Overrated Books?

[tracy18]

I love reading books, and have been catching up on all the literature that I had no time reading before the pandemic. I've also been revisiting classics that I had read in high school, and to my surprise, I don't find them great anymore. For example: I loved To Kill A Mockingbird as a teen but find it really overrated now. Though well-written, the book is pseudo-progressive when it comes to the discussion of race.

I have created this thread hoping to hear what books you think are overrated and why.

 

[Avro Arrow]

@tracy18 , I have removed the link in your post, because the website seems questionable, and your post stands fine without it.

 

[Owain Taggart]

This is a great topic idea. I think my big one would have to be Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land. I don't really think this one has stood the test of time very well. The concept itself is fine, and I actually love the idea, but the execution drowns us in so much period philosophizing and values of the day, rather than focusing more on the actual story of a Martian on Earth, which in the end left me feeling rather underwhelmed. There are parts that are very sexist and racist that just wouldn't fly today. I ended up feeling rather negative about the book, and no other book has ever given me such a visceral reaction.

I'm sure it was amazing when it was first written and that it was brave and inspirational, but I don't really feel it works now. Time has made it such a chore to get through.

 

[rhubarbodendron]

I always found 1984 overrated. It's really nothing new but only an extrapolation of history into the future. Much of what Orwell wote in that book has become true by now and we are on the best way towards living the rest of that book as well as several others like Animal Farm (all animals are equal but those with a pink skin are more equal and hence the farm belongs to them), Fahrenheit 451 (psycho-meds and electronic media) and Brave New World (designer babies and complete loss of autonome thinking /common sense).

 

[Kor]

As L.P. Hartley famously wrote, "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there." With years or decades of hindsight, certain works that were trailblazing in their day may not seem like anything special to contemporary readers, since so many other works since then have followed those same trails and expanded and built on them. Or they may seem backwards because they present ideas that are now considered archaic. So to me, it's important to think about what it would have meant to readers of the time in which it was published, in the context of society of that period, etc.

Kor

 

[Miss Chicken]

This is a great topic idea. I think my big one would have to be Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land. I don't really think this one has stood the test of time very well. The concept itself is fine, and I actually love the idea, but the execution drowns us in so much period philosophizing and values of the day, rather than focusing more on the actual story of a Martian on Earth, which in the end left me feeling rather underwhelmed. There are parts that are very sexist and racist that just wouldn't fly today. I ended up feeling rather negative about the book, and no other book has ever given me such a visceral reaction.

I'm sure it was amazing when it was first written and that it was brave and inspirational, but I don't really feel it works now. Time has made it such a chore to get through.

That is a book that I have penciled in to read next year. I read it about 35 years ago and really enjoyed it so maybe I should just leave it at that rather than risk disappointment.

One book I recently reread and saw through a more critical eye was Fahrenheit 451. I thought the story was far less believable than I remembered it. I could not see how society could have changed their attitude to books in such a short time.

 

[Owain Taggart]

One book I recently reread and saw through a more critical eye was Fahrenheit 451. I thought the story was far less believable than I remembered it. I could not see how society could have changed their attitude to books in such a short time.

I loved that book. I think that it's full of allegories though. The book burning is so much more than that. It's the fact that you have a government that doesn't want anyone to know how much better life was, that they have a fear that anyone reading these 'books' would have enough curiosity to find out for themselves and want to defy the government, hence the underground movement, the book burning symbolizing systemic suppression. I found it immensely powerful and it's still quite relevant today. Sadly, I felt that the recent HBO movie missed the entire point.

As for Stranger in A Strange Land, It's an odd one. The reason I feel it's so overrated is that it's so mired in cultural wankery that the actual story of the Martian doesn't seem to breathe, feeling more like side-story. It was frankly a chore to get through.

Now, if the story were to be rewritten today, It'd likely not focus so much on current-day culture and philosophy. If it were up to me, I'd set it further into the future to avoid that kind of thing, in order to be able to focus on the story of the Martian on Earth.

As L.P. Hartley famously wrote, "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there." With years or decades of hindsight, certain works that were trailblazing in their day may not seem like anything special to contemporary readers, since so many other works since then have followed those same trails and expanded and built on them. Or they may seem backwards because they present ideas that are now considered archaic. So to me, it's important to think about what it would have meant to readers of the time in which it was published, in the context of society of that period, etc.

Yep, fully aware of that, in fact I almost made a note to the same effect in my original post. Even taking that into account, I feel Stranger in a Strange Land is overrated.

 

[auntiehill]

James Joyce's Ulysses.

Fuck.Me. Running. Reading that monstrous tome was sheer torture. I had to slog through it back in college and was horribly disappointed with it. I had high hopes for it, as I'd loved "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man," but this? It's like he took the best parts of " Portrait " and blew them up to Death Star proportions until the pretentiousness of it all just runs you down like a steam-roller.

There are some wonderful pasages, some brief flashes of genius, but it's not worth wading through the 25 pounds of crap to get to it.

In my opinion.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[Miss Chicken]

I loved that book. I think that it's full of allegories though. The book burning is so much more than that. It's the fact that you have a government that doesn't want anyone to know how much better life was, that they have a fear that anyone reading these 'books' would have enough curiosity to find out for themselves and want to defy the government, hence the underground movement, the book burning symbolizing systemic suppression. I found it immensely powerful and it's still quite relevant today. Sadly, I felt that the recent HBO movie missed the entire point.

As for Stranger in A Strange Land, It's an odd one. The reason I feel it's so overrated is that it's so mired in cultural wankery that the actual story of the Martian doesn't seem to breathe, feeling more like side-story. It was frankly a chore to get through.

Now, if the story were to be rewritten today, It'd likely not focus so much on current-day culture and philosophy. If it were up to me, I'd set it further into the future to avoid that kind of thing, in order to be able to focus on the story of the Martian on Earth.



Yep, fully aware of that, in fact I almost made a note to the same effect in my original post. Even taking that into account, I feel Stranger in a Strange Land is overrated.

I think my problem with it was that there were people alive with living memory of when books were accepted. I think if it had been set another 200 years in the future than it would have been more believable.

 

[Kai "the spy"]

I once heard a phrase, probably a quote by somebody famous or something. It says "Classics are the books nobody wants to read, but everybody would like to have read".

 

[Marc]

I loved that book. I think that it's full of allegories though. The book burning is so much more than that. It's the fact that you have a government that doesn't want anyone to know how much better life was, that they have a fear that anyone reading these 'books' would have enough curiosity to find out for themselves and want to defy the government, hence the underground movement, the book burning symbolizing systemic suppression. I found it immensely powerful and it's still quite relevant today. Sadly, I felt that the recent HBO movie missed the entire point.

Though Bradbury claims the book burning etc wasn't as much a reference to government oppression as the impact that television was having on society or as he put it - turning people into morons.

http://www.openculture.com/2017/08/ray-bradbury-reveals-the-true-meaning-of-fahrenheit-451.html

 

[Delta Vega]

As I think I've stated on here before, I used to buy short novels, classics, on paperback, purely to say I owned a copy.
Never opened them, never read them, just smelled the fresh book smell and put them neatly in a cupboard.
Loads of them still lurk at my ex wifes.

 

[Owain Taggart]

Though Bradbury claims the book burning etc wasn't as much a reference to government oppression as the impact that television was having on society or as he put it - turning people into morons.

Hmmm.. Interesting what I got out of it then, given I feel it makes more sense from an in-universe perspective for what happens. I can see the TV thing as well, but much less so. But I guess that's a changing perspective due to a difference in time period.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Tried to read Heinlein as an adult after reading all of him as a teenager. Absolutely unreadable. Stranger is pretentious, Time Enough for Love is.. wtf Heinlein problematic city.

Then I found Podkayne of Mars in a second hand shop, a book I read multiple times around the age of 12 and adored. UNREADABLE.

 

[Colonel Midnight]

I think I said it in a previous thread a long time ago, but still holds true for me...

The Fatal Shore

Aaaarrggghhh... How to turn what is a fascinating subject (colonization of Australia and its respective issues therein), into boring dreck.

Cheers,
-CM-

 

[Doom Shepherd]

I read “Beloved” for a college lit course and found nothing interesting about it. It was a fancied-up ghost story.

At least, that’s how I felt at the time. 30-years-older, some-experience-with-PTSD, actually-has-known-some-Black-people me might have a different experience.