Monday, May 30, 2011


"I hate Freud and want to kill him because he made 'id' a real word so my spellcheck doesn't catch it when I misspell 'if' that way."


"I really hate Freud and all of his theories."

"I hate Freud. What a pervert."

"I hate Freud. I really, really hate Freud."

"I hate Freud.. and if he wasn't dead already.. I would wish him dead"

"Can't believe that dude was lecturing about what a genius Siggi Freud was. it's freakin 2011"

"i hate Freud & Rogers. there's no evidence in there theory."

"Freud was a creeper, if you listen to his ideas, you're a creeper ...
children dont understand the concept of mother and father so young, they dont recognize faces or personalities, its just people who give them things and pay attention to them ... freud was retarded im glad hes dead"

"sigmund freud sucks. He's bad to his student carl jung."

"unless you're a silly psychoanalyst. then everything has a sexual subtext! but i hate freud and all of that crap..."

"just hate how he shows up in every single book that mentions psychology. I think that our culture needs to get over him."

"I hate Freud man, everything he does!"

"Hate freud n his sex theories makes my essay writting take time ! #fml"

"I hate Freud. I wish he was alive so I could kill him."

"I think freud sucks and is psycho."

"Sigmund Freud sucks! I hate him for all this stupid pedagogy stuff and psychanalysis... It's sooo much to learn, damn!"

"I fucking hate freud.. Penises and all that shite!"


"Psychology can kiss my ass! Hate Freud and dont a shit about what he says lmfao x3"

"Final conclusion: I hate Freud! I don't like his theories, I'd, ego and superego! Not that true!"

"I'm tired of Freud and cognitive thinking ):"

"I would say more about my hatred for Sigmund Freud (yes, the psychology guy) but I'm so consumed by this hatred towards him, that the only words I can say are: 'Yes, I really hate Freud. Without a doubt, I want to revive the man and beat him to death, revive him again and then shoot him, revive him again and beat him with a sledgehammer, then revive him again and hit him with a phallic shaped blunt object.'"

"Yeah, I kinda hate Freud for being a misogynist mommy-complexed penile little weasel."

"I hate freud bc every argument begins and ends with 'it's in your subconscious' YEAH WELL THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH"

"ugh i hate freud. why do i have to write an essay about this horny ass man? honestlyyy"

"I hate Freud so much, I swear they aren't even words! :/"

"Erghh. I hate freud./.. Stupid pervert!!"

"I really hate freud and I can't believe we still are educated on his disproved, out of date theories"

"My dream interpretations have been shockingly accurate in the past, yet I STILL refuse to believe it's legitimate just because I hate Freud."

"I hate Freud. He's such an arrogant butt and so sexually obsessed, it's hard to believe that there are people who really take him seriously."

"when someone says 'according to Sigmund Freud...' I immediately render their argument invalid. I hate Freud."

"I have found yet another reason to hate Freud. They just keep on coming."


"The amount of times I heard the words poo, turd, excrement, defecation, anal, and genitals in that lecture was just unnecessary. Hate Freud."


"I hate Freud. His entire philosophy says that everyone wants to screw their mom and I DO NOT want to screw my mom!!!"



Sunday, May 29, 2011



"Another theme in the story is that society is wrong. As Huck travels down the river, he does many things that would be contrary to the beliefs of society such as helping the slave escape. He also learns black people are people too. The book is an irony because of this style."

"I'm sorry, but Jim talks too much in this book."


"i hate Goethe, he's the most ugly writer ever plus he's German, bleah!"


"Oedipus Rex was not very intriguing to me because it was hard to understand and I could not follow the characters very well. I would suggest that they revise it to make it fit today’s standards more appropriately."

"Oedipus Rex is bad. The book reminds me of drinking rancid milk. First off, there was far too much incest in the book, no one likes to hear about incest. Also, the book is incredibly unbelievable. Yeah, I'm sure that the Sphinx really told a riddle, and if you got it wrong, he ate you. I am sure that is 100% historically accurate. Don't even get me started on this blind guy 'seeing' the future. Sounds like a ...Miss Cleo to me. Jocasta did the only realistic thing in the entire book..."


"BOLOGNA! I am sick of this story and never again wish to read it ever. I am not even kissing this dreadful story goodbye, I am pushing it out my front door and throwing its shoes along with it."

"I think that it was amazing because I just read that Anne Frank and her family was hiding behind the bookshelf and the people who was looking for them that they never did and the Jews was trying to move to another state because Hitler was trying to kill them because Hitler never liked them when he was a little boy like his father did and before his father died."


"It would be nice if Tactitus’ understanding was more like a tacit understanding.

That is, unspoken."


"This book seemed more like personal opinions of others' works than anything else. Reading it was like reading a grip of book reviews; it would have been like this site binding together this review and others to make a book. Since I have never read pretty much all the books this book referred to while making comparisons, I was completely lost."


"I give this book 2 out of 5 because Dr. Jekyll clearly made the mistake that no scientist would like to make in their entire scientific life. He used his knowledge for bad reasons which resulted in hurting people."

Saturday, May 28, 2011

W. B. Yeats - Michael Robartes and the Dancer

"Hate it! all of it!"

"A dear friend gave me The Collected Poems of W.B. Yeats ... I think of my friend every time I crack the spine."

"William Butler Yeats is about as bad a poet one can be ... as a technical writer he was, 98% of the time, an incompetent bumbler."

"This book is something I would not recommend to anyone. The writing is awful. I could not seem to get into the book at all. Normally, even if I don't understand the plot or don't enjoy a certain genre, I can at least give the author credit for the writing, but this is not the case with this book. I was bored from beginning to end."

"to me it try to show that G*D is everything and technology is against G*D. I o not believe in this."

Friday, May 27, 2011

R. L. Stevenson - The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde II

"I found the book extremly hard to understand. It is written in an old english style and jumps around alot. It goes from describing a scene of one thing and then jumps to another topic completely. I thought this was an ok book for it's time but is too confusing for the modern day passive reader."

"The book was too slow for real enjoyment."

"A double personality everyone has, in which one should be chosen over the other. This seems as looking everything in black and white, when most of the things and people are grey. There is always the constant struggle of choosing whether the good or bad option which we know clearly, but a bad one amidst a million good does not convert you into your evil self. The book also portrays that once you turn evil; you cannot go back, which in a way I agree on since the guilt of the malicious things done would be a too great burden for an innocent person to live with. Still, being positive minded, I'd like to believe it's never too late to change, and that without the need of potions, only through determination, Jekyll could have found an inner strength to suppress his evil side and transform back into himself, which is what many people have proven to be able to do these days."

I found that the description of the setting was over used and i cannot understand how Jekyll suddenly can invent a potion that can turn him back and forth from Hyde!"

"A Slight Boring"

"I half way expected Hyde to be huge and beast-like similarly to the way he is seen in comic books and even movies. That part was disappointing. The fact that the book jumps from one perspective to the next and the story is simply retold from another point of view. It is simply not a good book. There is a lesson in this. If your wife tells you a book is bad and you burn the original chances are the second is going to stink just as bad."

"Not a classic.
Please, it is exagerated to think this book is a classic, such a opinion is too restrict and reflects a readers too simple meaning of life."

"This is one of the hardest and boring books in life! It deals with strict men of Science, for instance, Dr. Hastie Lanyon. This book, like the Invisible Man, is a novel that has WAY too many details and should be strictly enforced not to be read. Who wants to read a book about science-fiction and not to mention the cuss words on every page? Who likes minor details around every corner. But, I must admit, there are fabulous descriptions of the characters and them themselves are quite interesting! But, this book is not good."

A Kid's Review

This book was a MAJOR DISSAPOINTMENT. I would strongly advise AGAINST reading it. I thought it would be suspensful, or at least interesting, but sadly it was just a bad book.

The story holds no suspense--the explaination of Dr.Jekyll's antics is handed to you on a silver platter--no mystery, no surprise, just boredom. The author, in the beginning, gets the reader interested, but the ultimate piece in the whole mysterious puzzle is downright stupid.

The language was annoying, too. I respect that the book was written many years ago, but the way the characters rambled ON AND ON and never got to the point was downright obnoxious. I only read the book because I needed to for school. It was almost torture to read the constant whining and complaining of Dr. Jekyll, which, by the way, went on for 13 pages straight.

I was totally let down by the simplicity and stupidity of the book. A classic shmassic. It was a horrible, badly written book with a flimsy plot line. To any person who wants to read it simply because it's famous, they're in for a real shocker. And if anyone says it's a good book, three words: big fat lie."


"I did not like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde because it took too long to get to the plot. There was a lot of talking, but did not go into full detail of how he became Mr. Hyde. The author would even go back in time to things that had nothing to do with the story line. When I think of Mr. Hyde, I think of more chase scenes and anger. I also think of more scenes of Dr. Jekyll in his laboratory. The ending was also kind of plain and boring; I like endings that give me closure or an ending that hints of a second book.
Older people who like old British novels would like this book because older novels were written in the same form. People who have a lot of time on their hands would like this book; it takes a long time to read it. People who read a lot and do not get bored by a slow book and do not fall asleep could read this book. British Literature majors would also like Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde because of the style of writing. If you get bored really easily and can fall asleep reading; then you should read this book."

"What is this?
So I am sixteen (writing this review under my Mom's account) and I have been trying to read this book, but i just cannot get past page 19. For me and maybe some others as well am having a hard time getting this book and no its not because I'm slow or do not read often (I love to read), but because i didn't have the patients to keep re-reading to understand what is going on in the book!"

"yet another uninteresting 'classic'...
We were always told in school to read the classics...and so, having embarked on an attempt to do this, I find it very uninspiring. Just as interesting as Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment, Stevenson's Jekyll and Hyde novel is both unexciting and a waste of time. Maybe the modern day media has dullened my senses, maybe I have become anaesthetized to the twists and turns of this timeless classic. Then again, maybe it is hugely overrated by literature readers who get their cues from the 1940's."


"Trying recently to read this book, I was struck by how terrible it is. Stevenson's non-fiction - mostly travel writings - is very well-written, but his fiction s*cks. THe story begins with a scene which is utterly false and impossible to picture: a scene of a man and a young girl running into eachother at a corner by accident, having been travelling perpendicular to one another. So they run into eachother, literally, at the corner. And the man, so the narrative goes, is not so much a man as a human juggernaut. He tramples calmly on the girl, headless of her screams. Now, physical interactions of this kind are chaotic. It would never come about that the girl collides with the man (Mr. Hyde) and then is trampled. If such an unlikely collision were to occur, the girl and the man would interact in a chaotic manner, with each being put off balance and spun around by the impact. The man would not be in a position to 'calmly trample' the young lady. This scene, which is supposed to be a cornerpiece of Hyde's brutality, is completely false and impossible to visualize. And could much better have been dramatized as Hyde being importuned by the girl and giving her a good sound thrashing."

"The worst book ever
HATE this book I love to read but this book was a bore and do
not read it I have never read a book as bad as this one and this book is also stupid it is a book you put down you will never pick up. And I was told I would love this book if you are ready to press the buy button for this book don't read Jeffery Archer insted"

Thursday, May 26, 2011

R. L. Stevenson - The Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde

"Here's what you need to know: Dr Jekyll IS Mr. Hyde. I've now saved you an afternoon."

"piece of ccrrrrraaaaaaaaapppppp"

"I read the first story of the book 'Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde' and with all the recommendation I got I thought I will have some fun times with a classic mystery, but didn't like it one bit! I donno if it was cuz I was told of the story before hand *rolling eyes* or that on page 11 I guessed the rest of it all by myself! But whatever it was .. it was a complete torture to get through! The writing was so incoherent and he went on babbling about so many stuff before realizing why he even bothered to talked about it at all!"

"Completely overrated and boring. The guy barely kills anyone. It may have been controversial in Victorian England but now it shows its age."

"Sooo very boring. A LOT less interesting than I thought it would be, it has almost no action whatsoever in it."

"Boring, with little excitement. It didn't help that I already knew the main point of the story. Could be a ton deeper in regards to the science and characters...not very impressed."

"I don't think it should be a classic but you know i understand from this time period that this was made that it would be pretty good but i mean come on, by today's standards its not very good at all and it doesn't make me think."

"I give this book 2 out of 5 because Dr. Jekyll clearly made the mistake that no scientist would like to make in their entire scientific life. He used his knowledge for bad reasons which resulted in hurting people."

"This was one of the biggest disappointments i have discovered so far when it comes to reading. Though I must confess that with a more vivid vocabulary i might have concluded differently."

"The story is related in past tense, not in medias rei, in the middle of the action, which diminishes the momentum of the story."

"I suppose back in the day it would have been this amazing story, but even if you weren’t familiar with the events it seems like it would be really hard to not figure out what was going on. Then again, the mystery genre wasn’t even around then, so it’s not like people had read things like this before."

"You have to pay attention to tell who is who and where they are."

"It had some scary parts in it, if there is a movie of this out there, I will not watch it!"

"Every time I think about this book I feel anger welling up. I liked the story and the style, but I've got lots of trouble with the subject. It's a story about a man who wants to be able to do evil without ever being held accountable for it. Some might say, it's about a man who truly wishes to do only good, but I just can't see it that way. I see more humanity in trying to deal with one's shortcomings than in finding ways to push them on someone else."

"Hmm I wasn't really impressed with this. It was very short for one thing. I don't know what to say realkly- it really wasn't what I was expecting. RLS didn't go into detail and explain all the different levels of his transformation or even chemistry setting (I am a big chemistry geek - so a little test tube descriptoin wouldn't have been asking to much would it?)
It could have been so much better."

"What exactly was Stevenson trying to say I'm not quite sure"

"The sotry is nothing like pop culture portrays. The monster is a small man, not a huge giant. I read it for the cultural experience. I wouldn't read it again."

"I definatly prefer the Broadway version. At least in that one he's doing it to help someone else."

"-For one thing, I got confused between the characters (Utterson, Lanyon, Enfield-like, who's who?!)
-And for another--and this may make me sound like a classics weakling--but basically, it was just words to me. I didn't really understand it too well...not trying to sound dumb or anything."

"I liked the music from the Broadway musical better. ;)"


"Glad this one was short. Started a little slow, picked up quite a bit in the middle, and then just screeched to a halt in the last quarter.

Of course, I never feel good about critiquing a book written 100+ years ago. The language, tone and style are just completely different than anything I read normally.

Oh yeah, and God Bless the Packers!


"Too much tellin', not enough showin'. Authors in Stevenson's day seem to have had something against things actually happening during the course of their stories, so the story only progresses by other characters talking about things they'd heard had happened, before. I guess that's why classic literature is usually considered so boring by modern standards..."

"I was hoping for a lot more. It pretty much sucks.The author would get his balls torn off it he workshopped this in a creative writing class. Inconsistent POV and imagery, facts don't seem to fit together. I hope his other stories don't suck this bad."

"I can't say I was impressed by this book. I was sort of disgusted of double-faced human natures.."

"i really did not like this book i was not cool"


Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Wordsworth and Coleridge - Lyrical Ballads

"Samuel Coleridge wrote one of my very favorite poems of thepre-modern epoch, Kublai Khan. He also wrote The Rime Of The Ancient Mariner, though, and for that I cannot forgive him. It's an over-wrought and under-abridged torrent of dreary drivel with unmusical rhymes, cursed with a storyline of sorts which takes ages to go nowhere. This so-called masterpiece strikes me as mostly another tool for sadistic lit teachers to torture their students with until they're conditioned to loathe all poetry."

"I hate Wordsworth. Believe it or not, his poems are too wordy."

"I HATE Wordsworth. To go any further would involve forum-inappropriate language."

"I hate Coleridges poetry, it drives me nuts!!!!!"

"I hate Wordsworth, so much shit about 'the mountains,' 'the green, verdent fields', etc. We get it. You like Nature. Next?"

"Ok, so maybe Willy W. wrote some pretty poems, but we just can't get over his overwhelmingly annoying pretension and hypocrisy. And it's all very nice that 'poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings', but did he really have to throw all that other shit in about 'a man speaking to men' and 'the breath and finer spirit of all knowledge' and 'bind[ing] together by passion and knowledge the vast empire of human society'? C'mon, Willy, talk about a big fat hypocritical ego..."

Monday, May 23, 2011

Jorge Luis Borges - Labyrinths

"I have no idea what has happened in any of the stories I have read. There's no plot here. No characters. It's all a bunch of confusing rambling about nothing. We are given no reason to care about the jumbled 'events' that supposedly happen in the text. It's poor storytelling, and yet the language isn't beautiful enough to count as poetry, either."

"This book seemed more like personal opinions of others' works than anything else. Reading it was like reading a grip of book reviews; it would have been like this site binding together this review and others to make a book. Since I have never read pretty much all the books this book referred to while making comparisons, I was completely lost."

"Borges sucks cock."

Tacitus - The Annals

"I hate Tacitus, really, can't stand the guy !!!"

"I hate Tacitus. Die, Annals, die!"

"Fuck that. Fuck the past."

"Tacitus is a fucking fraud."

"It would be nice if Tactitus’ understanding was more like a tacit understanding.

That is, unspoken."

Saturday, May 21, 2011

Chaucer - Troilus and Criseyde

"this 'lytel booke' stinks."

"I had to read this for an undergrad English class...From Epic to Romance. This was neither epic, nor was it romantic. More annoying than Romeo and Juliet. Just awful."

"Because really, any girl traded to an invading army as part of a prisoner exchange is a shameless hussy who is Just Asking For It. Let's deride her for being untrue to her true love, so that we can call our poem a Romance."

"I like romantic comedies.. Jill Mansell and Cecilia Ahern are good. All the Harry Potter books (yes I am a Harry Potter geek..). Russel Brands autobiography is funnyy. I hate Chaucer."

Friday, May 20, 2011

Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet VI

"I didn't actually read the whole story. I tried to read the paperback. Then I went to SparkNotes and couldn't get through that either. So, I sat down and watched the movie hoping the Leo could add something to this storyline. I managed tough it out, and ended up wondering why ANYONE would compare a romance novel to this... thing. It's certainly something you shouldn't read for leisure, but for school or something. Otherwise it's very unentertaining."

"I don't believe dat love have such powers and it has no full meaning for a reality show, to me it sounded more like a poks. But i enjoyed reading the book and it gave me a strong feeling about life. Romeo died for love without any regard for what lies ahead. I put this qus to any one who has feelings for this book would u die for a girl\boy u love so much if u really don't trust that person?"

"Shakespeare is Shakespeare. Honestly, I kind of feel like if you've read one you've read them all, but I suppose if you're going to read just one this is probably where you should start. I've read maybe half of his extant works, and I'm done."

"bah! i hated this! couldn't understand much of it, which is sad since i speak english. dumb metaphors!"

"Not Shakespeare's best work, in my opinion. I much prefer his dramas"

"what i dont like is Death because love !!!! Love is eternal , love is a supreme force.."

"His works were never directed for kids, so kids shouldn't read it."


"I only liked Paris"

"This book was ok, I dont like to read older books."


"It was 'blah' and hint of 'meh'."

"All I have to say is this: it's overdone, and I'm tired."

"Does everything they say HAVE to be poetry?"

"Kind of confuzzled on this one"

"What a crock of archaic sheep-dung!"

"'What light through yonder window breaks?'

'Oh, it's totally you Romeo!!' ;D

LOL, i made the second one up!!! ;p

*Clears throat*

This book was really good. (:

William Shakespeare has a way of defining love...a type of love that is undefinable...

Well...of course we all know the true love by this point, right??

GOD's love. :)"

"I don't see the point in reading this story except to promote cultural literacy (in which case, a plot summary would suffice)."

"Horny, whiny teenagers annoy me a cynic, but I find Juliet to be a child and Romeo to be a wishy washy, whining wimp."

"My mom made me read it. Because they do in America. I thought the ending was so ridiculously morbid I rewrote it. I swear. Eleven syllables per line, because my mother failed to accurately explain the principle of the iamb."

"Shakespeare: Even more pretentious now than he was 500 years ago. I'd wish he'd die and stop coming out with books but that would be like asking for Tupac to kick it, if you know what I mean."

"Romeo, Romeo.... of all Shakespeare's plays this one is over done. Read Twelfth Night or Titus and Adronicus instead!"

"Ah Shakespeare--how doth we judge thee--let me count the ways. Do we look at Shakespeare in total, or do we put on our 21st century glasses and fiddle with the pieces? Actually, Shakespeare was rather fun, albeit lengthy and tedious.
Shakespeare was a writer."

Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet V

"At the age of THIRTEEN, Romeo, after complaining about his lovesick relationship with Roselind ... Now, Romeo, an 8th grader, jumps from one girl to the next. Plus, through the whole story he's ALWAYS crying and whining about how he hates his life, instead of actually doing something. What a man. If I was a girl wanting a MAN, I wouldn't ask God for Romeo, the antithesis of a MAN"

"This was actually more vulgar than I thought it was going to be. If you were planning on acting this out with stuffed animals, this is not the play to do that, other than the sword fights."

"Maybe I'd feel more depth in this if Romeo and Juliet were mature, responsible adults. But the fact is that they're not, and I have no sympathy for a little 13-year-old girl"

"Yes, like many others, I was put off by the emo teenager who instantly falls in love with the beautiful girl and kills himself for someone he knows about as well as the Tim Hortons guy I say hi to every morning as he pours me my Earl Grey"

"I sure wish Shakespeare didnt poison his books with nasty things."

"Romeo is in love with Rosaline and just all of the sudden is in love with Juliet? I don't believe that. I don't think he actually loved Juliet, and maybe not even Rosaline. He did what a lot of men do; see pretty girl, kiss pretty girl, try to get pretty girl into bed. I don't think the two of them actually had a meaningful conversation about their likes and dislikes"

"I keep on finding myself mocking Romeo (Ro-emo :)). The guy literally reacts to everything with suicide."

"And now we present ROMEO AND JULIET with Jackson Porter.

Romeo and Juliet, ah the most beautiful love story of all time....

WHOA! STOP THE TRAIN RIDE THEIR, G! This was bizarre. I take it to mind that it was written in like, what, 1611?, and by boring old Shakespeare, but, that's no excuse for this weird stuff in it. The whole story takes place in four days (get me to believe that and I'll give you a hundred dollars).
I don't get why we need to read this. It was pretty much a waste of my time.

Jackson out!"

"Wha, wha, wha. Get over yourselves! A classic, perhaps, but I have no patience for lovesick teenagers (more specifically, for teenagers in general.) It bothers me that Shakespeare relies so heavily on the timing element. I sit there sweating, lamenting the fact that, were it not for a few minutes more, the outcome would be far less tragic."

"The book is written in a 'old time' way. I thought that the point of there love is stupid, two people that just want to be together just suicide. What I have learned in life is that suiciding don't solve any problems. I don't get why people say it was good, because to me, I've have read better love stories."

"Sometimes the book bored me a little because it was kind of boring. Whenever Romeo would profess his love for Juliet, I didn't like it because it was very long and boring."

"As much as I am easily swayed by Old English, and fancy rhymes, this story still didn't do it for me. Every now and then I would get sucked in it and embrace a few lines, and some moments. But, really the whole plot was unrealistic, and the characters were over dramatic. I understand that this was made in an era where entertainment was just starting to bloom, but that should not be an excuse. Romeo [age, who really knows?] is a weak, romance-hungry, hippo-critical, emo, sucker who just broke up with his girlfriend Rosaline and rebounds onto Juliet. Juliet [age 14] is an easy ho, who fell in love in a day because of Romeo's good looks, and flattering words [GAME]; she has no clue about Romeo's very recent ex-GF Rosaline. The two [R&J] knew each other for less than a day, talk for a few hours, then decide to get married. Juliet's dad [Capulet:] is a total stiff, douche bag who dominates his wife and anything that passes his way. Mercutio was the only character with character. Tybalt was a childish, fool. Benvolio is just a character who takes up some time and dialogue. The nurse, and the friar were the only people who had some common sense, and true human feelings who actually get screwed over the most. Paris is some dude in the end to add a bit more drama to this 1590s theatre novella; He's supposed to be Mr. Perfect-in-every-way and is set up to marry Juliet by her parents. Sadly, Paris actually thinks he loves the ever-so-beautiful-yet-naive Juliet. Romeo's pop [Montague:] is a total moron who thinks he can make everything better by making a golden statue of Juliet after she and Romeo die [remind me how many people died again? anyway.:], because a golden Juliet makes for sunshiny rays of happiness. It's a story that is similar to today's highschool dramas of life; being naive, with hormones raging, so called 'puppy love.' STUPID. It's no wonder this story is all the rage with highschoolers. I too was suckered into this book in highschool; read it again as an adult and you'll beg plead to differ."

"This book was NOT funny, and the sex scene wasn't clear"

"I found Romeo and Juliet to be enlessly obnoxious and pretentious. The whole play was meant for me to be emotionally involved in these characters, but I never really cared about anything that happened to them ... People say this is the greatest love story ever written, but modern love stories have dealt with the exact same themes that Romeo and Juliet did. Didn't Twilight have these thems of love, free will, fate, temptation, death, and even God?"

"It didn't seem like a romance play to me. I believe it is more of an Anti-war play."

"Regardless of its advanced language, the consept is clearly stated. It revolves around a very important issue, which people lack to recognize. Assumptions. Assumptions is what lead many of the characters to do what they do. Romeo kills himself because he assumes that Juliet is dead. If he hadn't assumed, then this event would have not taken place."

"The story of Romeo and Juliet has always been one of hate for me. I didn't like the fact that Romeo was lamented his love for one girl and then in the next minute he would be enamored with a different girl. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that most of Shakespeare's plays are kind of like this."

"I didn't feel any sympathy at all for these people. They were too stupid for pity."

"I think that it was amazing because I just read that Anne Frank and her family was hiding behind the bookshelf and the people who was looking for them that they never did and the Jews was trying to move to another state because Hitler was trying to kill them because Hitler never liked them when he was a little boy like his father did and before his father died."

"It was just a little to much imagination, personally."

"This is trash. I generously rated it 2 stars because it's somewhat 'well-written'. I expected it would be good, because, as we all know, it's Shakespeare, and everyone loves him. And it's Romeo and Juliet, it's a classic. As it turned out, the plot is completely pointless and insane and left me firmly convinced that William Shakespeare was on crack."

"Yes, that's it, the story of two teens meant for each other in a 'star crossed' destiny. Eventually they both die, and the story ends. Not so interesting to me, although then again I'm not one to find myself interested in classical literature like this, or any work by Shakespeare."

"Hate: Romeo and Juliet. Romeo is a whiny idiot. He's head-over-heels for Rosaline and can't possibly even THINK of loving anyone else ever, yet 3 days later is killing himself for Juliet. Juliet is hella young, and a petulant teenager who'll do anything to annoy her parents, including dating their mortal enemy. Gross. I'm not a fan of love at first sight (it's BS, IMO) and am even less a fan of teenagers doing massively crazy, life-altering things (e.g. suicide) for teenage infatuation.

Whoever decided that this was a model for love is a moron"

"I'm finding Shakespeare's plays seriously disappointing, chockfull of whiny brats who need a good slapping. It's a shame his poetic skill is wasted on such drivel."


"What I always have considered to be one of the the worst love stories (or one of the worst stories in general) was changed in my view after I read it... for the worse. I dislike Shakespeare, and I dislike poetry, so either way this is a lose lose situation. 'But', you may say, 'You're a theatre kid. You're supposed to LIKE Shakespeare!' I find that to be stereotypical.
Shakespeare is too wordy. Why can't you just say what you mean (and only say it once, Shakespeare is very repetitive)? It may be a classic, but this classic needs to be replaced.
This is a whiny and depressing piece of literature in which the hero is more feminine than the heroine.
Don't read unless you're a Twilight fan."

"I understand that Shakespeare was a romantic guy but I wonder if he even factored in the realistic part of life..."

"What flighty young girl, though a voracious reader, wants to read Shakespeare her first year in high school? There are too many new cute boys to look at!"

"Altogether I thought that their parents erecting golden statues of them was kinda lame. Made them something to look up to instead of telling people that they where wrong and they should never get the idea that what they did was ok."

"I don't know why its considered the best love story of all time because I kind of thought it was crap."

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet IV

"I never read a Shakespeare play that I found the least bit engaging. Not R&J, not Hamlet, not Macbeth, not Merchant of Venice, not A Midsummer Night's Dream, not Othello. I have no defense. I must just be dumb."

"It all started when Romeo been depressed ever day moping around and feeling sad all of the time because he loved Rosaline and she did not love him back. So one day Romeos cousin told him about this party and that Rosaline would be there so they left and Romeo saw Juliet there and followed her to her house and both exchanged thoughts about each other ... Play was very stupid it sucks no one should read it because there is no point of reading this because all this play is taking up your time."

"Shakespeare's book, Romeo and Juliet, is placed in the 18th century. A time in which women were not considered as thinking people or capable of having any feelings ... it is very heavy, and you never see the moment in which you are going to finish it. The book is written in an intelligent way, and the fact that is written by the famous writer and poet, Shakespeare, gives a good impression of the book to the reader."

"Bring me proof that 'love at first site' can actually exist ... For those who love tragedy, I recommend Othello or Odepius Rex, and for those who like Shakespeare, I recommend Much Ado About! Nothing"

"Getting Old
This may be one of the great works of humanity, but it just doesn't cut it for me. The gender sterotypes are nauseating, to say the least. Though required in schools, this book is nnot one of the bests to read on your own time. Or maybe I am just disillussioned."

"Gimmie A Break!
Not that I don't like Shakespeare's works, but his tragedies are terrible, especially this one. I can't understand the language real well, so I have to grab one with the contemporary language so that it'll be easier to understand. I just can't understand this love tragedy at all! Here are some things that confuse me:

*How did this feud really begin?
*Why can't this story end in happily ever after?
*Why does Lady Capulet have to be so stuck up on everybody?
*Why couldn't Shakespeare have written in a language we could all understand?
*Why does everybody have to jump to conclusions?

I simply can't understand why people love this play so much. It's ridiculous! If you want a true love story, try reading 'A Midsummer Night's Dream'. This one absolutely SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

"I'm supposed to like this classic, but the poetic dialogue wasn't realistic enough."

"Cliche, lacks literary value
This is probably the most cliche novel ever written. It's boring as well and isn't even in English. Fail!"

"I bought this book hoping it could help me understand shakespeare's words better, but it didnt. Instead I had to look up every other word in a dictionary or sometimes even online. Soon it just got so hectic that i just threw the book out and bought a better more reliable source."

What a boring love story - I wasn't impressed."

"I wonder if I really know what I'm getting into by criticizing this book. In all likelihood I'm going to get a wave of negative comments because of what I'm about to say. To badmouth The Bard is almost to badmouth literature itself, and I don't want to do that.

Thomas Jefferson once said 'I cannot live without books', If anything is true about me, it's that.

But thats the thing, technically, RAJ isn't a book, it's a PLAY."

"My daughter was given this book to read in her 8th grade class. The Plain English translation is AWFUL! The translation clearly states sexual induenedo and the Lord's name is taken in vain several times. Whether this is Shakespeare's true meaning is unclear to me....but it is COMPLETELY inapproriate for high schoolers. Please be very cautious when ordering this version."

"i just read this book. everybody like always talks about how great it is and everything. but i don't think so. like, it's been done before, right?? soooo cliched. omg."

"Sex sells; so does violence
We human beings haven't changed much since we discovered the written word. There's a reason they call it 'the oldest profession'; sex sells, and we all know it. And there's just something too fascinating about blood that keeps us from turning away; why else would we slow down to stare at the car wreck?

Watch Hollywood today, and tell me that sex and violence don't sell. And don't tell me that 'Romeo and Juliet' is about romance; young teens rarely understand what romantic love is and all too frequently mistake lust for love. Shakespeare needed dough, and "Romeo and Juliet" provided it for him. Some of his other pieces are also primarily fluff, but they were fluff in a more cerebral fashion. 'Romeo and Juliet' simply panders to the lowest common denominator.

It's in this vein that Shakespeare wrote this spurious piece. There's nothing here that tells us anything about the human condition other than what we already know and acknowledge as some of our worst traits: that we can be impulsive, gullible, stubborn, hateful, and murderous.

As far as I'm concerned, the only good thing about 'Romeo and Juliet' is that it spawned the plot for 'West Side Story,' which, although laden with cheese, does highlight some of the more noble facets of the human character (along the less noble) and features some wonderful music. "Romeo and Juliet" will, however, simply annoy anyone with half a brain."


"I'm sorry, but this book was awful. You can burn me for a heretic, but it was. It was supposed to be tragic; I thought it was hilarious. First, everybody says that Romeo and Juliet were lovers torn apart by fate. Fate had nothing to do with it! They died through sheer stupidity and melodrama on their part. Had they not been so hasty, they both would have come out alive. Second, the characterization was extremely shallow and one dimensional. Third of all, Romeo and Juliet weren't 'in love' at all. How can you love someone you've known for all of five minutes? When they meet at the Capulet party, all Romeo does is ramble about pilgrims and hands and prayer. Then he leaves and Juliet declares she's in love. They didn't even have a real conversation."

"that book that you throw out
this is a really bad, boreing book that i couldn't wait to throw out"

"Romeo and Juliet, the tragic story review
As I didn't liked the story at all I cant say lots of things about it but if I had to rewrite the book, I would do it in modern English. Old Englih is one of the reasons I didn't liked the book. Another reason is that is a very predictable story and it has only 2 themes: Romeo and Juliet's love and the war between their families. For me Romeo is the worst character because he only thinks about Juliet and kissing her.
These and much more are the reasons of why I didn't liked the story"

"Literary junk food for the masses
Plain and simple - Shakespeare sold out.

*R&J* is simply sensationalist trash. It contains a good portion of Shakespeares worst verse and insipid characterizations. It's unchallenging, crude, and simply melodrama for the most part. It's the Shakespearean equivalent of 'Party of Five' and the Spice Girls.

The only saving grace of this 'play' (why not call it a 'B-play?') is the beautiful soliloquy by Mercutio about Queen Mab.

The rest is absolute garbage.

Read a real play. 'Hamlet,' although dreadfully overplayed, is a fine work. So is 'Caesar.'

And forget Shakespeare. There are other fine Elizabethan writers who have been forced to exist in the "Bard's" shadow. Had Marlowe lived, we wouldn't have even known about Shakespeare. And Donne finally been recognized for the genius that he is. "

Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet III

"Does anyone honestly like 'Romeo and Juliet?'"

"What i would really like to know is how William Shakespeare is considered a genus?"

"it just didnt touch me the way i thought it would."

"this book made me angrey. why would somebody write this it is so boring. no one likes shakespear unless they are wierd or went to greadute school."

"To be fair, I do not care for any of William Shakespeare's works, partly because they all end in tragedy and partly because I have a very difficult time understanding what the characters are speaking about due to the language."

"The Bard, receiving an assumption of timelessness because he's been required reading for the last 350 years."


"This book is the worst love story ever! Read Stephenie Meyer books!
~Sachi <3"

"I thought it was bogus about how they fall in love in first sight and die for each other... like okay now."

"Recommends it for: Old People
A good book. But not as good as a fine old classic by J. K. Rowling. A warning note to all you Shakespeare fans out there, with a classic, you always go wrong."

"I didn't like this book because it was really boring. another reason is that the words are weird and the author doesn't spell word correct."

"I hate plays so I did not enjoy this novel."

"Horrible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!How can people be so stupid!!!!!!!!Is it a love story or a hate story?????????????????"

"If Romeo and Juliet was a piece of modern literature, it would have been an epic fail in my book (sad to say that there are books that sound like this published last year! Eeek!). But the timeless language of Shakespeare can only be condoned by a brave reader, which was not I, but this novel/play encouraged me to read the romance I was afraid of. Not the swooning maiden on the cover wrapped in the arms of a buffish, half-naked man kind of romance though, true romance that comes from the heart of an experianced writer (Du Maurier, Sparks). I didn't understand it, and shied away from it. Shakespeare and many other authors that I cannot remember the names of at this moment have shown me that romance does not have to be stupid, it can always be thrilling and kick ass!"

"I’ve read far FAR better stories from authors that don’t need to make their lines rhyme to have a good story"

"Oh tradgety. What would I do without you or your undying love. Yeah, sounds lame...well so is this."

"It's funny how people say William Shakespeare is complete genius for writing this. There's never been a greater act of plagerism in history. Pyramus and Thisbe, anyone?"

"I probably shouldn't hate on this too much. I mean, it did spawn off Tales For the Leet, quite possibly one of the funniest spoofs i've seen in my entire life."

"What was Shakespeare smoking?"


"What silliness, what stupidity! Romeo and Juliet are not and CAN not be the greatest lovers in history. For if they are, it would certainly speak volumes on how truly shallow and reckless human love truly is.

Even more was I disgusted with the rash decisions of each character. Killing themselves over each other is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I don't give a damn how much you like your boyfriend, why are you killing yourself because of it? There's plenty of fish in the sea. Cry a river, build a bridge and get over it."

"god, i hate reading shakespeare. it's like agony. i don't like thinking 'what the hell is going on?', 'what does this shit mean?'"


"I just can't buy the whole premise of the story. You families won't let you be together so you commit suicide. I'm too much of a fighter. I'd have found a way."

"It was hard to read and they didn't use proper English. i know it was witten in like the 1600s but no one talks like that anymore."

"Im a guy i really didnt enjoy it, if i was a girl i might have"

"If Shakespeare were alive today I think he would have given this one star as well."

"I hate that this book is read by teens who are over-emotional and hormonal to begin with and then being told that if they can't get their way, opt for death?"


Monday, May 16, 2011

Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet II

"You do not want to get me started on a rant about this play. However, I'll give a short list of why it's terrible.
1. Why the fizz bits are the montaques and capulets fighting to begin with?
2. Romeo is a wuss that mopes about his trouble with girls and does nothing about it. Also let's point out he poisons himself and Juliet stabs herself.
3. It's Romeos fault that mercutio the best character gets killed.
4. The whole premise of faking your death never makes sense, just run away.
5. At the end the parents are like 'oh, by the way we really didn't care if you married.'"

"In the book Romeo and Juliet, a Family Feud with two offspring from the family fell in love and were not aloud to see eachother. It didnt meet my expectations"

"He's pimping himself around the block while little miss romeo is doing what ever other girl is doing; fantacising about her romeo (haha). Then within five minutes of knowing each other they decide that they are perfect for each other? No. They weren't even alive long enough to get to really know each other. They went straight from honeymoon bed to death bed. Isn't that what every girl dreams of? They can't be together so they kill themselves? Dumb. If that happened in today's society then people would not romanticize it. Why are teenagers being taught this? if anything it should be used as a 'what not to do' book. I read this book for my freshman english class and though that it was so stupid."


"PA_THE_TIC! Seriously, these kids are pathetic. First of all, Romeo was just getting over a broken heart, so wouldn't that make Juliet his "rebound girl". Who marries their rebound girl? And they only knew each other for one evening before they decided to get hitched. These two need to learn how to control their whoremones. Throughout the story I'm just inwardly groaning and rolling my eyes, but when they both finally killed themselves.. I was kinda disappointed. I think the two idiots should have suffered a bot more (gosh I sound evil, but it was just pathetically annoying to have to read."

"this book is about a super dooper romantic couple that are in love but their love is forride bum bum bum. they secertly get married and try to run away. read the book and see what happens next."

"I could go on about the ridiculousness of this book for ages but you have anymore brain cells than these characters, you already get my point. And for those of you who AREN'T any smarter than Romeo and Juliet, I'll dumb it down for you. This book sucks."

"If I wanted to read about romance, I would have picked out a romantic novel"

"And number three, the chorus of the play said it was fate that Romeo and Juliet dies, but I don't think so. How can Romeo be so shallow and just fall in love with Juliet at first sight? To me, 'love' at first sight is such a strong word. When you are completely unaware of a person's background or culture or most important, personality, that means 'love' at first sight is based on a person's looks. If Romeo and Juliet are aware of each other's households, I'm sure at least Juliet wouldn't let something like this happen.

Oh and, did you know that during Shakespeare's time, women are not allowed to be actors so they need a little boy who's voice hadn't changed yet to play Juliet? Yeah I know, is crazy. Also, why are we studying Romeo and Juliet? I think we're studying so deep into this play that we are considering this William Shakespeare didn't even thought of."

"The most OVERRATED piece of literature EVER.

love at first sight?
more like on the rebound.

Although part of me wants to believe that the play may be good (since it was written to be a play, not to be read), I still see nothing amazing about it. Two dumb teenagers rebelling for "true love" (aka making out)

When we were about to read it in class I was SO excited to finally read it. I mean, come on, it's Romeo and Juliet for God's sake...
but no.
And yet, I continued trying to find something good about it.
Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

I HATE this play.
and what I hate even more is the fact that it seems like teenagers are being encouraged to run away and get married with the first guy/girl they meet. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I think it's funny that people have tried to ban books with value because they're 'controversial', but nobody ever thinks of banning this one. Honestly, what's the moral here? Defy your parents for the guy you just met at a party and made out with?"

"'Oh my god I just heard that Juliet died. Now I'm going to kill myself.' Geez. Talk about immature."

"I hate Shakespeare, save a for a few plays, I hate him, especially this overrated trash called Romeo and Juliet, the so-called 'ultimate love story.' How can it be the ultimate when both the lovers die because of stupidity. I much prefer his comedies such as 'Midsummer Nights Dream,' the 'Taming of the Shrew,' 'The Merchant of Venice,' and 'Othello'"

"The book relates to many different genres of literature. The catagories are Death, Hatred, and Drama. Throughout the book people are dying from quarrels in the streets of Verona. The book met my expectations, because they were not set very high."

"I, like 99% of the population, fail to see the value of Shakespeare.

He has precisely two plots, both dull.
One is the boy-meets-girl, boy-loses-girl, boy-finds-girl-again plot found here.
The other is man kills king, becomes king, ends up in bad way.

His prose is indecipherable, pointlessly convoluted, uses a thousand words when ten would suffice and is DULLL, DULL, DULL."

Sunday, May 15, 2011

Shakespeare - Romeo and Juliet

"Classic, I suppose."

"This book has a stupid plot with stupid characters."

"Shakespeare is an amazing writer, but society epitomizes this play to too far a standard."

"Shakespeare is so overrated."

"I dont like this book so much because i hardly read and when I do its mainly sports."

"I hope you NEVER have to go through reading this. Sad thing is you probably will....Hated it!"

"BOLOGNA! I am sick of this story and never again wish to read it ever. I am not even kissing this dreadful story goodbye, I am pushing it out my front door and throwing its shoes along with it."

"I can't believe that people use to talk like that back then.
I have to say, as I read more of the book and tried my best translated Shakespeare’s words into my own; it wasn’t as hard to understand. But I don’t find Romeo and Juliet to be such a grate book. But then again it’s not a book, it’s a play.
First off there was too much poems. It like, watching a movie that have singing every five min. Too many things are dun behind the stage. Like fights, the wedding….. I don’t think it was a good idea to make it into a book."

"I didn't like this book because it was all about them two finding love. Also it could have been better by making it more intresting."

"I still have a problem with Juliet. And now I have a problem with Romeo. I find them both to be too whiny to fit into the Shakespeareal archtype of tragic hero/heroine."

"it's not a book, it's a play, and any teacher who makes you read it in school alone, as a book, is a douche. Because first off, it's not meant to be read that way, it's mean to be performed. Or at least read out loud by a few different people.
The reason I didn't like it, is because of the shakespearian talk. I like to read things that actually make sense"

"sometimes you just wanna yeLL 'JULIET! YOU MOTHER FUCKING RETARDED ASS GIRL!'"

"he sucks to be quite frank every single one of his plays don't really make a lot of sense and some of the stuff that happens in said plays make no fricking sense
Ex 1: Romeo and Juliet see each other 1 i repeat 1 time and suddenly they are willing to die for each other and cause a massive war of families ... In the end, Mr. William is one of the most overated writers around and hell a nice chunk of people don't even think he really wrote half of his plays"

"I strongly disagreed with the message portrayed in the play Romeo and Juliet. I strongly pitied a large percentage of the characters but not the specific characters that the author ended the reader to pity. In my personal opinion Shakespeare was more concerned with making a scene than actually creating an accurate image of humanity.

It is my personal opinion that the true vicim in the story 'Romeo or Juliet' was neither Romeo nor Juliet but Paris. Romeo did in fact die in this tale, as did Juliet, but these characters had the chance to die in love. Paris lived alone.

Paris was also an often forgotten character. His role in this story should have been a much larger one. Romeo and Juliet were two over dramatic children who did not fully understand what was best for either of them. It ended in death. They disrespected there parents and elders and paid the price for this.

Shakespeare wrote a story that has become quite popular but I still strongly dislike this play."

"In general, he's severely overrated. Yes, his influence is considerable, there is no doubt of that. But literature has evolved a lot since Shakespeare, and an inordinate amount of time is spent with his material as compared to more relevant texts."

"Juliet is naive, silly, and incredibly annoying. She is supposed to be pure and determined, but all I see is a flirtatious girl with little ambition or drive except to be with her true love.

All Romeo could do was spout useless verses about Juliet's beauty. And all Juliet could do was respond to the mutual affection."

"i didn't actually 'read' this. sparknotes/movie? yaa."

"This is trash. I generously rated it 2 stars because it's somewhat 'well-written'. I expected it would be good, because, as we all know, it's Shakespeare, and everyone loves him. And it's Romeo and Juliet, it's a classic. As it turned out, the plot is completely pointless and insane and left me firmly convinced that William Shakespeare was on crack."

"This book is about the stupidity of two young (and when I say young, I mean it!) people who see eachother and think they are in love with eachother. Their infatuation with eachother drives them to come up with the dumb idea of feigning death and laying in a tomb, after Romeo kills his 'wife''s cousin. Juliet is a young stupid girl, who has no ambition and does nothing at all but complain and cry about how much her life sucks. Romeo is a sexist young man, who encourages Juliet to be a waste of space. Both feed on popular stereotypes. Juliet especially, is the worst role model possibly imaginable. She sends a bad message to girls, and Romeo, a bad message to guys. I am not saying I would not recommend this book to others, it is hilariously idiotic when you can riddle through all the gibberish writing. If you are looking for a good laugh and a chance to make fun of people because of 1) how much their miserable lives suck 2) how they react to their miserable lives sucking and 3) how they make their miserable lives suck, this book is for you."

"I only gave this four stars because I wanted to blow my brains out after reading it."

"i just dont like how they both ended up dying."

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Sigmund Freud - The Interpretation of Dreams

"Outright silly"

"I did not care for this book, and I even work in the field of psychology!"

"I did try to read it, though, and didn't get very far. Even when I was studying psychology in college, I never had the urge to pick up this book again."

"I don't think I could get much out of it, for it appeared that his mind and ideals were as rigid as his treatment paradigms."

"i just don't think everything has to do with sex!"


"In my opinion, this is more of a reference book on dreams. Whenever I have a dream I look up my dream meaning using the index. Unfortunately, usuallly the dream definitions that Freud discusses in this book only help me to analyze part of my dream. But then again it would be impossible I think for him to analyze anyone's dream through a book, as we are all individuals and live different lives so that our dreams would be variably different from one another's. Anyways, I just use this is as a reference and I don't expect I will read much of it,,,but for someone who really wants to study dreams in general and their meanings, this may be a good read."


Friday, May 13, 2011

Oscar Wilde - The Importance of Being Earnest

"I suggest that no one else ever ever read this play."

"I wonder how old I need to be before I'll start enjoying comedies."

"Hated it! it might be a satyr and all but I did not like it."

"Sometimes I had to wonder about the stupidity of the personnages, I mean they act in such a stupid mannor."

"I read this on my 100 classic book collection for Nintedo DS because it ranked ad 'the funniest book' well I'm sorry but I didn't laugh once."

"i used to call it 'the importance of being a liar'"

"To quote Monty Python" OH YES, PLEASE, DO GO ON "'oh it was extremely interesting. Very very, quite.. it was dull. dull, dull, dull, god it was dull!'

If you have to have someone explain the "nuances", then it's not well written (or interesting)."

"In other works, when characters are impossibly witty or erudite, we scoff at the writer's artificiality. In Wilde, we call it genius. Why?"

"Being a comedy, the play often awakens thoughtful laughter, or laughter that makes one think about important things, within the audience."

"After reading this I came up with the theory that Comedy cannot be timeless. Comedy always was and can only be commentary on contemporary society, or based on the basic and general knowledge assessed up to that time."

Thursday, May 12, 2011

Herman Melville - Moby-Dick III

"It would have been really good... if it wasn't for this whole whale affair."

"The most boring 35 hours of my life!!! The writing was beautiful, and lyrical, so listening to this book on audio was like listening to soothing background music where you don't listen to the lyrics. A big book about nothing."

"Melville really needed an editor."

"Perhaps it was the time in my life-but I just did not enjoy this book. What a shame as I always considered it a classic."

"Ahab and starbucks character were boring and the idea of the book is just ....weird ."

"I actually read the kids version of this book and that's all I needed! ;0 Captain Ahab will and ever be one of the weirdest characters ever written"

"Got sick to death of trying to figure out the symbolism contained in every sentence. Are you kidding me?"

"Here’s the thing. I know you think that Moby Dick is a seminal work of American literature that’s influenced everything that has come after it with a mighty influential power, but, see, it’s actually not. You know why? Because nobody wants to read it. You know why? Because it’s so ungodly boring ... Moby Dick may be a great novel on epic themes (it is, obviously), but that doesn’t make it okay."

"Whaling is not worthy of such extensive literature"

"This book bored me to tears. I read it because it's a classic. I gave it one star because it was written in English, a language I love"

"Every one says this book is a classic and that it's Soo interesting frankly I disagree. It's boring! I mean too much detail I mean there are 50 pages straight about the difference between two whales. Maybe it's because I read it in 6th grade but even back then I had a college reading level. I understood the book but found it boring."

"I know an American classic is supposed to stretch my reading ability but I need a dictionary for every other word when reading for fun, it's not fun.

I only sailed with the crew until chapter 45. I had always thought this was an adventure story but I found it to be a book that did not know which way it wanted to go: is it a biological study of whales, a history of American whaling, or a venue of a person attempting to be Shakespeare.

Sorry, English professors but I don't understand how this is an American classic."

"I got to chapter 45 and could not go any further. The language was too much for me. I thought this was an adventure story; didn't think I would need a dictionary for every other word. I don't understand how this is an American classic. Sorry, English professors."


Tuesday, May 10, 2011

Sophocles - Oedipus Rex II

"I believe Sophocles' main purpose of writing this play was to teach us that we can not change fate. When I think of fate, I think off the word outcome. I ask myself: What will happen next in my life? Or how will this decision affect my outcome in life? One thing I know is that we can not change what God has set aside for our lives. Oedipus could not change the fact that he killed his father and married his mother. As much as Oedipus wanted to think that he didn't kill his father, Laius, he couldn't change that he did. God has a plan for our life and as much as we might want to change something that happened in the past, we can't. This is why we have the choice to make the right decision or the wrong decision. I guarantee if we make the right decisions we will have fewer consequences that affect us in the future. Oedipus could not change the outcome of his sin. I believe this is the main point Sophocles was trying to teach us throughout the play."

"Greek? Please!! The quality of the book itself is fine, but the story is terrible. Don't even try to read it"

"I thought that it was really weird that he killed his father so he could marry his mother, I didn't think that things like that happened way back then."

"The book is very hard to understand, you can't skip a few pages and keep going because you will be lost. You have to be devoted to read it, you have to read each page carefully and examine every sentence to find out what the true meaning is. What turned me off to this book was the incest, its not my thing. I'm not into that stuff"

"I would never read this book unless i had to again. Just for the fact that I hate to read."

"This book was very boring to me. It was kind of hard to understand.... The part when they where having sex with their family was very nasty. I hope that i would not have to ever read anything else about this book. Because it was not interesting at all. It did not get any of my attention. The book of Oedipus, which I did not like at all."

"This whole book was about incest! There was almost nothng else in the book. Everyone is related to everbody else in some way. Im not in to all that stuff. I think Sophocles went a little too far. I understand that incest went on back then but give me a break! The story was a litte too far out there."

"The language used in this book is hundreds of years old and is not relevant to how speak today. The way this story is told makes it unbearable to get through and hard to understand. I'm not saying its that bad of a story, but there is no reason to read a book the way it was written in ancient Greece."

"We know as the reader so much more then what the actors knew that it is hard to go and relate you just keep asking yourself why?"

"Like I said in the beginning, the book was a good read you just have to realize that the author was apparently incapable of putting some real thought into it. Also the portrayal of the Gods was unforgivable. I mean really since when does a greek god interfere with the lives of mortals to give a pointless warning?"

"Oedipus Rex is bad. The book reminds me of drinking rancid milk. First off, there was far too much incest in the book, no one likes to hear about incest. Also, the book is incredibly unbelievable. Yeah, I'm sure that the Sphinx really told a riddle, and if you got it wrong, he ate you. I am sure that is 100% historically accurate. Don't even get me started on this blind guy 'seeing' the future. Sounds like a ...Miss Cleo to me. Jocasta did the only realistic thing in the entire book..."

"It was boring because it was not in modern language. In order to follow the story, I had to keep stopping myself and take time out to understand the 'code' of words. While I was taking time to understand I had already forgot what I was reading in the first place."

"Prose isn't very inspiring, we all know the story so most of its intended emotional impact is lost."


"well, it was better than the iliad, but that's like saying, 'i sure like being constipated vs. having diarrhea!'"


"This review refers to the W.B. Yeats translation."


"The deal-breaker for me, however, was the fact that the play is not only summarized on the back cover, but specific details to the plot are revealed, robbing the story of any surprise at all for the first-time reader."


Monday, May 9, 2011

Sophocles - Oedipus Rex

"Oedipus Rex is one of those awkward tragedies. The first time I read it I was lost. It’s a Greek mythology. This text includes extemporaneous factors."

"Don't bother reading this hogwash! This play is garbage! The whole plot is bleeding stupidity!

The prophesy said that Oedipus would kill his father; later to add that he would marry his mother! The characters so clueless that they can't put together the facts! His ankles, for goodness sakes, are a dead give away! Once his father died, and a new suitor became available for the throne and Jacosta's hand in marriage, it was so obvious Oedipus was her son! Why would she marry a man around the age of her supposed dead son, after her husband was murdered? Shouldn't she be able to tell that the killer of her husband was her son? Meaning he would return home to wed her! The dialogue dragged on and on, and wasn't necessary; it was so very boring! Oedipus was so annoying that I wanted to kill him myself; he is not even a true tragic hero! The plot was conveniently done so it worked, but it's not plausible! This is the worst piece of literature I have read! I almost fell asleep during it in class! The only reason the play is famous is because of the Oedipus complex! Either this play is his worse, or Sophocles is a horrible author/ playwright!"

"Yeah, he marries his mom, we got it."

"Oedipus Rex was not very intriguing to me because it was hard to understand and I could not follow the characters very well. I would suggest that they revise it to make it fit today’s standards more appropriately."

"I did not like this play. There were many things that a good play has to have that this did not. For example characters, setting, conflict, and the main theme."

"I am still having nightmares. No one needs to read these descriptive words and imagine the filthy images portrayed in this play. I cannot even imagine how messed up Sophocles' mind was ... Also, just as a side note, when you rearrange Sophocles’ name, it spells Cop Holes."

"i read this some time in high school. it's pretty pointless, in my opinion. although maybe i didn't get much out of it in high school. maybe it's actually a critique of power and hierarchy. well, i don't care enough to find out."

"Oedipus Rex was not as good as I thought it would because it did not meet the criteria that I thought to make a good book. It was very dull and was not understandable to me. The writing style was more of a Greek style and kind of random. It did not have a very good attention grabber which is one of my main criteria and what keeps me wanting to read the book."

"Sophocles convinces me the Greeks get far too much credit for developing drama."

"Negatively, it began to get confusing and completely understand where the plot was going due to the language the author wrote in."

"I found three different online translations of Oedipus the King and read them in parallel to help assure I was getting most of the nuances. Hmmm. When I rate something extremely old like this, I ask myself, what would happen if a modern playwright wrote something similar? My best guess at the answer is that he wouldn't have any chance at all of getting it produced. It's rather dull, and what characterization it has lacks subtlety ... As an artifact from the past, it is interesting and educational. As entertainment judged with no handicapping, even modern television writers routinely do better."

"As I was reading this book , I thought this book was totally and ridiculously weird that Oedipus
had a actual physical and sexual relationship with his mother. In today’s society that’s just something
that can’t be said. But if you actually read again then in those days it was like an abomination . As I
began to read further it had some details that was explicit (jocasta and Oedipus). But I think what
really makes this book a good is that they had some strange situations that made you think in deep
concentration to what would you do. It’s also a good book because it has mortals vs. the gods . That’s
like crazy like humans vs. different god’s with different powers. I don’t know . This book is weird
in so many ways ."

"Would i recommend this book 2000 years ago? Of course. Would i recommend it now? Of course not. This was probably a very captivating book back in the day, but for a modern audience, its a lackluster book to say the least. Guy kills his Dad and porks his mother, I'm not really sure how this became a mainstream story that people would take their family to see. Only in ancient Greece. The story line wasn't even very interesting, just blind guys, incest and murder. Let me know when the Thunder Crusher comes in and blows everything up. Not only was the book not interesting, but the author only has one name. I mean come on. How can you take someone seriously when they have one name and is very similar to the word 'testicles'?"

"After reading Oedipus Rex I felt like it was ridiculous that Oedipus and his mothers were married. I didn’t understand how they never knew they were related, even worse that they were mother and son. This was not a book I enjoyed, other than the eye gouging and mother lovin’ it was a boring. I could not stay engaged with the story. The characters were completely unrelated able."

"It wasnt that good because there are a lot of hidden messages in the book. Also it is very compliated. This play is about a a kings prophecy that unfolds to come true. This causes a lot of trouble in his kingdom."

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Vladimir Nabokov - Ada or Ardor

"I did it! I conquered my nemesis book: Ada! It only took me a decade to get through it, but in the end - Nabokov, I sunk your battleship!!!!!"

"Wow! It requires a strong sense of dedication to make it through a 600-page book"

"Having to turn back to the Notes every other page for a translation of French or Russian sayings gets really old."

"I've rescued three of these from Goodwill-- the black hardcover, no jacket. I'm suspicious of anyone who says they ENJOYED this novel. Try as I might, I can't get past the tenth page. When I read online that other PLANETS are involved, I gave up."

Saturday, May 7, 2011

Goethe - Faust (The Second Part of the Tragedy)

"If you're going to read Goethe, stop after Part One so you can keep liking him."

"i hate Goethe, he's the most ugly writer ever plus he's German, bleah!"

"Oh i hate goethe with His f****** Poems..."

"I just want to mention how much I hate Goethe's Faust. Suck it, Goethe!"

"hate goethe too. he is gay"

"Goethe is overrated. The only effort this man did is the Faust - and maybe also the Prometheus - but he's a terrible dramatist. All in all it's just a question of taste. Why may he not show his rhymes to public? and at least it's more intelligent than 99% of most german so called humor. Look at your TV!"

"If you have read (and not just seen) Goldman's 'The Princess Bride,' you will understand my reaction to this classic. The short of it is that Marlowe's 'Dr. Faustus' is a more-to-the-point rendering of the classic tale. Goethe starts strong, but Part II loses focus, and dulls the story.

The play is called 'Faust,' therefore our focus should be on Faust, as the focus of 'The Hobbit' is on the Hobbit Bilbo. Goethe does this to perfection in the first part of the story. Mephisto's seduction of Faust is palpable--you can taste the evil dripping of every page, and you twist in time with Faust as he wavers back and forth under Mephito's barrage.

However, Part II does not follow logically from the events in Part one. Instead of focusing on the decline and fall of Dr. Henry Faust, we get setting after setting after setting. Goethe's main gimmick is the Pleasure Garden, which takes place in Oberon's Enchanted Forest. Furthermore, there are ample helpings of Greco-Roman mythology that sent me packing to my 'Bulfinch's Mythology.' This is all nice, but if we wanted Homer or the Bard, we would go to the source. As Bruce R. McConkie said, 'Don't drink below the horses.'

This brings me to William Goldman. Part of the humor in 'The Princess Bride' is that it is 'the good parts version.' Marlowe's 'Dr. Faustus' should be considered 'the good parts version' of Goethe's retelling. A lot of Goethe's flourishes and irrelevant asides could be excised without any violence to the plot and the story telling. Of course Goethe was building on Marlow's work, but in several places, he went a too far.
However, the ending was the most disappointing ending conceivable: deus ex machina by virtue of grace. So eat, drink and be merry (and sell you soul to boot), for mercy CAN rob justice, and we CAN be saved in our sins, not from our sins."

Friday, May 6, 2011

Marcus Aurelius - The Meditations

"By today's standards, a bog-standard blog.

The only reason that this was preserved in the first place is that the author happened to be a Roman emperor. (That, and that ancient Rome didn't have LiveJournal.)"

"I read this because the author was referenced in an episode of 'Law and Order: Criminal Intent.'"

"This book fell into the category of useless books that told me nothing I didn't already know."

"There are several hundred meditations here, but I wonder whether Marcus Aurelius had late-stage Alzheimer's or something, because actually there are only about 8 different thoughts, which are repeated in one form or another ad nauseum. And even among those, a couple are of no use to an atheist, and a couple more are of no use to someone living in the present day (it might have made sense to talk about focusing on the work one was intended for way back in AD 15th of April, or whatever, when everyone was either an emperor or a scholar or a craftsman of some kind, but in today's world of office jobs and menial labour the idea doesn't really appeal)."

"i found this book heavily laden with the author's guidance and advice on life and a difficult book to read as a novel."



Thursday, May 5, 2011

Shakespeare - Coriolanus

"I got bored.

I briefly joined the Shakespeare Book Club but there was one pretentious old sod in it who reminded me of school. He's probably just trying to impress impressionable girls in the group, and I can imagine that he doesn't have many friends."

"Balls. The MOST boring Shakespeare out there--and that's saying a lot."

"As a man of theatre, reading a play is kind of 'one man performance', and is a totally different experience for me, comparing to the very same plays performance at theatre or in film form. I consider them as three different versions of one story."


Mark Twain - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn III

"Sure, 'The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn' is a literary classic. That doesn't mean that it's great. For the modern readers of today, this is boredom-inducing material."

"The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, by Mark Twain, is a dull book that is kept alive only by its strong moral lesson that contradicts the rights of slavery."

"made from toilet paper...
I would clean my hand after reading and I will never eat apple while reading it."

"Whatever you do do not read this book. It's long, it's really hard to read, and the story just flat out sucks. A lot of people say that this book is packed with meaning, BUT IT'S NOT. Mark Twain wrote a stupid story about a boy and a slave floating down the mississsippi. THAT SOUNDS REALLY INTERESTING!! Yea right. This book is a big waste of time, it should be out-lawed from our schools, because Twain likes to use the 'N' word a lot. This book in my opinion, should get the 'Turkey of the Century' award. A big book B-B-Q, should be devoted to all the copies in print."

"I dont really like this book because lets face it, it needs some more spice. Throughout the whole book it was just so plain and dull. Maybe this book appealled to other people hundreds of years ago, but not now!"

"This book can be writen in 50 pages NOT 200. Thats a waste of 150. At one point maybe it was a great book. But hell, now its a waste of time. And why read the book when the movie is out?"

"The basic scheme of the book is Huck runs away with a slave and they pretty much do nothing exciting the entire book with a dumb ending. It reminds me of most classics."

"The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn was an extremely plotless, racist book relating the adventures of the rather tedious, annoying character of Huck Finn. Huck had recently left his hometown and went rafting down the MIssissippi with a slave, Jim. Huck is forever lying to and leaving Jim, in a fashion that made me wonder if he had ADD. The end of the novel, which had potential to make it better, made me hurl the book across the room, in a way certian to make any librarian weep.
I also found the dialects that Clemmins used extremely annoying. I had to sound out the words to myself to see what he was trying to relate.
If you want to read a book, any book, pick something, anything, else. Trust me on this one."

"It's just a story about a stupid kid that runs away and that uses the 'n' word one too many times."


"I would like to sanction a zero star rating
Or maybe -5. This book should have never saw print, much less read and loved by generations of Anerican readers. That goes to show how stupid Americans can be. Nor should it be regarded as the novel that inspired all other American novels. Nor should anybody be impressed by the seven or eight dialects employed within the novel's structure, which the fool author made up to fool us into believing people actually talked like that. The story is a couple of people floating down a river, with a number of utterly unsuccessful scenes meant to enhance and define a theme so obvious its not even worth mentioning. Then there is the structure of scenes themselves. Each uniformly the same in length and what occurs except the last where in the scene drags on and on and on and on. Then to top it all off at the end Hucleberry Fin regresses. This is worthless. Anybody who likes this novel is stupid. They have no linguistic intelligence or even logical intelligence. And yes you all should read Dean Koontz who is a better writer than Samuel Clemens ever dreamed of being. He will be our Shakespeare, never Mark Twain. I will come back from the dead to stop that from occuring. This is the worst, well known, book ever written so far as I know in this language"

"I read this book in 10th grade and it was so boring. I understood it but it was not interesting. I mean what is so wonderful about a crude and disgusting boy who needs a bath and a brain. Though i did find something postitve about it... it can be used against the enemy in a time of war!"

"I am told this novel is an American classic. Well, I wonder why I should have to read it then, not only am I Canadian, I also have more interest, being a teenager, in the present."

"Who the hell is this Mark Twain character?! Simply put: What a lousy novel! Maybe this was his first novel...I don't know. Anyways, I sure hope he doesn't plan on writing anything else. I read this book, initially, in the author's native bulgarian language...and it was even worse! The translator was probably trying to do us a favor by touching up this P.O.S. novel, but I think it would take an act of God to save this text... "

"WEll, what comes to mind when reading Huckleberry Finn at first was superstitious. As I fisrt opened up the book I was so so curious about reading the novel because it had so many interesting things that appeared on the front cover of the book. The cover of the book seemed to be a catching title so I decided to read the book and check it out becausse mostly all my friends have read this book and asked them what the book was about they said it was a cool book so now I decided to read it.

The first chapter was interesting it was about Mark he found six thousand dollars a piece in a cave and he gave the money to judge Thatcher and so the judge gave him back n his friend a dollar piece everyday for interest. Tom and his friend seemed trouble for towards this. Tom and Mark seemed to be very enthusiastic about hanging around together.

I thought the first few chapters were very catching and appealing towards others. But as I kept at it reading the book I found a lot bias surrounding the book. I couldn't believe this there was so much hate and foul language in the book. My thoughts towards the book began to dread away.A book title can describe a thousand words but when siting down and reading the book I found that the book was totaly out of my league to read I was so astonished by the language that was being used and expressed at others. I hope that I will never ever find a book this upseting and full of rubbish language."

"Ultimately, this book was a massive waste of my time and brain cells."


Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Mark Twain - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn II

"The only part I enjoyed was when they were helping the black man escape his cell. That part was hilarious"

"i can see the impact it had the the 1810's but i don't see it now."

"i read this book when I was teen and liked it,some times I have this dream to be instead of him."

"This book was confusing. The language was from the 1850s, how am I suppose to know what they are talking about if I’m from the 1990s? The book first started off with a notice that said 'Persons attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot will be shot.' Now, if we are not learning anything while reading this book then why do people insist on us reading this? So that was a very confusing way to start off a book."

"It did not interest me, and furthermore the dialect was hard to read and understand. Sometimes I would even skip the entire part that I was not able to read, which made me confused afterward."

"This book is said to be the first book in American Literature ... After reading it, I say that statement is complete BOLOGNA!"

"In the end we are left with a mere cartoon character, with a mischievous smile and the formulaic catchphrase of 'they're trying to sivilize me.' Despite the cute misspelling, the static nature of Twain's main character is a serious, unforgivable flaw in his work."

"Personally I detest stories about a little boy's adventures ... I did not find a moment where the book was not both confusing and boring. Maybe its just me being a sixteen year old practical girl who cannot relate to the whims of a younger boy who has very little education and a strange sense of 'street smarts'."

"It was almost ghastly to get finish it. In fact, I didn't finish it, come to think of it."

"I FINALLY FINISHED THIS BOOK!!! I feel like I should have a party to celebrate. Yikes, I would not recommend this book, and I did not enjoy reading it."

"Another theme in the story is that society is wrong. As Huck travels down the river, he does many things that would be contrary to the beliefs of society such as helping the slave escape. He also learns black people are people too. The book is an irony because of this style."

"I'm sorry, but Jim talks too much in this book."

"before i read this book i was wondering what could i learn form it. after seeing some of the things huckleberry finn goes through with his father, i can see there is a lot to learn"

"Can you read a peice of writing that says things like 'We laid there all day, and watched the rafts' or '... found the camp - fire I built, and watched it all night...'. I mean come on how boring do that sound, your reading about it someone relax and not doing anything. Bordom causes lost of concentration. It's hard to read Huck Finn when your mind isn't into the story."

"this is the infamous book where i get my saying... hey chile =) i didn't know that chile' was meant to be the word child!"

"ive never liked mark twain except for a christmas carol"

"Think yourself reading THE ADVENTURES OF HUCKELBERRY FINN, and you had to choose whether you liked or hated it. What would you say? Liked it, hated it, or both? If it were up to me to choose, I would have to say both. I say that because first of all it was slow. That is because it went on forever to get a point across. Second of all, it was confusing to read. There were words added and misspelled. Lastly, it was happy. Huck's Aunt Sally was going to adopt him. Just get ready for me to explain my thought out reasoning.

First off, I didn't like this book because it was slow and dull to read. It doesn't have anything that captures my attention or that will keep you awake long enough to finish the book. It takes almost forever to get a point across. 'Is it Bill, or Tom, or Bob? -Or what is it?' 'I reckon I shock like a leaf, and I didn't know hardly what to do' (chapter 11). So, if it takes that long for an idea to get across, then it drags one mind away from the story.

Secondly, I didn't like this story because it was hard and confusing to understand. Some words were misspelled and placed in the wrong places and/or were just added. That can change the whole meaning around. If the author is trying to say one thing, then it will come out a different way because of the common error(s). 'You don't know about me without you have read a book by the name of THE ADVENTURES OF TOM SAWYER; but that ain't no matter' (chapter 1). It makes it hard for one to understand the story line and what the sentence is trying to really say. It just has to make sense."

"I never cared about what happened to Huck because to me he is very unrelatable and unlikable."

"All of the slang really defeats the whole 'bettering your independent reading vocabulary when reading' purpose."

"Recommends it for: noobs
Meh, boring for me, never really read it over a skim, bombed all the quizzes--lazy"

"I don't enjoy 'Classics,' unless entertaining. This story is not. I don't know who decides which books belong in the category, and why they force garbage into it, but it's lame, stop doing it.
The version I read had pictures and pop outs. It was 25 pages long.
The N word doesn't excite me, maybe because I'm a rapper."

Monday, May 2, 2011

Mark Twain - The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

"One of the longest, most boring books in history."

"Like the musical Oklahoma, the book is simplistic."


"The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. One of the reasons why I hate this book because its confusing just everything, coming all at once. I have to stop and be like 'Wait, what's happening here'? Also because of the hill billy like language too. Another reason why I hate it, is because its sad, I don't like that a lot of people die, to me its just slighty annoying about people keep dying, cause you can get also bored with it. The last reason why I hate this book is because its in a different time period, which is not that interesting to me. That it bores me to death. Overall, these are the reasons why I absoultely dislike ... The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. To start off, Huckleberry Finn is confusing because of the way he talk. An example would be 'Why, yes dats so; I-I'd done forgot it. A harem's a bo'd'n-house I reckin.' LIke that, you can't even make out the words. Another why its confusing is because everything goes from one way to the next. I don't understand what I'm reading half the time, and it annoys me that I'm reading a book that I don't understand clearly. To continue, another reason why I absouletly hate this book is because its pretty sad. I don't like that the fact that main characters keep dying. One after the other, you would probably assume in the next chapter, and the next chapter someone important is just going to end up dying. I don't like this book being that sad. I don't even read depressing, sad, books, so its the first time really ever reading anything like this. Lastly, I also hate this book because of the time period. Wow, the 1850's bores me to tears. I know reading old times is good to read sometimes, by learning about history is good to know, but its not something I would want to read in a heart beat. In conclusion, these are the main reasons why I truly disliked ... The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. I hope I made it clear why I never liked it."

"unrealistic/illogical character motivations, hard-to-read language and slang, portrayal of race and race relations, boring, too much adventure, and many many more ... I sincerely don't understand why anyone would enjoy the experience of reading this book."

"The moral, be yourself and go where you like, almost encourages children to run away when the going gets tough. The overall childish storyline with Huck and Tom, made me feel like I was reading a children's book."

"I would not suggest this book to anyone it is extremely racist and boring for the first 5 chapters."

"My dislike for the book has nothing to do with Twain's actual writing- but I think I'm just too old for the spirit of it (Tom's intentional trouble-seeking behavior annoyed me, although that was obviously not the author's goal, nor the experience others have of it). Primarily though, I didn't like it b/c whether the language stays as is or changes as proposed, the racism is so deep and so shockingly offensive that I couldn't get past it (although I know it's a period piece and indicative of the attitudes at the time, etc, etc). My review: Profoundly dislike."


"Found my reaction this time around to be much like what I remember thinking back when I was 16: truly, I just do not understand this book's claim to a place in the American canon. I can see how reading it aloud to a seven-year old boy could be fun (Huck plays cops and robbers! Huck steals a raft! Huck dresses up as a most improbable girl!), but otherwise I don't get why adult readers would want to read such a silly episodic adventure story. I guess this just isn't my genre."

"P.S. The vulgar language is so obscene that I shuttered throughout the story."

"The Adventure of Huckleberry Finn is the book that I would have kept on my bookshelf to get old and dusty but I was forced to read it by my English teacher. Unfortunately I had to read it everyday! Write up chapter reviews on what new events and or characters from what happened the last few chapters. The book it’s self was thicker than an inch wide, so why would I would I bother to read it. While reading the book my eyes were glued stuck while my mind wondered off elsewhere.
Three hundred and five is the total amount of pages that are in this book. Forty-three chapters long is what almost completes it. Even after the forty third chapter Mark stopped with the numbers and started with phrases. Instead of saying chapter forty-four he said 'Chapter the Last', 'Afterwards' and so on. To me I felt as though he dragged the book on longer than it should have been."

"Maybe this book is really properly fantastic, but I will never know that, because every time when I think about Finn and Twain, I have an urge to vomit. Pardon me."

"I really didn't enjoy this book at all. It was very boring, and on top of that, I didn't like the fact that the 'N' word was repeated more than 200 times. From what I've learned about the author, I don't like him because he seems like a racist."

"Have you ever lived down south? Have you read a book called Huckleberry Finn? Well the reasons some people don’t like it is because the language is hard to understand, it has real old words and slang I never heard before like 'yellow' and 'nigger head.' It reminds people of the obvious, I can read a textbook on south life, and slavery, and know the same things and more. Finally the book is Ironic. The fact that Jim was free all along and trying to escape. Add all of these things together and you have a 2 out of 5 in a rating.

' You’ll have considerable trouble and considerable joy.' It’s easy to see to see that the old words from Huck Finn that takes away from the adventure in the book. You really can’t understand the language. It takes away from the story line.

'Today in channel 6 action news. The police have found a KKK hideout that were keeping African Americans as slaves.' ' Slavery is still very much alive' The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is so controversial because it touches on a topic that people already know. Everyone knows about slavery and about, and about the role that it played in the south. This book is just an unneeded reminder. Its doesn’t touch on anything new things.

'Ms.Watson she dead, and she set Jim free in her will.' The good part of Huckleberry Finn was that the plot was Ironic. Jim was trying to escape when he was free all along, that Huck thought he was going to hell for setting Jim free but he was actually doing the right thing. The need for the journey was just for Huck and Jim to grow and become more than what they were in the beginning.

With out a doubt Huck Finn is a So & So book. The bad parts are that it uses words and slang tat people have never heard of, and the fact that it is obvious and is touching on an issue that people already knows. But every cloud has a silver lining the same is for this book. Hey there are parts in this book that suck but the irony in this book makes it all better in the end. So next you leave here today imagine that you were Huck traveling thought the Mississippi and going threw all of the adventures that he went throught and write your own review."

"This book was horrid, with the only good part of it, which allowed it to get one star, being when Huck wanted to saw off Jim's leg. THAT was hilarious."

"In The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Mark Twain write like speaks."

"This book is sooooo boring and I do not get any of the English. I don't get how people back then could actually talk like that. And this book is about 300 pages long. I think that I will really really have a FUN time...I am being sarcastic, for your information!"

"This book was silly to me as a child. I thought Huck Finn was made to look Stupid. No one in my house is allowed to say this word (s_____). so I hesitate to be so blunt on such a classic. Lots of Respect to Mark Twain and the people who did enjoy this book."

"I enjoy reading about different time periods and people's lives. But this book uses racial language that made me so uncomfortable I just couldn't enjoy it."

"I had high hopes for this book... and ended up slapped in the face with confusing description and dialogue that's left me questioning my ignorance. Huckleberry Fin was just an average kid who really left me wondering whatever happened to him in the end. I COULDN'T UNDERSTAND IT. I had some clues that his dad abused him"


"This book is a joke. It does careen in the end an Twain had to bring in Sawyer to save it. Also, I can't believe students are STILL reading it in school regardless of the racial phrases that are used. This novel is a perfect example of why the canon should not exsist."

"Once upon a time, I could not get enough of Twain. Once upon a time, I could not get enough of the Hardy Boys."