How to study literature without a university?

[Theomanic]

I'm not proud of this, but I've never read a word of King--well, not true exactly. I did open a couple of his books but was put off by the style so didn't invest the time in them.

I wouldn't be ashamed of not reading King, but it is good to know thine enemy. Most of his books are long enough that they require quite a commitment. Even though they're not challenging reads, they just go on and on. If you do commit to one, I'd probably say The Stand is my favourite. The shortest one I can think of is The Gunslinger but it's not a very good example of his work.

On another note, I think Harold is completely wrong about Harry Potter

The book is rich with themes and it shows life in it's very basic, down to earth nature.

Rowling did a fantastic job with it, more than people are inclined to believe.

Oooh, I'm totally on Bloom's side regarding Harry Potter. I actually still haven't read the final book because they've been harder and harder to slog through. I understand that they're kids books, but the illogic of it was so vexing! "Oh Harry, just because you're the saviour of the universe is no reason we should listen to you! Now go away while the grown ups mess up and you do everything alone."

[youkrst]

It's easier, after all, to hand in exercises and take quizzes than to expose your thoughts and stretch yourself. That takes real commitment.

aint it the truth.

I heard Joseph Campbell say once: "I don't believe in studying subjects because they're said to be important, do you?"

oh yeah, and later in the same bit, but if these things DO grab you, what can they do for you?

If this is going to be the criterion in the future, then perhaps next year the committee should give its award for distinguished contribution to Danielle Steel, and surely the Nobel Prize for literature should go to J.K. Rowling.

50 shades of grey? love to hear what Bloom has to say about that.

[SkywardGnost]

On another note, I think Harold is completely wrong about Harry Potter

The book is rich with themes and it shows life in it's very basic, down to earth nature.

Rowling did a fantastic job with it, more than people are inclined to believe.

Oooh, I'm totally on Bloom's side regarding Harry Potter. I actually still haven't read the final book because they've been harder and harder to slog through. I understand that they're kids books, but the illogic of it was so vexing! "Oh Harry, just because you're the saviour of the universe is no reason we should listen to you! Now go away while the grown ups mess up and you do everything alone."[/quote]

Well I mean, the ministry of magic didn't listen to harry because they like to control the masses. It was a parallel to how the media and government works today.

Unless you're talking about something else...

[Theomanic]

Well I mean, the ministry of magic didn't listen to harry because they like to control the masses. It was a parallel to how the media and government works today.

Unless you're talking about something else...

An example I can think of is

Spoiler

I think book 5? Wherein Harry keeps trying to tell the adults (his teachers) the bad things he's seen and they're all "Oh you're so imaginative. Now go away so the grown ups can talk". The Order of the Phoenix and all that. Imagine how much better things would've gone if Harry had more than a bunch of half-trained kids helping him!

I guess this is yet another book which people have different interpretations of it. Just take with a lot of salt.