What "Classic" disappointed you?

[ldsrsc]

I love some classic books, but others I just don't like. Big fan of Sherlock Holmes.

I could not get into Frankenstein. I felt it was slow and had too much scientific information for it to be thrilling. I felt Phantom of the Opera was much more interesting and thrilling.

The Grapes of Wrath was boring, in my opinion. So was The Old Man and the Sea.

I could not stand White Fang. AT ALL. Probably my least favorite book I've ever tried to read.

And lastly, I don't understand the hype for Lolita. It's about a pedophile. Why is this book considered a love story and great literature?

[CashJames]

I was on this classic reading kick. I decided to read all the classics before I die. "Moby Dick" Changed my mind. Has anyone else tried to read this with a resulting disappointment? The language is difficult and i swear if the actual plot had been stuck to, it would be a 100 page book. There are so many side notes about fish, their behavior, their habitats, their favorite television show etc.... that I completely lost interest. It feels like you are reading a biology book for high school.

What "Classic" disappointed you?

Although I love Moby Dick, I need a dictionary to get through it. Footnotes would be lovely.

Virginia Woolf's 'To the Lighthouse' is by no means a favorite. Rather dry, somewhat hard to follow. Samuel Butler's 'The Way of All Flesh' I found boring, with good passages hidden throughout. I'll have to reread it after acquainting myself with a bible. Until then, many references won't hit their mark. Lastly, 'The Postman Always Rings Twice' by James M. Cain was a total miss for me. I understand it was racy for it's time, but today, reads the way I imagine a harlequin novel does.

[Gannon]

I am not sure why, and I am going to read it again but "Slaughterhouse 5" disappointed me on the first read. Now before all you Kurt Vonnegut fans get up in arms. I am going to read it again and I have been known to completely change my opinion after a second reading.

[Bookwurms]

I am not sure why, and I am going to read it again but "Slaughterhouse 5" disappointed me on the first read. Now before all you Kurt Vonnegut fans get up in arms. I am going to read it again and I have been known to completely change my opinion after a second reading.

I read that book a few months ago and also was very disappointed! And no I don't think I will be re reading it! LOL!

[Gannon]

I am not sure why, and I am going to read it again but "Slaughterhouse 5" disappointed me on the first read. Now before all you Kurt Vonnegut fans get up in arms. I am going to read it again and I have been known to completely change my opinion after a second reading.

I read that book a few months ago and also was very disappointed! And no I don't think I will be re reading it! LOL!

Hi there Bookwurms. Good to know that it was not just me, because it is an immensely popular book. To be honest I can't remember much about it, it was a fair while ago. But I am going to read it again.

[Tralala]

I am not sure why, and I am going to read it again but "Slaughterhouse 5" disappointed me on the first read. Now before all you Kurt Vonnegut fans get up in arms. I am going to read it again and I have been known to completely change my opinion after a second reading.

I read that book a few months ago and also was very disappointed! And no I don't think I will be re reading it! LOL!

Hi there Bookwurms. Good to know that it was not just me, because it is an immensely popular book. To be honest I can't remember much about it, it was a fair while ago. But I am going to read it again.

Deadeye Dick was much better, in my (not so) humble opinion.

[swervo513]

^ Yes i will definitely read it when my current stack of horrors are worker through, just out of curiosity more than anything else, i may love or it or hate it who knows?? I still think many "classics" were just labelled as such due to a lack of competition at the time or a society which didnt question or challenge views as much as this generation does..

Very good point. It is also true that preference plays a role. In addition, many classics may read difficultly because it is either lost in translation or the lingo has just changed. I tried to start reading 1984 a few times and could not get into. And it was not a case of language or preference because I love dystopian themes. It just did not catch my interest.

All this talk about Moby Dick has lured me in though. I read that the author worked on a whaler ship so much of what he wrote came from experience. I am also very interested in Marine biology so maybe it is right up my alley. I will be reading it on my kindle soon. (it was free)

Great thread BTW!

[MacGuffin]

Hermann Hesse's Steppenwolf. I know it is hugely popular, but the story got completely on me at A Treatise on the Steppenwolf. Its a huge section of philosophical musings that got so profound and pedagogic that I had to stop.

I might give it a try again if people say otherwise.

[varnish7]

I'd say for me all the classics I've read have been somewhat disappointing. It's not as though they were bad, or that I didn't enjoy them. It's just that for me, the classics don't live up to all the hype. I keep hearing how a certain book is the absolute best in the world. It'll make you laugh, cry, and go into seizures of ecstasy all at once. It has a timeless message. It'll cure cancer. And so forth. Then I read it, and it's like "Well, that was a good book. I should read it again sometime, or maybe read something else by that author." My response isn't any different than it would be for a Stephen King novel.

[Connie_88]

The Picture of Dorian Grey by Oscar Wilde

I think it had it's moments where it was quite absorbing (the ending was very good) but, even though it's a short book, it felt like a long hard slog to finish it. Maybe I just didn't click with Wilde's writng style

[Bighuey]

The Picture of Dorian Grey by Oscar Wilde

I think it had it's moments where it was quite absorbing (the ending was very good) but, even though it's a short book, it felt like a long hard slog to finish it. Maybe I just didn't click with Wilde's writng style

I just put a post about this on another topic, but I thought the original movie was better than the book. The book was kind of so-so.

[AlysonofBathe]

One word: Pamela, written by Samuel Richardson.

Just painful, really, really painful. I know it gets toted as the first proper novel in English, but oh man is it bad. Honestly, I can't believe novels got popular after this poor example. I'm not even anti-epistolary; there's just so many problems - the most amusing of which is Richardson's inability to figure out that a novel written in epistolary form really shouldn't be in present tense.

Cheers,
Alyson

[Fran]

One word: Pamela, written by Samuel Richardson.

Just painful, really, really painful. I know it gets toted as the first proper novel in English, but oh man is it bad. Honestly, I can't believe novels got popular after this poor example. I'm not even anti-epistolary; there's just so many problems - the most amusing of which is Richardson's inability to figure out that a novel written in epistolary form really shouldn't be in present tense.

Cheers,
Alyson

I have 'Pamela' in the TBR pile for sometime ... you're not encouraging me to escalate her

[AlysonofBathe]

I have 'Pamela' in the TBR pile for sometime ... you're not encouraging me to escalate her

Actually, this is going to sound weird, I would recommend escalating it.

It's bad, there is no doubt of this. But in my opinion it crosses the line from bad to delightfully bad, just like a classic 1950s B flick. Well, I guess I should preface that with: if you have patience, it is delightfully bad. If you prefer quick reads, it will just be painful without any comedic effect, because oh man is this one repetitive book.

If you can find the patience to get through though, it is really unintentionally funny. Happy reading.

Cheers,
Alyson

[shaphat]

I hated Moby Dick and Don Quijote, if I hadn't been required to read them for school I wouldn't have touched them at all.