My English teacher believes Tolkien has no literary merit....

[BlueFire]

I remember reading somewhere than you shouldn't use books like LOTR and Harry Potter in the AP exams.. I guess it doesn't flow well with the Collegeboard. I probably wouldn't use those books in my essays anyways. I think thats what your teachers mean... :P Perhaps she chose the wrong words.. :P

[Ginkasa]

No, she was pretty clear in that she believed they had no literary merit herself. I've also heard several stories of people who have used sci-fi or fantasy novels on the AP test and still gotten 4s or 5s. Even if she did mean they simply wouldn't be considered to have literary merit by the AP graders (of which she is one, BTW), then she's still wrong.

I would also like to point out how one of the first things she told us about essays was that we should focus more on the overall meaning than small things like super correct punctuation (she was more in the perspective of grading an essay than writing one). She heavily stressed that overall meaning is the most important part of the essay, but it seems that, to her, choice of novel would be more important...


/me shrugs and walks away

[Crash]

You telling me Michael Crichton has no MERIT????

damn, i hate those people... everyone sucks who isn't Emily Bronte....

Bull**** I say

[GameMaster]

Hmm...sounds like your English teacher is bitter. Doesn't want to give the popular books the credit they deserve. Maybe she has something against novels turned into movies. Or perhaps she failed as a writer herself and takes out her anger on being merely an English high school teacher upon her students and the material they tend to enjoy.

[Xantar]

While I certainly don't agree that fantasy or sci-fi novels have no literary merit just because they're sci-fi/fantasy, I do have to say that authors in the genre my and large aren't making it very easy for me to argue otherwise. All too often, I think they concentrate too much on gee whiz bang stuff. "Look, I created an entire world!" or "Look! I conceptualized a new technology!"

A case in point is Ringworld, Larry Niven's novel which is considered by many sci-fi buffs to be a "classic," mostly because it envisioned a world in the shape of a ring around the sun (just like Halo). That's all well and good, but the story itself consists of some explorers wandering around the place and looking at things. That's not only boring, it tends to make the book into something more like a technical exercise rather than a work of literature.

It's an unfortunate fact that because of the genre, sci-fi/fantasy authors think they can get away with mediocre characterization and story development so long as they present us with lots of cool gadgets or spells or something. I'm not saying that books to match Dickens don't exist in the genre. I hear Song of Fire and Ice is pretty good (though I haven't managed to get a hold of it). And I personally think Guy Gavriel Kay's Sarantine Mosaic makes very good jabs in the right direction.

But, sci-fi/fantasy is a very popular genre, and like anything where a lot of product is produced, the vast majority of it will be crap.

On the other hand, some people seem to think that if you dared to enjoy reading something, it must not be literature. There's stupid people on all sides, I guess.

P.S. Sorry, but Harry Potter really isn't great literature.

[Stonecutter]

Originally Posted by Xantar

It's an unfortunate fact that because of the genre, sci-fi/fantasy authors think they can get away with mediocre characterization and story development so long as they present us with lots of cool gadgets or spells or something.

*Cough*TOMCLANCY*Cough*

[Krypton]

Tim Dorsey is my favorite author.


the book "Cadillac Beach" is a classic.

[DarrenMcLeod]

Krypton - Every Time I Die kicks ass.

Also, I'd love to see someone use The Da Vinci Code on an AP Test. They'd get destroyed.

[Ginkasa]

Originally Posted by Xantar

While I certainly don't agree that fantasy or sci-fi novels have no literary merit just because they're sci-fi/fantasy, I do have to say that authors in the genre my and large aren't making it very easy for me to argue otherwise. All too often, I think they concentrate too much on gee whiz bang stuff. "Look, I created an entire world!" or "Look! I conceptualized a new technology!"

A case in point is Ringworld, Larry Niven's novel which is considered by many sci-fi buffs to be a "classic," mostly because it envisioned a world in the shape of a ring around the sun (just like Halo). That's all well and good, but the story itself consists of some explorers wandering around the place and looking at things. That's not only boring, it tends to make the book into something more like a technical exercise rather than a work of literature.

It's an unfortunate fact that because of the genre, sci-fi/fantasy authors think they can get away with mediocre characterization and story development so long as they present us with lots of cool gadgets or spells or something. I'm not saying that books to match Dickens don't exist in the genre. I hear Song of Fire and Ice is pretty good (though I haven't managed to get a hold of it). And I personally think Guy Gavriel Kay's Sarantine Mosaic makes very good jabs in the right direction.

But, sci-fi/fantasy is a very popular genre, and like anything where a lot of product is produced, the vast majority of it will be crap.

On the other hand, some people seem to think that if you dared to enjoy reading something, it must not be literature. There's stupid people on all sides, I guess.

P.S. Sorry, but Harry Potter really isn't great literature.

Yeah, I realize that most sci-fi fantasy ins't really all that good. Mostly my anger was at including Tolkien specifically.

And I was just quoting her words; I realize Harry Potter is not great literature.


/me shrugs and walks away

[BlueFire]

Originally Posted by Crash

You telling me Michael Crichton has no MERIT????

damn, i hate those people... everyone sucks who isn't Emily Bronte....

Bull**** I say

Wuthering Heights is awesome.

Sorry, continue.