Quote:
Originally Posted by Morthoron
Oh, I wasn't irritated that LOTR came in third; in fact, LOTR wouldn't necessarily come in third on my own personal favorite list. Rather, I was bemoaning the list in general (I'm rather surprised that Ayn Rand and Harper Lee managed to muscle in against such literary heavyweights as Dan Brown, Stephen King and Harry Potter). So much for Steinbeck, Dickens, Hugo and other such second-rate hacks.
|
Well, I am afraid that the poll - and not that I fancy polls anyway, or trust them much, but I don't know the agenture that made it, so I can't judge - shows exactly the "commercially succesful" stuff (however nasty this is to be said of LotR, but after the movies, this is just normal). And I think I read somewhere here recently that LotR is among the books most lied about - i.e. people say they have read it when they in fact didn't. Not thinking that they'd lie about it in the poll, but anyway, it says something of the overall views (and maybe similar things may apply for even the Bible or others, like Dan Brown).
Quote:
|
Yes, a good book, but not the only book (to paraphrase the movie Inherit the Wind). But if we are talking strictly from a literary standpoint (and I realize that the question that was asked was rather vague in that regard), then I would have to say the Bible is inconsistent.
|
The other things is actually that it is not, in fact, one book, but many books from many different authors put together; so if we were too picky, it should be maybe even placed separately (but since it is already one book, it won't be much helpful to separate it, I think, quite the opposite. Also, there is the question whether even the people who wrote it read all of it). And again: not sure what the American translations look like (or if they had King James in mind), but I daresay at least the Old Testament cannot reach its heights
as a work of literature in translations - it's totally different in the original (all the literary techniques, like playing with words, alliteration etc.).