Ahsilet

With female writers, many tend to stick with love, relationships, motherhood, or wifehood to be the center of the book. Since I'm not the lovey-dovey type and not big on motherhood or wifehood, I find myself not being able to stomach a lot of books by females. Yes, we are emotional creatures, but when you tend to write on these emotions the books start to all have the same formula. I notice male writers can wite about whatever they want do to the fact that they aren't emtional or nurturing creatures. When you can separate your emotions from the point you're trying to get across, I find the story to be more relatable and it welcomes a range of people to be the audience. I notice female writers tend to exlcude certain people from the audience when it comes to their work. And with this I am talking about fiction.

Kinda sad that Rafa didn't win the French Open and will not be participating in Wimbledon this year. The disappointment of these recent two grand slams has really overshadowed his accomplishment at the Australian Open earlier this year. People really thought he had the French Open in the bag before the clay court season had started since he had already won that last four. I would like to see Ana Ivanovic back on top. I think she is a great tennis player. She had a rough run as No.1 last year, and this year she's been getting knocked out of major tournaments earlier than what she has been use to for awhile.

I wanted to start a discussion about when it comes authors, would you rather read books by male or female authors? I know some of you might post something like "as long as the book is good, it doesn't matter what sex the author is." Yeah, true, if the book is good it doesn't matter. Overall, looking at all the books you have read, what sex has produced the most books that you like and can relate to? Sex shouldn't matter, but if someone was to ask me if I preferred male or female writers over the other sex, I would simply say male writers. Males have produced books that I have found to be more relatable or entertaining due to the fact that men have not limited themselves to things they write about like women have.

I only read the back of the book. If it's a book I've heard about, then I go straight away and buy it without reading the back of the book, which can get you in trouble sometimes.

I am an American Literature major and I always wanted to work for a publishing company as a critical writer. Ever doing that would be a stretch, so I went into engineering.

Do anyone think Ana Ivanovic can defend her title at the French Open. She has improved majorly on the clay court, and even herself said she enjoys that court more now (probably only saying that because she won the French Open last year.) I am a fan of her and would like to see her back at No.1, and this time, a great tennis player at No.1. Her run as No.1 was horrible last year. Is Maria Sharapova ever coming back to the court? And I mean "officially" coming back instead of that doubles mess she pulled this year that had her quickly packing and heading home.

I am not a non-fiction reader. The non-fiction I do read is autobiographies by glamour models and video vixens such as Katie Price, Jodie Marsh, and Karrine Steffans.

To me, he didn't seem as a villian for some reason.

Finally thoughts: With this time line, it's seems to say that "since Tolstoy, the Brontes, Dickens, and Fitzgerald are 64 years and plus before us, they are classic." I mean, I just don't see how anyone feel they can set up a time line on liteature and be okay excluding greats works of Marquez, Salinger, and Morrison from these other "classic" writers. But it's okay throwing them in the circle with Meyer, Rowling, and King just because the didn't meet this time limit. I am an American literature major and will be graduating in May and I can't even tell you a cut off for what to consider what is "classic" and what isn't. If we base things off writing style, then how can a time line for "classics" be made. The Renaissance is different from Romanticism, which is different from Victorian, which is different from Modern. So if we went off a time period due to writing style, then that can't work either, can it? But whatever, I'll leave the reading circles and classic book groups alone. I should had never made any suggestions knowing what I know now.

No it does not. Their are many novels out there post-World War II that have influenced literature greatly. A book forum should not determine that. A line should not be drawn anywhere, because then you have stripped many books of this "classic" label. Esepcially minority writers.

I still haven't started this book. My friend told me to read Dracula first since that's the best vampire novel ever. Only thing I know both of these books is that they're about vampires. I don't know when I'll start The Historian since I've never heard anything good about the book in person.

I am totally shocked that a timeline is used to determine what a "classic" is on this forum. It has been accepted in the literary world that The Color Purple, The Street, and Beloved are American "classics." To say that a timeline strips those books of that label on this forum because they weren't wrote before World War II is really crazy. I picked those books for a reason and not just something that popped off the top of my head. If you look at the line-up of the reading circle has had, there is no diversity with the exception of Kazuo Ishiguro. None of the authors are female or of African decent. I went with with African American women for that purpose. Plus, I tried to make a connection between those books. I chose Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl because this book was clearly before it's time. "An African American female slave publishing a book of true slave events, what???" It's best to read the life of an actual slave rather than by Harriet Beecher Stowe or Mark Twain, two white upper class people who have no clue about the slave life. Then Their Eyes Were Watching God and The Street because they are two wonderful Harlem Renaissance masterpieces by females. Went with Alice Walker because she "re-discovered" Hurston and put her name back out there. Lastly, Toni Morrison because she was the first African American female to receive and Noble Prize for her amazing "classic" novel, Beloved. This line-up brings "classics" to people on this forum that would have never looked twice at these books. I am so tired of seeing the same'ol "classics" listed on this forum when there are wonderful novels out their being looked over. So forget a time limit and let the forum speak on this. If they don't like my idea, then erase it. But saying a certain time period should determine such a thing is ridiculous.

what????

Jacob, Esme, Alice, and Rosalie.

I was thinking maybe "classics" by African American women. This is the line-up I would use for the poll: Harriet Jacobs's Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, 1861 Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God, 1937 Ann Petry's The Street, 1946 Alice Walker's The Color Purple, 1982 Toni Morrison's Beloved, 1987