EPTPride and Prejudice is the secret to girls - Page 4
| Blogs > rinoh |
|
N.geNuity
United States5112 Posts
| ||
|
Hypnosis
United States2061 Posts
- Letter to W. D. Howells, 18 January 1909 That's a bit harsh now isn't it? | ||
|
Megalisk
United States6095 Posts
"Everytime I read 'Pride and Prejudice' I want to dig her up and beat her over the skull with her own shin-bone." | ||
|
DreaM)XeRO
Korea (South)4667 Posts
On January 31 2010 07:47 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Mark Twain once said "The only thing more useless than a library with no books, is a library filled with books by Jane Austen." he was right. holy shit is that for real? | ||
|
enzym
Germany1034 Posts
i did not read the book, but judging from what i have seen of it jane austen seems like a suberb writer. the characters make sense, tell you about the time in which the storyline takes place and about the way human beings perceive and interact with their surroundings. will it tell you how to understand girls? i havent seen any indication of this, and i think it would take away from the greatness of the writing. id say read it and learn what you can. or dont if it is unbearably boring to you. On January 31 2010 11:11 MoltkeWarding wrote: talk about flattering yourself.Shakespeare does boost your reading ability, although it requires a certain amount of literary maturity to appreciate it. By saying so I make no slander against anyone in particular, but anyone who thinks they've read Shakespeare to the point of having exhausted its nuances is wrong. For even the most brilliant readers, Shakespeare is nearly infinite, by which I mean when reading him, we are not limited by his work, but by our interpretive capacities. He is the one author who can be read again and again, who never ceases expanding, so long as we ourselves expand. | ||
|
GrayArea
United States872 Posts
On February 03 2010 07:27 enzym wrote: i did not read the book, but judging from what i have seen of it jane austen seems like a suberb writer. the characters make sense, tell you about the time in which the storyline takes place and about the way human beings perceive and interact with their surroundings. will it tell you how to understand girls? i havent seen any indication of this, and i think it would take away from the greatness of the writing. id say read it and learn what you can. or dont if it is unbearably boring to you. Ya, I agree. The way she writes is really quite clear and even though its written in classic English, it's really easy to understand exactly what she means. You can even pick up the sarcasm and everything also. I really like the way she writes (although I've only read P&P of her books). The story is really good too. Excellent novel, highly recommend it. | ||
LosingID8
CA10835 Posts
| ||
|
Etherone
United States1898 Posts
On February 01 2010 04:52 Hypnosis wrote: It seems a great pity that they allowed her to die a natural death. - Letter to W. D. Howells, 18 January 1909 That's a bit harsh now isn't it? you haven't read the book i take it. | ||
|
Jonoman92
United States9110 Posts
On February 01 2010 04:52 Hypnosis wrote: It seems a great pity that they allowed her to die a natural death. - Letter to W. D. Howells, 18 January 1909 That's a bit harsh now isn't it? rofl that and the Mark Twain quote are great. I thought I would've heard of that Twain quote before if it was real though, but maybe not. | ||
|
StorkHwaiting
United States3465 Posts
On January 31 2010 07:47 DoctorHelvetica wrote: Mark Twain once said "The only thing more useless than a library with no books, is a library filled with books by Jane Austen." he was right. I choked on water lol. Mark Twain is an awesome man if he said this. I fucking hate Jane Austen. Same with the Brontes -_-. | ||
|
Orome
Switzerland11984 Posts
| ||
|
MoltkeWarding
5195 Posts
On February 03 2010 15:47 Orome wrote: Try to learn to appreciate Jane Austen guys, it's worth it. At the very least stop taking cheap shots at her books without having read them just because they're 'girly' and Mark Twain didn't like them. On one hand, it's a matter of taste, and there is little to be done about it. On the other, none of the invectives hurled against her books have demonstrated any merit or understanding. Sometimes it's easier to admit that you don't understand how to enjoy something than to insist that it's unenjoyable. | ||
|
Durak
Canada3685 Posts
| ||
|
Undisputed-
United States379 Posts
| ||
|
BanZu
United States3329 Posts
On February 04 2010 03:30 Undisputed- wrote: I got cliff notes for that one Likewise. | ||
|
Musoeun
United States4324 Posts
My complaints are two-fold: 1) Her men aren't particularly realistic, and tend to fall into either The Good Guys or Evil Scoundrels (who, in modern parlance, only want to get inside your pants). My mother, sisters, etc. defend Austen as good reading for "realizing what kind of man a woman wants" but I'm not sure how applicable that ever is. Maybe she's right and I'm just being stubborn. 2) Her fans. It's not that I object to girls being soppy over some stud, it's just that I've never comprehended what, exactly, makes these people such models. It's not that they're wimps, exactly, it's just that the majority of her characters are gentry - roughly, the not-quite-idle not-always-rich of Austen's era - meaning kind of unrelated to actual life for the majority of human beings. (Actually, come to think of it, in this case Twilight starts to seem like a spiritual successor to Austen except that Austen could actually write fine English.) But yeah, Austen's worth reading - at least in small doses - both for general cultural knowledge and for the fact that many girls (and a few guys I know) really do think it's cool. At the very least, it can't hurt. | ||
| ||
