer? Struggling how? If you're struggling to stay interested you might just want to set it down. It stays pretty consistent in terms of tone and theme throughout the book. I liked 2666 enough to pick up and read The Savage Detectives a few months later but I haven't felt the urge to read anything else by him since.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
novamute posted:Struggling how? If you're struggling to stay interested you might just want to set it down. It stays pretty consistent in terms of tone and theme throughout the book. I liked 2666 enough to pick up and read The Savage Detectives a few months later but I haven't felt the urge to read anything else by him since. I did this + Nazi Literature in the Americas in between. All three are cool, but after I The Savage Detectives I decided to wait for Dutch translations from now on (Savage Detectives was the only one I read English and took me way longer, though normally I read English pretty fluently. I guess I don't like the English translations as much)
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 19:09
|
|
|
I loved Nazi Literature in Americas but I'm kinda turned off by the sheer size of the other two books. Think it's worth reading? edit: Okay, that was probably too wide. I think what I enjoyed about it most was the overwhelming sense of absurdity; do the two other books evoke that too? anilEhilated fucked around with this message at 19:27 on Nov 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
novamute posted:Struggling how? If you're struggling to stay interested you might just want to set it down. It stays pretty consistent in terms of tone and theme throughout the book. I liked 2666 enough to pick up and read The Savage Detectives a few months later but I haven't felt the urge to read anything else by him since. I'm about halfway through and mostly just struggling to stay interested. Mostly just curious if there's some sort of conclusion or revelation or other payoff. It's been quite a slog for me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
anilEhilated posted:I loved Nazi Literature in Americas but I'm kinda turned off by the sheer size of the other two books. Think it's worth reading? Not as much as Nazi Literature in the Americas, I'd say, as they're more narratively straightforward (still not super straightforward) but they are a lot more emotional and have less of a clear theme like Nazi Literature. In my experience there definitely seems to be a Bolano style (or even universe), with strong links between all three books. Of course, with its structure and length, Nazi Literature is comparatively a breeze (I think I finished it the same day I bought it, while the others took me several weeks)
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 19:45
|
|
|
Ben Nevis posted:I'm about halfway through and mostly just struggling to stay interested. Mostly just curious if there's some sort of conclusion or revelation or other payoff. It's been quite a slog for me. There's a moderate payoff for the story about the lost author whom the two dudes are looking for, but that's hardly what's great or significant about the book. The second part in particular "goes nowhere" if that's what you feared. I absolutely loved that book though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
I just finished Catch 22 yesterday. While I enjoyed it alright, thought it was quite clever in parts, and I feel like I "got" the various commentaries and absurdities that Heller was trying to present, I didn't love it the way everyone else seems to. This is a novel that appears on every "Top 100 novels of All Time" list you'll ever see, often in the top 20 or even top 10, and is many peoples' favorite book ever, and I only thought it was good. For these reasons, I face that dilemma of wondering if I'm the problem here, which I'm open to accepting as entirely possible. Does someone who really loved the book want to chime in and maybe describe for me what Catch 22 means to them, or why it deserves all the praise it receives? I'd love to get a deeper perspective, and maybe some more explanation on the aspects I might have missed that make this novel one of the greats. Edit: VVVVV poo poo, I was afraid of that... VVVVV Moacher fucked around with this message at 23:43 on Nov 25, 2014 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
YOu're fundamentally broken if you don't love it with all your heart, soul and mind I'm afraid. You might as well be dead. Heller reaches almost Chestertonian levels of cool prose.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
Moacher posted:I just finished Catch 22 yesterday. While I enjoyed it alright, thought it was quite clever in parts, and I feel like I "got" the various commentaries and absurdities that Heller was trying to present, I didn't love it the way everyone else seems to. This is a novel that appears on every "Top 100 novels of All Time" list you'll ever see, often in the top 20 or even top 10, and is many peoples' favorite book ever, and I only thought it was good. For these reasons, I face that dilemma of wondering if I'm the problem here, which I'm open to accepting as entirely possible. I'm with you, I also didn't love A Catcher in the Rye when I re-read it a year ago. Most such lists are dumb anyway & feel like they were compiled by Time Magazine in the 80s or something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Moacher posted:Does someone who really loved the book want to chime in and maybe describe for me what Catch 22 means to them, or why it deserves all the praise it receives? I'd love to get a deeper perspective, and maybe some more explanation on the aspects I might have missed that make this novel one of the greats. really funny drunk driving scenes
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 00:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Moacher posted:I just finished Catch 22 yesterday. While I enjoyed it alright, thought it was quite clever in parts, and I feel like I "got" the various commentaries and absurdities that Heller was trying to present, I didn't love it the way everyone else seems to. This is a novel that appears on every "Top 100 novels of All Time" list you'll ever see, often in the top 20 or even top 10, and is many peoples' favorite book ever, and I only thought it was good. For these reasons, I face that dilemma of wondering if I'm the problem here, which I'm open to accepting as entirely possible. Stop caring about Americans' literature opinions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2014 00:23
|
|