Toaster Retribution

Controversial Opinions

419 posts in this topic

On 10/29/2018 at 5:24 PM, TheOrlionThatComesBefore said:

I feel a lot of books get a bad rap because they were assigned as school reading.

There were a lot of books I despised in high school because they were required reading (1984, The Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Hemingway in general, several others I can't even remember). I only read bits of them and used sparknotes for the other the important parts. Since graduating I've read several books in the same vein and rather enjoyed them. Granted, I haven't gone back to read the ones I listed because I still can't quite get over my high school grudge against them.

I think required reading is a terrible idea, since it generally doesn't actually help students. They should come up with a better system to introduce the ideas presented in the books, but let the students read the books of their own choice.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Elandera said:

There were a lot of books I despised in high school because they were required reading (1984, The Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Hemingway in general, several others I can't even remember). I only read bits of them and used sparknotes for the other the important parts. Since graduating I've read several books in the same vein and rather enjoyed them. Granted, I haven't gone back to read the ones I listed because I still can't quite get over my high school grudge against them.

I think required reading is a terrible idea, since it generally doesn't actually help students. They should come up with a better system to introduce the ideas presented in the books, but let the students read the books of their own choice.

I didn't bother with Fahrenheit 451 at all and just used sparknotes. I got 100% on the assessment.

Fahrenheit 451 is stupid.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Elandera said:

There were a lot of books I despised in high school because they were required reading (1984, The Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Hemingway in general, several others I can't even remember). I only read bits of them and used sparknotes for the other the important parts. Since graduating I've read several books in the same vein and rather enjoyed them. Granted, I haven't gone back to read the ones I listed because I still can't quite get over my high school grudge against them.

I think required reading is a terrible idea, since it generally doesn't actually help students. They should come up with a better system to introduce the ideas presented in the books, but let the students read the books of their own choice.

 

23 minutes ago, Kidpen said:

I didn't bother with Fahrenheit 451 at all and just used sparknotes. I got 100% on the assessment.

Fahrenheit 451 is stupid.

I absolutely loved The Great Gatsby, and I read it as semi-assigned reading (we had to choose between that and Catcher in the Rye, and I think I was one of two students who picked The Great Gatsby). But when I see teachers pushing and prodding students to praise books they were assigned to read, I cringe. You can't make someone love a book, even if it's a classic, or it contributed a lot to the world of literature, or what have you. People are going to like what they like and hate what they hate, and I think that if a student hates The Great Gatsby or Fahrenheit 451 or some other widely-hailed book, they should be allowed (and maybe even encouraged) to say so in class. And if they loved it, they should be allowed and encouraged to say so too. Even if their reasons for loving the book differ from the teacher's. 

See, I think a big problem with modern English lit classes is that students are pushed to adore the classics, for the same reasons critics and teachers adore them, which only fosters groupthink and a fear of going against the grain. When in reality, books should be read to broaden one's horizons, to be exposed to ideas one might never have encountered otherwise. And if a student's opinion goes against Accepted English Class Reasoning (TM) for one reason or another, it should be given a voice. Because I feel like schools need to teach critical thinking more than they do, and students aren't going to learn critical thinking by being reprimanded or shunned for speaking their minds. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kidpen said:

I didn't bother with Fahrenheit 451 at all and just used sparknotes. I got 100% on the assessment.

Fahrenheit 451 is stupid.

Sparknotes saves lives.

Fahrenheit 451 is a fun read. 

Books are almost always better when you aren't pushed to analyze them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Elandera said:

There were a lot of books I despised in high school because they were required reading (1984, The Great Gatsby, Lord of the Flies, Hemingway in general, several others I can't even remember). I only read bits of them and used sparknotes for the other the important parts. Since graduating I've read several books in the same vein and rather enjoyed them. Granted, I haven't gone back to read the ones I listed because I still can't quite get over my high school grudge against them.

I think required reading is a terrible idea, since it generally doesn't actually help students. They should come up with a better system to introduce the ideas presented in the books, but let the students read the books of their own choice.

I read all 4 of the books you listed hear some time after graduation.  none of them were required reading for me (though other students with different english teachers did read them) but I still wasn't a huge fan of them, though Hemingway had a few decent ones.  I suspect I'd have liked them less if I had been required to read them, though.  On the other hand, I loved a lot of the books I was required to read in 9th grade (To Kill a Mockingbird, A Wizard of Earthsea, and The Alchemist were all fantastic and I periodically reread them even now)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TwiLyghtSansSparkles said:

See, I think a big problem with modern English lit classes is that students are pushed to adore the classics, for the same reasons critics and teachers adore them, which only fosters groupthink and a fear of going against the grain. When in reality, books should be read to broaden one's horizons, to be exposed to ideas one might never have encountered otherwise. And if a student's opinion goes against Accepted English Class Reasoning (TM) for one reason or another, it should be given a voice. Because I feel like schools need to teach critical thinking more than they do, and students aren't going to learn critical thinking by being reprimanded or shunned for speaking their minds.

I see this as a big problem with the American school system in general (and perhaps other countries, but I don't have experience there). I once had a Civics teacher who was notorious for no one getting better than maybe a B in their class. The reason was because if you wrote an assignment that didn't reflect his own view point, or if it wasn't written how he'd have written it, you didn't get a good grade. It could have been a paraphrase of the book, and it still would have been wrong. The only reason I got an A is because I was great at BSing in my writing. I listened just enough to know what he'd want to hear and write to that.

That's the same kind of uniform thinking a lot of different teachers in different topics push students toward. 

3 hours ago, Kidpen said:

I didn't bother with Fahrenheit 451 at all and just used sparknotes. I got 100% on the assessment.

Fahrenheit 451 is stupid.

Luckily, Fahrenheit 451 isn't one of the books in my required reading, so I never gained that same disdain as I did for some other books. I read it about a year ago and actually enjoyed it.

Oh! That reminds me of another problem I have with assigned reading (which goes pretty well with what TwiLyghtSansSparkles said). When we read classics as assigned reading, we're often pushed toward analyzing it the same way. We're told this means that, and that means this, and there's no other interpretation. However, most of the authors didn't have one particular focus or meaning behind their books, and each person should be able to interpret it in a way that makes sense for them. Allowing that will allow youth to learn critical thinking techniques that help them actually apply what they learn and read to their lives in a realistic way, instead of shoving them into a box of groupthink.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Elandera said:

I see this as a big problem with the American school system in general (and perhaps other countries, but I don't have experience there). I once had a Civics teacher who was notorious for no one getting better than maybe a B in their class. The reason was because if you wrote an assignment that didn't reflect his own view point, or if it wasn't written how he'd have written it, you didn't get a good grade. It could have been a paraphrase of the book, and it still would have been wrong. The only reason I got an A is because I was great at BSing in my writing. I listened just enough to know what he'd want to hear and write to that.

That's the same kind of uniform thinking a lot of different teachers in different topics push students toward. 

In my second (I think) year of college, I was still going for a journalism degree, and I had a "teacher" with very, VERY strong left-leaning biases. She would ask opinion-based questions on assignments (things like "Do you think it is okay for people like Bill O'Reilly to share their political viewpoints on TV?"). Questions that could only be answered by giving an opinion of some sort. But see, she didn't want to hear your opinion. She wanted to hear her opinion in your words. If you did this, you'd get full credit. Give an opinion she agreed with and reasoning she didn't approve of? Partial credit. Disagree with her? Zero points. 

She also smugly told a single mom working full-time that no, she would not give out less homework, because "school should be your full-time job," but that's another story. 

1 hour ago, Elandera said:

Oh! That reminds me of another problem I have with assigned reading (which goes pretty well with what TwiLyghtSansSparkles said). When we read classics as assigned reading, we're often pushed toward analyzing it the same way. We're told this means that, and that means this, and there's no other interpretation. However, most of the authors didn't have one particular focus or meaning behind their books, and each person should be able to interpret it in a way that makes sense for them. Allowing that will allow youth to learn critical thinking techniques that help them actually apply what they learn and read to their lives in a realistic way, instead of shoving them into a box of groupthink.

Oh man, I feel this so much. In high school, I used Frankenstein for literary criticism essays twice, in two different classes, at two different grade levels. For these essays, we had to choose some sort of thesis, and then support it with both our own reasoning and quotes from "expert" critics. The problem was, one of my theses was that the characters in Frankenstein represent the three natures of man—good, evil, and the soul struggling between them—and the other was that Frankenstein is a scathing critique of parents who abandon their children. In my school's rather large collection of literary criticism essays, I could not find a single essay that even addressed those themes, however briefly. I had to resort to cherry-picking sentences and quoting them out of context to make it sound like the experts supported my reasoning, because the assignment's structure didn't leave a lot of room for original thought. 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love all seasons of Power Rangers (with the exception of Operation Overdrive and Megaforce), and the 2017 movie was awesome. (Time Force and RPM are my favorites)

I don't like peanut butter.

I hate Friends and The Office and most other comedy shows with a burning passion. The 'friends' are awful to each other and the office workers are assholes. I much prefer the snarky humor (and actual plot) you get in more serious shows.

I love To Kill a Mockingbird and Jane Austen, and I'm a huge fan of classic Russian literature, especially Dostoevsky (especially especially Brothers Karamazov) and Turgenev (though it helps that I can read it in the original Russian, if very slowly). ...it should be noted I am a Russian/Linguistics double major and this is basically required of me.

Snape is my favorite Harry Potter character, and I think that he was ultimately a good person. I don't actually like Harry himself much at all.

Moridin/Elan Morin Tedronai is my favorite character from WoT (not sure how controversial, but we shall see)

I don't like the Star Wars movies much at all, though the original trilogy was ok, and Rogue One - but in general I prefer the old expanded universe, and the new novels and stuff are growing on me.

It was on and finished before I was even born, but I think Babylon 5 is the greatest science fiction show ever made, though I still love Trek and Stargate and such. I also love Syfy's show Defiance, from a few years ago, but no one else ever seems to have heard of it.

...yeah, I'll stop there.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really enjoyed the book "The Great Gatsby", and the movie adaptation with Leonardo DiCaprio.  I felt it really did the book justice.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet Heat Skittles are an abomination and a crime against tastebuds. 

(Adding to the literary discussion, it bothers me that Catcher in the Rye is considered high school reading.  It's about a teenager, but that doesn't mean it was written for teenagers.  It's meant to be an adult reflection on that time of change, loss of innocence, etc.) 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/23/2018 at 3:18 PM, Ookla of Toriyama said:

(Adding to the literary discussion, it bothers me that Catcher in the Rye is considered high school reading.  It's about a teenager, but that doesn't mean it was written for teenagers.  It's meant to be an adult reflection on that time of change, loss of innocence, etc.) 

I so agree. That book either curses, blasphemes, or both every page. I do not get how that is appropriate for teenagers to be reading.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2018-11-14 at 4:55 AM, Ookla the Strange said:

Snape is my favorite Harry Potter character, and I think that he was ultimately a good person. I don't actually like Harry himself much at all.

Agreed. Or, almost agreed. Fred Weasley is the best, but Snape comes at an honorable second place.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate Star Wars the original trilogy and love the prequals

… Wait, before anyone comments, this is because I think they are both awful (script/editing/etc.) Luke in one scene even calls Leia "Carrie" (The name of the actress that played her)
The reason why I like the prequals is because they have a better story than SWtOT.  It shows the good guy turning evil, which is a story many people don't tell.  How it is written is poor, but if you look past that...

On ‎11‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 7:55 PM, Ookla the Strange said:

I don't actually like Harry himself much at all.

I share this sentiment.  I also hate Ron, and don't think Hermione is well developed as she should not be smarter than every single Ravenclaw
I probably like Neville most though.  Fred and Snape are tied at second I think for me...

 

Edited by Furamirionind
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Furamirionind said:

I hate Star Wars the original trilogy and love the prequels

 

In total agreeance here.

3 hours ago, Furamirionind said:

I probably like Neville most though. 

I like Arnold best.

Edited by Ookla the [your choice]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ookla the [your choice] said:

I like Arnold best.

I am so confused... This was the notification I got for your message...

whatIsThisNotification.PNG

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Furamirionind said:

I am so confused... This was the notification I got for your message...

whatIsThisNotification.PNG

That's what happens when a person's name is too long. It just cuts it and other stuff out.

Edited by Ookla the [your choice]
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Furamirionind said:

I share this sentiment.  I also hate Ron, and don't think Hermione is well developed as she should not be smarter than every single Ravenclaw
I probably like Neville most though.  Fred and Snape are tied at second I think for me...

I liked Harry at first, but I disliked him more on each reread. I liked Ron well enough, but I think the fandom ruined him for me. Not the whole fandom; just a very vocal segment of it. Here's how it'll go: 

Unsuspecting Person: You know, I didn't really like Ron all that much. 
Ron Lovers: WHAT DID RON WEASLEY DO TO DESERVE THIS SENSELESS BASHING????????
UP: I wasn't bashing him? I was just saying that I—
RL: NOW YOU LISTEN HERE, YOU MISERABLE CRETIN. RON WEASLEY IS PERFECT, YOU HEAR? HE IS PERFECT IN EVERY WAY, SHAPE AND FORM. HIS FLAWS ONLY SERVE TO MAKE HIM MORE PERFECT AND IF YOU DARE SAY HE IS ANYTHING LESS, WE WILL HOUND YOU UNTIL YOU SEE REASON! 

Now, I think he's meh at best. And Hermione is….you know, I hate to echo the words of a teacher picking on a student, but a lot of the time she really does come across as an insufferable know-it-all. Then again, that could be a reaction to having the fandom shill her day in and day out over the tiniest acts of goodness on her part.

Although I am not ashamed to admit I love Snape as a character, flaws and all. He's done some awful things, but he's done some amazing things, and that is what makes him a joy to read about.

Edited by DirtyOoklafaceFullOfLame
3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nifflers are clearly the best characters. I'm still unsure why the entire rest of the books weren't about them when they were revealed. But I think it might be because the entire HP series is just a prequel to Nifflers. To contrast how boring wizards are.

That is all.

5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Ookla the Lurker said:

Nifflers are clearly the best characters. I'm still unsure why the entire rest of the books weren't about them when they were revealed. But I think it might be because the entire HP series is just a prequel to Nifflers. To contrast how boring wizards are.

That is all.

Everything makes sense now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Ookla the Lurker said:

Nifflers are clearly the best characters. I'm still unsure why the entire rest of the books weren't about them when they were revealed. But I think it might be because the entire HP series is just a prequel to Nifflers. To contrast how boring wizards are.

That is all.

Remus Lupin And Luna Lovegood Hang Out With A Bunch of Nifflers: A Musical to Apologize for Cursed Child, anyone? :ph34r:

7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean it seems the logical thing to do doesn't it?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything makes sense now... Harry Potter was the introduction to the magical world and nifflers.
Crimes of Grindlewald is starting to actually show us the nifflers a little more, and establish what they can do, and how amazing they are.

Next, we can expect to see a story from a niffler POV...

Of course, we can expect 7 books and 8 movies from each story.

Oh, and do you know the play "Puffs"? It is the story of Harry Potter from the Hufflepuff perspective... We need the same thing from nifflers now too!!!!!!!!
(My mother is obsessed with Harry Potter...)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some timely controversial opinion: 

Neon Genesis Evangelion is a mess. If the statement, "put a bunch of stuff in a blender and process into a chunky goop" ever made sense as a critique for anything, it's for this show.

The best part about the show? A Cruel Angel's Thesis. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎17‎/‎2018 at 2:01 PM, mattig89ch said:

I really enjoyed the book "The Great Gatsby", and the movie adaptation with Leonardo DiCaprio.  I felt it really did the book justice.

It was one of my favorite books I had to read in high school because it made me FEEL SOMETHING. But me and my best friend saw the movie and to this day we adore it.

On ‎11‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 6:43 PM, DirtyOoklafaceFullOfLame said:

I liked Harry at first, but I disliked him more on each reread. I liked Ron well enough, but I think the fandom ruined him for me. Not the whole fandom; just a very vocal segment of it. Here's how it'll go: 

Unsuspecting Person: You know, I didn't really like Ron all that much. 
Ron Lovers: WHAT DID RON WEASLEY DO TO DESERVE THIS SENSELESS BASHING????????
UP: I wasn't bashing him? I was just saying that I—
RL: NOW YOU LISTEN HERE, YOU MISERABLE CRETIN. RON WEASLEY IS PERFECT, YOU HEAR? HE IS PERFECT IN EVERY WAY, SHAPE AND FORM. HIS FLAWS ONLY SERVE TO MAKE HIM MORE PERFECT AND IF YOU DARE SAY HE IS ANYTHING LESS, WE WILL HOUND YOU UNTIL YOU SEE REASON! 

Now, I think he's meh at best. And Hermione is….you know, I hate to echo the words of a teacher picking on a student, but a lot of the time she really does come across as an insufferable know-it-all. Then again, that could be a reaction to having the fandom shill her day in and day out over the tiniest acts of goodness on her part.

Although I am not ashamed to admit I love Snape as a character, flaws and all. He's done some awful things, but he's done some amazing things, and that is what makes him a joy to read about.

I fall weirdly in the middle. I don't think Ron's perfect, but I felt like he was severely underused/not used well. Like he's a great character, but he really only comes in handy when tension or exposition was needed. 

 

My controversial opinion...the ending of Legend of Korra was bad. 

Spoiler

This stems from two reasons for me. First is because the romance. I don't have a problem with Korra and Asami getting together. What I DO have a problem is with how it felt like it came out of nowhere and how unnecessary it was. My rules for characters is that romance should not be the first or last thing we see them do UNLESS it is an integral part of their character. For Korra it HAD STOPPED BEING INTEGRAL, to the point I'm pretty sure the creators said that they were done with romance when talking about Season 3. So for romance to come back after all that time for the final scene sat wrong with me.

 

Secondly, Korra's whole arc was to become a fully realized Avatar. She started out eager about her role in life and her place in the world. That role was challenged, but she always rose to the occasion. In Season 4, Korra spent most of her time MIA, regaining her full strength. And the first thing she does after gaining that strength back and defeating the enemy? Take a break with Asami to the spirit world. That...felt like a counterpoint to both Korra's arc in the season and her motivation in the series. I get it, but it doesn't feel...well, not earned but not right. 

 

I'll never say "don't watch the show," but I always hesitate a bit and feel the need to warn people that it might not sit with everyone. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sword of Truth was not at all a terrible series (not the first 11 books anyway), and it genuinely baffles me why so much hatred is directed at it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.