It's probably true that you can't judge a book by its cover, but you can tell a lot about a person by what book they're reading, so we decided to provide some insight into what the book that you're reading says about you:
The Bible has helped many people to live better lives and be kind to one another. It has also helped many people to be judgmental douchebags that try to force their views on others and lose their sense of humor. Fuckers.
Toilet books rock. Heavy Metal magazine ftw.
The Secret is such a big joke. I would love to make a short film about a handful of devoted Oprah fans who have mastered the "Secret" and enter into reality altering warfare with each other over contradictions of will. (there will be blood)
I don't even know what that yellow and red book is. Don't care. No. Don't reply telling me.
Much like stereo instructions, a manual is not a book.
Obama's book alt title shoulda been "I'll Even Buy This Book to Prove I'm Not Racist" by Every Guilt Ridden White
Rowling writes poorly. What? You liked the books? OK. So fucking what. She still writes like a child. Your love of her stories is no more valid than my opinion of her skill. I could write something as long as one of her books about the dumb, irritating, or dissonant shit in her stories. D minus. (but surely I'm wrong due to the huge sales, right?)
Brown's books are not much better. He is the Winger of popular fiction. Some poor schmoe had his story purchased, well raped, watered down, sensationalized, and had fake spectacles put on it by Brown.
Its very...true.
Harry Potter was good in the sense that it got alot of kids introduced to the genre.
But, there are definetly better fanstasy novels for that age group.
"Duo cum faciunt idem, non est idem" - When two do the same, it's not the same. I meanna two quite differert men may read one book, but motives and effects (interpreting) may be much various
I am always reading a book - and it is usually a fiction murder mystery. I hate blood and gore movies, but love mystery and suspense and stories about solving murders. It is very unlike anything else about me and I would love to know what it says about me. My appetite for these books is insatiable,
Your an idiot. Obviously Harry Potter is a child's book and you are just dumb for reading it. And what wouldn't children understand? death? magic? having a crush? missing your parents? These are all themes anyone can relate to so shut the fuck up about it not being a children's books.
The problem with what you're saying there is that "If it can be understood by a child, then it's simply for children." I read Jurassic Park when I was in middle school after watching the movie. I enjoyed it, I got the whole "cloning dinosaurs" thing. Since I got that - the single cohesive element of the entire FUCKING story - does that make Jurassic Park a children's book?
People want to lump all the Harry Potter books into "children's books" because it started off as such. But the level of sophistication in the books grew along with the audience. No one wants to recognize it as "real" literature because the NY Times Bestseller list decided all the intellectual elite needed to see something else in the top five slots - presumably to salve their own egos. So they shunt it off to one side with all the other YA titles like "young Indiana Jones."
The fact of the matter is there isn't a required word count to be considered "adult" literature. There really isn't such a thing as an "adult" exclusive book. Unless you count porn. Which I do. And enjoy.
Oh, give me a break. Harry Potter is fun and all but it is *clearly* written for children and young adults. It's about freaking *wizards*, for chrissakes!
Go to your local library and see where they've catalogued the HP books. Oh, that's right, they're in the children's section.
what the fuck do you normally read that you consider the HP books sophisticated?? They're childrens books. End of story. I'll give some examples of the two different genres so you understand better.
Sophisticated Adult: East of Eden - John Steinbeck
Unsophisticated Children: Harry Potter/Twilight
Sure they're fun, but don't try and make the argument that they're sophisticated. That just makes you look like you're in 8th grade...
Well, for starters, I hate to shit all over your proud childhood moment but Jurassic Park was not well written. Some high-brow ideas in it, sure, but it is riddled with shoddy continuity and sloppy structure. JP was science pulp. That you read and understood it is to your credit but has nothing to do with the HP books and their level of quality.
The HP books are good for enticing young people into continued reading. Its not that they totally suck .... but they do suck a little. Every book is essentially a mystery. The answer to the mystery every time is "Voldemort." Its like the end of every Scooby Doo show except it ends up being the same dude under the mask. The books can try to get past the Adults Only sign with it's fake mustache of "darker content" but most of us can tell its just 2 kids in a trenchcoat.
The author's intellectual oversights are forgivable if the books are for children. But if you want to claim that they belong on an even footing with standard fiction then they suffer under scrutiny. They are simply good kids books. Not great. Not genre spanning. Nothing to do with number of pages.
you're an idiot harry potters a sick book and the seventh one is definetly themed for young adults, so suck a dick, im way cooler then you by the way you pussy ass bitch
If you lack the ability to even write properly, I would greatly hesitate to even consider your opinion as worthy of consideration. This is far from an ad hominem argument, as i am merely considering the fact that most people who have read extensively should know the difference between "your" and "you're".
That said, these are books which span the age spectrum, so that I believe the Harry potter books are 'fun' for all ages, but I wouldn't go so far as to call them astounding pieces of literature. They lack complexity, persist in the black/white distinction of moral acts [for the most part] and are written with a vocabulary that a 10 to 12 year old child should be able to understand. They *do* encourage people to read, and that is the major benefit of them.
I agree with the previous statement. HP got people reading who usually wouldn't pick up a book. Also, try starting a counter-argument with something more intelligent than "your an idiot".
The first couple of harry potter books were probably good for middle school aged children.. fun for adults to read, but the writing was a little childish.. however, as the series goes on it gets very dark and very adult. The vocabulary also isn't very child like. It's a good book for all ages and, best of all, it gets people reading who wouldn't otherwise.
Heh, I actually have a lot of this mentality when I'm selling these books to customers. Although I'll admit I highly enjoyed the Harry Potter books and I still wanna read Palahniuk.
"Literature" is a matter of opinion. Who gives a rat's ass if a novel's written poorly, or has pulpy content? Who cares if the main character was abused as a child,if he isn't engaging on some level? Stories were originally meant to ENTERTAIN or INFORM, not to depress or be analyzed word by word. I'd rather read some pulp magazine fiction than The Catcher in the Rye, or Ulysses, or some high-and-mighty piece of "literature" any day, hands down. Apparently, "literature" has to be depressing to be well-written. Whatever happened to reading being fun?
You have really good books on this list and people are fighting over Harry Potter? Wow...I guess I am to old to be on this site. This obviously is for the 13 and under crowd!
The people who are saying Harry Potter is for children all seem to be arguing that all fantasy novels are for children. I know plenty adults who enjoy reading Harry Potter. Yes, it began as a children's book, but that was when the characters were 11 and 12, and even them there was some complexity to them. the point is that the books age with the target demographic. But seriously, this is a comedy site, and to expect more than jokes on this site is stupid. Arguments about what is good literature on a joke site are pointless.
(195 Comments)
Twitter
Holy Taco Goes to the Bahamas
June 12th, 2009 at 05:52 am
I agree with the post. It looks like that to other people, but it doesn't nessesarily mean that you agree with them...
...man I hate commenting on post's...
June 12th, 2009 at 09:47 am
maybe if you stopped sucking so much filthy cock you wouldn't hate commenting on posts so much.
June 12th, 2009 at 01:54 pm
i suck filthy cocks all the time and love commenting on posts. guess again
June 12th, 2009 at 07:14 am
I have never farted and not enjoyed it's aroma on some level
June 12th, 2009 at 09:44 am
My balls are the best selling book of all time.
June 12th, 2009 at 11:08 am
OMG the Bible is fairy tales??? NoOOOOoOOoO!!
June 12th, 2009 at 11:21 am
Голосую за 4ю ))
June 12th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Aww look at all the cute little bible humping faggots getting all butthurt over the jewish fairy tale book.
June 12th, 2009 at 01:55 pm
The Bible has helped many people to live better lives and be kind to one another. It has also helped many people to be judgmental douchebags that try to force their views on others and lose their sense of humor. Fuckers.
Toilet books rock. Heavy Metal magazine ftw.
The Secret is such a big joke. I would love to make a short film about a handful of devoted Oprah fans who have mastered the "Secret" and enter into reality altering warfare with each other over contradictions of will. (there will be blood)
I don't even know what that yellow and red book is. Don't care. No. Don't reply telling me.
Much like stereo instructions, a manual is not a book.
Obama's book alt title shoulda been "I'll Even Buy This Book to Prove I'm Not Racist" by Every Guilt Ridden White
Rowling writes poorly. What? You liked the books? OK. So fucking what. She still writes like a child. Your love of her stories is no more valid than my opinion of her skill. I could write something as long as one of her books about the dumb, irritating, or dissonant shit in her stories. D minus. (but surely I'm wrong due to the huge sales, right?)
Brown's books are not much better. He is the Winger of popular fiction. Some poor schmoe had his story purchased, well raped, watered down, sensationalized, and had fake spectacles put on it by Brown.
Funny shit as usual, HT. Rock on.
June 12th, 2009 at 03:57 pm
Its very...true.
Harry Potter was good in the sense that it got alot of kids introduced to the genre.
But, there are definetly better fanstasy novels for that age group.
June 12th, 2009 at 06:28 pm
Correction: I Enjoy Old Jewish Fairy Tales And Like To Apologize For Being Human.
June 12th, 2009 at 11:34 pm
"Duo cum faciunt idem, non est idem" - When two do the same, it's not the same. I meanna two quite differert men may read one book, but motives and effects (interpreting) may be much various
June 13th, 2009 at 12:11 am
kiss ma ass
June 13th, 2009 at 01:34 am
Ulysses by James Joyce: I'm willing to endure 800 pages of indecipherable nonsense to look intelligent to you.
The Catcher In The Rye: I want to feel unique, but with as many people as possible.
anything by Ayn Rand: Practical or not, true or not, I love the idea of most people suffering so that the best people (me) can be happy.
Romeo and Juliet: Don't hit on me, I'm in 9th grade.
June 13th, 2009 at 07:17 am
Finnegan's Wake = back away slowly from reader, don't make eye contact.
June 13th, 2009 at 04:57 am
Hipster?
Sadly, it's probably true.
June 13th, 2009 at 10:10 am
I am always reading a book - and it is usually a fiction murder mystery. I hate blood and gore movies, but love mystery and suspense and stories about solving murders. It is very unlike anything else about me and I would love to know what it says about me. My appetite for these books is insatiable,
June 13th, 2009 at 04:59 pm
What? No Twilight jokes?
June 15th, 2009 at 09:55 am
Twilight is self-explanatory. It needs no Photoshop.
June 14th, 2009 at 06:24 am
That Harry Potter book definitly isn't a Child book!!
Most Children wouldn't understand most of what happens in it!
June 14th, 2009 at 10:24 am
Your an idiot. Obviously Harry Potter is a child's book and you are just dumb for reading it. And what wouldn't children understand? death? magic? having a crush? missing your parents? These are all themes anyone can relate to so shut the fuck up about it not being a children's books.
June 14th, 2009 at 11:42 am
The problem with what you're saying there is that "If it can be understood by a child, then it's simply for children." I read Jurassic Park when I was in middle school after watching the movie. I enjoyed it, I got the whole "cloning dinosaurs" thing. Since I got that - the single cohesive element of the entire FUCKING story - does that make Jurassic Park a children's book?
People want to lump all the Harry Potter books into "children's books" because it started off as such. But the level of sophistication in the books grew along with the audience. No one wants to recognize it as "real" literature because the NY Times Bestseller list decided all the intellectual elite needed to see something else in the top five slots - presumably to salve their own egos. So they shunt it off to one side with all the other YA titles like "young Indiana Jones."
The fact of the matter is there isn't a required word count to be considered "adult" literature. There really isn't such a thing as an "adult" exclusive book. Unless you count porn. Which I do. And enjoy.
June 14th, 2009 at 03:12 pm
to "I Disagree": I love you. Your arguement is all that is needed.
June 14th, 2009 at 07:17 pm
Children's books are in the children's section.
June 17th, 2009 at 03:55 pm
oh my goodness
its freaking Harry Potter
you all should try reading the New York Times
June 15th, 2009 at 06:39 am
Oh, give me a break. Harry Potter is fun and all but it is *clearly* written for children and young adults. It's about freaking *wizards*, for chrissakes!
Go to your local library and see where they've catalogued the HP books. Oh, that's right, they're in the children's section.
June 15th, 2009 at 11:43 am
what the fuck do you normally read that you consider the HP books sophisticated?? They're childrens books. End of story. I'll give some examples of the two different genres so you understand better.
Sophisticated Adult: East of Eden - John Steinbeck
Unsophisticated Children: Harry Potter/Twilight
Sure they're fun, but don't try and make the argument that they're sophisticated. That just makes you look like you're in 8th grade...
June 15th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
Well, for starters, I hate to shit all over your proud childhood moment but Jurassic Park was not well written. Some high-brow ideas in it, sure, but it is riddled with shoddy continuity and sloppy structure. JP was science pulp. That you read and understood it is to your credit but has nothing to do with the HP books and their level of quality.
The HP books are good for enticing young people into continued reading. Its not that they totally suck .... but they do suck a little. Every book is essentially a mystery. The answer to the mystery every time is "Voldemort." Its like the end of every Scooby Doo show except it ends up being the same dude under the mask. The books can try to get past the Adults Only sign with it's fake mustache of "darker content" but most of us can tell its just 2 kids in a trenchcoat.
The author's intellectual oversights are forgivable if the books are for children. But if you want to claim that they belong on an even footing with standard fiction then they suffer under scrutiny. They are simply good kids books. Not great. Not genre spanning. Nothing to do with number of pages.
June 14th, 2009 at 06:54 pm
you're an idiot harry potters a sick book and the seventh one is definetly themed for young adults, so suck a dick, im way cooler then you by the way you pussy ass bitch
June 17th, 2009 at 01:46 pm
wow did you just learn to swear? your an absolute ass
June 14th, 2009 at 07:58 pm
exactly
June 14th, 2009 at 09:47 pm
To "your stupid"
If you lack the ability to even write properly, I would greatly hesitate to even consider your opinion as worthy of consideration. This is far from an ad hominem argument, as i am merely considering the fact that most people who have read extensively should know the difference between "your" and "you're".
That said, these are books which span the age spectrum, so that I believe the Harry potter books are 'fun' for all ages, but I wouldn't go so far as to call them astounding pieces of literature. They lack complexity, persist in the black/white distinction of moral acts [for the most part] and are written with a vocabulary that a 10 to 12 year old child should be able to understand. They *do* encourage people to read, and that is the major benefit of them.
June 19th, 2009 at 12:15 am
If you are as smart as you think you are by writing that ridiculous comment....then why the FUCK are you on holy taco?
*ooooh weeee let's argue anonymously with someone over the internet, yea yea, I'm a bad ass*
YOU MY FRIEND ARE A FIRST CLASS DUMB ASS!
June 15th, 2009 at 01:54 pm
I agree with the previous statement. HP got people reading who usually wouldn't pick up a book. Also, try starting a counter-argument with something more intelligent than "your an idiot".
June 17th, 2009 at 01:44 pm
okay your an absolute dick man. keep your opinion to yourself. god.
June 14th, 2009 at 07:47 pm
The first couple of harry potter books were probably good for middle school aged children.. fun for adults to read, but the writing was a little childish.. however, as the series goes on it gets very dark and very adult. The vocabulary also isn't very child like. It's a good book for all ages and, best of all, it gets people reading who wouldn't otherwise.
June 14th, 2009 at 09:08 pm
to quote mitch hedburg, any book is a childrens book if the kid can read
June 15th, 2009 at 03:23 pm
Heh, I actually have a lot of this mentality when I'm selling these books to customers. Although I'll admit I highly enjoyed the Harry Potter books and I still wanna read Palahniuk.
June 16th, 2009 at 06:24 am
i am 12 and what is this?
June 17th, 2009 at 01:50 pm
"Literature" is a matter of opinion. Who gives a rat's ass if a novel's written poorly, or has pulpy content? Who cares if the main character was abused as a child,if he isn't engaging on some level? Stories were originally meant to ENTERTAIN or INFORM, not to depress or be analyzed word by word. I'd rather read some pulp magazine fiction than The Catcher in the Rye, or Ulysses, or some high-and-mighty piece of "literature" any day, hands down. Apparently, "literature" has to be depressing to be well-written. Whatever happened to reading being fun?
June 18th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
theese are hilarious!!!!
June 19th, 2009 at 12:17 am
It's amazing....
You have really good books on this list and people are fighting over Harry Potter? Wow...I guess I am to old to be on this site. This obviously is for the 13 and under crowd!
June 24th, 2009 at 05:05 am
That Harry Potter book definitly isn't a Child book!!
Most Children wouldn't understand most of what happens in it!
dizi izle dizi izle diziizle canli dizi
July 30th, 2009 at 02:44 am
The people who are saying Harry Potter is for children all seem to be arguing that all fantasy novels are for children. I know plenty adults who enjoy reading Harry Potter. Yes, it began as a children's book, but that was when the characters were 11 and 12, and even them there was some complexity to them. the point is that the books age with the target demographic. But seriously, this is a comedy site, and to expect more than jokes on this site is stupid. Arguments about what is good literature on a joke site are pointless.
October 28th, 2009 at 09:23 pm
really funny, but you need to proofread your stuff a bit more diligently, you can see the original text under the word asshole on the fourth book :/
Post new comment