/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.3075208]

Why is this book so loathed on /lit/ (and from what I see, among academia wankers)??

[Anonymous No.3075213]

Cuz people like to hate on things they enjoyed in adolescence. The Catcher in the Rye and similar books suffer from this fact. Also, it's not a super great book.

[Anonymous No.3075219]

>>3075213
>Also, it's not a super great book.

Care to explain why?

[Anonymous No.3075234]

>>3075213
Pfft. That's not true. 20,000 leagues was my favorite book when I was young and it remains a favorite of mine to this day. Sure, it's not the best in the world, but I still love it.

[Anonymous No.3075253]

>>3075208
It's disliked because Kerouac isn't a very good writer however this is a bit of an overreaction as OTR is actually alright, especially compared to his other shite like Dharma Bums.
Also because it's a book typically loved by 16 year olds

[Anonymous No.3075256]

>>3075219
Different anon, but I found everything about it to be shallow and uninteresting. The writing was boring and his idea of adventure sets low standards for its readers.

[The Bunk !aUuOckdYz6 No.3075265]

I've never read On the Road, OP, but I know what you mean, and I've read/heard the same things.

I don't want to create a thread, so I'll post this here:

Since we're speaking of books we read as kids/teenagers, my Canadian Lit prof. has made us read Anne of Green Gables this semester. I just finished reading it and I think it's excellent; I wish I had discovered it sooner. I was fairly prejudiced against reading it when I first saw it on the syllabus (Kid's book in a 2nd year University class--wat), and I had semi-low expectations for it, but it really won me over. Reminded me not to take things so seriously all the time. Anyway, if you guys want an easy, pleasurable read to distract you from the more serious stuff you may be currently studying/reading, I highly recommend it. I already bought an extra copy to give my little sister for Christmas.

[Anonymous No.3075272]

Honestly, I read it when I was reading a bunch of beat generation stuff and when I would've wanted to like it the most but it was just boring to me, and it wasn't written all that well at all. I guess it was "important" but it wasn't a great work of literature.

[Anonymous No.3075273]

>>3075208
>Why is this book so loathed on /lit/ (and from what I see, among academia wankers)??
There's not really any point in responding, by using 'academia wankers' to criticise people who spend their lives being experts on books you've revealed to me that you likely have a relatively closed mind on this issue as you're already in a defensive stance.

[Anonymous No.3075280]

>>3075273

[Anonymous No.3075294]

>>3075256


>The writing was boring

I never understood this criticism about OTR. Different stroke, folks etc aside, I found his prose to be very, very honest, beautiful (sometimes flawed) and above all, warm. His descriptions of places and people were so endearing, I found myself smiling with joy on many parts of the book. And the last paragraph almost made me cry.

I would call Hemingway's "For Whom the Bells Tolls" BORING. And I love The old man and the sea

>his idea of adventure sets low standards for its readers

what were you expecting? Kerouac fighting dragons and saving damsels in distress?'

He traveled across the US. He found love, homosex, a Buddhist vision, hunger, pain, love for his friends, jazz music, and another piece of the meaning of life.

I have the unfounded suspicion that the people who hate On the Road are middle upper class white faggots snobs who only read books that stroke their inner egos.

[Anonymous No.3075300]

>>3075273

if you are bad at something you like to do, you go on and teach it

[Anonymous No.3075302]

>>3075294
>On the Road are middle upper class white faggots snobs
Odd because they're also the books primary fanbase

[Anonymous No.3075314]

>>3075300
That phrase doesn't refer to academia you dolt, where the fuck else do you think people who are good at literary analysis go?

[Anonymous No.3075317]

>>3075314

>good at literary analysis

[Anonymous No.3075332]

>>3075294
Don't take it so personally by putting up defenses and creating strawmen (dragons? really?). It puts you in a bad light.

You found his descriptions "endearing" and find beauty in his flaws and enjoy his "honesty". That's all well and good. I found it nice at the beginning (and think it works better in The Dharma Bums), but I prefer a little more meat underneath it all. I read for substance more than anything and Kerouac fails to provide me with any.

Rattling off a list of things YOU find eccentric or interesting (jazz music, homosexuality, etc.), despite his often superficial dealings with most of them, isn't going to change my ideas about how uninteresting his idea of adventure is. Why did you need OTR to tell you about those things in the first place? How boring are you?

[Anonymous No.3075365]

>>3075332
Sounds like someone's butthurt.

[Anonymous No.3075378]

>>3075365
>LEL U MAD BRO XD LE EPIC TROLL

[Anonymous No.3075385]

>>3075365
If you think me asking "how boring are you?" means I'm butthurt, you might be a little too sensitive for this whole 4chan.org thing.

[Anonymous No.3075393]

It's better than this piece of garbage.

[Anonymous No.3075416]

On the Road was alright. It had it's moments. Had some moments that made me wince. Mostly whenever he described African American characters. He didn't seem like the sharpest shell on the beach at times.

Burrroughs was probably the genius/true original/outlaw of the bunch, but I guess the alchy ex-football jock was more palatable and marketable than the wife-killing, heroin- addicted old man who went around perving on teenaged boys.

[Anonymous No.3075421]

>>3075416

IIRC Kerouac was schizophrenic (although not chronic)\

[Anonymous No.3075431]

>>3075393
Sorry, I forget, Bukowski complains like a how many year-old of what ethnicity?

And second on Burroughs being the OG beat. Not only was his writing actually exciting and original, but his prose style didn't suck dragon ballz or could pass as written by a middle school ESL student like Kerouac 's

[Anonymous No.3075439]

>>3075431
>Bukowski complains like a how many year-old of what ethnicity
Oh /lit/, I wuv u

[Anonymous No.3075441]

>>3075431
70 year old Jew

[Anonymous No.3075451]

>>3075431
>written by a middle school ESL student like Kerouac 's

what a sad cunt

[Anonymous No.3075453]

I certainly don't loathe the book, but I don't love it either.

It has parts that are extremely well-written and endearing. For example, the section of the book with Terry was honest and beautiful.

Oh the other hand, the handful of really great sections where stuck between long breaks of dull, repetitive prose and characters.

There were only so many times I could read about how MAD Dean was, and what a LUST he had for life, and how CRAZY for living he was, and how...

Then considerable total section of the book that was onomatopoeia about jazz. I enjoy jazz, but goddamn I KNOW HOW JAZZMEN BLOW ON THEIR INSTRUMENTS.

Anyway, I think the main problem is that Kerouac lacked focus. If the novel had been trimmed a bit, I think it would much more effective in its goal.

[Anonymous No.3075460]

Eh, the main thing I disliked about On the Road was that some chapters could be extremely exciting (for instance, when they first started hitch hiking in the back of the truck) while others were extremely boring (their time in Denver for instance). I also disliked how suddenly it ended. I don't really "loathe" it though.

[Anonymous No.3075464]

>>3075453
>>3075460
Shit, that first anon said it better than me. That is exactly my opinion of the book.

[Anonymous No.3075478]

>>3075431
So far I've said 80, 74, and 76 year old florida jew. I keep switching it around because people misquote me, like: >>3075441

My hope is that one day, someone will correctly quote my numbers by accident.

[Anonymous No.3075503]

>>3075460
>when they first started hitch hiking in the back of the truck
>mvq that one guy pisses on himself when peeing off the truck

[Anonymous No.3076411]

bumpin'

[Anonymous No.3076420]

it's shallow, it's poorly written, it's boring, and the lifestyle depicted doesn't appeal to me in the slightest. and neal cassady is a cunt.

[Anonymous No.3076423]

Beat generation is pretty shitty in general, they tried to emulate great books but never understood what made them great.

[Anonymous No.3076442]

I read this because of not only the general praise for it among my friends, but also because the vagabond lifestyle appealed to me greatly just a couple of years ago. Boy, was I in for a let down. I expected Easy Rider or Kings of the Road, and I got something not quite like either (in a bad way) that revealed a superficial understanding of pretty much everything mentioned in the book, and that also featured some of the worst prose I've ever read.

[Anonymous No.3076474]

The main issue with On The Road it's really hard to view the book solely on its inherent qualities at this point. You're likely to have some bias about the book's fan-base that creeps into your judgement.

[Anonymous No.3076483]

>>3076474
I'm >>3076442.
The thing is, I hang out with the kind of people who read OTR, so I naturally expected to enjoy it. I had no preconceived negative idea of the book, I expected to enjoy it very much.

[Anonymous No.3076687]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0808392/
anyone who enjoyed the books should watch this movie on neal. it's pretty sad and really shoves the reality or their drunk lives down your throat.