Who Is The Worst Writer Ever?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dfloyd

Owen Wister, Theodore Dreiser, Kafka, just are either nor interested in the subjects these writers pursued or were just not up to digesting their style. The Virginian, An American Tragedy, and The Trial are certainly three books which should be on everyone's reading list. Also, The Jungle (Upton Sinclair) should be read by most everyone.

With that said, the writer who I definitely didn't enjoy Is Virginia Wolf. To the Lighthouse and Orlando are just not my cup of tea, but this doesn't mean she wasn't a good writer.

---

I thought I'd like To The Lighthouse but she doesn't have an interesting style of writing.

C.S Lewis is the worst writer I have ever read.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr. Hill

I always thought, if we're going by renowned authors, James Joyce. There's just something about him that screams practical joke and I don't find it funny.

---

I think that there are good reasons to think that Finnegans Wake was a joke, but it also is an interesting experiment in writing.

Don DeLillo. Maybe I'm not giving him enough of a chance because I've only read a couple of his books, but seriously, no thanks.
I thought The Jungle (because, honestly, that's the only Sinclair I've read) to be kind of silly, but I would hardly count him or Kafka as worst writers ever. I consider it also something that should be read by most people and very important, disregarding the sillyness.
If we're "allowing" famous and generally not considered good authors, then I'll toss in Stephanie Meyer and Clive Cussler.

What is worst to you can be better to me....

God, I love Kafka. It follows, however, that any person claiming his/her stylistic tendencies to be “in the vein of Kafka” is, certifiably, the worst writer ever. :nod:

Federico Moccia

ok, a thought. Worst writer because of grammar or of content? or of style, even?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JADJARHD

Actually I was talking about Tolkien more than Herbert with the time jumps, although Herbert does it a little. Herbert's Dune books are almost unreadable to me. It is very disjointed and does not flow very well. I don't think Dune is a very well written book. What I did like were the prequels written a few years ago by Frank Herbert's son and another guy based on Herbert's notes. Those were really good.

Herbert (like Tolkien) gets an A for imagination, but a D for writing.

---

I know I shouldn't be bumping such an ancient thread and I've only read the first Dune so I may not be in a good position to judge, but I agree that it is badly written.

Sci-fi books are for the most part plain spoken and unambitious with their prose but, in Dune, it seems like Herbert wanted to use language more creatively but to me it seems flowery and not well done.

Ayn Rand.

It's a close race between prickly_pete and GL Wilson.

Actually, I think the first page got it right with Kenji Siratori.

My husband says Colin Forbes.

And we both agreed on Harold Robbins (for everyone who gets the joke :D)

pi 0

He's a contemporary poet who must have the most inane motives to create in the history of art. His work includes a book called 'Number Poetry', which is what it sounds like - pages and pages of numbers.

Seinfeld or Karl Marx of the Marx brothers.

Archer is peerless as a bad writer. Utterly and relentlessly devoid of talent in every department.

stephen king

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dfloyd

Seinfeld or Karl Marx of the Marx brothers.

---

Really? I quite like Seinfeld...His "show about nothing" is fantastic post-modern television.

Here is Paul Fussell on Graham Greene:

Quote:

---

: EXAMINATION: English 345, Expository writing

: The following passages have been written by Mr. Graham Greene in his book "Ways of Escape." They have been passed by his editors and approved by his publishers, who assert that Graham Greene is "the most distinguished living writer in the English language." Rewrite each passage as directed.

: 1. Correct the grammar:

: a. "I am not sure that I detect much promise in [Orient Express] except in the character of Colonel Hartep, the Chief of Police, whom I suspect survived into the world of Aunt Augusta and TRAVELS WITH MY AUNT."

: b. "In my hotel the Ofloffson..., there were three guests besides myself: the Italian manager of the casino and an old American artist and his wife -- a gentle couple whom I cannot deny bore some resemblance to Mr. and Mrs. Smith of [THE COMEDIANS]."

: c. "The day of the Lee-Enfield and the Maxim gun were more favorable to the European than those of the dive-bomber and the Bren."

: 2. Shift the misplaced modifier to the right position:

: "it is only since the Revolution that the Pole, I believe, has changed his habit of only communicating on certain major feast days."

: 3. Eliminate the jargon:

: "What the [Polish] authorities had not realized was the effectiveness of this play [Eliot's MURDER IN THE CATHEDRAL], at this moment in time, in modern dress..."

: 4. Suggest alternative phrasing to eliminate the cliches:

: a. "The game...was not worth the candle."

: b. "These men [at Dien Bien Phu] were aware of what they resembled -- sitting ducks."

: c. "Resettlement was a turn of the screw of discomfort."

: d. "A Ghurka patrol worked by the compass and not by paths. It moved as the crow flies."

: e. "For me to describe Brighton was really a labor of love."

: f. "The sudden arrival in 1931 down a muddy Gloucestershire lane of a Norwegian poet whom I didn't know from Adam seemed uncomfortable."

: 5. Eliminate the awkwardness:

: "A writer's imagination, like the body, fights against all reason against death."

: 6. Eliminate the redundancy:

: "Next day [in Israel] I met a Burmese officer, a Frenchman, a Swede and a Finn (English was the common language they all spoke)."

: 7. Reconstruct the sentence to eliminate excessive prepositions:

: "Suicide was Scobie's inevitable end; the particular motive of his suicide, to save even God from himself, was the final twist of the screw of his inordinate pride."

: 8. Give the sentence a backbone and eliminate the awkwardness:

: "Some critics have found in [TRAVELS WITH MY AUNT] a kind of resume' of my literary career -- a scene in Brighton, the journey on the Orient Express -- and perhaps a hint of this did come to mind by the time Aunt Augusta arrived at the Pera Palace, but what struck me with some uneasiness, when I reread the book the other day, were the suggestions I found in it where the future was going to take me."

: "Be sure your name is on your paper."

---

If we can include poets, I would like to put forward Carol Anne Duffy. After several lengthy discussions on the subject with friends and lecturers, we have decided that the only possible reasons for her being given the position of Poet Lauriet are those two awful poems on the GCSE english syllabus (now one, after education for leisure was removed). I cannot think of a single redeeming feature of her work. It is awful.

The question is pointless unless one has read all of the books ever printed, but if we restrict it to our own limited reading, in my case it would have to be L.Ron Hubbard of Scientology fame (infamy?) whose book Fear was appallingly bad (tautology?) as befits all those who seek to control the ingenuous. I read it at the behest of a bartender who had read one of my novels and who had an ultra diverse weltanschauung.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarkBastable

Archer is peerless as a bad writer. Utterly and relentlessly devoid of talent in every department.

---

He's also a dreadful speaker if not person. He drops down to the Southern-most Hemisphere on occasion trying to promote his latest opus (I think it's in the contract) and hits the talkshow circuit. As a self-righteous pompous prig he's unmatched, with his self-heroic chivalric tales of his survival as an honoured guest of Her Majesty: how he talked junkies out of their addiction and convinced habitual murderers to not lose hope...

And of course not to seem to betray their trust he claims to only have written about them on tiny scraps of paper in pencils he kept up his arse in the dark after he was certain everyone was asleep

And then in an effort to seem blokey he tries on a joke about the cricket wars as though he's genuinely interested, and, worse, as though anyone is.

But the thing is, everyone with a full set of marbles despises him, and he just doesn't get it...



Okay, favorite bad writer of the week goes to - Robert G. Barret 'And De Fun Don't Done'

As an Australian butcher turning to butchering the language instead (apparently he's on continuous loan in the prison system) he's created an off beat hard boiled private eye who, in this one at least, winds up in Jamaica-

And de fun don't start...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emil Miller

The question is pointless unless one has read all of the books ever printed.

---

And also holds relevance only to our own biased opinions. Some people find lengthy metaphor intollerable. Others love it. At the end of the day, these sorts of discussions are really just for us to discuss our own little prejudices. At the end of the day, I think we all realise that there isn't going to be one answer to this sort of question, but it's fun to see what others think on the subject.

Personally, I believe Henry James is the worst author who is "considered literary." In my opinion James spends far to much time trying to create an identical replication of real life, which I understand considering he's part of the realist movement. However, his preoccupation in overly complicated diction, and obsession with exposition is unbearable. It seemed like James was under the idea that everyone who read his stuff was too dumb to understand the story. Some people may like him, but there are far more talented writers then Henry James.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conartist

pi 0

He's a contemporary poet who must have the most inane motives to create in the history of art. His work includes a book called 'Number Poetry', which is what it sounds like - pages and pages of numbers.

---

Sounds interesting. I want to know more about him

mine are--tie--delillo, steinbeck, or, did i already post that before?

kilgore trout

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ecurb

It's a close race between prickly_pete and GL Wilson.

---

love it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by libernaut

kilgore trout

---

He's an interesting author, though. I believe his works (bad enough to be quite good) are to be read in context of his authorship. Vonnegut implied that notion quite strongly.

There are a lot of bad writers/authors that sell a lot of books. Now, it depends on what we (as a society) call literature... I am sure that Nicholas Sparks wouldn't be considered lit, but he makes a lot of money.
I never much liked Paulo Coelho... it's entertaining, but slightly one-dimensional. Never liked Hemingway either, but then again most women don't.
None of these are awful though... I never read the ones that are.

oh and how can you say steinbeck?? why? oh why!!?? :banghead:

very easy. of mice and men is the single worst book for me ever that i finished. the first 50 pages of White Noise are right in there, then trash can.:flare:

But, but... East of Eden is one of the best books ever written.

u kid? right?

NO, not Steinbeck! The man is a brilliant author. I studied 'The Pearl', and I also taught it, and I cantell you that the symbols and motifs are so carefully crafted, and yet throught such simple language - his work is really good.

Now, a woman like Cecelia Ahern will leave you ripping your hair out.

Her writing is slow, the dialogue is predictable, and characterisation is so poor.

I had seen the movie 'P.S. I Love You', and so naturally I wanted to read the novel - BIG MISTAKE! Let's just say that the screenwriters and director of the movie did a HUGE improvement to that novel. I didn't even finish reading the novel. Terrible.

I'm definitely on the side who appreciates Steinbeck. I'm surprised you hated Mice. I thought it was a brilliant short novel but to each his own. I would have to say Mark Twain is my least favorite. I wouldn't say worst ever because obviously that's not true but I have never liked a shred of any of his works.

author's such as Khaled Hosseini (The Kite Runner) frustrate me.
i enjoyed the first work as brain fluff, the second was EXACTLY the same plot. different names, different area, same plot. sadly, this is seen in many contemporary writers. though i've read none of them, i have heard that the 1st harry potter book was quite well written. once the fame hit, however, quality was traded for quantity and cash. if writers continue this trend, there will be few "classics" coming out of my generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Razeus

James Joyce

Hands down.

---

What are the odds? I came to this site because I was looking for an on-line version of Thoreau. Out of curiosity, I looked at the forum and found this thread. I had to register just to nominate this very author.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kelby_lake

:)Moby Dick had about 10 million chapters on species of whales

---

That brings to mind book I cannot praise too highly - The Cruelest Miles, by Gay and Laney Salisbury. It is the gripping story of the race to deliver the life-saving diphtheria serum to a remote Alaskan village. The format of the book is similar to that of Moby Dick, only it's more interesting.

Jack London. :willy_nilly:

Richard Dawkins. The man's sick in the head, he thinks that he's some sort of nineteenth century sage for Christ's sake. He's a puppet feeding pap to the masses. I hate him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by G L Wilson

Richard Dawkins. The man's sick in the head, he thinks that he's some sort of nineteenth century sage for Christ's sake. He's a puppet feeding pap to the masses. I hate him.

---

I wouldn't say I hate him, or that he is sick in the head, but I do not approve of his work; his atheistic propaganda is little more than the religious equivalent of incense and candles for the masses. He is uneasily aggressive, and uncomfortably to similar in mindset to many religious fundamentalists.

His debates always seem childish, especially when he is next to Stephen Fry or Christopher Hitchens who are able to debate like intelligent men.