Fanboy and Gothgirl is a modern novel, I think it was written in 2006, so I'm not surprised you haven't heard of it. It's not something that a person with a PHD in English would enforce on children, but I just like the story.
I've tried to read "classic" novels, but I don't go near 19th century british novels. Thomas Hardy is really not a good writer, same for the Bronte sisters. I like Oscar Wilde but everyone else, poets and novelists, just really bug me. I can't relate to the characters and the language is just so different. I feel like I've never been educated on the language. Because the language is just so different I feel that I can't comprehend the story all that well. That's pretty much why I dislike Hamlet, that and because his stories aren't that great. But rarely are people remembered for their stories, it's always for the way they write. I wouldn't mind reading old books, even Shakespeare, if it was for historical purpose, like to better understand the time. But no, we're just told that this guy is great and rarely given a reason why. Their books are treated like the works of God and that really bugs me.
To Kill a Mockingbird isn't a bad book and it was one of the few novels where I got some historical purpose for why it's great. It shows us how racists people were and how we've grown as people and how intolerance is stupid. Animal Farm is also another novel where it has historical purpose because it is an allegory for Stalin's rule over Russia. I think that novel is beautiful, both of those works are great, but they're modern. Most modern novels usually have relevance. The 19th century ones, I feel that teachers try to extract relevance from them. After all they're timeless so they must always be relevant. I could partially understand Wuthering Heights because it deals with love, but I feel that we could read another modern novel with the same meaning. Idk. I just don't like it when teachers analyze every little thing in a novel. Like I said it bugs me.
Whats the song that makes you cry ?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Fanboy and Gothgirl is a modern novel, I think it was written in 2006, so I'm not surprised you haven't heard of it. It's not something that a person with a PHD in English would enforce on children, but I just like the story.
I've tried to read "classic" novels, but I don't go near 19th century british novels. Thomas Hardy is really not a good writer, same for the Bronte sisters. I like Oscar Wilde but everyone else, poets and novelists, just really bug me. I can't relate to the characters and the language is just so different. I feel like I've never been educated on the language. Because the language is just so different I feel that I can't comprehend the story all that well. That's pretty much why I dislike Hamlet, that and because his stories aren't that great. But rarely are people remembered for their stories, it's always for the way they write. I wouldn't mind reading old books, even Shakespeare, if it was for historical purpose, like to better understand the time. But no, we're just told that this guy is great and rarely given a reason why. Their books are treated like the works of God and that really bugs me.
To Kill a Mockingbird isn't a bad book and it was one of the few novels where I got some historical purpose for why it's great. It shows us how racists people were and how we've grown as people and how intolerance is stupid. Animal Farm is also another novel where it has historical purpose because it is an allegory for Stalin's rule over Russia. I think that novel is beautiful, both of those works are great, but they're modern. Most modern novels usually have relevance. The 19th century ones, I feel that teachers try to extract relevance from them. After all they're timeless so they must always be relevant. I could partially understand Wuthering Heights because it deals with love, but I feel that we could read another modern novel with the same meaning. Idk. I just don't like it when teachers analyze every little thing in a novel. Like I said it bugs me.