Books/Films You Know Are Good But Can't Get Through

[Hamish McBagpipe]

There are a few works that I know are good but just can't get through. Joyce's Ulysses is one of them. I have read Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, enjoyed it and thought it was very good. Ulysses I've tried and tried but find almost completely indecipherable, yet modern literature is widely acclaimed to have begun on that June day in 1904.

Another one is Faulkner's Sound and the Fury. I think you need a full semester course on this one before tackling.

On the film front I know that Citizen Kane is good, but every time I've tried to watch this one it bores me to tears and I never make it through it all in one sitting. I enjoy lots of films from this era, On The Waterfront for one is in my top 10 all time, but Citizen Kane ain't.

Any picks yourselves?

One thing is that I've noticed from the other posts is that few of you really think that there is any real objectivity in appreciating literature or film. That is, I don't think many of you think you can say one piece of art actually IS better than another. I do. I don't like Citizen Kane, but I KNOW that it is better, hands down, no argument, superior to Deuce Bigelow: European Gigolo.

[STLantny]

I always went through life thinking that art is the only truly subjective thing in life.

[MCS]

As to the idea of objective greatness in literature/art/film, I've always liked this little story. It's from Penny Arcade.

[ QUOTE ]
I took a "History of Film" class once and the professor started out by saying that he didn't want to hear that we didn't like any of the movies he was going to show. "These movies are all great," he said. "If you don't like them, you are wrong. Quite frankly, if you think that the 'Mona Lisa' is a bad painting, it says more about you than it does about Da Vinci's skill as a painter."

[/ QUOTE ]

Incidentally, I started reading Ulysses yesterday. It's going fine so far and I'm sort of getting into the style.

From what I have heard, and from sixty seconds of skimming it, it seems Joyce's Finnegan's Wake is basically impenetrable.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

I'm not trying to be snobby. I find merit in what I see as the worst films and books. But at some point I think we can draw a jagged, foggy line.

[Hamish McBagpipe]

There is a quote I'm trying to find. Some critic met Joyce years later and said something like, "Joyce, I read your Ulysses. What a novel. Took me six years to read it." And Joyce says, "That's alright, it took me six years to write it."

[RacersEdge]

When you watch CK, think about how Kane looks different depending on who is talking about him. That's from a film class I took. It might give you more to think about.

[STLantny]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not trying to be snobby. I find merit in what I see as the worst films and books. But at some point I think we can draw a jagged, foggy line.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I have never thought about it, but I just assumed, people like what they like, therefore, you think it is either good or its not. Personally, I know little to nothing about art, but I like to look at it. I always try to get to the museum in STL every couple of months when Im bored. There are some things I like, and others I just do not. Is that why people go to school for art, to learn what is good? I love Magritte, and old italian/grecko statues/armor etc, but I cant stand "modern" freako stuff. Is there a reason why I should find appeal to someone dumping on a picture of jesus? Is there something that I just do not get, that I would learn in school?

[Hamish McBagpipe]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I have never thought about it, but I just assumed, people like what they like, therefore its you think it is either good or its not. Personally, I know little to nothing about art, but I like to look at it. I always try to get to the museum in STL every couple of months when I bored. There are some things I like, and others I just do not. Is that why people go to school for art, to learn what is good? I love Magritte, and old italian/grecko statues/armor etc, but I cant stand "modern" freako stuff. Is there a reason why I should find appeal to someone dumping on a picture of jesus? Is there something that I just do not get, that I would learn in school?

[/ QUOTE ]

"To learn what is good." That's the question. And put like that how can I say yes, you should take the classes to find the merit in that picture of Christ in urine? But, for instance, Shakespeare was impenetrable (i like that one) to me upon first readings. I could only appreciate it once I had learned more about the symbolism, allegories, etc. This is not to say that I don't have any original ideas or tastes of my own but when tackling something new I'll defer to the experts for a while. Now I can read a Shakespeare play without any prior critical knowledge and appreciate it and form my own opinions on it. I have to emphasize that I don't believe the opinions of the "experts" is the answer, I distinctly remember an English prof, for example, with some totally hair-brained ideas about the Great Gatsby that were just completely wrong and misleading. But if you are a known expert on stamp collecting and I want to get into the hobby, I'll follow your lead for a while at least.

[STLantny]

Aye that makes sense. The Shakespeare example was perfect, because in high school, I was the same way, until I had a teacher (great teach) that showed us the symbolism and all the "behind the scenes/what bill was thinking" type of stuff, I just never realized it applied to art (paintings etc). But, Im fairly stupid, thats what I like Poe.

[dabluebery]

I try and watch any movie nominated for Best Picture Oscar. But I can't bring myself to even try to watch Master and Commander (the Russell Crowe movie) or Dances With Wolves, which won for the 1990 season.