/lit/ - Literature

is it really that bad?

>>16986423
This is a textbook example of utter, nauseating mediocrity. The dialogue is unnatural and heavy-handed (such as the almost comical overuse of metaphor and idiom for the characters Samuel and Lee), the themes and allusions are drawn straight from scripture, without any alterations or considerations upon those themes beyond the fact that they're eternal, the style is simultaneously simplistic and barren, yet absolutely pretentious and stilted. Through this book I have somehow acquired an intense dislike of Steinbeck, as if his snivelling sense of poetic and moral superiority emanates in undiluted aspect from the words, sentences and chapters of this book. Not only is the book nauseating and full of itself, it also dares to be an absolute slog, spanning several generations and many, MANY uninteresting, monofacetted personalities. This becomes a special issue when it dawns on you that almost all of the arcs presented within the book is wrapped up through some sort of tired cliché, be it a faux-Shakespearean revelation, a suicide or some sudden, forced change in a characters mental state (a principle perhaps most grievously applied to Adam Trask).

Fuck this absolutely disgraceful pile of steaming shit.

>>16943795
This is a textbook example of utter, nauseating mediocrity. The dialogue is unnatural and heavy-handed (such as the almost comical overuse of metaphor and idiom for the characters Samuel and Lee), the themes and allusions are drawn straight from scripture, without any alterations or considerations upon those themes beyond the fact that they're eternal, the style is simultaneously simplistic and barren, yet absolutely pretentious and stilted. Through this book I have somehow acquired an intense dislike of Steinbeck, as if his snivelling sense of poetic and moral superiority emanates in undiluted aspect from the words, sentences and chapters of this book. Not only is the book nauseating and full of itself, it also dares to be an absolute slog, spanning several generations and many, MANY uninteresting, monofacetted personalities. This becomes a special issue when it dawns on you that almost all of the arcs presented within the book is wrapped up through some sort of tired cliché, be it a faux-Shakespearean revelation, a suicide or some sudden, forced change in a characters mental state (a principle perhaps most grievously applied to Adam Trask).

Fuck this absolutely disgraceful pile of steaming shit.

what did I think of this?

This is a textbook example of utter mediocrity. The dialogue is unnatural and heavy-handed (such as the almost comical overuse of metaphor and idiom for the characters Samuel and Lee), the themes and allusions are drawn straight from scripture, without any alterations or considerations upon those themes beyond the fact that they're eternal, the style is simultaneously simplistic and barren, yet absolutely pretentious and stilted. Through this book I have somehow acquired an intense dislike of Steinbeck, as if his snivelling sense of poetic and moral superiority emanates in undiluted aspect from the words, sentences and chapters of this book. Not only is the book nauseating and full of itself, it also dares to be an absolute slog, spanning several generations and many, MANY uninteresting, monofacetted personalities. This becomes a special issue when it dawns on you that almost all of the arcs presented within the book is wrapped up through some sort of tired cliché, be it a faux-Shakespearean revelation, a suicide or some sudden, forced change in a characters mental state (a principle perhaps most grievously applied to Adam Trask).

Fuck this absolutely disgraceful pile of steaming shit.