Cliff Notes, Greatest Hits Collections, Movie Trailers and Other Entertaining Nuggets

[NewMaxFranklin]

What is your opinion of these things?

This post was inspired by my dull day. I started to read Hamlet, which I had never read before, on a website. But, I got bored with it and read the cliff notes instead. :o Anyway. After reading the cliff notes and some character analysis stuff, I went back and read the whole play, which I enjoyed more, now that I didn't have to decode the story and could enjoy the poetic words on a basic level.

Then I went out to get the new Incubus CD, "Morning View." I also picked up the Beatles "1," the collection of all their #1 hits, that came out a year or so ago.

I thought about catching a movie on the way home, but none of the trailers I'd seen looked very good. I know trailers aren't a good way to judge movies, but none of he stories interested me, so the so-so trailers drifting through my head were like fertilizer on my seeds of doubt.

Anyway, back to the question. I like cliff notes, because they allow you to get the basic story. I wouldn't mind if I wrote a book that became a classic and lots of people picked up the cliff notes. The cliff note readers would probably not have been exposed to the story at all if the short version was not available. And if they like the story they might read the whole thing, like I did with Hamlet.

I see movie trailers as a necessary evil. Movie trailers can make a good movie look bad and a bad movie look like the best movie in the history of film. But, they do their job. Which is to tease the audience; make them want to see the thing. Though, I wish they'd leave out the spoilers. Some of those dang things can give the whole movie away.

The reason I buy greatest hits collections is because I'm poor. ;) I'd rather get all the cd's by the bands I like. But I can't so I get the Greatest Hits to tie me over until I'm a millioair Writer/Director. :cool:

[LightAngel]

Cliffnotes were the only reason I managed to survive my Gulliver's Travel's test in English Class. Hey, we just finished reading Hamlet as well, and it is pretty cool. I'm probably one of the few people who acutally like Shakespeare.

[The Mad Hatter]

I somehow managed to get a master's degree in English, so of course I have an opinion on this. I know this is the classic teacher's line, but I really do believe it: Cliff Notes are NOT a substitute for actually reading the book. I say that because I've had some serious issues with their interpretations in the past... I can't remember the details, but I felt that some of their interpretations of the meanings in Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury were utter crap, and so did everyone else in the class. Don't use the notes as an excuse to not come up with your own interpretations of the themes, characters, symbolism, etc.

However, in some ways, Cliff Notes can be a good supplement for the books, in that it can help you keep track of the characters, timeline of events, and so forth. Myself, I would read the book first. If you're still vastly confused, consult the Cliff Notes.

That said, Cliff Notes saved my butt during my comprehensive exams for my master's. The reading list was something like this:

"Everything written in the English language from the 17th Century onward, excluding most of John Grisham and Rush Limbaugh."

I've read a lot, but there were many books that I had read, say, in the 9th grade and had completely forgotten about. So, a week before the exam, I plopped myself in front of the Cliff Note stand at Barnes & Noble and skimmed as much as I can. It worked: not only did I jog my memory as to what I had read long ago, but I was also able to remember enough to incorporate them into my essays.

NOTE TO IMPRESSIONABLE KIDS: Let me emphasize that I said it JOGGED my memory. If I had tried to incorporate stuff I got out of Cliff Notes on books I hadn't read, I would have flunked spectacularly.

Please, remember these words of wisdom from The Human Ton's little friend, Handy the Hand Puppet:

"Don't be a jerk! READ A BOOK!!"

[Danielle]

Call me crazy, but.....HEY! I WASN'T SERIOUS! {pout}


Anyway, call me crazy, but I think that it's better to read the book first, then the cliffnotes. Then, if you want, the book again. I think it's better 'cause I can read the book, and if I don't understand it or anything, I can read the cliffnotes, occasionally yelling "I REMEMBER THIS PART!!" and waking up the neighbors at about two in the morning. You read the cliffnotes, and you understand the book. THE BOOK YOU JUST READ! Then, perhaps, you can read the book again with a new understanding.


Yeesh. I'm going a bit too much into this, aren't I?

[Lonestarr]

I have never used Cliffs Notes, and I don't see myself ever using them.

I don't own a lot of Greatest Hits compilations (the ones I have are mostly film composer compilations), but I have Queen's "Greatest Hits" album, which I love.

I concur about trailers being a necessary evil.

a) They can serve, IMHO, as entertaining mini-movies before the feature presentation, and they can also let you know if the films being sold are worth your time. Speaking of which...

2) Trailers can be a crapshoot. They can make a "Battlefield: Earth" look like a "Battleship Potemkin" and vice-versa. You just never know. You have to be careful with them.

[NewMaxFranklin]

I had never read cliff notes until yesterday. But, I see them as a valid tool, as others stated. The right tool for the right job. I like them, because in college you'll probably have to read a lot of stuff that your professors love, bur you could care less about. If you heave to read something you're just not into, why not read the cliff notes, skim the actuall story and focus on the parts your proff is keen on. I guess that attitude is why I'm not in college. :rolleyes:

[LightAngel]

Hey I only used cliffnotes just to understand certain points of novels that I didn't understand, which have only been in two cases. For me, they're just a good study guide once I have read the actual book.