|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 13, 2007 6:25:10 GMT
LOL. "The best of times, the worst of times" indeed ;D Dickens was a fantastic social reformer and his work is highly regarded both as literature and for forwarding the lot of ordinary people in Britain. There is no doubt his novels will be remembered until the last human dies at some point in the far future and that his name will outlive almost every other writer. But that doesn't mean everyone will love his work. No writer has ever gained universal regard, not ever will. Think of all the kids who hate learning Shakespeare - the man regarded by most of the world as the greatest playwright in history. I've read a lot of novels by a lot of writers in a lot of different styles. Some that were not particularly well written I have loved; others that were superbly written I have loathed. Just as in music, we all have differing tastes. Be a boring world if we did not
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Dec 13, 2007 15:06:05 GMT
Winterfox, I think I can see why you think he's overrated.
He's just showing a world instead of writing a nifty, if possible action-filled scene.
He had no skills like a talented writer, and he just explores.
His stories are made for reading to explorers, I think, people who want top dive in and be immersed into a world.
And what's even stronger: He wrote for himself.
Not for an explicite audience.
Most professionals don't do that. They always have an audience in mind they write for.
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Dec 14, 2007 9:54:01 GMT
Mine was the tersest of posts; some other was the worsest of posts; there was the wisdom of age; there was the age of foolishness. Twentieth century literature was the epoch of relief without the plot devices of the epoch of incredulity, one post was lightly seasoned; another was the seasoning of Darkness, let us post where hope springs; not the winterfox of despair; we had everything before us; we had nothing before us, let us all go direct to Heaven, let us all not go direct the other way --in short, the Victorian period of literature was so far unlike the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insist on its being received, for good or for evil, in the superlative degree of comparison only. Ew. Gibberish madlibs is gibberish. Winterfox, I think I can see why you think he's overrated. He's just showing a world instead of writing a nifty, if possible action-filled scene. Wrong. Insofar as pinpointing my reasons for finding him overrated/mediocre, anyway. LOL. Wrong again.
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Dec 14, 2007 14:20:56 GMT
I give up. I like his work and you don't and I don't understand why.
|
|
|
Post by cleglaw on Dec 14, 2007 17:15:52 GMT
Well done, Winter fox! With a few words you managed to dismiss my post. Moreover, it was done with some wit. On the other hand, when Alrik endeavors to provide support for your point of view, you respond to him with neither kindness nor wit.
We are discussing Tolkien, and there exists a quotation of his which is apropos.
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Dec 14, 2007 17:31:52 GMT
D'aww, passive-aggressive accusation of trolling. Come now, if you want to say something, come out and say it.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 14, 2007 17:38:50 GMT
OK, I'll say it: no fighting! Back to Tolkien or other writers everyone, please
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Dec 14, 2007 17:40:53 GMT
I heard the movie "The Fight Club" should be not bad. Hm, by the way, I recently wiondered if literature of the kind of what we connect with the name of "Jules Verne" would be possible nowadays ? Especially since there's nothing to discover, nothing to explore anymore ?
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 14, 2007 17:42:53 GMT
I guess there's a bit of Tyler Durden in all of us... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Dec 14, 2007 18:30:46 GMT
I heard the movie "The Fight Club" should be not bad. Hm, by the way, I recently wiondered if literature of the kind of what we connect with the name of "Jules Verne" would be possible nowadays ? Especially since there's nothing to discover, nothing to explore anymore ? Hence the popularity of speculative fiction, particularly futuristic novels with connections to our Earth.
|
|
|
Post by hector on Dec 15, 2007 0:42:29 GMT
I guess there's a bit of Tyler Durden in all of us... ;D WWTDD?
|
|
|
Post by Alrik on Dec 15, 2007 12:59:21 GMT
@wintefox: Yes, but not on earth.
I mean that stories like 20.000 Mileas beneath the sea are rare nowadays; everything goes to ... what you already named: Sci-Fi and so on.
One very rare example of the "spritit of Jules Verne", as I call it, can be found in the "Dinotopia" books. Not the TV movie ! I actually hate it, because it doesn't catch the "spirit" at all, imho.
And so, I believe that novels in this spirit are rare, nowadays, and I believe that ... well, no-one would read them, because the real life spirit of discovering the earth has gone, too. It's still possible to discover long lost gone vast towns within the jungles of south america, but our "white spots" on our maps are almost gone now. There are no more real life reports of travellers finding things like ... Angkor Wat, for example.
And why do I write this ? Because I have the feeling as if Tolkien is a distant member of this spirit, too.
In his stories, he describes areas and countries to an extend normal publishers would regard as "tiresome" and not to be "good enough" to publish.
I think that the whole style of writing has changed, and that the "exploration theme" has more or less gone now, partly, because most people - and publishers - would rather see action-driven scenes and themes.
Of course, I'm not all-knowing and I don't own too many ooks which means that I don't know too much about contemporary literature. I can do nothing but catch things that are "in the air", as I perceive it, and make my deduction out of this.
So, it might well be that there are areas of literature where this theme of exploring still is used and read. But I don't know.
Al I can say that Tolkien' style is some kind of "ancient" to me, and I believe my perception of it being "ancient" must've something to do with the style and spirit that was common within literature and society in general around the time when he wrote - or at least evolved is own, unique style.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 15, 2007 20:25:02 GMT
I think you have a point with modern SF, Alrik. Little if any is set on Earth itself anymore. There's a small amount of Fantasy that is still, but not a lot.
Same with the explorer theme. Very few modern writers take their characters into areas unknown by those characters, and when they do they usually give them guides or otherwise make those areas feel more the untraveled than the Great Unknown.
|
|
|
Post by killerzzz on Dec 16, 2007 4:27:00 GMT
I think you have a point with modern SF, Alrik. Little if any is set on Earth itself anymore. There's a small amount of Fantasy that is still, but not a lot. Same with the explorer theme. Very few modern writers take their characters into areas unknown by those characters, and when they do they usually give them guides or otherwise make those areas feel more the untraveled than the Great Unknown. I find the best SciFi/Fantasy-on-Earth stories are horror novels. ;D Cuz thats what I read horror books for: the fantasy and the sci-fi. The thrill, if it comes, is a bonus. Yaay adventure. Killerzzz
|
|
|
Post by Lews on Dec 19, 2007 5:37:27 GMT
Who the [Censored] cares how original, creative, grammaratical, spellerafulieric, etc it is.
Do people enjoy reading it? Yes? Good! Great for them. Does everyone need to? No, they don't. But that doesn't mean that people can't enjoy it.
I [Censored]ing hate movie critics. They always talk about how bad movies are are criticize like every single little thing and then I watch the movie and its enjoyable and its like 'what the hell' who cares how artistic or original or etc it is, I enjoyed it, everyone I know enjoyed it, stfu.
Now: I dislike the Lord Of The Ring books. They aren't intresting to me. Probably because my dad read them to me every single year for a while. i got fed up with it, and when the movies came out and all my friends were raving about how [Censored]ing amazing they were I was not. I saw each one first day, and was disappointed with them all. Not to say that my friends were wrong, I was glad they liked them. Though it was funny to see them trying to quiz me like 'LOL U DONT KNOW THE BOOKZ OR DA MOVIES.' and i was like 'i told you about the book and im the person you called at 1 in the morning to ask what happened to Gandalf when u read that he died.'
[Censored].
|
|
|
Post by Winterfox on Dec 19, 2007 9:28:44 GMT
You sound rather angry.
Are you saying that nobody should criticize anything? Or anything that other people enjoy? That's a pretty ridiculous attitude to have. I mean really, really ridiculous. No, sorry, just because you or your friends like something does not mean other people who disagree should be made to shut up. The world doesn't revolve around the tastes of unique special snowflakes.
Happily, the publishing industry, the movie industry, and pretty much every single other industry disagree with you. There are professional reviewers--of just about any kind of product--for a reason, after all.
|
|
|
Post by hector on Dec 19, 2007 9:40:54 GMT
People who despise critics bore me.
Agree with what critics say? Fine. Disagree? Debate it. "Shut the [Censored] up"? My, my. Childish tantrums are so stimulating.
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Dec 19, 2007 10:33:21 GMT
Everyone's a critic. There's no getting around it We love what we love & we hate what we hate, and a lot of the time we tell our friends all about it. That's criticism
|
|
|
Post by Lews on Dec 19, 2007 23:10:46 GMT
You're both funny.
|
|