Is it normal to strongly dislike the majority of "great" art of lit.?

I feel like I dislike more of the "masterpieces" of western culture than I like! I read Sula, a Toni Morrison novel this week (she's a nobel prize winner) and I thought it was a stinking pile of you know what.

It's funny though, because it depends on the medium, in some cases. The "great works" of theater for example, I almost like all of them. Eugene O'Neill, Edward Albee, Clifford Odets, Brecht, Harold Pinter, etc.

Novels, though, it just seems to be a bottomless pit of works that I simply can't stand with very few exceptions like The Grapes of Wrath, 1984, Cat's Cradle, and All Quiet on the W.F... The vast majority of great novels and films though I just honestly feel physically repulsed by... like my eyes will start stinging/watering, I'll start yawning, and I'll find myself lost and having to back track repeatedly.

I also get the nagging feeling a lot that the majority of great works -- any medium -- in recent years has been sort of biased towards like an "affirmative action" of sorts... For example, did you know that a straight white non-hispanic male hasn't won the nobel prize for playwriting since Eugene O'Neill posthumously won it in the 50s? O_o

I dunno, am I alone in any of this? I just feel bummed that I have "poor taste"

Great Works? Who came up with that term? What the hell is a great work?

It sounds like you like some of the "classics."

But wtf is a "Great Works?"

Originally Posted by vizigothe

Great Works? Who came up with that term? What the hell is a great work?

It sounds like you like some of the "classics."

But wtf is a "Great Works?"

"Classic" implies different things in different mediums, so it's not a suitable term. "The classics" in literature, by my understanding, refers to western-humanities type traditions of writing... Everything from Plato and Aristotle to Hobbes and Locke.

As to what is a great works [sic], I'm referring to works that meet a measure of quality/worth to the canon by critical and academic consensus.

Originally Posted by vizigothe

Great Works? Who came up with that term? What the hell is a great work?

It sounds like you like some of the "classics."

But wtf is a "Great Works?"

The works of Robert E.Howard and H.P. Lovecraft.

Originally Posted by JustShoveJayOhBe

Novels, though, it just seems to be a bottomless pit of works that I simply can't stand with very few exceptions like The Grapes of Wrath, 1984, Cat's Cradle, and All Quiet on the W.F... The vast majority of great novels and films though I just honestly feel physically repulsed by... like my eyes will start stinging/watering, I'll start yawning, and I'll find myself lost and having to back track repeatedly.

Perhaps you need to broaden your horizons. At least I think that's the term . At any rate, if you looked past the "boring" writing and considered the messages and meanings, and the complex relationships and all that, I'm sure you'd see the quality. Some books aren't my cup of tea either because they're just dry, but they're revered by many because of something deeper.

Originally Posted by D.B. Cooper

Perhaps you need to broaden your horizons. At least I think that's the term . At any rate, if you looked past the "boring" writing and considered the messages and meanings, and the complex relationships and all that, I'm sure you'd see the quality. Some books aren't my cup of tea either because they're just dry, but they're revered by many because of something deeper.

Yeah but I feel like there's a lot of books with depth AND great prose, so why bother with things with depth but bad prose?

Originally Posted by JustShoveJayOhBe

Yeah but I feel like there's a lot of books with depth AND great prose, so why bother with things with depth but bad prose?

Theres really great steak but if you couldnt get it and someone offered you mediocre steak, why would you say no?

Also, differentiate between "to like" and "to acknowledge".
You can easily acknowledge the skill of an artist of any kind and her/his contributions to the further development of an art form without liking it.

I dislike much baroque music, including many of Bach's works, and most (not all) of Mozart's work gets on my nerves very quickly. But still I acknowledge the impact Bach and Mozart had on music as an art form and I recognise their genius. I just don't listen to most of their stuff.

To like is one thing. To acknowledge is another.

I am in to poetry and art. Not so much literature and I really don't see what the big deal is about the mona lisa. I love a lot of the impressionist work of the 1800s

Originally Posted by Eire_Emerald

I am in to poetry and art. Not so much literature and I really don't see what the big deal is about the mona lisa. I love a lot of the impressionist work of the 1800s

Grrrrr, why do so many Irish people love impressionism. We're being brainwashed by those damn fatcats in the national gallery. You have to go to IMMA, broaden your mind man, be freeeeeeeee.

Originally Posted by Arch-hereticK

Grrrrr, why do so many Irish people love impressionism. We're being brainwashed by those damn fatcats in the national gallery. You have to go to IMMA, broaden your mind man, be freeeeeeeee.

he he, I will do it just for you. I love modern art as well, original innovational art.

I've found that I'm enjoying the supposed "great works" (to use your term) much more now that I'm older...and reading them outside of classes. Reading a book for a class usually kills any impact, because I treat it as an assignment and thus read bits at a time rather than as much as I can at each instance.

The problem is that none of the books you listed are the real great works. Toni Morrison? Please. Compared Victor Hugo or Johnathan Swift, Morrison and Steinbeck are pedestrian and boring. That's the explanation, your educators are pushing boring and ridiculous literature on you, and calling it "The Classics" or "Great Works".

I personally find the whole concept of the "classic" elusive and unnecessary baggage. Read what you want to read. Don't let social preconditions affect your judgement. Of course there are some books that have timeless influence, both in fiction works and non-fiction, but that shouldn't change what you personally get out of reading something. Whether that be enjoyment, enlightenment or even just a laugh or two.

Originally Posted by Stalins Ghost

Don't let social preconditions affect your judgement.

I don't think that's an easy thing to do, society in and of itself is violence to individual thought, in my view, and I often feel a longing to feel like a part of something greater than myself, though I find time and time again that academic/intellectual culture doesn't seem very welcoming or compatible to the way I think.

The only reason I even took the time to read any of these recent "great works" is because I felt like I'd like to write a book, and I wanted to see how to do it in a way that I could actually get it published. I actually don't like reading or even writing all that much because I think it's tedious and it makes my eyes water and I just never got into the habit growing up... but, what I like about writing is showing it to other people and especially reading it out loud to people because I'm very good at speaking and telling stories. Could never do acting and that sort of thing because I can't memorize lines. It's just sad because I work in criminology and there aren't many opportunities to give speeches or lectures or anything, and I feel like I'd be really good at that and I love talking to audiences and watching their reactions. Maybe I should be a professor

Originally Posted by JustShoveJayOhBe

I don't think that's an easy thing to do, society in and of itself is violence to individual thought, in my view, and I often feel a longing to feel like a part of something greater than myself, though I find time and time again that academic/intellectual culture doesn't seem very welcoming or compatible to the way I think.

The only reason I even took the time to read any of these recent "great works" is because I felt like I'd like to write a book, and I wanted to see how to do it in a way that I could actually get it published. I actually don't like reading or even writing all that much because I think it's tedious and it makes my eyes water and I just never got into the habit growing up... but, what I like about writing is showing it to other people and especially reading it out loud to people because I'm very good at speaking and telling stories. Could never do acting and that sort of thing because I can't memorize lines. It's just sad because I work in criminology and there aren't many opportunities to give speeches or lectures or anything, and I feel like I'd be really good at that and I love talking to audiences and watching their reactions. Maybe I should be a professor

Funnily enough I'm quite similar in those respects. I'm reading a wide variety of stuff these days to try to gauge what I'd like to try writing myself. And likewise I'm considering going down the academic route (Classics/Ancient History) because I'd like to try my hand at lecturing. Also considering teaching as a result.

Originally Posted by Stalins Ghost

Funnily enough I'm quite similar in those respects. I'm reading a wide variety of stuff these days to try to gauge what I'd like to try writing myself. And likewise I'm considering going down the academic route (Classics/Ancient History) because I'd like to try my hand at lecturing. Also considering teaching as a result.

I dabbed in history a couple times (love reading it of course), but never again. I've never seen a more childish academic field full of pointless arguments and credential parading than history... ugh... sour memories...

Everything depends on one's criteria. My great is different to another's.