The Worst Book You've Ever Read? [Archive] - Page 2

Kafka's Crow

05-11-2008, 08:31 AM

Right now I am quite tempted to say A Portrait of the Artist as a Yong Man, becasue this is my second time reading it, having to read it now for school. And the frist time I read it I did not particuarly enjoy it becasue I really did not care about the character of Steven at all, and I was not drawn into the story.

And now I am currently trying to get through Chapter 3, which is just absolutely painful, becasue it is basicaly just an entire sermon written word for word, of a priest rambling on and on and on about the same thing for a ridiculous amount of pages, when really I got the point in the first couple of paragrahs.

This one is meant to be painful. Joyce is setting the stage for his most lyrical and beautiful prose. Stick with it, the beauty of next chapters will amaze you. This sermon will dissolve in the sheer beauty of art. This is the whole point of this book. Go to your local library and look for James Joyce Audio Collection after finishing reading the book. There is a selection from The Portrait read by Cyril Cusack on CD 2. It will make you hold your breath, it will make you swoon with joy, it will make you fall madly in love with James Joyce!

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060501790/thelibyrinth

liesl

05-17-2008, 06:52 PM

the worst book ever for me was Northanger Abbey....oh my....i don't like jane austen's idea of a gothic good time.

Agreed. That being said i don't particularly enjoy any of Austen's novels. I actually gave up reading 'Sense and Sensibility' in preparation for university, but was forced to read it recently for a final year module.

I must admit that one book i always remember failing to finish was in fact 'Catch 22', and whilst i persevered and completed 'Moby Dick' i am definitely in agreement that it is a terribly trying read.

Dark Muse

05-17-2008, 07:49 PM

This one is meant to be painful. Joyce is setting the stage for his most lyrical and beautiful prose. Stick with it, the beauty of next chapters will amaze you. This sermon will dissolve in the sheer beauty of art. This is the whole point of this book. Go to your local library and look for James Joyce Audio Collection after finishing reading the book. There is a selection from The Portrait read by Cyril Cusack on CD 2. It will make you hold your breath, it will make you swoon with joy, it will make you fall madly in love with James Joyce!

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0060501790/thelibyrinth

This was not my first time reading it, and I did not care for it the first time I read it. The second time I liked it even less. It just does not meet with my personal taste.

And I do not think we mean the same thing by "painful" it was painful for me to read becasue it was a drag and just went on and on about the same thing over and over. I got the point in the first parapgrah, it did not need to go on for a whole chapter.

The first time I read it my mind kept wandering, and I would just check back in every once in a while to see it was still talking about hell and sin, and than let my thoughts drift again.

stlukesguild

05-17-2008, 08:05 PM

Right now I am quite tempted to say A Portrait of the Artist as a Yong Man, becasue this is my second time reading it, having to read it now for school. And the frist time I read it I did not particuarly enjoy it becasue I really did not care about the character of Steven at all, and I was not drawn into the story.

And now I am currently trying to get through Chapter 3, which is just absolutely painful, becasue it is basicaly just an entire sermon written word for word, of a priest rambling on and on and on about the same thing for a ridiculous amount of pages, when really I got the point in the first couple of paragrahs.

Of course the argument could be made that art isn't merely about "getting the point". Certainly we could have "got the point" of War and Peace or In Search of Lost Time in far fewer words than were expended by the writers... but art isn't about "getting the point"... its not something that can be reduced to a definition or a mere menu.

Dark Muse

05-17-2008, 08:19 PM

Yes that is true, but I just did not think it was nesscary to the story to have word for word an entire sermon. Particuarly when most of it was just repeating the same thing. So no new information was being imparted, it was the same idea and much of the same words just arranged in different ways for several pages.

cipherdecoy

05-17-2008, 09:07 PM

Weekend In Paris - chick literature. I don't see how it's possible for any classic to be the worst book someone has read unless s/he has only read nothing but classics in his/her life.

Beautifull

05-17-2008, 09:32 PM

Frankenstein by Shelley...
i couldn't even finish it.

Dark Muse

05-17-2008, 09:35 PM

That is a surprising choice, I rather enjoyed it myself

Osita

05-17-2008, 09:41 PM

I remember Nobel Laurette Wole Soyinka's "The Interpreters". It is a very difficult read. But they say it is a great work. Try it for yourself.

I have come back from my mission,
Across seven seas and seven deserts
Above mountains high above the clouds
Far from shores of Motherland
Bombs away - ordinance delivered,
Mission accomplished.
Severed limbs, smashed heads, torsos flying
Wailing, mothers searching, blinded
Children shrieking, groping
Fathers mourning, bitter, swearing, upwards pointing.
I have come back from my mission,
To the accolade of the Big Man,
To the gratitude of country.
Nightmares, cold sweat –
Who will calm the turmoil in my soul?
Mother! Mother! Who will calm the turmoil of my soul?
I have come back from my mission,
To the accolade of the Big Man,
To the gratitude of country.

Sir Bartholomew

05-17-2008, 09:50 PM

??????

bounty

05-17-2008, 09:50 PM

That is a surprising choice, I rather enjoyed it myself

hmmm, am a big fan of frankenstein too...

ThousandthIsle

05-19-2008, 12:09 PM

People are free to choose any book they like as "the worst," but I'm amazed at all the classics. Have none of you ever read a truly junk book? LOL

My worst reads, in order, are:

1. Le Mariage by Diane Johnson (incomprehensible)
2. The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini (dramatically purple prose, one wonders how he wrote so badly)
3. The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown (it's just nothing but "riding in cars with boys")

Antiquarian: I agree, The Kite Runner was poorly written! It bothered me the entire time, but I made it through the book because it was a simple read, but also I found that for me, the story was strong/heavy enough to pull me to the end. It still had an impact on me, but was by no means fulfilling.

I've never gotten around to finding out for myself, but I wonder if this novel was originally written in English or not, or what Hosseini's background with the English language is? Perhaps something was lost in translation... does anyone have any info on that?

Also, I am curious about your adjective - "purple" prose! I've never heard that before but it seems to work! Why did you choose to describe it that way? :)

Mugwump101

05-19-2008, 06:33 PM

Twilight by Stephanie Meyer, I don't see what the rave is about. It's poorly written and the characters just fantasize about each other. Oh also, Madame Bovary and The Awakening. Both books are dreadfully dull and pointless. I sense that I'm not liking a certain plot.

Dark Muse

05-19-2008, 09:20 PM

I just began reading Madame Bovary, and though it is too soon for me to really judge. It is true that so far, nothing has really jumped out at me in the book

ThousandthIsle

05-20-2008, 11:35 AM

Looking back, I don't think the prose, itself, was so "purple" as the book was just totally melodramatic.

I definitely agree with you there. I can't remember the main character's name, but his courtship/marriage with his wife made me squeamish... It was definitely overly sentimental for a romance I could not care about. He was not a likable character, and I think his relationship with his wife made my stomach turn because I myself would have recoiled from someone like him. But she seemed to love him just the way he desired her to regardless.

Dark Muse

05-20-2008, 11:52 AM

Right now I like her, but I will see what happens as the story progressess as there has not been that much of her yet, as I just got to the part where he fianlly praposed.

ben.!

05-22-2008, 07:05 PM

For me there have been three books I can safely say I didn't enjoy at all:

Things Fall Apart - Chinua Achebe - Just could not get into it. I know its all to do with African culture, but I just could not relate, their strange rituals with foo-foo yams and beating the wife and kids for acedentally dropping a bowl I just could not see point in. But then again, I think thats my western culture kicking into it.

Snow Falling on Cedars - David Guterson - I found the prose in this cold and distant, the dialogue stinted, and as a reviewer rightly said on Amazon: 'The characters are about as alive as my left shoe'. The plot I found uninteresting too, and jumped around too much.

and

Devil Wears Prada - Lauren Weisberger (Is that her name?) - The pinnacle of silly chick literature. I read this purely to pretend I'd seen the film of it with a friend and not the gory modern Australian adaption of Macbeth. Most of the novel is about a young woman who goes to her work, gets paid big bucks but whines the whole time about how her boss treats her. I spent the whole 3/4 of the novel I read thinking: 'Why doesn't she just sue her boss for harassment and defamation? Better still, change jobs? She could put the richest fashion mag job in her resume.'

Ahh, the joys of flaws in bad plots...

Sir Bartholomew

05-23-2008, 11:24 PM

those Harlequin paperbacks :sick:

EricP

05-29-2008, 01:52 AM

"Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand -- I don't understand how this book has endured and remained so popular. I knew when I picked it up that I disagreed with Rand's philosophy, but I hoped that the novel would be well-written and nuanced. Instead, I found it to be preachy and filled with one-dimensional characters.

Dark Muse

05-29-2008, 02:17 AM

I have not read that one, but I have to say I abolutely love The Fountainhead

armenian

05-30-2008, 03:30 AM

i can never get past the first 2 or 3 pages hitchhikers guide to the galaxy

Idril

05-30-2008, 09:19 AM

i can never get past the first 2 or 3 pages hitchhikers guide to the galaxy

Awww, I loved that book but I can also see how it wouldn't be everybody's cup of tea.

I just finished Somersault by Kenzaburo Oe and I have to say, that was one of the hardest books for me to finish, I didn't care for it one little bit. :sick:

slobone

06-01-2008, 07:23 AM

Never Let Me Go, by Kazuo Ishiguro. Hands down the creepiest most depressing book I've ever read. You have to give him credit for how exquisitely he crafted this piece of slime. I can't even believe I managed to finish it.

Dark Muse

06-01-2008, 10:57 AM

That sounds intriguing

kelby_lake

06-02-2008, 01:53 PM

i can never get past the first 2 or 3 pages hitchhikers guide to the galaxy

I glanced at bits which I liked. I wouldn't want to read it all the way through but I enjoyed smiling at some episodes I passed.

bej6s

06-02-2008, 02:52 PM

Books I couldn't finish:
Lord of the Flies by William Golding
Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck
A Kestrel for a Knave by Barry Hines (British Lit)
The Bluest Eye by Toni Morrison

Idril

06-02-2008, 09:53 PM

I thought the film would be easier, but I've tried several times and haven't been able to get through that, either. Still, I know some people who adore that film, so maybe it's "just not for us."

I think the book would be easier than the movie because there's a little more description and things flow slightly better...although even the book is pretty random and very, very silly.

slobone

06-03-2008, 01:10 AM

It actually sounds good to me, too. I love Ishiguro's writing and this is the only book of his I haven't yet read.
Oh, it's brilliantly written all right. Otherwise it wouldn't have been so painful to read. Kind of like Eraserhead...

Anyway, read it and get back to us. But I doubt if I'll be tackling Remains of the Day anytime soon. Apparently the movie didn't do justice to how depressing it is.

I think the book would be easier than the movie because there's a little more description and things flow slightly better...although even the book is pretty random and very, very silly.
I think the original radio series was the best version. The movie looked pretty awful, I stopped watching after 10 minutes.

maria4645

01-11-2010, 12:13 AM

virginia wolf-mrs. dalloway omg i had to read this book for an advanced english class and i couldnt get passed 30 pages.

prendrelemick

01-11-2010, 12:12 PM

A Thousand Splendid Suns. Deary me, misery from start to finish.

The Comedian

01-13-2010, 02:21 PM

I had a really, really, really hard time enduring Uncle Tom's Cabin. I know its an important historical work. And I appreciate that. But Heavens! Oh, is it ever so sentimental! The softened skin from under a poor child's tears could not tell of the immense sorrow that I had to face when this monstrous pile of sentimentally was laid heavy upon my shoulders! Woe! Woe! Exclamation points! Woes!!

applepie

01-13-2010, 03:51 PM

ama_li

02-24-2010, 05:04 AM

Also, From A Buick 8, By Stephen King. Everyone said it was such a good book, critics were wronG. It was not at all suspensful.

I feel the same

JommiL

02-24-2010, 05:49 AM

Adolf Hitler´s Mein Kampf

Stupid, full of psychological lies, aggressive & lot of upside-down thinking, logic thinking is ridiculous - and filled with repeat, repeat, repeat...

Gretchen

02-26-2010, 05:10 AM

The Book of Skulls by Robert Silverberg

MrRegular

02-27-2010, 07:01 AM

Has no one here ever ventured to the sci-fi/fantasy section lately? Though, I admit, I've never read any of the entries into the HALO 2 saga, nor any of the Diablo books, but I have read a couple (yes, I am ashamed) of the Star Wars and Star Trek books in my youth. No es bueno.
Though I must confess that the books based on the DOOM video games were surprisingly well written... Did I just say that?

pooteeweet

02-28-2010, 11:09 PM

I would have to say Grapes of Wrath :sick: I know it is standard for high school English class, but ugh... It is the one and only book I refused to read, and I'm certain my grade for it showed. I did take time to explain to the teacher that I just simply couldn't put myself through that kind of punishment:D

Did you read it? If you didn't, how do you know it's bad?

Patrick

The Clansman, by Thomas Dixon, Jr. - read it for a race in literature course...important read, but unsettling.

Patrick

Ashbe Maeur

03-01-2010, 01:06 PM

I heard that that was the best book of the year.

If this is true... then that's really sad.

I read it myself. It's honestly barely tolerable. The only thing that kept me reading was watching a family dynamic completely crumble, that was somewhat interesting.

I would have to say Grapes of Wrath :sick: I know it is standard for high school English class, but ugh... It is the one and only book I refused to read, and I'm certain my grade for it showed. I did take time to explain to the teacher that I just simply couldn't put myself through that kind of punishment:D

So... have you ever actually read it?

You can't say something is the worst if you haven't experienced it. :P

One of the worst books I've ever read was "The Zookeeper's Wife." The premise, and the actual backstory to the novel is powerful, but the author did a terrible job writing the book.

The story is constantly broken up by her need to dribble quotes from obscure historical sources, that can go on for 10 or more pages, leaving you completely confused to where her characters left off.

In short, it's a broken up, jumbled mess of a story. Maybe if it was re-written I'd like it more.

The Monkey for Stephan king , i couldnot complete it cause it was stupied

This is a joke, right?

... Really not trying to be mean here.

Three Sparrows

03-02-2010, 02:05 PM

Stardust, by Neil Gaimen
:willy_nilly:

ktr

03-02-2010, 02:38 PM

atlas shrugged.

---------

page one of this thread is hilarious btw -----

IceM

03-02-2010, 09:52 PM

I still contend that Candide by Voltaire is drivel. I KNOW I got ripped for this on another thread. It wasn't intended for aesthetic value. It's a satire of (I'm confident it was, not completely sure) Liebniz's* philosophy. But still, Austen was satirical (although to the same degree) as Voltaire and her work is much more readable. Crap I thought.

eyemaker

03-03-2010, 02:56 AM

I would have to say Grapes of Wrath :sick: I know it is standard for high school English class, but ugh... It is the one and only book I refused to read, and I'm certain my grade for it showed. I did take time to explain to the teacher that I just simply couldn't put myself through that kind of punishment:D

I'm bothered with this post.. can you emphasize reasons for having this claim? or let's just say, were you able to understand the "book" when you read it? i can't believe you're tossing this up..

i'm not trying to be mean here though.

atlas shrugged.

---------

page one of this thread is hilarious btw -----

kinda lenghy yeah, but It's not the worst for me..

ForKnowledge

04-02-2010, 02:12 PM

Worst book I've read the Alchemist

PeterL

04-02-2010, 04:06 PM

People keep mentioning things that are readable. Most of them aren't very good, but it is possible to read the whole thing. I defy anyone to read all of The Last Immortal by J. O. Jeppson. I don't know anyone who has managed to get past the fifth page.

D.S. Poorman

04-03-2010, 01:31 AM

A Million Little Pieces

That's when I knew how full of it Oprah Winfrey is. She picked this dreck for her BOTM Club. I picked it up off my mother's dining room table and... well, it wasn't pretty. Just bad from so many angles.

Rosie Cotton

04-03-2010, 10:07 AM

I know I'm going to be drawn and quartered for this, but Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte. I hated it when I read it and want it to be cut into very small pieces, and I think the fact that everyone else loves it doesn't help me like it more.

One Gallant

04-03-2010, 11:57 AM

Snuff by Chuck Palahniuk. It's bad to the point of parody.

MagicalSoul

04-03-2010, 02:11 PM

Well, The most boring book that I couldn't complete is Lord of the Flies by William Golding.
I don't know the reason, I was reading it in order to improve my English, I couldn't complete it though. Maybe because it's about a group of kids, or maybe it's meant to be for children. I don't know. *shrugs*

Imaginarium

04-04-2010, 01:43 AM

I think we can all concur that the Twilight series was a disgrace to literature.

D.S. Poorman

04-04-2010, 05:04 AM

Imaginarium, did you catch any of the online backlash when Stephen King dared to say that Stephanie Meyers is a bad writer? The hell storm was so amusing to see. I was already a SK fan but I would like to buy him dinner for that.

MagicalSoul

04-04-2010, 09:57 AM

I think we can all concur that the Twilight series was a disgrace to literature.

I'm really happy to hear this of someone, at last!

I always hated Twilight and really didn't get why it's compared to Harry Potter worldwide sucessfull books. I am a fan of HP, and couldn't go through Twilight without rolling with laghter when Edward glittered :smilielol5:

Anyways, Twilight is a romance story with a too simple plot I waited for some actions to be done but alas it all ends up well at the end of each chapter.

Let fans of Twilight forgive me, but I truly can't digest this series.

Babak Movahed

04-04-2010, 11:50 PM

Twlight! This series made me truly nauseated, someone should tell Meyer to never ever ever write a book again.

Rosie Cotton

04-06-2010, 01:57 PM

I took it as us not even gracing Twilight with the honors of being considered a book.

Il Dante

04-06-2010, 06:58 PM

When I've read all the books in the world I'll get back to you on this...:wink5:

I can't be sure of the worst books, but I can say some of their characteristics.
I think it's time for a...
:rant:

The mediocre author always overdescribes conversations. Exhibit A:
"Well, I'd better be going now," said Randall nervously as he took a glance over his shoulder.
"Oh no, you mustn't leave," said Mrs. Connors warmly with a twinkly in her eye as she set a plate of scones down on the table. "You simply must stay for tea!"
"No, I really have got to go," said Randall, turning pale.
"Oh I insist," said Mrs. Connors with a flick of the wrist. "You wouldn't turn down my hospitality," she asked curtly.
What the author really wants to write here is a movie screenplay, not a book, because movies are good at showing things (like flicks of the wrist and glancing over the shoulder) while books are good at telling things. Of course, the author absolutely HAD to include that "flick of the wrist": it was part of the intrinsic essence of the story.

The mediocre author also makes the mortal mistake of describing emotions. Exhibit B:
Her heart sank. The whole world felt like a whirl and all her love seemed to seep out like water down a sink drain. All she felt was her extreme nothingness and a desire to change things. There was a pain in her heart, and it was almost unbearable.
This author does not understand that it is futile to use words to describe emotions; rather, you must use words to convey emotion.

The mediocre author dutifully uses as many literary cliches as possible, such as...
1. When a girl is nervous, she bites her lip.
2. When a boy blushes, his face "turns bright red"; but when a girl blushes "all the blood rushes to her face."
3. Every benevolent grandfather has a twinkle in his eye.
4. If you hear a "cry" that scares you, it is always "blood curdling"; but, if you are scared and let out a "cry" it is never "blood curdling"; if anything, it is "piercing."
5. When a character is scared, they turn pale; this holds regardless of skin color or tan.
6. If a young man is handsome, his eyes are always "dark."
7. You may use a thesaurus. But NEVER, under ANY circumstances, are you to use it to find a synonym for the word "beautiful."
8. Descriptions of scenery must be made as long and excruciatingly detailed as possible.
9. If machine-guns are involved (they usually aren't) their sound must be described as "incessant" and as a "rattle."
10. When a boy and girl first meet, it is imperative that this first meeting be as awkward and "embarrassing" as possible, with much "face turning bright red" and "all the blood rushing to her cheeks."

The mediocre author may also fall into the following traps:
1. Insert lots of foreign-language sentences and phrases. This has the advantage of demonstrating how smart the author is.
2. All characters must talk and think exactly like the author.

Finally, the mediocre author adheres to this motto religiously: leave no noun unmodified; and may no verb suffer the loneliness of not having an adverb as companion.

Mr.lucifer

05-28-2010, 05:50 PM

What are pershap the worst books of all time? I disallow mainstream popular fiction because its too easy and mainstream novels tend to be mediocre at worst. The true **** tends to deservedly obscure.

I say one of the worst books of all time is Rah and the muggles.

the silent x

05-28-2010, 07:04 PM

I think it may come down to perspective, I know a couple of people that love my nomination, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek by Annie Dillard (give a crazy woman a pen after getting her high on every drug known to man and you might come close to the terrible ramblingness).

humpty dumpty

05-29-2010, 06:56 PM

One of the books that I had to struggle to finish was Emma, by Jane Austin. I know it's considered to be one of her best, but it didn't keep me interested long enough. It took me six months to finish the book ( :D ) and that only because I felt I HAD to finish it!!! :p

tiredstudent

05-29-2010, 07:31 PM

Mr.lucifer

05-30-2010, 11:59 AM

ok, well it was kinda semi, not really mainstream... but

Cirque du freak series was the worst i have EVER read. and thats a considerable amount.

*and the expression is mediocre at BEST. you basically said that mainstream books are actually good and that the Worst one is mediocre

I meant what I say. At best mainstream ficiton is pretty good, the most are average, and the rest is mediocre. The truly bad stuff is just obscure. Being mainstream is neither a a measure of mediocrity. Jk rowling and stephen king for master writers, nor either are they mediocre.

Gizlam

10-17-2010, 06:53 AM

Alright people!

It's easy to talk about what books you love and what excites you and makes you bubble with happiness.

But what books have you read and been seriously dissapointed with. What books have you stopped reading halfway because the plot lines or language or whatever have bored you.

This is not a place, I repeat, this is not a place for you to slag off books and just call them rubbish. We need reasons people! Was it the narrative? the realistic quality of the book? The characters? The writing? the list is endless.

Personally i find that talking about books that you dont like can be more interesting than waffling on about great ones. Especially if someone disagrees!

So whether its a Meyer vampire volume or a Chekov classic lets get them red pens out and make constructive criticsm.

(sorry for bad spelling)

Personally for me it is Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace.

The plot line = Fantastic
The Language = Fantastic
The Characters = Too Many

Although I'm a sucker for a non linear narrative this was too much for me. The amount of jumping between characters and what they were doing confused me and caused a lot of flicking through the novel to remember. Also being a book of 1000 pages it meant a lot of flicking especially to where the footnotes where. I felt as i was reading a make your own horror story goosebumps book like i did as a child.

I'm annoyed at myself for not finishing it as im sure the characters would of blended into one anothers narratives. However, at the time I was so confused and could only have the book out for 3 weeks so I had to stop.

One day I will return to it anad power through.

Dark Muse

10-17-2010, 01:27 PM

The Outlander by Diana Gabaldon

The only reason why I did not throw the book against the wall mid-way through, and than maybe use it to start a bonfire and dance around it (Ok that last part may be a slight exaggeration) was because I was reading it for an online discussion group so I pushed myself through it to the end.

One of the biggest problems is the fact that I don't do romance, but I had been led to believe by others that the book was more than just a romance, and was a really good Historical Fiction which is one of my favorite genres, so I decided to give it a chance, and found it to be just awful.

For one thing through the entire book I wanted someone to push the narrator off the side of a cliff because I found her unbearable, she was the most useless and incomptant heroine ever.

The writing was bad, the character development was lacking for me, and there is one section of the book in which there is literally like 5 chapters of sex, and I am no prude, but it did nothing to enhance the story, it was just there to wave sex in front of the reader like a shiny object, in addition the book was already longer than it needed to be, so I began to just skip over those parts because they were irrelevant, and not reading them made the book a whole lot shorter.

papayahed

10-17-2010, 02:24 PM

The Outlander by Diana Gabaldon

The only reason why I did not throw the book against the wall mid-way through, and than maybe use it to start a bonfire and dance around it (Ok that last part may be a slight exaggeration) was because I was reading it for an online discussion group so I pushed myself through it to the end.

One of the biggest problems is the fact that I don't do romance, but I had been led to believe by others that the book was more than just a romance, and was a really good Historical Fiction which is one of my favorite genres, so I decided to give it a chance, and found it to be just awful.

For one thing through the entire book I wanted someone to push the narrator off the side of a cliff because I found her unbearable, she was the most useless and important heroine ever.

The writing was bad, the character development was lacking for me, and there is one section of the book in which there is literally like 5 chapters of sex, and I am no prude, but it did nothing to enhance the story, it was just there to wave sex in front of the reader like a shiny object, in addition the book was already longer than it needed to be, so I began to just skip over those parts because they were irrelevant, and not reading them made the book a whole lot shorter.

pffwwww. I picked this book up several times, I'm glad I didn't buy it. I did however get it free for my Kindle, luckily that can be easily remedied.

Syd A

10-17-2010, 06:03 PM

Dickens because he's boring, slow and depressing.

[/scathing]

Dickens is depressing??? Practically all of his novels have a nauseatingly happy ending!

Lord Macbeth

10-17-2010, 06:21 PM

Dickens is depressing??? Practically all of his novels have a nauseatingly happy ending!

A Tale of Two Cities, all that death in the French Revolution and ends with a man sacrificing his life for another?

All the despair shown in the workplace and abuse in Oliver Twist and David Copperfield?

Even the greed in A Christmas Carol which was NOT written so much to be the easy-TV morality play it is, but rather a commentary on folks like Scrooge and how they think..."decrease the surplus population" and all that.

There isn't the adjective "Dickensian" for nothing...

The worst I've ever read?

Well, I read plenty of schlock books in high school because they required them (yes, that's good education...) but the "classic" that I honestly felt was the worst of that kidn that I've read, that I really would dispute calling a classic?

Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton.

ATROCIOUS pacing.
OVERLY-DESCRIPTIVE (and this from someone who doesn't care for that style from Hawthorne or Conrad but can at least respect that their form is decent, THIS is just a mess, description over storytelling.)
FLAT dialogue.
STILTED description (add that to the fact I think there's TOO MUCH description, and you can begin to see why I loathe this book so.)
DULL protagonist (I understand Frome is a very reserved man, but really he gomes across as being so reserved and so introverted that he honestly is not a very relatable character, his SITUATION is relatable, loves a woman that's not his wife and that wife is not-so-nice, but really we can identify with that not because Wharton makes Frome identifiable but because that's an age-old theme for mankind and literature itself, everyone from Homer to Shakespeare to the moderns have used that, FROME is just not a dynamic character.)

The ONLY thing I can credit Wharton for is her setting, not only where and when but the wintery scenery she plays Ethan Frome agaisnt, really does come across as not only a believable setting but also very much approporiate for the despair the novel TRIES to convey, that symbolsim isn't attained effectively as the other elements fall flat, but at least the setting gets us a bit of the way there.

But other than that, Ethan Frome is out in the cold.

Syd A

10-17-2010, 07:46 PM

A Tale of Two Cities, all that death in the French Revolution and ends with a man sacrificing his life for another?

All the despair shown in the workplace and abuse in Oliver Twist and David Copperfield?

Even the greed in A Christmas Carol which was NOT written so much to be the easy-TV morality play it is, but rather a commentary on folks like Scrooge and how they think..."decrease the surplus population" and all that.

There isn't the adjective "Dickensian" for nothing...

That's 19th-century England for you. Would you rather he had written about well-fed, happy orphans who play in the meadows all day long? Dickens had to be at least a little bit realistic. At least his novels had a happy ending; most orphans didn't have that happy ending at the time, I assume.

One of the most powerful scenes in all of English literature is that of Sydney Carton giving his life for a man he considers his better, a man who still has a chance at happiness. How could you not love that ending?

stlukesguild

10-17-2010, 10:32 PM

300+ responses to the "Worst Book You've Ever Read"... with half the responses or more naming some classic book that has survived the for generations for some reason. Surely the real title of the thread should be "Books I Personally Didn't Like (for whatever reason... but rarely having to do with issues of artistic merit) or Understand.":D

Lord Macbeth

10-17-2010, 11:58 PM

That's 19th-century England for you. Would you rather he had written about well-fed, happy orphans who play in the meadows all day long? Dickens had to be at least a little bit realistic. At least his novels had a happy ending; most orphans didn't have that happy ending at the time, I assume.

One of the most powerful scenes in all of English literature is that of Sydney Carton giving his life for a man he considers his better, a man who still has a chance at happiness. How could you not love that ending?

Wait...I said all that defending Dickens' work, so...why are you asking ME if I'd rather the orphans were all happy and fed and everything was peachy-keen, I just went on about how thematic Dickens' work is.

300+ responses to the "Worst Book You've Ever Read"... with half the responses or more naming some classic book that has survived the for generations for some reason. Surely the real title of the thread should be "Books I Personally Didn't Like (for whatever reason... but rarely having to do with issues of artistic merit) or Understand.":D

I'd challenge that--I understand what Wharton was trying to accomplish with Ethan Frome, I just think she failed as the plot is slow to develop, unrewarding and trite when it does, the pacing is simply atrocious, nearly all of the characters unrelatable, flat, or both, Wharton's obsession with over-narration and over-description make the work feel even more distant, which CAN work if you've a protagonist like Frome who is by his very nature distant, but NOT when the pace and lack of convincing characterization have already made him so distant...

I don't dislike Wharton's work because of a personal reason, or a failure to "understand it," but rather because I view it as an artistic failure on Wharton's part. Wharton was a good writer, but Ethan Frome is simply a failed attempt and, to compound matters, many other, perhaps better writers have done the same sort of story--and better.

LuggageFan

10-18-2010, 12:11 PM

Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger. Book about a spoiled brat being raised in New York, who's going through puberty and learns how to swear, and it was bad because everyone raves about it like it's mindblowing, and it's just a dated, mediocre, 6th grade reading level book about a spoiled brat whose familiarity with things like unemployment begins and ends with the letters U and T. Really, just a major, major disappointment, and that's what makes it so bad - if it had been a forgotten book, and I'd read it, I'd likely have a different assessment.

To paraphrase a comment about the book on Amazon: Why has everyone told me how fine his threads are when this emperor is wearing no clothes?

Syd A

10-19-2010, 01:15 PM

300+ responses to the "Worst Book You've Ever Read"... with half the responses or more naming some classic book that has survived the for generations for some reason.

The argument from tradition is the weakest argument you could make. Next you'll tell us that Harry Potter is a masterpiece because it sold a jillion copies.

AlfredtheGreat

10-19-2010, 08:59 PM

Last Exit to Brooklyn by Hubert Selby Jr.
Written in a terrible style.

Mr.lucifer

10-19-2010, 10:47 PM

Ever since I discovered ray carney, I've wondered if its actually possible to critically challenge any artistic canon. Don't get me wrong I have never hated a classic. At worst, a classic simply does not move me.

Kyriakos

10-20-2010, 08:02 AM

I vaguely remember feeling appalled by a copy of I spit on your graves.
Stopped reading it soon afterwards...

stlukesguild

10-20-2010, 04:47 PM

The argument from tradition is the weakest argument you could make. Next you'll tell us that Harry Potter is a masterpiece because it sold a jillion copies.

Sorry, but the argument as to the numbers sold is the worst possible argument you could possibly make. If a work survives the ages, on the other hand, it is because generations of literary critics and other "experts", subsequent writers, and subsequent generations of readers have found that the work continues to resonate. Your personal opinions or mine are largely meaningless as to whether a given work will survive as part of the "canon". The fact that a work of art has survived, however, leads one to suppose that it has some real merits whether a given individual is enthralled with the work or not. This does not mean we must, can, or even should be expected to like every work of art that has survived. However, one does open oneself to a certain degree of incredulity when one makes a proclamation that this "classic" novel or that "classic" poem is the "worst book I ever read" (as opposed to simply a book that I disliked). The tradition or canon need not be defended. It is the opinion that challenges the tradition that needs to make a argument that is somewhat better reasoned out than "It was boring" or "It sucks". Lacking this, the first thought that comes to mind when someone declares, "It was the worst book I ever read" is "Hmmm... I wonder what books this person actually has read... and which ones they actually understood."

Silas Thorne

10-20-2010, 04:53 PM

Perhaps a lot of people can't really remember the worst books that they've ever read (as worst would imply unremarkable and boring too), but can only recall well-known ones that they didn't like?

stlukesguild

10-20-2010, 04:53 PM

I've wondered if its actually possible to critically challenge any artistic canon.

Certainly... but such a criticism demands more than the personal opinion: "I found it boring", "I didn't like the characters" "I didn't like the ending." It must also be understood that a work that has survived as part of the canon has done so because a great number of literary "experts"... be they academics, critics, "common readers" in the manner in which Virginia Woolf defined the term, and subsequent writers... felt and continue to feel the work is of real merit. You may find it difficult to convince these others and of course you open yourself to their counter opinions.

kaleidotroph

10-30-2010, 12:06 AM

I find that Erewhon by Samuel Butler is one of the dullest books I've ever read. His satire is mostly amusing; however, his writing is terribly bland. I'd categorize reading Erewhon as cruel and unusual punishment...inflicted by myself, on myself. I suppose I'm a masochist now.

Seasider

10-30-2010, 06:02 AM

Finnegans Wake and anything by Gertrude Stein. Both utterly incomprehensible.

mal4mac

10-30-2010, 12:05 PM

Patrick_Bateman

10-30-2010, 12:07 PM

Dickens is good????????????????????????

interesting....

Oli

10-31-2010, 07:15 PM

As you like it - Shakespeare sold out

Joyeuse

11-01-2010, 09:04 PM

My least favorite book by far is John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress. It's really a shame, too, because the book started out with this really nice poem by Bunyan. But then the man descends into this abject, ridiculous allegory. I understand, the point of the novel was to teach readers how to be good Christians, but really, it gets to be a bit much. The constant quoting of the Bible I can handle--I've really got to accept the work for what it's trying to accomplish--but I'd also been told that it also worked as an adventure novel. And it is the furthest thing from interesting in that respect.

A much better novel with a religious undertones is Journey to the West. You've got all the desire to teach people how to live morally, but at the same time you've got fun adventures filled with interesting characters. In contrast, what does Bunyan give his reader? Other than cardboard characters and heavy-handed allegories, he doesn't give much.

I'll admit, there's one redeeming aspect. Some of the phrases he used, such as the "Slough of Despond," and "Vanity Fair," were really pretty good. However, five interesting words and one good poem do not a good book make. Therefore, I'm going to have to label Pilgrim's Progress as a FAIL.

Drkshadow03

11-04-2010, 03:13 PM

In 'serious' literature camp. Henry James' "The Wings of a Dove" is now, for me, tying with the Bible, Lucretius, Joyce's Ulysses and Proust. Desert island reading if the island is in hell...

How can you know if something is good or bad? Who could have thought Montaigne could be so good and Lucretius so bad, or that Dickens could be so good while Henry James is so bad? Guess you just have to read fifty pages and then give up if it feels like shovelling mud on the banks of the Styx. Helps to lose opinions like "James is a classic, I *should* read him."... Doesn't make the next hundred pages any better!

James is hit-or-miss with me. I took a class and found I enjoyed about half of what we read, and could barely finish half. Then I looked at the publication dates of the works I liked and the works I didn't like.

Turns out the works I enjoyed were all his early to middle works, while the ones I didn't like and found dreadfully boring all fit into his later period works.

dfloyd

11-05-2010, 02:00 PM

They always contain works which are generally considered among those which the well-educated person should certainly read. They may not be the best, but they certainly provide a base for expanding literary capabilities. And they separate the seasoned reader from the dilletant. They also give the frustrated reader a podium for venting his/her feelings which heretofore have not been expressed.

inbetween

11-05-2010, 05:59 PM

the worst book I ever read is propably the one I was forced to read for english major... kate greenville's the secret river....
quite philosophical content but awfull stile... awfull!
and I read a book that made me skipp a houndred pages ('t was melmoth the wanderer from oscar wilds grand uncle...) and the secret river is even worse
no matter what the NEW YORKER says, don't try it!!!!

ariella

11-14-2010, 11:08 PM

'Dharma bums' jack Kerouac, I've explained why on other threads.
'Wasp Factory' iain banks, really not my thing at all, not that I read the whole thing so maybe it got better, since some people seem to like it.
'The Lovely Bones' alice sebold, for obvious reasons.

Jassy Melson

11-14-2010, 11:16 PM

The worst book I've ever read is a biography of Charles Wesley. I can't even think of the author. It was so badly written and just plain dull that it was a real chore to read it.

mona amon

11-15-2010, 06:41 AM

New Moon by Stephanie Meyer. **Yawn** :Yawn:

Ane

11-15-2010, 10:10 AM

God, I read so much dire crud when I reviewed books.

One of the worst was "Beat the Reaper" by Josh Bazell, which was basically just a literary penis enlarger. I was also forced to read various chick-lit bestsellers and it made me depressed how these gender stereotypes (which I find negative), both male and female, are preserved and strengthened through books. "Bergdorf Blondes" one of them was called. Oh the HORROR!

wat??

11-20-2010, 09:04 PM

Alexander III

11-21-2010, 06:31 AM

I utterly loathed Robinson Crusoe, I know it is one of the first novels in english, yet Defoe's writing and style was pretty much like the Dan Brown of the 18th century.

Also Have to agree that Dawkins The God Delusion, was quite ridiculous, it seems like in the book he assumes we are all of a highly limited intelligence, as most of his arguments are quite laughable. And seeing interviews of him doesn't help this image I have. His entire book, can be outdone by one Shakespeare quote, "there is more in heaven and earth Horatio, than your philosophies can dream of"

Kafka's Crow

11-21-2010, 08:19 PM

Pillars of the Earth

Wooden characters, horrible coincidences and unlikely happenings, if this writer is so "good" then I am James Joyce!

bohn

11-21-2010, 08:35 PM

Catch-22.

wat??

11-21-2010, 08:37 PM

Oh please.

Ane

11-22-2010, 12:03 PM

I found both 'Mere Christianity' by C.S Lewis and 'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins to be very instructive in how to conduct a terrible argument based on ill drawn conclusions, but not very enjoyable. And while I'm sure that I have read worse books than these two, none have made as ugly an impression on me.

Is this because you're a believer or because you thought they were poorly written? I haven't read either, so it's not to defend them, I'm merely curious, probably because I read a book by two Danish guys who wrote about us evil atheists and well, naturally that would make my list of one of the worst, but more out of personal convictions than taste. Which made me wonder how we even distinguish that and maybe it's subject for a completely different thread, I don't know :)

baaaaadgoatjoke

11-22-2010, 12:23 PM

Desperate Characters by Paula Fox

Reviews of this one are almost unanimously positive, but I just could not enjoy it at all. If you look around you'll see people praising the prose as being worthy of Fitzgerald, it's the perfect length, gripping portayal of middle class ennui, etc., but it simply did not resonate with me.

To be fair, I was tiring of postmodern literature so it may have been a timing thing, but I just can't believe that I'm the only person who didn't get into this one.

Veho

11-22-2010, 12:35 PM

Oh please.

Never heard of it.

wat??

11-22-2010, 05:01 PM

Is this because you're a believer or because you thought they were poorly written? I haven't read either, so it's not to defend them, I'm merely curious, probably because I read a book by two Danish guys who wrote about us evil atheists and well, naturally that would make my list of one of the worst, but more out of personal convictions than taste. Which made me wonder how we even distinguish that and maybe it's subject for a completely different thread, I don't know :)

'Mere Christianity' is actually written in support of faith, despite the misleading name. And no, I am not religious myself.

Ane

11-22-2010, 05:03 PM

'Mere Christianity' is actually written in support of faith, despite the misleading name. And no, I am not religious myself.

Ah my bad. Does correspond better with all the christian motifs in the Narnia books.

RaoulDuke

11-26-2010, 07:38 PM

Atlas Shurgged is probably the most tedious book I've ever read. I actually agree with a lot of Ayn Rand's Objectivist ideas, but the book was hopelessly repetitive and the characters were awfully black and white.

kelby_lake

11-27-2010, 10:12 AM

In 'serious' literature camp. Henry James' "The Wings of a Dove" is now, for me, tying with the Bible, Lucretius, Joyce's Ulysses and Proust. Desert island reading if the island is in hell...

How can you know if something is good or bad? Who could have thought Montaigne could be so good and Lucretius so bad, or that Dickens could be so good while Henry James is so bad? Guess you just have to read fifty pages and then give up if it feels like shovelling mud on the banks of the Styx. Helps to lose opinions like "James is a classic, I *should* read him."... Doesn't make the next hundred pages any better!

I loved The Wings of a Dove but the thing with James is that his novels take a LONG time to get going. Once they do, they're great. Definitely watch the film of the novel, at least. It's one of the saddest stories I've ever read.

To Kill A Mockingbird is very overrated.

kryssi_nykki

04-04-2011, 11:02 PM

a kestrel for a knave was the worst book i have EVER read.... and i only read it because i was forced to... those damned lit teachers....

Emmy Castrol

04-04-2011, 11:35 PM

The Handmaiden's Tale by Margaret Atwood.

I know it's not the futuristic, totalitarian state setting because I like Orwell. I just can't read anything by Margaret Atwood, Helen Garner or Virginia Woolf without feeling like I want their main characters (and the writers of them) to perish out of existence. I cannot understand their kind of femaleness at all, similar to how I feel about Australia's first female prime minister, actually.

Alexander III

04-05-2011, 05:00 AM

Seasider

04-05-2011, 05:42 AM

I thought The Life of Pi was the worst Booker Prizewinner I ever read until I remembered The Bone People I would have included Midnight's Children but I couldn't get past the first 50 pages.

mal4mac

04-05-2011, 07:45 AM

I loved The Wings of a Dove but the thing with James is that his novels take a LONG time to get going. Once they do, they're great. Definitely watch the film of the novel, at least. It's one of the saddest stories I've ever read.

I thought the film was excellent. The plot was great, I just found the soul-searching style excruciatingly slow. I might try one of his early novels - is "Portrait of a Lady" easier to get through?

Anyone prepared to defend Lucretius? I found the Roman physics in De Rerum natura stultifyingly boring - as well as wrong! The Epicurean morality (of course) was excellent, but that only ran to a few pages... At least I saw why the Christians didn't bother burning that one... two hundred pages of Roman physics makes even Christian metaphysics look good...

Emil Miller

04-05-2011, 08:13 AM

[QUOTE=mal4mac;1022247]I thought the film was excellent. The plot was great, I just found the soul-searching style excruciatingly slow. I might try one of his early novels - is "Portrait of a Lady" easier to get through? /QUOTE]

I haven't read Portrait of a Lady but you might care to read The Europeans or Washington Square which are considerably less verbose than James' other work. Whilst there is no way in which I would spend time reading Wings of a Dove or The Golden Bowl, his shorter novels make pleasant if not gripping reading with the possible exception of The Turn of the Screw.

Seasider

04-05-2011, 08:26 AM

I liked What Daisy Knew very much. And The Bostonians. The DVD is great with Vanessa Redgrave among others. (well she's a recommendation in my view, though I know it's controversial )

Calidore

04-05-2011, 08:56 AM

Confederacy of Dunces. It won a Pulitzer, and it was absolute crap. Unpleasant people behaving unpleasantly, who you were apparently supposed to laugh at contemptuously.

Buffalo Girl

06-06-2011, 03:30 PM

The Kite Runner. The beginning was actually quite enjoyable, but by the middle of the book the writing seems to get sloppy, and the plot gets more ridiculous as the story progresses. Several times I found myself saying "you have got to be kidding me" as the plot "unfolded" (although that is perhaps a generous description of the way the plot moves from the middle of the book forward). Such a disappointment, although I know there are many who would disagree.

G L Wilson

06-06-2011, 03:57 PM

The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins. It was a layer cake of rubbish. BTW I am an atheist.

oanna

06-10-2011, 01:32 PM

Veronika Decides to Die - Paulo Coelho
It took me 2 hours to read it and I was quite disappointed.

ChicagoReader

06-10-2011, 04:27 PM

Huck Fin, I read it early on in high school and absolutely despised it. I've been trying to will myself to give it another go but with so many enticing books on my shelf it doesn't look like it will get a chance anytime soon.

Fafnir

06-10-2011, 09:52 PM

The worst 'literary' book I've read is American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis.
I don't think it's a poorly written book and I understand what Ellis was trying to achieve, I just really disliked the graphic descriptions of torture, rape and mutilation which are abundant throughout.
It's strange because I consider myself rather open-minded about violence in visual arts such as movies or even videogames however, with this book, instead of being a mere bystander to the carnage, we experience the murders as Patrick Bateman, a perspective which I found quite disturbing.
Besides the violence, Ellis paints a thoroughly loathsome picture of 80's 'yuppie' society. There was not one single likable character in the whole novel.

If it is the purpose of art to provoke strong reactions then Ellis succeeded admirably with me. What I'm saying doesn't diminish from his abilities as a writer, yet I still dislike the novel itself. It may not be the worst book I've read from a technical perspective but it's one of the books that I've least enjoyed.

If anyone is wondering, I have seen the movie and I really enjoyed it, Christian Bale was great as Bateman. The condensed version of the 'Morning Routine' monologue was better in the movie than it was in the novel.

aliengirl

06-11-2011, 11:10 AM

"The Inscrutable Americans" by Anurag Mathur is the worst book I've ever read. A pure waste of time! The only consolation I have is that I was not so foolish as to buy it or borrow it. A friend lend it to me and I think she did it with the best of intentions. The whole story revolves around a young man who goes to US for higher studies. But his sole purpose is to lose his virginity somehow which certainly does not happen till the last page. Most of the pages seem to be taken from some porn magazine. The author tries to be witty but he forgets that wit also needs some peg to hang on. I read to the end only because I don't like to leave any book unfinished and also to save others from the trouble. Oh, my three precious hours!

mastermind23

03-15-2013, 08:58 PM

Catcher in the Rye. The most boring, pointless, about nothing book ever!

I thought The Life of Pi was the worst Booker Prize winner I ever read

Agreed. Another terribly boring one.

Adolescent09

03-16-2013, 08:11 PM

Oscar Wilde's absolute ABOMINATION which is 'The Picture of Dorian Gray'. More predictable than the outcome of a teenage boy stroking his package, more mundane than the wait for christ's second coming, and about as sad as a man who has won the Jackpot.

Yulehesays

03-17-2013, 03:03 PM

Probably The Road by Cormac McCarthy, or Blood Meridian by the same perpetrator.

Desolation

03-17-2013, 03:24 PM

romeoindespair

11-04-2014, 06:35 PM

I haven't read that many bad books but I guess if I had to pick Enders game

I don't know how to put this but Ender doesn't feel like a real person to me. I get that he's supposed to be a tactical genius but there comes a point where he feels too perfect. From day one it feels like he's one step ahead of everyone.

Pompey Bum

11-04-2014, 07:14 PM

The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell. About a gay Nazi who drinks his own diarrhea. Very highly regarded in France.

romeoindespair

11-05-2014, 01:11 AM

Marbles

11-05-2014, 05:22 AM

Not sure about the worst book but Martin Amis' Money gave me plenty of headache. There are flashes of interesting writing but its characters are mirror images of one another, flat and indistinguishable, all silly maniacs. At no point apart from the opening scene of the chase did it pique my interest and I can't wrap my head around the fact that it's much lauded, so much so that Penguin published it as 'modern classics'.

Poetaster

11-05-2014, 05:50 AM

Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. I can't believe I bothered to finish it.

Eiseabhal

11-10-2014, 05:06 PM

I've read so many rubbish books that I forget most. Almost any blockbuster is as dispensable as a newspaper. They aren't even suitable for wrapping round a fish supper.

tonywalt

12-17-2014, 07:19 PM

Lacuna by Barbara Kingsolver. Flat protagonist and other cartoonish characters - in the midst of historical events that i already knew about.

Poetaster

12-17-2014, 07:45 PM

Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged. I can't believe I bothered to finish it.

Since posting this, I have actually gone back and read Atlas Shrugged cover to cover. I wish I hadn't bothered, it's still the worst book I've ever read.

Eiseabhal

12-17-2014, 08:18 PM

Poetaster, that qualifies as masochism

Marbles

12-18-2014, 12:27 AM

Since posting this, I have actually gone back and read Atlas Shrugged cover to cover. I wish I hadn't bothered, it's still the worst book I've ever read.

It's on #78 on LitNet Top 100 books. I have not read it but now I'm interested. How did it find a place in top 100 and be such a terrible book...hmmm.

Lykren

12-18-2014, 12:55 AM

I have never heard anyone whose opinion I trust have a single good word to say about Ayn Rand or anything she wrote.

Scheherazade

12-18-2014, 06:25 AM

I have never heard anyone whose opinion I trust have a single good word to say about Ayn Rand or anything she wrote.Admittedly, I have read only less controversial works of Rand, We, the Living and Anthem but I found her work juvenile at best. One of these days, I will go ahead and read The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged as well but I often wonder whether she's given more prominence and credit than she deserves.

Had these works were written, say, by an American author, do you think they would have been received in the same manner?

Jancarlo

12-18-2014, 05:34 PM

11 Minutes by Coehlo... A girl I was seeing recommended it. It's been like 3 years, to this day, still the worst book I have read.

Poetaster

12-18-2014, 07:27 PM

Poetaster, that qualifies as masochism

Oh, it does! Believe me.

It's on #78 on LitNet Top 100 books. I have not read it but now I'm interested. How did it find a place in top 100 and be such a terrible book...hmmm.

The philosophy behind it is juvenile, and the writing is abysmal. Greed is good, that's all you need to know about it really.

I'm not going to say give it a miss, but trust me it's an awful novel.

papayahed

12-21-2014, 09:11 PM

It's still Orlando by Virginia Woolf

TheAlertDriver

12-21-2014, 09:16 PM

Anything by Coehlo, I've read 3 of his books, Veronika Decides To Die, The Alchemist and 11 Minutes, 11 Minutes being the worst of the three.

lichtrausch

12-22-2014, 01:20 AM

Anything by Coehlo, I've read 3 of his books, Veronika Decides To Die, The Alchemist and 11 Minutes, 11 Minutes being the worst of the three.

Why do you do that to yourself? After reading 2/3rds of The Alchemist I knew I was done with Coehlo.

Marbles

12-22-2014, 02:14 AM

The philosophy behind it is juvenile, and the writing is abysmal. Greed is good, that's all you need to know about it really.

I'm not going to say give it a miss, but trust me it's an awful novel.

I'm probably not going to read it in the coming years. I value LitNet members suggestions and opinions. Thanks!

TheAlertDriver

12-22-2014, 05:31 PM

Why do you do that to yourself? After reading 2/3rds of The Alchemist I knew I was done with Coehlo.

The Alchemist was the last one I read before completely giving up on him. I guess at the time I pushed myself to read his works since he's such a celebrated author around here (where I live) so I wanted to see what fuss was about.

Scheherazade

12-22-2014, 07:42 PM

The Alchemist was the last one I read before completely giving up on him. I guess at the time I pushed myself to read his works since he's such a celebrated author around here (where I live) so I wanted to see what fuss was about.

Same here. I am truly at a loss that why his sugar-coated, cliche-ridden, pseudo-philosophical and psychological works are proving to be so popular.

TheAlertDriver

12-22-2014, 09:13 PM

Haha sugar-coated and cliche-ridden indeed. His writing is straight forward with a simple inspirational message underneath. I think he appeals to people who are just starting to get into literature. If that's the case I guess he'll serve as an introduction then they'll move on to bigger things.

Vota

12-25-2014, 11:18 PM

Heart of darkness. Bored me, and I found Conrad's style very difficult to get into sync with. I remember having to adjust to Melville, but then really enjoying it in Moby Dick.

Catch-22. Jeez, not funny at all in my opinion. Hated Yossarian.

The Last of the Mohicans. If you've seen the movie with Daniel Day Lewis, then don't bother with the book, as the movie is so far above it as to make any kind of comparison unfair to the movie.

WriterMan

12-27-2014, 09:11 PM

Probably the "great American novel" named The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, written by Mark Twain.

It's abysmal, and vastly overrated. I can't see how anyone ever made it past page one, but I know I sure tried. When I made it to the end, I realized that the only thing I had gotten out of reading it was a hatred for Huck Finn.

I will try Tom Sawyer, eventually.

Lykren

12-27-2014, 09:33 PM

Sarabande

12-28-2014, 08:19 AM

Emil Miller

12-28-2014, 08:56 AM

The worst book I've ever read would be a toss-up between Heller's "Catch 22" and "Our Mutual Friend" by Dickens. Joyce's "Portrait" was heavy going too and, oh, so was Richardson's "Pamela". You can see that I studied these for Literature at University, but that was over 25 years ago.

"Catch 22" just wasn't funny; or, it was funny in a Mel Brooks way - i.e. HE thinks it's funny!!

Somewhere on this thread I think I've listed the worst book that I've read but I must admit that Catch 22 was a complete waste of time. Not only was it unfunny but it seemed to be making a comment about the futility of war in a juvenile sort of way and saying: 'Look how hip I am'.

Poetaster

12-29-2014, 07:49 PM

Poetaster, you have a companion in masochism!

I have to say, the company keeps me going, haha.

kev67

12-30-2014, 02:36 PM

SJR90

12-30-2014, 02:47 PM

I just finished reading (and reviewing) Dean Koontz's Frankenstein: Prodigal Son. What a waste of time, but I couldn't bring myself to stop in the middle of it. I had to finish to see if it redeemed itself. It did not. Two things that make a great story great were completely void - no interesting characters or captivating plot. Koontz simply made Victor Helios (Dr. Frankenstein) way too smart (he had a machine designed for almost everything - impede aging, accelerate birth, download information directly to the brain, making an army of clones) and bastardized Mary Shelley's characters by placing them two hundred years into the future. If you haven't read the novel, don't even think about it! :) Koontz is very facile in his use of words, but his storytelling needs some serious modulating.

Helga

12-31-2014, 06:46 AM

Shirley by Bronte, I just didin't like it, don't know why just don't.

Pope of Eruke

12-31-2014, 08:02 AM

The worst book I've ever read would be a toss-up between Heller's "Catch 22" and "Our Mutual Friend" by Dickens. Joyce's "Portrait" was heavy going too and, oh, so was Richardson's "Pamela". You can see that I studied these for Literature at University, but that was over 25 years ago.

"Catch 22" just wasn't funny; or, it was funny in a Mel Brooks way - i.e. HE thinks it's funny!!

Un-****ing-believable. Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man is incredible. Maybe it's because you were forced to study it that you didn't enjoy it, I find that sometimes.

Vota

01-02-2015, 11:29 PM

At the moment it's a tie with the not funny Catch-22 and the despair inducing Blood Meridian.

SJR90

01-03-2015, 11:04 AM

At the moment it's a tie with the not funny Catch-22 and the despair inducing Blood Meridian.

I've never read Blood Meridian, but a friend of mine did. The only book I've read by Cormac McCarthy is The Road, which I found to be very good, despite its appalling lack of character development.

stlukesguild

01-03-2015, 11:11 AM

Is character development an essential element of all works of literature? I would think that's rather like criticizing Van Gogh's Starry Night for its appalling lack of red.

Pompey Bum

01-03-2015, 12:37 PM

I found The Road's negative anthropology believable and disturbing, and its insistence on morality as a choice rather than a circumstance enormously relevant and deeply moving. I wouldn't describe its lack of character development as appalling; in fact, I don't even see it as a flaw in what is at heart a parable. The father and the boy are constants to one another. The world changes but humankind does not. Nor do they.

There is a discussion of The Road (and a number of McCarthy's other novels) on this thread:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?80550-Nominations-for-New-Classics&highlight=New+classics

Feel free (if you like) to join in. :)