It’s difficult to understand the criticism that first confronted famous works of literature since we’re accustomed to seeing them elevated to an intellectual pedestal. Since there was less fanfare, they could write critiques independent of public opinion, which frequently led them to write off a masterwork as worthless trash.

10 Fancy Freestyle

The story of Jay Gatsby’s extravagant parties in pursuit of Daisy Buchanan has captivated readers for decades, despite the fact that F. Scott Fitzgerald’s 1925 novel is a common source of complaints among high school students and has a rather uneven track record when it comes to film adaptations. When the book was initially published, there was absolutely no hint of such. When Fitzgerald learned that his magnum opus had sold just about 21,000 copies, he was devastated; the author had made about as much as he had from a short story he had written years before. Reviews like this one from the New York Herald Tribune, which states, “The Great Gatsby is purely ephemeral phenomenon… a literary lemon meringue,” must have hurt even more because of that.Fitzgerald received an advance of $2,000 to pen the novel, although he only got about $13.00 in royalties on The Great Gatsby during his lifetime. He didn’t live to see his book rediscovered and placed in the hallowed ranks of American literature when he passed away in 1940. Worse yet, he lived to witness the 1926 film adaptation. There has seldom been a classic novel that has let the author down so much.

9. Grass leaves

One of the most revered poets in American history, Walt Whitman’s Leaves of Grass has stood the test of time as a literary classic. The fact that this was accomplished after the poetry collection had been self-published for its first two editions is quite remarkable. The American Civil War essentially put an end to the third edition just as it was about to be officially published. Not only that, but the book’s groundbreaking style and explicit sexual material caused a lot of controversy and negative reviews. “It is impossible to imagine how any man’s fancy could have conceived such a mass of stupid filth, unless he were possessed of the soul of a sentimental donkey that had died of disappointed love,” writes Rufus Griswold, Edgar Allan Poe’s archnemesis, in 1855.When it came to the pain that Whitman’s writing caused him, that was only the beginning. While employed as a clerk for the Department of the Interior in 1865, he accidentally left a copy of the book on his desk. His boss discovered it and fired him for penning such foolish nonsense. A ban on the book was imposed in Boston in 1882 due to its controversial nature, which was deemed “obscene literature.” Regardless, it was likely well-received compared to our other poetry endeavors.

8. The Monster

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein evolved from a disturbing dream into a groundbreaking work that fuses science fiction with horror. Among the most iconic and tragic monsters in horror literature, Frankenstein’s monster must have been terrifying to readers in 1818, when a well-known public demonstration by Giovanni Aldini had demonstrated that dead human tissue could be electrocuted to produce effects similar to reanimation. The Quarterly Review, however, disapproved, writing, “A tissue of horrible and disgusting absurdity… Our taste and our judgement alike revolt at this kind of writing.” as an example of how not everyone was captivated.William Godwin, “is the patriarch of a literary family whose chief skill is in delineating the wanderings of the intellect,” the review claims, is to blame for the book’s flaws. Mary Shelley had dedicated the work to her father, Godwin, who was a conservative, and many of her detractors were angry about it. Petty political bickering ensnared even an enduring tale like Frankenstein.

7. The Address at Gettysburg

Of all time, Lincoln’s 1863 address stands as a monument to the tens of thousands of Union soldiers who sacrificed their all in the last stand. That’s due in part to the fact that its brevity (only 263 words) facilitates classroom memorizing and reading. A superficial reading, however, ought to make its linguistic and historical merits apparent. “The cheeks of every American must tingle with shame as he reads the silly, flat and dishwatery utterances.” That is, unless you’re a writer for the Chicago Times.A reviewer from the Harrisburg Patriot & Union similarly used the adjective “silly” in their piece. Since Harrisburg was very close to Gettysburg and would have more correctly portrayed the opinions of those who had lived through the Gettysburg campaign, it would have hurt Lincoln more than the attacks published in the Chicago Times. However, a complete retraction of the original review would be printed by the modern successor of the Patriot & Union 150 years later. Presumably, it was unnecessary for them to make an effort.

6. Wrathful Grapes

John Steinbeck’s 1936 masterpiece ostensibly follows the Joad family as they relocate from Oklahoma to California, but it reads more like a written documentary, with ample space for colorful depictions of characters like a mechanically deceitful automobile salesmen. As a reflection of the times, the bestseller was severely criticized upon publication, destroyed, and outlawed. For some, the book’s treatment of dust bowl victims as objects of exploitation smacked of Communist propaganda. (In a twist of fate, Joseph Stalin briefly banned the book in the Soviet Union.) “The arguments are selected from the customary communistic sources and arguments… ” is a review that is typical of the time and appears in the San Francisco Examiner. Neither the Communist ideology nor its propaganda can be characterized by consistency, as any educated reader will tell you.Even with all the criticism, the book nonetheless managed to land one of the most critically acclaimed Hollywood adaptations of all time—all within four years of its widespread burning.

5. Henry V: A Novel

Even though Emily Bronte only ever authored one book—Wuthering Heights—under a male alias, it was sufficient to establish her status as a literary giant. The 1939 film adaptation is widely regarded as one of the most romantic films of all time, and it is just one of many cinematic adaptations of the book. The brutality with which several of the characters treat one another contributed to the book’s reputation as a daring and divisive work during its original publication. “How a human being could have attempted such a book as the present without committing suicide before he had finished a dozen chapters, is a mystery,” says the 1848 review from Graham’s Lady Magazine, which, despite being a touch radical for its day, reads like a parody of a stuffy 19th-century critic. A combination of bizarre horrors and vile depravity, it is.One of the highest-paying periodicals of the day, Graham’s Lady Magazine is now most famous for being edited for a short time by Edgar Allan Poe. Despite the critic’s scathing criticism of Bront’s work, it is unclear whether he or she was satirical.

4. The moby-dick

The printed version of Herman Melville’s 1851 classic looks significantly different from what you might expect from all the adaptations and cultural osmosis. It isn’t until chapter 28 that we meet Captain Ahab, whose desire for vengeance makes him far more interesting than protagonist Ishmael. Readers accustomed to genre fiction may find the literary style tedious or unnecessary due to its complex and rambling nature. Publications like the London Spectator and the New York International published scathing criticisms of the book even when it was published:When it tries to depict something that neither exists nor can be imagined, it becomes phantasmal and turns off the reader rather than drawing him in. This is especially true when the work is narrative or dramatic fiction in nature.Additionally, it should be mentioned that Melville faced challenges with technology, at least in this initial area. Part two of the review made fun of the novel for using a first-person narrator despite the fact that every character died by the conclusion. Of course, a printing mistake in the original UK edition severed an epilogue that showed Ishmael as the sole survivor. However, the critic may have seen that shave as an improvement rather than a flaw.

3. The Thinkstock of the Raven

The publication Southern Literary also published an extremely critical review of it. “It seems as if the author wrote under the influence of opium.” This conclusion sounds more like something you might hear on Amazon than a 19th-century literary review, but it seems the writer was so enraged that Poe described the protagonist as being scared by things like a rap at the door and fluttering curtains.A youngster frightened to the edge of stupidity by dreadful ghost stories is the only one the poem’s events could impact, according to the assessment, which leaves a bigger effect than the partial appreciation for Poe’s use of meter and rhyme. At least one prominent literary figure from Poe’s age was hell-bent on erasing all dread from his masterwork of terror.

2. Wilnnie Wilbur and the Pooh

Author A. A. Milne came to regret penning the Hundred Acre Wood series, but the stories of the foolish old bear and his naive companions have enjoyed over a century of success in a variety of genres. Dorothy Parker, who reviewed The House at Pooh Corner (1928) for the New Yorker under the pen name Constant Reader, had a stronger dislike for the novels than he did. The part when Pooh says he made his favorite song more “hummy” by adding a “tiddely pom” was the most offensive to her. “And it is that word ‘hummy,’ my darlings,” Parker continues, “that marks the first place in The House At Pooh Corner at which Tonstant Weader fwowed up.”Some Parker devotees have felt compelled to clarify this feeling by noting that the review was written during a particularly difficult period for her, during which she would have despised any book that even hinted at being sappy. Her pieces for Constant Reader were characterized by others as more akin to stand-up comedy than serious critical analysis. Fans of Pooh shouldn’t take offense to Parker’s comments because they are harmless. However, there’s still the chance that Pooh’s House was actually a ruse.

1. Artistry by William

Robert Greene, a prominent writer of the Elizabethan era, made one of the earliest remarks about Shakespeare’s work that has survived to the present day. Shakespeare had already had a number of plays played when he wrote it in 1592. Unless you count Richard III and The Taming of the Shrew, none of these plays would be considered classics by the average person today if you asked them to name a Shakespeare play. Still, Greene’s astounding lack of concern was on full display: “There is an aspiring crow, adorned with our feathers, that believes he can bombast out a blank verse just as well as the best of you. And, being an absolute Johannes Factotum, is, in his own conceit, the only Shake-scene in a country.”Greene insulted Christopher Marlowe in his pamphlet only for fun. Greene avoided a less than pleasant reaction because he passed away before his scathing remarks were published. The booklet caused a great deal of controversy because Shakespeare and Marlowe were already quite famous; as a result, Greene’s editor, Henry Chettle, had to issue a “groveling retraction” in which he apologized to the two of them. (Recognizing the direction the tide was turning, Greene’s publisher appended a disclaimer to the booklet, stating that he was solely printing it “upon the peril of Henrye Chettle.”) Many contemporary authors probably couldn’t elicit such a passionate reaction from their readers.

SEE ALSO: Top 10 Horrific Details About Riding A Covered Wagon