Books that make you cry?

 
  • emo-queen пишет:
    People should be judged, but not by what they're reading. If Harry Potter and Co. brings someone who never touched a book to read and maybe to "high" literature, it is a good thing.

    Harry Potter is trash, I totally agree. But the original idea behind it is good.


    I'm sorry, but I don't quite get you. You defend Twilight because you like it. And again YOU're saying that people should be less arrogant and more tolerant. And again YOU're saying that Harry Potter is trash. Where are your tolerance and objectiveness? You know, Ii read Kafka as well. I like Harry Potter - it "makes me feel with the characters" using your own words. Please, no offences meant, but don't blame people for being arrogant when you can't help it yourself. No offences meant)))

    As for the topic - there lots of books I cried at. May be even too many. Jane Eyre, Remarque, The Little Prince, A Man's Destiny by Sholokhov, Hugo.

  • Once, when I was reading The Man Who Laughs by Victor Hugo.

  • Night by Elie Wiesel made me tear up a little.

    Why do we kill people to show that killing people is wrong?
  • The only ones I can think of right now are City of the Dead by Brian Keene, and the 7th Harry Potter book xD But there's got to be like ten others that I am blanking on >_< Oh, and kind of ashamed to say, but the end of The Notebook by Nicholas Sparks did make me a little teary...

    Time by Stephen Baxter came close, too -- because it was written so realistically that it frightened me x]

  • Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson made me bawl as a child and consequently I cry every time I read it (even now).

  • Crown of thorns : http://crown-of-thorns.webs.com/books.htm
    The Road to Sofia (Patyat kam Sofia): http://www.book.store.bg/p43527/pytiat-kym-sofia-stefan-dichev-.html

    Books like these tear my heart apart. So many horrible and devastating catastrophies have happened to my homeland, that is why bulgarian patriotism and nationalism had passed into a proverb in the course of time. i don't think there's any other country in the world that had suffered so much, with such a tragic destiny - we're still behind the other European countries in every way.
    Most of the troubles today come from the communist regime and the misunderstanded democracy that came afret that. And because most of the people are too stupid to realize, that INTELLIGENT doesn't mean someone who is a friend of whoever foreign president. And that when some shithead makes a "promise", that means : "i am going to raise all taxes, reduce all payments , so you can go and fuck yourself". the political situation today is.. very bad. in fact, most of the young people here emigrate, and eventually never come back. This is a huge problem for our scientific, economic etc. advance. Bulgaria was once a great country with lots of land and hope. Today we have neither.

    that is why I recommend those two books to all people who are interested in History. You'll see, that it is not very easy to survive when you have no money, no home and when all of your neighbours on the map hate you in the guts just because you've always managed to move on, no matter what.

    Have a nice reaing :-)

  • I'm sorry, but I don't quite get you. You defend Twilight because you like it. And again YOU're saying that people should be less arrogant and more tolerant. And again YOU're saying that Harry Potter is trash. Where are your tolerance and objectiveness? You know, Ii read Kafka as well. I like Harry Potter - it "makes me feel with the characters" using your own words. Please, no offences meant, but don't blame people for being arrogant when you can't help it yourself. No offences meant)))

    As for the topic - there lots of books I cried at. May be even too many. Jane Eyre, Remarque, The Little Prince, A Man's Destiny by Sholokhov, Hugo.


    You get a cookie for being absolutely right. And for my two cents... If you don't like a mainstream book at least keep in mind that it is getting people reading. I can think of no greater complement to a book than "This is the book that made me love reading" No matter how much you hate it, someone out there read it, liked it and then decided; because of it, to read more. FYI this is the same argument I use involving graphic novels in our library. If it is getting your child reading and then it gets them to read other things it can't be that bad.

    And to add another book to my list of books that make me cry... Stone Fox by John Reynolds Gardiner and The Little Match Girl by Hans Christian Andersen.

    It now became apparent (despite the lack of library paste)/ that something had happened to the vicar;/ guns began to go off in the distance./
    • Ta_Taa said...
    • User
    • 30 Sep 2010, 21:18
    Momo by Michael Ende... so cute and so sad...

    • Xamblu said...
    • User
    • 6 Oct 2010, 15:41
    There are many books that made me cry (especially children books) , but the one that makes me cry everytime I read is The Paul Street Boys by Ferenc Molnár.

  • I cry when I read Extremely loud and Incredibly close. The part where his dad calls the house and he doesn't answer the phone. Most times I just stop reading right there.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 9 Oct 2010, 15:40
    Books that make you cry abound in pathos. I don't mean to make a general claim that this is bad, I'll just try and get across how I see things. I know about a writer (a Nobel prize nominee) who avoided including such scenes from his own life (German persecution in WWII) and always maintained an "ironic distance". Nabokov attacked Dostoyevski on the same account, but Dostoyevski has a remarkably rich layer of ideas.

    No need to quarrel about whether HP or Twilight is good. They are both hyped trash. Every age had those. As I heard on a lecture recently, Harry Potter is like a chewing gum for the mind. You chew, you salivate, but you get no nutrients. What good is a sort of book you can read for years and remain just the same as when you began? But this is just me speaking.

  • HP and Twilight have their uses. Sometimes they get people back into reading, or sometimes they can be used as a social tool, like these are. If a book brings people together who might not otherwise have a reason to be, I think that puts it above the label of trash.

    I don't understand how people can read them myself, but I also can't understand how people can read Swanns Way or Infinite Jest.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 10 Oct 2010, 10:15
    Proust is central in the streams of World Lit. Un Amour de Swann is at least about a love affair, raises certain readers' pulses, might (admittedly in some odd projection) even pass for a sentimental novel, so it may also be the fateful stepping stone from trash to high literature. (I doubt HP and Twilight can do anything else but cause hunger for more books with the same pattern.) What Proust lampoons, however, isn't just an affair, like those one finds in cheap love stories, which are only relevant as providers of superficial identificational responses. After all, Madame Bovary and Anna Karenina 's protagonists cheat on their husbands, but that is contextualized with a complex of the authors' actual investigations in human nature and fate.

    The true topic of Un Amour de Swann is the psychology and that exact thing fascinated me. It discusses an ordinary thing - a relationship - but everything about the relationship is thoroughly motivated and investigated. The story ends when the attraction really died out in Swann, not with a duel or some other pathetic scene. It's the point of view that makes it a worthy read, among the other qualities.

    Everybody should read what they like, as long as they know how to place things; once they do, they'll eventually find themselves wondering why they were reading books that inspire no actual thought or significant aesthetic pleasure.. Such a waste of time - of course, not at an early age.

    • 8GotH8 said...
    • User
    • 18 Oct 2010, 01:17
    the kite runner.....

    Monday, 29 January, 1932:
    Something has happened to me, I can't doubt it any more.
  • All right. Everyone is so unbelievably clever here and never reads such trash as Harry Potter, but the thread about classics is still empty. How come?

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 18 Oct 2010, 14:00
    PetitVasya said:
    All right. Everyone is so unbelievably clever here and never reads such trash as Harry Potter, but the thread about classics is still empty. How come?


    IMO, because every question you ask in your thread is actually external to the classics: you are proposing a general discussion about the current reception of those books. We don't need to know much about General Literature to draw basic conclusions about that.

    You ask whether it is crucial to read them. It is crucial to read anything if you want to judge it.

    What you don't ask explicitly is this: how come certain books got to be cannonized and some were declared less worthy? The answer is not only their artistic worth, but also the historical significance, which correlates with the worth, and also with the advances e. g. in technique. Every great book is individual in that respect, so there are many special cases.

    As I see it, if we want to discuss actual classics we don't really need a general thread named "Classics".

    I did read some Harry Potter books several years ago.

  • conchoid in fact the thread is called CLASSICS and the questions I asked there were the first I could think of - and the thread itself implies that you are welcome to discuss everything you would like to discuss about classics (that's my omission I didn't make it clear).
    And there are many significant points there apart from the question why these books were canonized.
    Why didn't you write it all there?
    As I see it, if we want to discuss actual classics we don't really need a general thread named "Classics".
    Oh ... in my opinion, starting a thread about every single book and every single writer you would like to speak of is rather inconvenient, isn't it?
    We don't need to know much about General Literature to draw basic conclusions about that.
    Well, of course you don't need to, if you want to make some very basic conclusions. If you want to be able to make really deep and - what is even more important - RIGHT conclusions - you'll need to read a lot of classics as well as quite a lot of works of literary criticism.

    • [Deleted user] said...
    • User
    • 18 Oct 2010, 19:26
    PetitVasya said:
    conchoid in fact the thread is called CLASSICS and the questions I asked there were the first I could think of - and the thread itself implies that you are welcome to discuss everything you would like to discuss about classics (that's my omission I didn't make it clear).
    And there are many significant points there apart from the question why these books were canonized.


    Of course. But that particular question is the point that came to my mind while I was reading your questions in that thread. I was giving my opinion concerning your formulations, which you had asked above. Mind the question of reception.

    PetitVasya said:
    Why didn't you write it all there?


    It wasn't just me who didn't write anything. ;) It can be difficult to come up with a provocative opening for a thread. Also, there isn't very much people who visit this forum.

    PetitVasya said:
    As I see it, if we want to discuss actual classics we don't really need a general thread named "Classics".
    Oh ... in my opinion, starting a thread about every single book and every single writer you would like to speak of is rather inconvenient, isn't it?


    Never if it's worth our while and if we do them one at a time. ;) (Or several works together, if the books are tightly connected.) Even in a single general thread we would have to start with a specific work. But then the title of the thread wouldn't relate to the discussion quite so directly.



    PetitVasya said:
    We don't need to know much about General Literature to draw basic conclusions about that.
    Well, of course you don't need to, if you want to make some very basic conclusions. If you want to be able to make really deep and - what is even more important - RIGHT conclusions - you'll need to read a lot of classics as well as quite a lot of works of literary criticism.


    'Basic' ain't so bad for a start. Nietzsche loved boring basic truths.

    I was just separating a certain 'external' from the immanent of books while I was talking about the thread. I wasn't concerned with what wasn't given there, other than the canonization.

    You have more publicity now, I hope it will inspire someone. ;)

  • 'Basic' ain't so bad for a start.
    well yeah if there going to be a continuation and not just that "start".

    You have more publicity now, I hope it will inspire someone.
    Publicity? I'm not selling anything here.

  • ledifk said:
    I haven't cried with any books but I almost did when I was reading "The lovely bones" :p

    Me too.
    But I cried reading 'Neverending story' by Michael Ende.

  • i spilled some eyewater while reading "norwegian woods" by Haruki Murakami

  • Of Mice And Men -John Stienbeck

    A Walk To Remember- Nicholas Sparks

  • metalrayne said:
    A Walk To Remember- Nicholas Sparks


    Yes, that one too :)
    Lately I was thinking about books that made me cry and there was few. When I remember, then I'll write on this thread :)

  • The last book that made me cry was The Help, by Kathryn Stockett.

    Aaand a classic that made me cry was The Lady of the Camellias, by Alexandre Dumas, fils.

  • The last reading that made me cry was one murdered russian antifascist's memorial dedication.. The books don't make me cry, though yes, Remarque is sometimes extremely hard to read.. Btw my good friend told me she was crying while reading 'Onegin' and 'Garnet Bracelet' by Kuprin..

Anonymous users may not post messages. Please log in or create an account to post in the forums.