I remember when I was in middle school I was made to read some books of Carlos Cuauhtemoc Sanchez, they were awful just emotional blackmail for teenagers.
Printable View
I remember when I was in middle school I was made to read some books of Carlos Cuauhtemoc Sanchez, they were awful just emotional blackmail for teenagers.
When I read it I had only read Martha Quest but found no handicap in that. It's a long time since I read it but I think the narrative stretches over 15 or so years. Hope you enjoy it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Svidrigailov
I think you, like so many others, are making the faulty correlation of not liking a book equalling the book being bad. The thread isn't titled "what book did you least enjoy," but what was the worst book you read. Putting Ulysses and Da Vinci Code in the same category of quality makes me question your core literary sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by rubsley
Anything by Nicholas Sparks. He makes me gag.
No, I think you were correct first time. I also refuse to read, or even think about Ayn Rand. I have never read a page. I know nothing about it and it will stay that way.Quote:
I refuse to read Ayn Rand... or well, maybe I should just so that I can broaden my tolerance.
Indeed, as is evident in the vegetable thread (no offense...).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
I think if you were to walk into just about any book shop and close your eyes nearly 99/100 would be poor books (unless your blind man's buff stumbled upon the classics section). The skill is therefore not to choose your reading wearing a blindfold.
A Series of Unfortunate Events by Lemony Snicket.
I read the entire series and it was awful. It just leads you on and on and it never actually gets anywhere, and the ending was awful.
Quite.Quote:
Originally Posted by rubsley
I generally don't think much of these type of threads (shouldn't it be "worst" anyway?). It encourages people to bash books instead of trying to understand them. There's a difference between understanding why a book has become a "classic" yet not liking it personally, and shutting yourself off to a book that you may later enjoy. Some books need to be read more than once in order to appreciate them. Obviously some of the more pulpy fiction doesn't apply to the rule but classics are classics for a reason.
Also, the influence of popularity makes a dislike of a book a complete hatred. I've been very guilty of this in the past and I think a negative attitude to reading takes away some of the enjoyment and makes reading passive rather than active. Even some of the books that I don't think much of (To Kill A Mockingbird, for example).
After the rant, the worst book I've ever read has to be this one:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/All-American...owViewpoints=1
there is nothing worse then a'' worst'' book and by the look of this thread there are many.
an impression is still an impression and a book with a bad impression can be lastingly bad on a person, so it is better to air it out once and for all hence the purpose of this thread.
How do you equal something you do not like especially a book?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
Taste is entirely subjective and not reliant on a lables or medals.Quote:
Putting Ulysses and Da Vinci Code in the same category of quality makes me question your core literary sense.
Surely it is down to the individual to decide on whether what they have read is deemed good or bad and not the doner of merits.
Just because somebody doesn't like something doesn't necessarily make it a bad book. There's no point in saying a classic is "the worst book you've ever read" without any other reason apart from the fact that you personally didn't like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by cacian
I agree with Mutatis-Mutandis. The thread's title indicates something objective whereas the answers here have tended to be entirely subjective.
Vegetable thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by Neely
To cacian: That ^Quote:
Originally Posted by kelby_lake
Prince Of The Desert by Penny Jordan (Mills & Boon)
As the child of a promiscuous father, Gwynneth has vowed she will never become a slave to passion! But one hot night in the Kingdom of Zuran has left her fevered and unsure: did she really share a night of unbridled lovemaking with a stranger from the desert?
But Gwynneth doesn't realise she shared a bed with Sheikh Tariq bin Salud -- and that he is determined to make her his own…
I tend to agree with cacian: Books are art, and art is subjective. An author's look and feel works for you or it doesn't. Some vilify Stephen King as genre crap, some praise his skill and depth, and some take the middle road and call him quality genre crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandis
Surely it is down to the individual to decide on whether what they have read is deemed good or bad and not the doner of merits.
And surely you'd be wrong. It is indeed up to each individual to decide whether he or she likes or dislikes a given work of art, but it is rather naive if not juvenile thinking to presume that the individual's opinion in the same as judgment as to whether a work is "good" or "bad"... let alone deserving of its reputation.