[ SECRET POST #2342 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2342 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________

















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 066 secrets from Secret Submission Post #335.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

02. http://i.imgur.com/LrC3uBr.jpg

[(Anonymous)]

I only like Kate Beaton's version.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't see what being an English major and a bookworm has to do with it. Being a bookworm doesn't mean you have to like every book. In fact, it's probably more reasonable to expect to dislike some books, even some books that are clasics.

[dreemyweird]

Different strokes, eh? I don't consider it reasonable to support the opinion that there are ultimate universal criteria of what is good and what is bad in literature (although there are definitely some reliable ones when it comes to technique).

But I'd be interested if you shared your reasoning. I get finding the book boring, but why is it "badly written"? The language is quite good, I think, and I remember the plot being interesting. Besides, I was... horrified by the ghost scene. Couldn't sleep properly for a couple of nights.

And as to "bad" and "good" literature in general, now that I think of it it turns out I have never been bored by a book that was a universally recognized classic. Not a single one. I... don't know what to make of it. And by "not bored" I also mean "I thought they were all well written".

[(Anonymous)]

Just because it's called a classic doesn't mean it's any good. I prefer Jane Austen's books to any of the Bronte sisters' books.

[(Anonymous)]

That's reasonable. But the best adaptation is the musical adaptation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW3gKKiTvjs

(lets be real, i just wanted an excuse to post that)

[(Anonymous)]

I'm just here for Kate Bush's song.

[(Anonymous)]

There are plenty of classics that people don't like for some reason, so it is hardly unusual. They are only classics because enough people liked them at some point.

I found every character in this book thoroughly unlikable, but wouldn't call the book badly written. It just wasn't my cup of Darjeeling.

[iceyred]

Honestly, the only character I liked was Heathcliff. He had goals and motivations for his actions. None of the other characters stood out enough to make them memorable or relatable.

[(Anonymous)]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: ANNE WAS THE BEST BRONTE SISTER. CHARLOTTE AND EMILY ARE OVER-RATED.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't like it very much either but once I'd made up my mind to read it I was able to finish it in a night. It's not unreadable, but like many readers, I find the main characters unsympathetic. The only bit I found somewhat moving was poor Hareton and his misplaced and strangely touching love for Heathcliff.

Also the Kate Bush song but I only really like this version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FF0VaBxb27w

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think it is badly written but that's coming from a non-native English speaker. Compared to the prose of, for example, YA novels I really liked Emily Bronte's style or do you mean the plot/build-up of the story?

[(Anonymous)]

It's no-where near one of my favourite books, but I still prefer the book to any of the adaptions I've seen. The characters are so toxic. It's kind of fascinating. It's like an anti-love story. My reaction to it is always so visceral.

[writerserenyty]

I thought the book was fine, but man people who consider it to be an ideal romance....

[(Anonymous)]

I didn't think it was badly written at all, but I understand why a lot of people dislike it. It was assigned reading to me in High School, and I really loved it, mostly because all of the characters were so fucked up awful that I just found it fascinating.

Unlike so many other things I'd read and seen on TV, it took a very hard, unkind look at the life of some very privileged people, and it was an interesting window into society and the time period, in my eyes. I found that most of the characters made me love to hate them.

[iggy]

I'm an English major and a book worm, and I dislike Jane Austen's work.

So. I know the feeling.

[amanuensis1]

-Narrator I don't care about
-Distant peripheral observation structure to the prose
-Main female character's motives still not comprehensible to me
-"Is this two books or one?" story structure

= me never comprehending the popularity of this book

[(Anonymous)]

Bah, troll. With young Heathcliff's face.

[lunabee34]

This happens to be one of my favorite books; I've probably read it upwards of 20 times. I love to teach it, too, because for the most part students tend to respond positively. Or at least, you know, respond. LOL (See icon for example)

That being said, taste is super subjective, and there are plenty of classics I haven't either gotten around to reading or that I don't like or that I find boring. Different strokes and all that.

I love love love the Timothy Dalton film of this book; the score/soundtrack is fantastic.

[(Anonymous)]

I read Wuthering Heights in full years ago, hated the whole damn thing. I mean, I could give my laundry list of complaints about it, but mainly—I just didn't like any of the characters and I didn't really give a crap about what happened to any of them, either. I only really finished it because I had a real completionist streak back then.

Found out later my grandfather had also read the book, back when my mother was a wee bitty thing, and ALSO hated it. Same laundry list of complaints. Same completionist streak.

Later my grandmother, who had never read the book, went to see the movie version with Laurence Olivier and thought it was the BEST THING EVER and the MOST ROMANTIC STORY OH and started calling my mother Cathy (her name is Kate) because IT'S SO ROMANTIC. Whenever she did that, my grandfather started calling my uncle "Heathcliff". Trolling: not just for computers anymore

The whole "KATE NOW YOU ARE CATHY BECAUSE ~ROMANCE~" thing also led to my mother reading it much later in college, and being fucking horrified, what the fuck is this shit MOM YOUR IDEAS OF ROMANTIC ARE CRAZY

tl;dr that's three solid generations of hate for Wuthering Heights, and Laurence Olivier can make anything look fantastic

[(Anonymous)]

Wuthering Heights was so, so boring. I got halfway into it before I dropped it. I then tried watching the movie (1992) and ended up falling asleep.

[rivulet027]

I have my English degree and I've tried more than once but I can't stand Gatsby.

[(Anonymous)]

Best bit of commentary ever supplied to me on the subject was from my mother: just because they're classics doesn't mean they're good. They just did something first (or else were the first to get famous for it), quite often. You don't have to love all the classics and anyone who says otherwise is a tool. I, for one, loathe Wuthering Heights. I think I just read the cliff notes or the summary on Wikipedia.

[dragonimp]

I supposedly read this in high school. All I remember is something about the locks of hair in the locket before the funeral. Yeah, didn't make a great impression on me.

[(Anonymous)]

I love this book, but I think it's because I first read it as a young angst filled teenager. You need to be in the grip of hormones to go along with it IMO. I suspect I would have hated it if I left it until I was properly grown up.

ALso I do think it evokes a sense of place really well, and if you go to Howarth you can really feel how dramatic and foreboding the moors must have been at that time.