21st Century Literature discussion

Are there any specific writers or individual books that you think are frequently misunderstood? Maybe they're not valued in the way you think they might be, maybe their intent/affect is frequently misconstrued or entirely misunderstood...

What examples first come to mind?

Well I'm not sure how to tell whether a book is "frequently" misunderstood. But this favorite of mine gets a lot of bewildered bad reviews on goodreads:

Patricia Duncker, The Deadly Space Between

It's dark and stubbornly cryptic, and drenched in sexual innuendo. No wonder all these goodreads reviewers found it "disturbing", etc.

And while I'm on a grumpy roll:

Laird Hunt, In the House in the Dark of the Woods

4 stars from me, 1-2 stars from many.

(I hope Marc doesn't regret unleashing me on this topic.)

I think authors that write with humor are often taken less seriously, which is such a bummer, because there are so many good ones that also have literary merit. A novel can simultaneously tackle serious topics but also be fun to read and not be dinged for it.

I know a lot of people who hate On Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance but I think it’s a great book.

Robert wrote: "I know a lot of people who hate On Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance but I think it’s a great book."

Oh yes! This has been one of my favorite books for decades.

And I know there are plenty of writers/books that I frequently misunderstand, but I guess that's another topic. :-)

You wouldn't think Gordon Lish would be mentioned here, but:

What I Know So Far: Stories

Just check out those 1-2 star reviews!

No regrets, Bill!
:-)

Robert wrote: "I know a lot of people who hate On Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance but I think it’s a great book."

I liked that one too.

Well, I will sort of go the opposite route and name a book that many love and consider to hold deep truths: The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho.

Personally, I hated the book, felt it was shallow, poorly written, and formulaic.

I feel too many take it as deep philosophy when it's not.

Please excuse my grumpiness, lol!

I HATE that book! For all the reasons you mentioned

Stacia wrote: "Well, I will sort of go the opposite route and name a book that many love and consider to hold deep truths: The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho.

Personally, I hated the book..."

Whew! I've made myself read it twice, trying to figure out why it's so revered. Glad I'm not the only one who regrets the time I wasted when I could have been reading something good....

I thought of another example.

I have read two books by Jody Shields: The Fig Eater and The Winter Station. Both have a 2.9_ star rating here on GR, I think because people expect a lot of mystery or action.

But, her writing is very artistic & mostly quiet. She weaves a great tale, but it's something to read for the artistry. I am guessing many who panned her works were seeking fast-paced thrillers that are pumped out by the "popular" authors, so they have little patience for something slower with a different approach.

It's a shame because both the books had their own kind of beauty & intrigue, just not the commercially popular style. Kwim?

If you are interested, here are my reviews for The Fig Eater (which I gave 5 stars) and The Winter Station (which I gave 4 stars).

There are plenty of books where I disagree with people about the quality; and frequently ones where I think people just didn't get it. Examples of these abound in books that are routinely assigned reading in high school (see Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies et. al. )

For books or stories that are flagrantly misinterpreted though, two immediately come to mind. Kurt Vonnegut's 'Harrison Bergeron' is frequently held up as an example of the draconian restrictions those damn leftist socialists would impose on people in the name of equality; which is a bizarre interpretation to anyone who's ever read Vonnegut (he was a huge admirer of Eugene Debs, FFS). In reality, Vonnegut was parodying those very people who claimed that a Harrison Bergeron-like future was what socialism was promoting.

In the opposite camp is Fahrenheit 451. It's almost always held up as a cautionary tale about totalitarian government censorship, an interpretation Bradbury railed against. The initial death of reading in Fahrenheit 451 was a result of a form of "cancel culture", with people demanding that books offensive to various minorities be expunged, as well as people embracing those big glowing screens on their walls that demanded little in the way of intellectual effort. The firemen came after people stopped reading.