So I read this post the other day from this guy who went on Amazon and found 1-star reviews for classic books. It’s funny and disturbing all at the same time. Here are a few of my favorites with, of course, my commentary:

The Sun Also Rises
“Here’s the first half of the book: ‘We had dinner and a few drinks. We went to a cafe and talked and had some drinks. We ate dinner and had a few drinks. Dinner. Drinks. More dinner. More drinks. We took a cab here (or there) in Paris and had some drinks, and maybe we danced and flirted and talked sh*t about somebody. More dinner. More drinks. I love you, I hate you, maybe you should come up to my room, no you can’t’… I flipped through the second half of the book a day or two later and saw the words ‘dinner’ and ‘drinks’ on nearly every page and figured it wasn’t worth the risk.”

Hemingway is notoriously good at writing plainly about plain things (but in my opinion, still being worth reading, though The Sun Also Rises was one of my least favorites of his). If you didn’t know this before you picked it up, it surprises me.

To Kill a Mockingbird
“I don’t see why this book is so fabulous. I would give it a zero.”

I agree.

Gone With the Wind
“Well, it’s a girl’s world. The world of Gloria Steinem and the popular feminism, as distilled on TV (including CBC shows, not all fundamentalist Hollywood garbage) of my youth is GONE. Now the girls run the show. You’re not allowed to call them sluts. And it’s impossible to call them virgins. They’re all doing Rhett Butler. So what are they? Idiots… Hope you like the Gangstas. It’s what you deserve.”

Hahahaha, what?

The Sound and the Fury
“This book is like an ungrateful girlfriend. You do your best to understand her and get nothing back in return.”

Welcome to Faulkner Land. Your mother is now a fish.

The Great Gatsby
“It grieves me deeply that we Americans should take as our classic a book that is no more than a lengthy description of the doings of fops.”

And it grieves me deeply that that’s all you got out of this book.

Lolita
“1) I’m bored. 2) He uses too many allusions to other novels, so that if you’re not well read, this book makes no sense. 3) Most American readers are not fluent in French, so to have conversations or interjections in French with no translation is plain dumb. 4) Did I mention I was bored? 5) As with another reviewer, I agree, he uses a lot of huge words that just slow a person down. And it’s not for theatrics either, it’s just huge words mid-sentence when describing something simple. Nothing in the sense of imagery is gained. 6) Also, to sum it up, it’s a story about a pedophile.”

1) Boredom + written review = something you should probably not put on the internet. 2) Really? NOW’S YOUR EXCUSE TO READ MORE! 3) Lolita was published in Paris, where—HOLY CRAP—they tend to speak a lot of French. There wasn’t an obscene amount of it in there, either, and I’m sure if you looked for it you could find a version with translations. 4) Yes, you did. See point 1). 5) Oh crap! Not only French phrases but BIG WORDS?! How DARE he challenge your vocabulary and your monolingualism in the same book! It’s almost like you’re required to think! 6) And lust and jealously and guilt and crime, and all those hot topics. If you think it’s just about pedophilia, I think you may need to reread it.

Lord of the Flies
“I am obsessed with Survivor, so I thought it would be fun. WRONG!!! It is incredibly boring and disgusting. I was very much disturbed when I found young children killing each other. I think that anyone with a conscience would agree with me.”

Good thing I ducked or else the point of this book would have smacked me in the head as it whizzed over yours.

Native Son
“Well…someone who murders anyone…out of panic (which is a really stupid, irrational reason) does not deserve any sympathy. I felt the book was mainly about black people hating white people…as usual. Now, tell me anyone…if there was a book about a white person facing discrimination in Africa…or being killed because stones are thrown at them, then everyone would look down on them. Poorly written.”

I’m going to ignore the first two sentences and focus on the last one. I think the reviewer meant it was written “simply,” as I can’t fathom someone claiming a book by Wright is actually poorly written. Wright writes (haha) in an easy-to-read style. Contrast this to Nabokov who, according to the Lolita reviewer, uses SCARY BIG WORDS in such phrases as: “in the course of the evocations and schemes to which I had dedicated so many insomnias, I had gradually eliminated all the superfluous blur, and by stacking level upon level of translucent vision, had evolved a final picture.” Native Son is written in the style the main character would probably tell it, as a scared young man who has lived in poverty without an education and is describing the story of how he accidentally murders a white woman. He would probably not talk like the insanely-educated and lustful Humbert Humbert of Lolita.

And here are some more that I found just ‘cause:

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
“Boring and bland. He even spent two pages listing sponges. Don’t waste your time by reading this.”

Nothing like the submarine adventures spurred on by a misanthropic sea captain to make someone remember two pages of sponges. How can that be the only thing he lists when there were like 40 freaking crazy-busy scenes to balance things out? Seriously…they get trapped under ANTARCTICA and ALMOST SUFFOCATE. Did he forget that part? And the freaking giant squid fighting? AND ATLANTIS? Verne is excellent with scenes that cause adrenaline rushes, I don’t know what the reviewer’s problem is. Let’s hope this guy never reads any Melville.

Age of Reason
“If this novel had been my only exposure to existentialist thought, I never would have considered the philosophy seriously. The characters in this novel are so obnoxious I’d feel more comfortable hanging out with Dick Cheney in a dungeon full of scorpions, and I feel sorry for anyone who identifies with them or knows people who are like them. Sartre intentionally makes the characters so hateable because he wants to show us the necessity of taking responsibility for one’s freedom, but I’m not sure his point works; such people may decide that they willfully want to own up to their whimsically obnoxious ways.”

Aw, I liked Mathieu. Marcelle was obnoxious as hell, I’ll give him that, but the rest weren’t entirely that detestable. Bonus points for the Dick Cheney comment though, that made me laugh.

The Plague
“If you like to feel depressed, then by all means read this book….it is dark and imaginary smells are those of death….yuk….totally discusting.”

I suppose I shouldn’t question this reviewer’s knowledge of Camus’ philosophy and existentialism if the title didn’t even tip him off to the fact that the book would be depressing. Oh crap, it’s about disgusting things like death?! NO WAY.

It’s called The Plague, not The Prom.

And if you’re wondering about my absolute favorite book in the universe, The Caine Mutiny (which you’re probably not), it has no one-star ratings. It’s either as phenomenal to everyone else as it is to me or it’s just not very well-known. With 89 reviews and 70 five-stars for one version of the book, I’d like to think it’s a combination of both.

Yeah.

Today’s song: Have You Ever Seen the Rain? by Creedence Clearwater Revival