I can see why...I really can. That one I liked more after seeing the film, heresy of heresies. But I think Tom makes the whole book worth it anyway. "The Bell Jar"? Not sure if it's a classic or not...I'd say yes, but who the hell am I? But it's dark and stuff.

Another semi-lurker, semi-poster popping in. I tend to be a non-thinker when it comes to books as well. Sometimes I enjoy listening (or reading) to people who delve deeper, but sometimes I prefer to just like the book on that surface level.

Also am woefully underread in the classics region. My two favorite "classics" are Grapes of Wrath and To Kill a Mockingbird. Have never read Wuthering Heights or Moby Dick, but both sit on my bookshelves with every intent of being read.

This has been a very interesting scroll-through today. Usually I do a lot of skimming in the thread because there are many discussions about books I have no interest in (usually in the sci-fi/fantasy genres).

Dracula is a classic, Jilli.

Damn right it is.

To narrow things down, as I expand my pushing from comics to books, how do you feel about plays? Translated works? Short stories?

I'm good with all of those.

Also, would you be interested in some books on lit crit? Because I've got those, too!

How 'bout whatever ONE book on lit crit you think is best.

And a huge section on religious studies! You could borrow my copy of Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period!

(starts shuffling away from the manic woman)

Er, sure! If you think it would entertain me ...

Er, sure! If you think it would entertain me ...

Err... I'd have to bring you up to speed on Pre and Post-Christis canon, wouldn't I?

Boy, that Christis...what a pain in the ass and BOOOORRRING!!!!!

snerk.

Err... I'd have to bring you up to speed on Pre and Post-Christis canon, wouldn't I?

Yes, yes you would. If it will be as entertaining as the "Hand wave-y hand wave-y! Hypertime hypertime!" discussion, then I'm all for it.

If you're going to make a statement like this, for the love of Mike, separate your two points. Inline comments about specific works, which happens anytime there's a focused discussion about anything from cars to grammar to cheese (like: swiss; hate: brie, which is raunch) != a dislike of critical discussion, so while both may have been stated, conflating them just makes you seem like you're lecturing people about the wrongness of personal tastes, be that your intent or no.

If the only response to a larger, running detailed conversation is a series of snipes then it has a killing effect. Swiss hate and brie love don't pop up in a conversation of the cheese-making techniques of Switzerland and France. It pops up in what to have for lunch conversations. Which I suppose is one of the things that has come up here - this thread is more about what to read next.

A point made upthread is worth remaking: literary fiction as a whole, as a "genre" gets slammed in this thread in a way that would not be tolerated if somebody waltzed in and said Romance readers are idiots. (Not to pick on her, particularly since she's been very honest and self-reflective in this discussion, but Susan did this a lot.)

I don't need or want to hash it out any longer. But while I've changed my mind about some things, I certainly haven't been convinced by the umpteen posts here that people aren't defensive or feel insecure about literary criticism (several people have copped to that). Similarly, I'm still sure that there's an overriding distrust of academic criticism, that it kills appreciation or the joy of reading; that very little in-depth discussion of literature happens here (nobody has disputed that); and that the thread has a populist slant and a bias against academics.

I have changed my mind about a few things though. I do think the lack of a focused subject dissuades longer, active discussions. And I do think that's an argument for some kind of reading club.

Wow, that was a lot of posts.

I'm really just posting to say

To narrow things down, as I expand my pushing from comics to books, how do you feel about plays? Translated works? Short stories?

Also, would you be interested in some books on lit crit? Because I've got those, too! And a huge section on religious studies! You could borrow my copy of Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period!

Can I go to Plei's house and just wallow in the books? Or Ginger's. Or any Buffistas with massive bookcases (huge ... tracts of books?). I really love books. I haven't read anywhere near enough. Depending on mood, I can go into a bookstore and almost cry, just because there are all the books, and I know I'll never read them all, and I'll probably just go home and watch tv anyway, and there are all these worlds that I just won't get to know! I then I switch to happy, because, books!

I find some of my favourite books are books about books.

Um, so, yay books!

Similarly, I'm still sure that there's an overriding distrust of academic criticism, that it kills appreciation or the joy of reading; that very little in-depth discussion of literature happens here (nobody has disputed that); and that the thread has a populist slant and a bias against academics.

I'd agree with all that. I'd prefer saying a dislike of academic criticism rather than a distrust.

All that does not bug me at all. Anything that suggests I am a bad reader or a lesser one based on my participation in a thread that operates on those facts makes me want to claw at things.

Just as an aside, I think one problem is that "the canon" and "literary fiction" aren't the most clearly defined of terms. I've been reading over today's posts, and I keep encountering books/authors where I'm all, "You mean that's part of the canon? To Kill a Mockingbird is beautiful! I've read Dracula! I went through a Stevenson phase, and has anyone else read his poetry beyond the children's stuff?"

And as for litfic, I don't think I've dissed it in many, many a moon. (Mind you, I don't think loathing Lolita with all the loathing that's in me or not being able to get through The Great Gatsby counts, because I'm only talking about my reaction to those two specific works.) I realized after many discussions here that I was operating from way too narrow a definition of litfic, though I reserve the right to dislike individual books whose style or theme repels me, and some of the styles and themes I find most repellant are more prevalent in contemporary literary fiction than in other eras or genres.

That fairminded and evenhanded enough?