Not following or acknowledging a trendy author is only a sign of independence if you've read his work. Without actually having read it, it's just laziness--you can't have a genuine opinion without being informed.

It's gonna be kind of hard to take your posts seriously if you keep doing things like referring to Vonnegut as a "trendy author".

High school English classes have a certain body of work they tend to use: Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, Lord of the Flies, Slaughterhouse-Five, etc. The criteria seem to include accessibility, relevance to teenagers, and an unmistakable message. Whether they're great literature seems to be pretty far down on the list of requirements.

To me, reading Vonnegut is a lot like being hit on the head over and over again. He keeps making his point until he's sure that the densest person gets it. I read four or five of his books, and never tried another.

Slaughterhouse 5 is certainly not one of my favorite books of his. I would have to say Bluebeard and then maybe Galapagos or Breakfast of Champions

Don't we have a book talk forum?

That's where this thread belongs. The discussion of the merit of an author's works is being discusssed.

Along with Cat's Cradle and maybe Deadeye Dick.

The argument that something is the staple of high school English classes certainly should not be taken as being something meaningful.

I've seen some so-called American History books that are the staple of high school American History classes.

Damn, this thread makes me grateful that forums didn't exist when Shakespeare, Hemingway, Victor Hugo, F.Scott Fitzgerald, Jack London, etc. died.

(For those who find these unfamiliar names, I'll simply say that they lived a long time ago, and therefore probably have no meaning or influence on your life.)

Yeah, but the upside of some of these posts is they help me gain perspective on the overall value of many of the opinions we see here day to day.

Are you going to judge the value of someone's opinion by whether they believe an author, a novel, a movie, etc. is of quality or value?

Of course not. But when someone has NO IDEA who a major author is, it tells me that they don't read books, or they didn't pay attention in school, or didn't go to school, and that tells me a lot about that person.

It's the outright dismissal of a work because of the perceived perspective it offers that gives insight into someones personality.

You can also search for "vonnegut" at CNN, at Associated Press, at AOL, etc...

You'll get the same obit.

which makes sense says it says: "By CRISTIAN SALAZAR, Associated Press Writer"


btw, i was never assigned any books by him in my high school english classes, but i do know who he is

He didn't just compare Kurt Vonnegut to Dr Phil did he? And how could you get through high school without even HEARING of Kurt Vonnegut? Slaughterhouse Five?

*shrug* I got through high school (gifted and AP English) without having heard of Vonnegut academically....first I heard of him was browsing my grandfather's bookshelves. He may have been an option on one of the summer reading lists, but obviously not one I chose, for whatever reason.
Nick Danger: "He keeps making his point until he's sure that the densest person gets it." Yes, that's the feel I got after reading him. That doesn't necessarily mean the books aren't good, or thought provoking, though I don't agree with every idea he espouses, it just makes it difficult to make it through too many books at one time.
And from what I've seen of recent school reading lists (the revised, "modern" versions, that don't have any focus on 'classics' or even being sourced from a variety of time periods), they are absolutely not long lasting literature (the Fahrenheit 451s or A Separate Peaces notwithstanding.)
Now, Vonnegut to Dr Phil, that's definitely an odd comparison...

c-man, of course not. I know plenty of people who've actually read Vonnegut and not liked him. Has 0 impact on my relationship or judgement. But when someone makes absurd comments based on an admitted lack of experience it reaches a point that it reminds me that you need to take some Internet comments with a major grain of salt.

this is why i asked for a link to that which the OP was referring. this was kindly obliged several posts later to which i wrote a reply.

This whole statement is basically wrong. Just because your school(s) made reading Vonnegut a part of its curriculum, doesn't mean all schools did. I've never read any of his material. I've heard his name, before, but that is about it. So, don't make blanket statements about people based on not reading one particular author's material. That's ridiculous.

Nobody can read everything. I have a BA in English and 1 year towards an MA in English and American Literature, and I've never actually read Moby Dick (something I probably wouldn't have admitted at school, even though I did have a professor who confessed she had never read Tristram Shandy).





My problem is people who have an opinion on Vonnegut's work even though they have never actually read any of it. It's an eyeopener to me.

Is it possible for me to have an opinion on Michael Moore's work even though I haven't seen Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 9/11 or any of his other political works? I did see Canadian Bacon but I'm not sure that counts.

Just curious.

We all form opinions on things even though we may not have experienced them. For example, I've never seen the movie Gigli, but the reviews I've read and people that I've talked to that saw it said it was horrendous. Why should I put myself through that given all the corroborative statements that back that up? My guess is that the poster that made those comments has heard of his work. While I don't truly believe you can make the most informed decision this way, with so many choices out there in every medium, it's often the only way to make a decision.

I should add, before I get attacked, I'm not comparing the merits of Vonnegut to the movie Gigli. It was just an example of a movie that came to mind that was horrendous.

I never had to read any of his books in school either. But we did read Shakespeare, Chaucer, Swift, The Crucible.

And this is what as known as prejudice (in the technical sense of the word). You are making a blanket statement about someone because of single common characteristic that they share with others, rather than basing it on actual experience.

And, on top of that, the whole argument is bogus to begin with. Let me use an area with which I am more familiar (i.e., direct experience as opposed to supposition): the modern era of literature. I will readily admit that there are commonalities in theme between various writers of the time, but to say, that I know what T.S. Elliot's poetry is like because I know what William Carlos Williams ' poetry is like is ludicrous. Show me how you can equate something like Elliot's "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" to Williams' "The Red Wheelbarrow". But they are both Modern American poets', so surely you must be able to figure it out.

Or perhaps you think that poetry is to wide an area for it to be an accurate example? Well, then let's stick with novelists. Are you telling me that you can could accurately assess what you'd learn from John Steinbeck's "The Grapes Of Wrath" because you are familiar with F. Scott Fitrzgerald's "The Great Gatsby"? They're both Modern American authors, surely their works must be similar.




Ah . . . well defended.