Thread: John Grisham- Your Thoughts

John Grisham is a wonderful writer and is a good storyteller. He started with A Time to Kill and his latest is the Ligitators. Here is a funny ad for it:

The law firm is not real, though it may be true for some law offices that are doing this in real life.

i always avoided him in my younger days, mainly because he's one of 'those names' like james patterson, tom clancy, lee child, etc who seemed to have a readership largely consisting of people who don't actually like to read. you know the kind, the ones who buy books to read on the metro and airplanes and that's about all. the ones who only read when they can't watch a movie. but i did once read, not entirely out of choice, a book by grisham called 'the summons' and i thought it was fantastic. haven't read anything else of his since unfortunately but it was a good story and he seems to be a decent writer. patterson, on the other hand, really is trashy and i read one page of a lee child book and wanted to slam my head on the table it was so meatheaded. still havent read a tom clancy book but have heard his stuff is actually pretty good. so i guess the lesson there is that not everything mainstream necessarily stinks, though some of it sure does. fortunately grisham is good!

So, what you're saying luckyscars, is that only people who devote every spare moment of their lives to reading are the ones who actually love to read? That's what it sounds like to me and it is frankly absurd.

I have read most of John Grisham's work and seen the movies to go along with them. I've not heard of this latest book, but I'm sure it will be just as enjoyable as the rest. I've also noticed that an American television network is airing a new series based on his book The Firm.

Some of Grisham's novels are brilliant. The problem I have is that some of them are also formulaic. Those typically involve a good-looking lawyer who stumbles onto something s/he shouldn't have and spends the rest of the novel being chased by a predictable, arguably one-dimensional, antagonist. Only some, though.

Clancy's work is only 'mainstream' because Ronald Reagan was seen getting off Air Force One with The Hunt for Red October. When he was asked about it, he said it was a cracking read, thus launching Clancy's career. His first dozen novels, involving Jack Ryan, are among the best thrillers ever written. Without Remorse is quite possibly the best.

I haven't read all of Clancy's stuff, but what I have read, I've loved.

Grisham is a very good storyteller, and as far as I am concerned, in general fiction storytelling is more important than "Literature Quotient". Some, like Austen, Dickens, Steinbeck, Conrad, EM Forster and the like can do both - If I want a book to sit down with and get stuck into, I would prefer a good storyteller.

I've enjoyed several Grisham books (The Rainmaker is one of my favorites though it might be guilty of being formulaic. I guess I just don't care) including The Innocent Man which isn't fiction though it is spellbinding. Always have enjoyed Clancy though I've not been able to get into Patterson.

Originally Posted by Offeiriad

So, what you're saying luckyscars, is that only people who devote every spare moment of their lives to reading are the ones who actually love to read? That's what it sounds like to me and it is frankly absurd.

nope. didn't say that at all. that was quite a leap you made there. if that's the kind of ridiculous inference you make through 'reading' then that's really quite saddening. because that's not even close to what i said.

what i did say was that when i was younger (note the use of the phrase 'when i was younger'. it usually denotes an opinion no longer held and from a less experienced perspective) i didn't care for books that were mainstream and/or current, simply because i made the assumption, which was quite wrong, that the fact they were mainstream meant they would not be as enriching as older or less commercially successful works. to some extent i stand by that, simply because in other areas of life the mainstream does suck and is not as worthwhile an experience. for example, vacations in places like bolivia or burkina faso would tend, for most americans at least, to be more interesting and educational than vacations in santa monica. that's kind of analogous with my prior opinions on mainstream novelists like grisham - that they were the santa monica of fiction. but the point i intended in my post was that grisham is, open reading, a decent enough writer. as are the others i mentioned, and over time i've learned to be open to such authors.

Like luckyscars, I must admit that I also avoided John Grisham in my earlier life. I too went for more obscure authors, seeking that exclusivity that one feels when being individual amongst your peers in your respect for a writer or other artist. I have since become far less elitist in my view of writers and Mr. Grisham can now count me amongst his many fans (I'm sure he'd be delighted to hear this)!

As an aside, but in a similar vein to Grisham's writing, I am now thoroughly enjoying the work of Mark Giminez as well.

John Grisham is good. I loved The Client from him. It's better than the movie

I loved his book. Rain maker and legal thrillers were my favourite. A nice author.