This is why I only read modern literature

[Nayrman]

So, in my intro to media studies course, we're currently reading C.Dicken's Hard Times (we're going over satire for the next week or so). I just hate reading d*ckens, or any book (that's not fantasy) that's basically older than my grandparents. Authors from before then are so dang wordy and they never get to the dang point.
I'm just glad it's Hard Times...much of C.Dicken's work is five times longer...

Discuss the terribleness of 19th century and previous author's horrible-ness save for JRR Tolkein...and even he had his moments *coughCOUNCILOFELROND*

**lol, word censor blocks out "dickens"*

[Macawmoses]

You complain about it being wordy? Terrible.

[Nayrman]

You complain about it being wordy? Terrible.

wordy to the extreme.
I know I CAN be wordy at times, but good gawd have you ever read any of Dicken's work not named a Christmas Carol? X_X;;
Every paragraph is three times too long with unecessary detail.
Example: He's explaining whats on a table and he goes on for about seven lines about how well embroidered the paper is...I mean really who cares how the paper is embroidered!? It serves no purpose to the plot! X_X;;

[Zovistograt]

I'm sorry, but that's just being lazy.  Saying you hate classic literature just because it's well-written is a really bad excuse to not want to think once in a while.  Classic literature has that amazing quality of being created for intellectual readers instead of for readers who just read to be entertained.

Also, careful with those blanket statements.  Oscar Wilde?  Edgar Allen Poe?  Come on.

[Nayrman]

I'm sorry, but that's just being lazy.  Saying you hate classic literature just because it's well-written is a really bad excuse to not want to think once in a while.  Classic literature has that amazing quality of being created for intellectual readers instead of for readers who just read to be entertained.

Also, careful with those blanket statements.  Oscar Wilde?  Edgar Allen Poe?  Come on.

Okay, 19th century authors who specialize in NOVELS. X_X;;

Well-written and needlessly detailed is a fine line that varies on personal opinion. I like my detail as much as the next guy, but I just take issue with Charles' pointless detail on things that are inherently un-important objects. I just wonder whether this was for the people who had no imagination or just to fill up pages.
I never cared for Wilde that much. I enjoy Poe, only because he can use atmosphere very effectively while keeping other things rather simplistic (obviously "The Raven" is the prime example).

Those are just my opinions anyway.

[Macawmoses]

You complain about it being wordy? Terrible.

wordy to the extreme.
I know I CAN be wordy at times, but good gawd have you ever read any of d*cken's work not named a Christmas Carol? X_X;;
Every paragraph is three times too long with unecessary detail.
Example: He's explaining whats on a table and he goes on for about seven lines about how well embroidered the paper is...I mean really who cares how the paper is embroidered!? It serves no purpose to the plot! X_X;;

I've read numerous tales from him and a plethora of others. There works delight me.

Attention to detail is something few have, but knowing exactly everything around you in a story is not only effective (if done masterfully), but it shows a brilliant mind is at work.

Denying classic literature for what it is, literature, is like going to a movie and saying there were too many scenes with people acting in it. It just doesn't work that way.

[Nayrman]

You complain about it being wordy? Terrible.

wordy to the extreme.
I know I CAN be wordy at times, but good gawd have you ever read any of d*cken's work not named a Christmas Carol? X_X;;
Every paragraph is three times too long with unecessary detail.
Example: He's explaining whats on a table and he goes on for about seven lines about how well embroidered the paper is...I mean really who cares how the paper is embroidered!? It serves no purpose to the plot! X_X;;

I've read numerous tales from him and a plethora of others. There works delight me.

Attention to detail is something few have, but knowing exactly everything around you in a story is not only effective (if done masterfully), but it shows a brilliant mind is at work.

Denying classic literature for what it is, literature, is like going to a movie and saying there were too many scenes with people acting in it. It just doesn't work that way.

then you've either missed my point completely, or have a very stark difference in what you find good writing

[HTA!]

I haven't read any modern literature for almost 2 years.
It's all garbage.

The classics like Treasure Island, Siddhartha, 1984, Robinson Crusoe (sp) are all I can take nowadays...

[Macawmoses]

You complain about it being wordy? Terrible.

wordy to the extreme.
I know I CAN be wordy at times, but good gawd have you ever read any of d*cken's work not named a Christmas Carol? X_X;;
Every paragraph is three times too long with unecessary detail.
Example: He's explaining whats on a table and he goes on for about seven lines about how well embroidered the paper is...I mean really who cares how the paper is embroidered!? It serves no purpose to the plot! X_X;;

I've read numerous tales from him and a plethora of others. There works delight me.

Attention to detail is something few have, but knowing exactly everything around you in a story is not only effective (if done masterfully), but it shows a brilliant mind is at work.

Denying classic literature for what it is, literature, is like going to a movie and saying there were too many scenes with people acting in it. It just doesn't work that way.

then you've either missed my point completely, or have a very stark difference in what you find good writing

Your point is that wordy pieces of literature bother you. I compared it to movies with acting. I haven't missed the point. Also, there are boards outside of Power On.

[Nayrman]

You complain about it being wordy? Terrible.

wordy to the extreme.
I know I CAN be wordy at times, but good gawd have you ever read any of d*cken's work not named a Christmas Carol? X_X;;
Every paragraph is three times too long with unecessary detail.
Example: He's explaining whats on a table and he goes on for about seven lines about how well embroidered the paper is...I mean really who cares how the paper is embroidered!? It serves no purpose to the plot! X_X;;

I've read numerous tales from him and a plethora of others. There works delight me.

Attention to detail is something few have, but knowing exactly everything around you in a story is not only effective (if done masterfully), but it shows a brilliant mind is at work.

Denying classic literature for what it is, literature, is like going to a movie and saying there were too many scenes with people acting in it. It just doesn't work that way.

then you've either missed my point completely, or have a very stark difference in what you find good writing

Your point is that wordy pieces of literature bother you. I compared it to movies with acting. I haven't missed the point. Also, there are boards outside of Power On.

Wordy to the point of being uneccessary. Like the example I posted or similar to cuts of a movie based on a book (LOTR is a prime example).

[Java]

The Count of freaking Monte Cristo is waaaaaaaay too long.
However, I can't complain because it's a great book, so far.
I'm only on Chapter 10, so...

I haven't read any modern literature for almost 2 years.
It's all garbage.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there.

In my opinion, Harry Potter and the Inheritance Cycle are two amazing series of books.
There's also quite a few other great books out there, but those two are great examples.

[britneymahboy]

That's stupid.  I'm sure any of those authors could get "to the point" in a page, but what is the fun in that? Sure, you would get done with your assignment, but then the story would be extremely superficial.  I think you just don't enjoy reading.

[HTA!]

The Count of freaking Monte Cristo is waaaaaaaay too long.
However, I can't complain because it's a great book, so far.
I'm only on Chapter 10, so...

I haven't read any modern literature for almost 2 years.
It's all garbage.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there.

In my opinion, Harry Potter and the Inheritance Cycle are two amazing series of books.
There's also quite a few other great books out there, but those two are great examples.

Harry Potter petered out after book 4, IMO.

But I completely forgot about those Eragon books.

I have read those and enjoyed them... but it was like finding a winning scratch off ticket and then coming up dry for years on end.

First mention of Twilight gets a kick in the pants.

[Nayrman]

The Count of freaking Monte Cristo is waaaaaaaay too long.
However, I can't complain because it's a great book, so far.
I'm only on Chapter 10, so...

I haven't read any modern literature for almost 2 years.
It's all garbage.

I'm gonna have to disagree with you there.

In my opinion, Harry Potter and the Inheritance Cycle are two amazing series of books.
There's also quite a few other great books out there, but those two are great examples.

Harry Potter petered out after book 4, IMO.

But I completely forgot about those Eragon books.

I have read those and enjoyed them... but it was like finding a winning scratch off ticket and then coming up dry for years on end.

First mention of Twilight gets a kick in the pants.

Twlight was horrible X_X;;
I know I'm not the target audience but it wasn't even a competant story...

[Tupin]

And the fact that there exists a "book" written entirely in text message format makes me wish I only read classic literature. The name escapes me right now, but when I read it, it was the worst thing I have ever read.

You should read a Confederacy of Dunces, Nayrman. It's not "classic" (written in the 60's, went unpublished for 20 years), but it's good.