• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

The Most Whack Writers

ions said:
Any writer that uses the term "whack" is well, whack. Also, writers that use pen names, writers that publish works by others in their name - the ones with teams of writers working for them. R.A. Salvatore for example.
Click to expand...

Which books?:confused:

If you mean 'The War of the Spider Queen' books, R.A.Salvatore is not taking the credit as author, just sort of a plot/character creator and founder of the project.
 
I know very little about Salvatore. What I do know is he has a massive amount of titles in his name. Either he doesn't sleep or doesn't write them all. Maybe he runs a piece of software. Generic Fantasy Plot Generator 1.0. There are a handful of authors that are suspected, or it's even public knowledge, that do not write all their own books. Danielle Steel maybe?
 
ValkyrieRaven88 said:
Isn't William Faulkner supposed to be really "whack"? My dad was telling me there's a book he wrote--As I Lay Dying, I think--where one chapter was just the boy going, "My mother is a fish!" Because she was dead or something. And then they drilled holes in her face.
Click to expand...

We just read As I Lay Dying in English class a few months ago. The boy you are speaking of (Vardaman) describes his mother as a fish for many reasons. He is still confused about the death of his mother and why it happened. Just before she died, he had caught a fish, and he witnessed similarities between the two (you'll probably understand if you read the book--he was only six or seven years old, my class guesses) and even one of the adult characters (Tull, the neighbor) used the fish once as a metaphor for Addie (the woman who died).

They didn't drill holes in her face :D. Vardaman really couldn't believe his mother was dead. When her body was in the coffin, he drilled holes into the coffin so she could breathe, mistakenly drilling holes into her face as well. To tell the truth, I kind of liked the book overall even though the rest of my class hated it.

Some authors I think are "whack" (at least sometimes):
John Grisham
Stephen King
Anne Rice

I guess I'm not really creative with my choices.
 
CattiGuen said:
what does that mean?:confused: You silly english people? lol:p
Click to expand...

Homer - the odyssey got on my tits (well man pecks) after a while :mad:
--------------------------------


translation : The book started to annoy me chronically. The more I got into it
and it kept saying new names for about 2 pages especially in the
book of the dead.

english slang - <insert book/person/thing/event> - 'gets on my tits'
of being male, i have pecs instead of breasts/tits ~ just some humour
 
Stewart said:
Dan Brown
James Patterson
Stephen King
Anne Rice
John Grisham
Saul Bellow
J.R.R. Tolkien
Mark Haddon
J.K. Rowling
Click to expand...

I will agree with you on almost all of these authors except three

Dan Brown
J.K. Rowling
ANNE RICE!!!:eek: She is awesome and a bit overcelebrated but still the best vampire novelist that ever lived.:D
 
Vespertilio91 said:
I will agree with you on almost all of these authors except three

Dan Brown
J.K. Rowling
ANNE RICE!!!:eek:
Click to expand...

Sorry, but those three are not up for debate.
 
Good lord Dan Brown makes the most fundamental mistakes in his writing. Doesn't even seem to be able to manage the passage of time properly or the fact that people have to eat and drink every now and again. Picked up Digital Fortress in a bookstore once before TDC became so famous and scanned a few lines before reluctantly giving up - premise seemed good but his total inability to write dialogue and make characters seem like anything but cardboard just grated.

On to the classics:
Henry James - I read classics, so I do know my way around archaic English words and familiar with the conventions of his day. Total exercise in tedium. Sooooo slow to develop plots that I can't keep track of what's going on.

William Faulkner - in fairness, only tried "The Sound and the Fury," but I like to have some shot at knowing what the heck's going on, sorry.

J D Salinger - would probably be totally obscure today but for the controversy over "Catcher in the Rye"
 
MonkeyCatcher said:
Jose Saramago
Click to expand...

Are you trying to pick a fight with me?

:D


J.D. Salinger doesn't bother me a lot; I find The Catcher In The Rye a great book, an excellent example of how to write an idiolect, and I don't mind millions love it. It just bothers me that people love it for what seems to me like the wrong reasons.

Teenagers are fascinated with Holden Caulfield, this too cool for school cynical teen who sees the hypocrisy and the stupidity of society, the phoniness in everyone, who rails against everything. That looks pretty cool when you're 15, but let's admit, Holden is a complete bastard! He's the phoney one. You have to be quite blind to not understand Salinger is making fun of teenagers, and you have to have issues to idolise Holden as a symbol of freedom and whatnot.

This kid is a good-for-nothing troublemaker who hops from college to college (a rather easy feat when his phoney dad is rich), afraid of responsability and of growing up. He usually rails at hard-working, decent (but always phoney) people who don't have time for his childish antics. I'll never forget the episode with Holden inside the cab: Holden, being the selfish prick he always is, wants attention, so he invites the cab driver to go have a drink with him. Now of course this hard-working (but phoney) man with responsabilities can't just do that, some people don't have rich (and phoney) parents and have to work for a living, so he gently declines. He's a phoney! Because he didn't obey Mr. Holden (I'm not phoney) Caulfield's will, he's a phoney! Phoney! Phoney!

And it just goes on like this until the end, Holden blaming everyone (who is phoney) for his unhappiness. If there is anyone phoney in the novel it's Holden (who is not phoney), the phoney (phoney) rich kid who whines about everything while everyone else (everyone who is phoney, of course) is just trying to make a (phoney) living.

And millions of teens see this guy as an IDOL. I'm telling you, Salinger was making fun of teenagers. You've got it all wrong. He's not a cynical teenager, he's a whinning phoney prick.

Other than this little detail, the novel is great.
 
Some have said that it's not how The Catcher in the Rye changes but how people's perspectives change as they read the novel. It's supposed to be one of those books you pick up every five years. Which can be the sign of a good book. Not only its timelessness but its ability to adapt itself to your particular moment in time. Apparently the cycle of perspective moves along as you have described Heteronym and then further. I read it once fifteen years ago and did indeed find Holden endearing because of the traits you mention. I'm not sure how much my opinion of him would change. The vague recollections I have of Holden's ideals I still agree with. Perhaps one day I'll read the book again. Hopefully I won't have skipped a node on the cycle by the time I do get to it.
 
Cause they're overrated? And the works they produced is boring to an individual like us?


Why are you so offended? You have alot of insecurities, ion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top