Emmett RensinReviews

A great premise and humorous, I'll give it that. But the tweets all come across as if they were written by the same whiny (male) protagonist (which, of course, they were), instead of actually embodying the personalities and styles of the individual characters and plots being summarized. [b:Ophelia Joined the Group Maidens Who Don't Float: Classic Lit Signs on to Facebook|6562532|Ophelia Joined the Group Maidens Who Don't Float Classic Lit Signs on to Facebook|Sarah Schmelling|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1425564282s/6562532.jpg|6755376] is one example of a better execution of the social media-style updating of classic literature.

Be warned--there is some strong language here. But if that doesn't bother you, then it's totally worth the read. As someone who uses Twitter, reading the classics from a Twitter perspective was absolutely hilarious. I'd already used Twitter as a strategy in class at the end of a novel--sum up the novel in 140 characters--but I can't wait to read them the Twitter version of Slaughterhouse Five when we're done reading it.

3.5 stars. Of course, I only read about half of the book, because I stuck to the works that I have read. You really need to read the original before reading the Twitterature for it to make any sense.
This book was absolutely hilarious. Some sections, such as Catcher in the Rye were absolutely amazing. Twitter captures Holden (or @HoldenLOLfield)'s voice perfectly and I couldn't help but laugh at loud at many parts. Several of them, such as Twilight, were not in the voice of the protagonist, however the tweets worked and were absolutely hilarious. But then there were the ones like Pride and Prejudice that just didn't work at all. I can't picture Lizzie talking about how great women's power is.
Overall, this book was fantastic! I wish that the authors just stuck with the protagonists whose voices lended themselves to the works though.

From the cover: amalgamation of “twitter” and “literature”; humorous reworkings of literary classics for the twenty-first century intellect, in digestible portions of 20 tweets or fewer.

If you, dear reader, like me, thought you’d be delving into a clever and witty little book of old texts reborn with a modern twist via social media, then you, like me, would be incredibly disappointed. I expected that this book would reflect an appreciation and understanding of the classics with modern-day insights from the characters within the novels. I expected to chuckle or even laugh when reading this (as I often do when reading jokes on my current Twitter timeline). In short, I expected too much from this book.

What I received (fortunately in exchange for less than $3.50 courtesy of Book Outlet) instead, was a crass, harshly satiric and mildly offensive batch of tweets that don’t honor the original works. Let me preface the rest of this review by saying I don’t mind vulgar language or content, when appropriate to the work, nor do I mind my favorite classics being adapted into clever retellings (Pride, Prejudice and Zombies anyone?) or even poked fun at.

Twitterature seems to simply mercilessly make fun of or criticize the classics within, dubbing the originals as overly long and boring. In their introduction Aciman and Rensin touch on how the classics are outdated and hard to understand and that this book strives to remedy that by “present[ing] their most essential elements, distilled into the voice of Twitter.” They strive to give us “the means to absorb the strong voices, valuable lessons and stylistic innovations of the Greats without the burdensome duty of hours spent reading.” I think, in hindsight, that maybe their introduction is a bad joke as well.

I also want to say that I did not read this entire book – after reading the first three sections (Catcher in the Rye, The Da Vinci Code and Paradise Lost), I quickly grasped that this book was not at all what I thought it would be and I then proceeded to skip to books I’m familiar with. What’s the point in reading something that tears apart a work I’ve never read? But let me highlight some of the more bothersome tweets:

From Pride and Prejudice – “Isn’t it cool how I’m defying my gender role by standing up for myself?”
“He and I are wed and have moved to our own home in the country. I got the man, his money, and uh…women’s power!”

From Alice in Wonderland – “I don’t know what’s going on, but in a typically feminine manner, I’ll allow confusion and being flustered to make me cry up a storm.”
“I found a stoner Arab caterpillar. He made fun of me. Oh yeah? At least I’m not three inches tall with a case of the munchies.”

From Twilight – “Pretty boy is a vampire. A bit obvious, but I still feel such a hormonal pull. He’s pure pussy magnet.”
“My life lately has been a bit like a lonely girl’s slightly creepy juvenile sex fantasy. But at least it really happened!!!”

Last, and featuring what I found to be most offensive, from Jane Eyre – “I wish my parents had died impressively. Like Harry Potter, that kid’s got one hell of an orphan story.”
“The education is legit. Like we read books, but kids are dying of illness. This place is grimier than a hooker’s snatch.”
(In reference to Rochester’s wife) “The Kunta Kinte pyro bitch is dead. Maaaaawwwage!”

Seriously!?

It seems to me that rather than a funny, insightful twist on classics, readers are given bare-bones, spark notes-esque summaries, interjected with “modern language” (swearing and some “lols”), from people who don’t appreciate or even understand the classics. I’m glad I spent so little on this book, because I won’t be keeping it. Unless you hate the classics and want to read tweets that mostly make fun of them, I wouldn’t recommend this book.

Wait, let me rephrase my review in the spirit of this book: TBH guys, this book is fucking garbage. LOL #sucks

Diese und weitere Rezensionen findet ihr auf meinem Blog Anima Libri - Buchseele

Ich weiß ehrlich gesagt nicht so ganz, was ich von diesem Büchlein erwartet habe, aber enttäuscht hat es mich nichtsdestotrotz.

„Twitteratur: Weltliteratur in 140 Zeichen“ ist flach und – in meinen Augen – oftmals ziemlich geschmacklos, dazu ist der Titel für mich irreführend gewesen. Denn statt die Werke der Weltliteratur, die hier verhunzt werden, tatsächlich mit nur 140 Zeichen zusammen zu fassen, haben die Autoren Twitter Mono- teils auch Dialoge geschaffen, die häufig mehrere Seiten umspannen (okay, ja, auf der Rückseite steht das auch drauf: „in jeweils mehreren 140-Zeichen-Tweets“, da hätte ich vermutlich vorher mal genauer lesen sollen).

Wonach die Werke geordnet sind, ist mir auch ein Rätsel. So folgt Lord Byron auf J.D. Salinger, Dante Alighieri auf J.K. Rowling, Chaucer auf Stephanie Meyer und zwischendrin verstreut taucht immer mal wieder Shakespeare auf.

Im Glossar werden dann Begriffe wie abhartzen, Bromance, Hipster oder YouTube so wie tonnenweise Akronyme à la BAMF, MILF oder OMG erklärt, „auf dass sie [Technikfeinde und Oldtimer] Humor und Wortspiel obigen Textes [der Tweets] zu ihrem Gewinn und zur Erbauung verstehen mögen.“

Um mal dem Stil treu zu bleiben: WTF?!

Gewollt witzig, übertrieben asozial und überhaupt nicht mein Geschmack – das ist „Twitteratur“ von Alexander Aciman und Emmett Rensin. Kurzum, für mich ein Reinfall. Denn auch wenn mir die Ansätze teilweise ganz gut gefallen haben, es war mir dann letztendlich doch immer viel zu dick aufgetragen.

A very funny book. I really enjoyed this and have read certain entries multiple times. It is definitely more fun if you have read the books referenced.

Not for those who are easily offended by some of their favorite books being poked fun at, but nonetheless, a clever concept.

very few LOL's...

So disappointing. Not witty. Really just summaries. Sparknotes. Bleh.

The author had a good idea, but failed to deliver. The books all seem to be in the same 'voice', and this becomes tirsome after a while. There is no attempt to capture the essence of each author. Furthermore, the 'tweets' are not tweety enough. Twitter involves far more acronyms, text speak and non-standard prose that this books give- It is merely a collection of sentences limited to 140 characters.

I've never tweeted once. After reading Twitterature: The World's Greatest Books in Twenty Tweets or Less -- at first a nominally amusing read that turned tiresome and awfully unfunny fast once the cutesy tweeting novelty wore off -- it's clear I've missed nothing by not embracing this brave new (and hyper-abridged) culture of the twit, tweeter, whatever.

Twitterature is the classics in 140 characters or less. Har. Like an evening spent with a bad, linguistically challenged stand up comic. Irritating.

Twitterature's individual entries are so short they're like Spark Notes to the real Spark Notes of the classics. Frankly, I'd rather read the real classics. Unabridged.

It's unfortunate that the made up word, "twitterature," just so happened to rhyme with the real word, "literature," thus making the gimmicky publication of this co-collegiate-authored book of mostly bad gags, possible.

But, on the flip-side, isn't it fortunate that "twitterature" also rhymes with "shitterature". Because "shitterature" encapsulates Twitterature to a "t".

THIS BOOK IS AWESOME!!!!!!!!

Disappointing. A great idea poorly executed. There is a sameness about all the parodies and they don't capture the various voices of the original works. This idea, if it hasn't already, will be done better.½

Absolutely hilarious -- though, I confess, it was much easier to understand and appreciate the Twitterature versions of books I had read versus books I had not. (I have only read twelve of the fifty or so books tweeted. *hangs head in shame*)

This book very nearly inspired me to join Twitter, too. But not quite.½

This is really very good fun. I bought it with the intention of showing my Literature class so that they could do something similiar through Twitter groups but found that I had way too much fun reading it. The humour is very undergraduate and facile, but I found it very entertaining.
One of my favourites is the Hamlet tweet that runs "mum says I should stop wearing black". Some of these are not suitable for children such as the one for Oedipus where he describes his wife/mother as a "total MILF".
Juvenile, but very funny.

There are many things that seem great on paper but fail to live up to their potential. This sentence sums up my thoughts on "Twitterature: The World's Greatest Books in Twenty Tweets of Less" by Alexander Aciman and Emmett Rensin. In theory, the idea seems like it would be vastly entertaining; the very idea of condensing the classics into tweets seems ripe for humor. Unfortunately, to say that the book was underwhelming might be a little too kind.

To read my full review, please go to: http://apparentlynotderanged.blogspot.com/2010/01/book-review-twitterature.html½

Great concept! Sixty great works of literature retold in twenty tweets or less - a tweet is a computer message of 140 characters or less. It is a tiny book, but has the full Penguin Classic treatment. You know this book isn't the usual Penguin Classic, though, by the quote at the bottom of the cover: "The classics are so last century" - Guardian.

The works turned into tweets include lots of Shakespeare, some Austen, several of the Russian classics, various Brontes, Homer, Virgil, Dante, Cervantes, and so on.

Examples include: from Hamlet - "WTF is Polonius doing behind the curtain!" From Dante's Inferno: "I'm havin' a midlife crisis. Lost in the woods. Shoulda brought my iPhone".

Lots of amusing stuff. The editors are 19, so there is some level of immaturity, too much cuss words, scatalogical references, and so on. Overall, pretty darn funny. The only one I really don't like and thought was unfair to the original was the Sherlock Holmes one, which is all a series of cocaine jokes.

Thanks to Peter for the great Yule gift!½

[Vacío/Empty]