I wouldn't go that far. Harry Potter is extremely popular to the point where the question should be easy whether you're a fan or not. As for Hemingway, he is not necessarily known for his beard and is less of a pop culture figure than many on this list.
That's the point, most people know the Harry Potter books but don't know about one of the greatest writers of the 20th century. Another example of the dumbing down of America. Just my opinion but I hate it when I talk to people and they know every character from Twilight of Harry Potter but never read anything by Steinbeck or Hemingway.
Interestingly, I worked in bookshops during the Potter phenomenon and the sales of kids books didn't change appreciably, they just shifted to Harry Potter and away from other authors, so I'm not sure if kids were reading more, or if they were just all reading the same thing.
I'm guessing you haven't read Harry Potter if you're lumping it in with Twilight. It's an incredibly intelligent, well-written and entertaining series and not at all similar to Twilight. It's also a children's book and doesn't share the same readership as Hemmingway. He's also dead. Old books are forgotten and new ones take their place in the general public's mind.
^^^ exactly this. Stephen king once said: "Harry Potter is about confronting fears, finding inner strength, and doing what is right in the face of adversity. Twilight is all about how important it is to have a boyfriend"
Well, according to you, I'm what's wrong with America. Yet I read the Old Man and the Sea (most boring book I've ever read, but that's not the point), but have never seen Hemingway's face, how does that make me dumb?
So are we supposed to attribute Neruda's Nobel to Chilean imperialism?
I would imagine that Hemingway couldn't win a Nobel Prize in literature if it weren't for a lot of people liking his writing more than you do.
(There are few things duller or more arrogant than people's constant need to attribute a difference in artistic taste to some kind of moral failing: "The critics didn't have the guts to admit the book was crap!" No, they just had a different opinion from yours. It happens.)
I've read lots of Hemingway and Steinbeck books, but I honestly don't remember seeing a single photo of Steinbeck. This quiz is not about the quality of work, it's about whose face has been seen more. I find it odd that you don't complain about more people knowing Papa Smurf than Papa Hemingway. I think kids reading a Potter book is far better than vegging out in front of the TV.
The harry potter character has been in six popular films, and pictures and gifs of him are often seen on social media. Contrastingly, very few people, even people who've read his books, have ever seen a picture of Hemmingway. It's not a "dumbing down" of any sort; it's simply due to if the quiz takers (usually kids/teens/young adults) have seen an image of the beard owner or not.
If you read a single Harry Potter book or see a single movie, you'll know who the headmaster of Hogwarts is and what he looks like. You can read every single novel and short story Hemingway ever wrote and not know what he looked like, or that he went by "Papa." Not to mention that Hemingway has been dead for more than 50 years, so no, his personal appearance is not quite the pop cultural touchstone it once was.
"You are what's wrong with America" presumes you are speaking to American readers. Harry Potter is a British series and there's no reason to expect British readers to be better versed in Hemingway than in Rowling.
Moreover, Stephen King's point about the subtexts of Harry Potter (and its immense literary superiority over books like Twilight and its ilk) is absolutely spot on. If you comment on the quality of books you haven't read or, conversely, assume that any literature aimed at a mass audience must definitively be poor, you are what's wrong with the world of literary appreciation today.
I do the same thing with soccer/football, as well as several American sports. Not every American is a fan of every sport in the US, and I suspect all citizens of other countries aren't necessarily soccer experts, either.
Castro did overthrow a dictator. The difference is that Batista was America's dictator and therefore an alright guy. Castro was a socialist and therefore the devil incarnate.
Perhaps eventually, Sulps. At first Castro didn't want to align himself with the USSR, or anyone else for that matter. He was forced to cosy up to the Eastern Bloc when the West embargoed Cuba and left him no choice. I'm not a huge Castro fan, he's done some dreadful things, but facts is facts.
Revolutions aren't necessarily democratic (or republican or whatever). A revolution isn't a defined step to a specific type of government ; it's an event leading to a change in government (and in society, usually). A dictator overthrown by a new dictator can totally register as a revolution.
(I just realised this comment is 5 years old but whatever)
JetPunk doesn't have a reply notification, so even though I'm replying to you the same day you wrote that, it might as well be 5 years after the fact because you'll never see it.
It's most likely due to recency, people hear about bin laden and Castro in the news a lot, and they both died relatively recently. Whereas Fredrick Douglas is a historical figure that a lot of people only hear about in high school history class.
Also, Castro and Bin Laden are more known internationally, who were talked about outside of their respective regions, and are part of world history. Douglas is tied to events in America and is not that important a figure in the rest of the world (as he didn't have a really big impact outside of the US I guess - personally, his name rings a bell but nothing more).
Monsters are interesting to read about and important to know about. Monstrosity doesn't (and shouldn't) equal obscurity just as surely as nobility doesn't equal fame.
Okay, who the hell is Hägar the Horrible ? I've never heard of him.
(I just tried putting in Harald Fair-hair... I know it has nothing to do with question, but that was the only nordic viking era figure I could think of with a funny name.)
What are "the" funny pages. Im not one to complain about quizes being to american-centered. Cause often the most well known answers/person are from america, or the uk instead of say eastern europe or africa (rightfully so or not). And even when not living in the us, a lot of things you hear about (presidents, cities famous for something but also certain foods or sayings). But funny pages. That is one you can ONLY get when you live there I think.
Now look at this: This is me admitting that I simply didn't know something. I'm not blaming it on my nationality or the quizmaker's nationality. I'm not saying the quiz is too ____centric or insisting that the topic is unworthy. I'm not spouting about how my generation knows important stuff while the next generation knows trivial BS.
I'm simply admitting there was an answer I didn't know.
I would imagine that Hemingway couldn't win a Nobel Prize in literature if it weren't for a lot of people liking his writing more than you do.
(There are few things duller or more arrogant than people's constant need to attribute a difference in artistic taste to some kind of moral failing: "The critics didn't have the guts to admit the book was crap!" No, they just had a different opinion from yours. It happens.)
Moreover, Stephen King's point about the subtexts of Harry Potter (and its immense literary superiority over books like Twilight and its ilk) is absolutely spot on. If you comment on the quality of books you haven't read or, conversely, assume that any literature aimed at a mass audience must definitively be poor, you are what's wrong with the world of literary appreciation today.
(I just realised this comment is 5 years old but whatever)
we can think on our own and can have a discourse without it devolving into a lifetime of enmity.
Henry the Eighth
Sure had trouble
Short-term wives
Long-term stubble!
(I just tried putting in Harald Fair-hair... I know it has nothing to do with question, but that was the only nordic viking era figure I could think of with a funny name.)
Frederick Douglass.
Now look at this: This is me admitting that I simply didn't know something. I'm not blaming it on my nationality or the quizmaker's nationality. I'm not saying the quiz is too ____centric or insisting that the topic is unworthy. I'm not spouting about how my generation knows important stuff while the next generation knows trivial BS.
I'm simply admitting there was an answer I didn't know.