I really wish that there was a figure who could get young people excited about language and literature and history the way charismatic figures like Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye get young people excited about science.

RandomKoolzip · 2012-05-25T19:27:50.419833+00:00

It's common (and socially acceptable) to hear someone say something like "oh, I suck at math" and then laugh about it. You never hear someone say "oh, I can't read" and laugh about it.

There's a difference between being able to read and actually doing it, which I think is what's relevant here. You see plenty of people (maybe not on reddit) who seem to be pretty proud of telling people "lol i dont read".

jamietri · 2012-05-25T16:36:37.170064+00:00

"Being a Harry Potter nerd has it’s downsides (besides the obvious lack of friends that goes along with it)"

C'man. This is bollocks.

red_leaf · 1 day

God I wish this meme would die.

steph-was-here · 2 days

And then he thought it would be a good idea to put her on a train surrounded by strangers for a few hours? USE YOUR BRAIN FINN!

Also he apparently told her dads and all of Glee club that he was dumping her and sending her to New York BEFORE he told her? Dick move.

rockeh · 11 days

Creepy.

foreverderpette · 14 days

I also remember that time, because it is now. If early 30s is suddenly what "young adult" means then I definitely missed that memo.

plumtingz · 16 days

Awwwwww yeeeeeeee

amydevi · 16 days

No. Everyone except you hates funny guys.

seeingeyehuman · 17 days

No, it's not like that at all.

Millerdjone · 21 days

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/isepo/what_is_the_scariest_book_youve_ever_read/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/kopk1/what_is_the_scariest_book_you_have_ever_read/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/qcqwl/what_is_the_scariest_book_you_have_read_ill_start/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/f8hrd/scariest_books_ever_written/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/e440q/scariest_books_youve_read_looking_for_suggestions/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/au227/what_is_the_scariest_book_youve_ever_read/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/8s0g9/askbooks_what_is_the_scariest_book_you_have_ever/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/dgety/what_is_the_scariest_book_you_ever_read/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/d4m0e/what_are_some_good_horror_novels_that_arent_by/

http://www.reddit.com/r/books/comments/ex65v/what_horror_books_do_you_recommend/

There you go. Looking at these threads, the consensus seems to be House of Leaves.

DutchMeNow · 21 days

He looks like he's holding in a fart and he's really sad about it.

sun_yat_sen · 24 days

Yeah, sure. That's what she was thinking.

Combustibutt · 25 days

the classics are not arbitrary -- it's not just because they were published in the 19th century, many books were published then -- it's because they are good enough to have survived since the 19th century.

Yes of course some works have more literary merit than others, and many of them are part of the literary canon. What I mean is that just because something is old, doesn't mean it's superior. There are loads of modern authors writing great literature, which people tend to dismiss in favour of "the classics".

they're not equal, and 'just the fact that you're reading' is not a good argument to me. it's like saying an organically-produced, healthy, homemade burger is as good for you as one from mcdonald's, and all that's important is that you're eating a burger.

I agree with you, the way I feel about it is (to borrow your analogy) - organic food may be healthier and better for you, but that doesn't mean you don't sometimes crave McDonald's.

Combustibutt · 26 days

I saw a post from yesterday about what books people have read so far this year. One member posted a large list of books (as did several others) that contained a lot of Doctor Who novels, as well as Sue Grafton, Vonnegut, and Michael Crichton. That person's comment was actually downvoted into negative numbers for no reason other than that someone clearly disliked their choice in books.

Ergh, seriously? That's ridiculous. I assumed that thread would just turn into a pissing contest and what do you know, it did.

I feel that all reading is worthwhile, if you're getting something out of it.

Exactly. While I enjoy reading and studying "classics", sometimes you've just got to kick back with a trashy book, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm really glad that the majority of people on this thread seem to agree. I'll happily admit that I love reading Stephen King (don't even get me started on that Stephen King thread from a couple of weeks ago), and I've read my fair share of terrible vampire books. Are they bursting with literary merit? Are they expanding my mind? No, but who gives a shit! I'm reading for myself and my own enjoyment, not so that other people will consider me "well read" or "literary".

Combustibutt · 26 days

I would describe someone as "well read" if they read often, if they read a lot of books, and if they read in a broad variety of genres.

I would say you are "educated" if you think about books critically as you read them rather than passively absorbing them.

The idea of which books are "classics" is for the most part really arbitrary, I don't think something automatically has literary merit just because it was published before the 19th century, which seems to be a common view. People thinking that they are superior to other readers just because they read classics rather than popular/contemporary fiction really piss me off. (By the way, I know that's not what you're saying with this question, it's just an aside).

Also:

If you read Harry Potter and Dean Koontz, are you educated?

Reading popular fiction and reading classics are not mutually exclusive. You can enjoy Dean Koontz and James Joyce, or Harry Potter and Charles Dickens, etc etc. Suggesting that someone is "not educated" because they read and enjoy fiction which is not considered "highbrow" is pretty stupid, especially if you're automatically assuming that people who read popular fiction only read popular fiction. I'll say it again: YOU CAN LIKE BOTH.

brenda0923 · 27 days

The reason I can't stand all the "I (/my mum/my brother/my aunt etc.) wrote this book PLEASE READ IT" posts is not because I object to reading self-published authors over popular ones, it's because it's just self-promotion and it pisses me off.

There's a big difference between a post saying "I recently read this self-published book, it was interesting because blah blah blah, let's discuss it" and "I wrote this book, please tell me it's good".

polynomials · 1 month

having a scene like this that just reinforces to the audience that he's sadistic is wasted when they could be fleshing out new characters introduced this season

Exactly. We've already got so many reasons to hate Joffrey, sure this made him seem a lot shittier, and fucked up in an EXTRA way, but I don't think it's radically changed anyone's mind about him.

I agree with you that it would almost have been better if there'd been a scene showing Joffrey as a sympathetic character - in the DVD extras for season 1 someone (one of the producers?) says that one of their mottos is "No bad guys" - they'd rather show multi-faceted characters. They seem to have pretty much thrown out that motto where Joffrey is concerned. Personally I think it's kind of boring to have a character who is just plain evil with nothing more to them.

polynomials · 1 month

I get what you're saying, but I still feel the same way about that scene. I guess should have elaborated, it's not so much merely the fact that it was disturbing, there are plenty of other disturbing scenes that I am OK with because they're necessary (ie the Harrenhal torture scene).

What bothered me was it's the way in which it was disturbing. What I didn't like about it was that they went with the sexual violence angle to show how psychotic Joffrey is when they could have done it in plenty of other ways. There are plenty of things that are in the book that they could have used (or they could have made up something else, that would have been fine too) but what they decided to go with was one prostitute beating another to death, while implying that Joffrey was getting off on it. I'm just not a fan of that decision.

polynomials · 1 month

Well, obviously. That doesn't affect what I'm saying though.

nisroch · 1 month

Absolutely. In the books I didn't find her a particularly interesting character (unlike the Queen of Thorns) but in the show she's a sassy badass, and there's nothing I love more, I think it's a huge improvement.

polynomials · 1 month

And those who didn't like the Joffrey scene kinda missed the point. It's one thing to say Joffrey is a spoiled little shit. It's entirely another to show that he is a dark, cruel, sadistic freak.

I didn't like the Joffrey scene but I don't think I missed the point. I get that there's a difference between Joffrey as a spoiled little shit and Joffrey as a sadistic freak, but as many people have already pointed out we do already hate Joffrey, there's no dispute over whether he's a bad guy or not, and the Mad King comparison was already spelled out to us by Tyrion in the scene with Sansa. My main gripe with the whole prostitute-torture scene was that it was INCREDIBLY disturbing to watch and, to me, just felt gratuitous and over the top. I don't think the ammount of character exposition achieved by it justifies how distressing it was.

Sumnerblack · 1 month

DO IT.

banway22 · 1 month

why support feminism when i don't support the majority of what feminists (public) say?

What is it that feminists are saying that you don't agree with? I'm genuinely curious.

thisisbearcub · 1 month

A career relevant to a literature degree? Tell me your secrets!

aliceinwonderpants · 1 month

I love seeing Lena out of character, it weirds me out...like seeing a dog walk on its hind legs.

plumtingz

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login