Who loves the classics?

[Magus]

I've always dug Samson (JUDGES) myself. I mean, seriously, the best revenge story ever. Well, he gets killed when taking his revenge, but still. All I'm saying is we all have dreams of killing people just for cheating at our riddles, with the jawbone of a donkey, nonetheless, and marrying hot chicks like Delilah, and killing thousands of people, not to mention setting their fields on fire using foxes and shit. Only downside is getting your hair shaved off, losing your powers, and getting your eyes torn out, followed by months of slavery. However, that's where the sweet revenge part comes in, as you bide your time, allowing your hair to grow back because of the witlessness of your enemies, and then crushing hundreds of them by knocking the building supports down. The unbelievers NEVER see it coming.

Also, I find it hilarious that I just used spoiler tags for a Bible story.

[Althane]

I enjoy much of Robert Louis Stevenson's work. I will agree that Hemmingway is just... yuck.

I've only READ Shakespear's The Tempest, but I've watched plays from almost all his other works..

Wait, I did read A Midsummer's Night Dream, that was pretty good. Overall, though, I prefer plays to actually READING the plays.

I've read Seutonius' The Twelve Caesars. Very interesting book, really gives a look into how REAL the Roman Emperors were. They really feel human.

I read a little bit of Plutarch. Besides finding out the ancient Greeks were dicks, nothing really interesting.

Hmmm, can't stand Charles Dickens, he's just boring as hell to me.

Trying to think of what other "classics" I've read. Does Sherlock Holmes count? I've ready every single one of those.

Yeah, I read a lot. I also spend a lot of time on the computer reading Wikipedia.

Oh, I didn't like Kidnapped. Though I love Edgar Allen Poe. The man was twisted, but he had some good stories.

[Nique]

Also, I find it hilarious that I just used spoiler tags for a Bible story.

You ruined it for me! I was just getting to that part! Thanks a lot moron!

I always liked the parables of the gospel myself. Poor rich jewish kid spent all his money on loose women and ended up pig-hearding. I won't spoilt the ending though like SOME PEOPLE.

[DeviousToast]

I personally prefer Poe as a short story writer to a poet. Not that there's a HUGE difference between the two, as his stories have a spectacular rhythm to them.

Don't get me wrong, his poems are good too. But they always feel to me like there was more he wanted to say. Fall of the House of Usher... mmm...

[Gascmark de Leone]

I like the Epistles. They're pretty simple, and you usually don't have to guess what parts are supposed to be taken literally and which parts are just symbolism.

I also read a lot of the H. G. Wells stories. It's kind of weird, reading books like The War of the Worlds, and realizing how wrong he was.

[Fifthfiend]

Originally Posted by Gascmark de Leone

By the way, does the Bible count as a classic?

(Please don't ban me for that. I'm not trying to make an argument.)

Depends how comfortable you are with someone sharing their opinion that it's a shitty read, full of one-note characters, preachy histrionics, agressively idiotic nonsense (Samson: Durrrr yes I tell pretty lady my secret weakness, pretty lady no betray me again hurrrrrrr) and a literal Deus Ex Machina of an ending that couldn't have been more contrived if it'd been directed by Michael Bay. Oh yeah and an epilogue that reads like the absolute worst drug-addled, utterly out-of-character fan-fiction ever put from pen to page.

I'm guessing people aren't gonna be too comfortable with that. So sorry boys and girls, Bible Study is over.

That last bit underlined and bold cause I get real tired of having to ban people for failing to get that over means over.

... I mean and honestly - the epistles? Those aren't even fucking stories, just straight-up damn advertisements for Jesusism. I mean really WTF, guys.

The Great Gatsy is basically daytime soap in book format.

I found I actually rather enjoyed GG - despite disliking basically every single one of its characters, especially any character whom I was supposed to find sympathetic.

I mean at some point it's just like okay yes, the very rich are evil sociopaths... sooooo what the fuck is Gatsby doing spending basically his entire life, nursing this weird-ass emoboy crush on an evil sociopath, who is herself married to another evil sociopath?

[Magus]

I was comfortable with your opinion about the Bible, as it was pretty hilarious. I'd also like to point out that we were earlier talking about Greek legend, which also had its basis in a religion; just because the religions are now extinct doesn't change that. In that sense I'd say the Bible is literature.

But I'll digress and avoid bannage, because you ARE Fifthfiend, and I know you mean business, by talking about Dracula. Why the hell did the movie skip anything exciting from the book and instead just focus on showing tits? Well...I mean...I kind've see why they did THAT, but in the book they keep fighting Dracula and chasing him down all over London, but in the movie absolutely nothing happened. The book is seriously one of my favorite reads. It makes modern shit like Anne Rice look atrocious, especially how weak and stupid her vampires are. And how goth and emo they are, as well. Dracula was just a plain old monster, and he wasn't goth or emo at all.

The movie tried to make him emo, actually, by throwing in some crap about his wife committing suicide and his being really sad about it. This never happened in the book, and it certainly never happened in real history, and if it had Vlad Dracul would've just shrugged it off completely as women in his time were pretty much considered worthless objects. And he was a ruthless psychopath who got a kick out of impaling his enemies. All I'm saying is the book was true to form and Dracula is just a very, very evil and psychotic guy who needs to be stopped. But the movie tried to make it into a romance and so ruined everything about the story.

Anyway, my point is that our modern society and Hollywood just seems like it has to project its values onto classic literature and rape the hell out of it. People are never just evil, there has to be some past trauma in their life that made them that way, etc. I can't stand it when people try and add stuff like that to classic literature.

[Tiako]

I love Homer. I love Virgil. I love Cicero. I think pretty much everything that has lasted over two thousand years has done so for a reason. More recently, I love Voltaire and Jonathon Swift. I hold the increasingly unpopular opinion that Dickens was a genius (I blame the fact that students have to read him in school for his current unpopularity). In non-fiction, Machiavelli was brilliant.

But more than anything, I love a good Sherlock Holmes.

women in his time were pretty much considered worthless objects

That isn't precisely true. The view of women held by our ancestors is much more complicated than modern feminists would have you think.

The movie tried to make him emo, actually, by throwing in some crap about his wife committing suicide and his being really sad about it.

That wasn't in either Nosferatu, Bela Lugosi's, or Christopher Lee's Dracula, and as far as I'm concerned, those are the only legitimate movies.

By the way, does the Bible count as a classic?

I'll avoid bannage (That may be the first time I have ever read a review of the Bible as a book), but I would like to add something: If you want brilliant religious writings, you can't go wrong with St. Augustine.

[Fifthfiend]

I'd also like to point out that we were earlier talking about Greek legend, which also had its basis in a religion; just because the religions are now extinct doesn't change that. In that sense I'd say the Bible is literature.

Except that Greek legend is a 'religion' that nobody believes, so you can discuss and criticize greek legend without having to worry about anyone getting all butt-hurt that you've offended their personal metaphysical conception of the universe, which is what the no-religion rule is all about.

I'll avoid bannage

Now see, if only you'd meant that.

If you want brilliant religious writings, you can't go wrong with St. Augustine.

What part of over did you think meant "Yes by all means, feel free to hawk the religious writings of a sainted Catholic theologian, whose works of biblical interpretation are foundational aspects of Christian doctrine"?

Let me be real clear:

Stop talking about religion, guys.

Tiako, banned for five days.

Next person brings up the subject? Is permanently banned.

There now, I hope that's clear.

Now if anybody wants to discuss any literature that is not a foundational document of an active religious denomination or specifically grounded in the theology thereof, please proceed in doing so.

EDIT: But if you do have something to say about religion, feel free to say it here.

[Magus]

Originally Posted by Tiako

That wasn't in either Nosferatu, Bela Lugosi's, or Christopher Lee's Dracula, and as far as I'm concerned, those are the only legitimate movies.

I was referring to this one. I mean, look at the title. This movie purported to follow the plot of the original novel. But the deviations change far too much, and change the whole meaning of the character. But Hollywood has done that to a lot of classic literature. I think the most criminal act was The League of Extraordinary Gentleman, though, and also Van Helsing and The Brothers Grimm.