Name the worst books, in your opinion, in the world. One nomination per member, and please just say the book, and the author it's by. Also, please, if you have enoguh time, include a brief summary of the book. and why it's so bad.
Printable View
Name the worst books, in your opinion, in the world. One nomination per member, and please just say the book, and the author it's by. Also, please, if you have enoguh time, include a brief summary of the book. and why it's so bad.
Das Kapital by Marx and Engels. Not only is it a load of inaccurate drivel, but there are people who actually believe the drivel.
The Lovely Bones by Alice Seabold. Basically all it is is a murder, young teenage sex, and dead people posessing other people's bodies with no explaination of how or why whatsoever. Alot of people are in love with this book; I don't know why. It leans more toward bizzare and sickening.
I heard that that was the best book of the year.Quote:
The Lovely Bones by Alice Seabold. Basically all it is is a murder, young teenage sex, and dead people posessing other people's bodies with no explaination of how or why whatsoever. Alot of people are in love with this book; I don't know why. It leans more toward bizzare and sickening.
Buenas Noches Buenos Aires by Gilbert Adair is a real stinker and to be avoided at all costs! Basically it's the story of Gideon ,a gay virgin teaching English in Paris in the 1980s,all the men he works with are gay too and have amazing sex. Some get AIDS. Gideon pretends he is sexually experienced eventually has unsafe sex and at the end of the book says he'd be utterly proud to die of AIDS! I kid you not! It's excruciatingly badly written, purple prose abounds. It took me ages to read as I kept wanting to throw it away but I had to finish it for my bookgroup.Easily the worst book I have read in years.Adair is a good cultural commentator but a very poor novelist I am sorry to say.
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.
Me Talk Pretty One Day, by David Sedaris. Ugh. About a gay American man who moves to France with his lover and tries to learn French. No redeeming qualities, nothing thought provoking in any way, nauseatingly and utterly without merit. I only admit that I read it in hopes that others will be spared.
Those sound like books that i would not reaad even if i had too. Whast were you thinking?
Anything by either Wordsworth or Dickens. Wordsworth because he's so arrogant [read The Prelude?] and generally boring [how many ways can you say the exact same thing about nature before realising that you're going to drive your good friend Coleridge to his death with boredom?]. Dickens because he's boring, slow and depressing. At least Simon Armitage sticks to poems, so his depressing literature can be over in under 5 minutes.
[/scathing]
Althouhg, i do have to admit that i liked Dicken's "Oliver Twist."
I can live with the film adaptations.Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowfeverlime
I am considering reanimating their corpses so I can put both Charlie & wild Willy [English teachers nickname for him] in a room together and watch their zombie-fresh selves eat each others brains violently.
One thing that can be said for them however, is that they evoke great passion in me. Even if it is the passion of violence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeslieS
I can't agree with you about Sedaris. He is hilarious. The story" Jesus Shaves" in particular is excellent.The arrogant teacher who ridicules everyone is a monster of French arrogance. How could you not laugh at the description of the class struggling to explain to the Moroccan muslim student what easter is?
" It is a party for the little boy of God who call his self Jesus and then he be die one day on two...morsels of ...lumber. The rest of the class jumped in, offering bits of information that would have given the pope an aneurysm.
He die one day and then he go above of my head to live with your father. He weared of himself the long hair and after he die, the first day he come back here for to say hello to the peoples. He nice the Jesus."
Wonderful stuff.
Yes, that's why I'm so confused.Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowfeverlime
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeymack
OK, I confess that I laughed at this part. Really hard. But a few pages later the man devotes an entire chapter to something he finds in the toilet.
I think the funny part was a fluke and the rest of the book reflects his true writing 'style'.
Not worth the slaughter of innocent trees!!
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on Sedaris! We must have some literary dislikes in common! To be honest I will read just about anything but find "chick lit" ie books of a certain type marketed exclusively at women largely quite vapid and formulaic. I like a book that tells a story, if I'm lucky I will learn something and it will have a resonance beyond its covers.
Wordsworth is a genious, and he suceedeed Coleridge as a poet laureate. I know that this sort of thing is subjective, but if Wordsworth's are the worst in the world, they would'nt last until this day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RococoLocket
Well it's just my personal opinion. I'm certain there are things you think are utter rubbish that have had accolades pour upon them too which you don't agree with :)Quote:
Originally Posted by subterranean
Sedaris isn't the best writer in the world but he is good for what he is: a humourist. I saw him read from "Me Talk Pretty" at the Sydney Writer's Fest. His stories are funny and engaging. They aren't going to win the National Book Award but I would say that isn't what he is going for.
As far as the Worst Book debate goes: I think Nicholas Sparks has to be one of the worst writers ever. I picked up Message in a Bottle after my friend raved about it. I have no idea why people think that tripe is readable.
I agree that Nicholas Sparks is pretty high on the list. I've never been able to read more than a few pages of his work at a go--it all reads like bad sentimental poetry written by a small girl. And yet, lots of people seem incredibly enthusiastic about the stuff. Maybe I'm just missing something.
Whether Dickens is boring is a matter of opinion, and whether he's slow is definately open to debate (how many pages does David Copperfield spend mooning over Dora?), but I don't find him at all depressing. He tackles some depressing subjects--social injustice, poverty, workhouses, screwed up old ladies with moldy wedding cakes--but he writes with such wit and irony that personally, I find it very entertaining. On the other hand, the whole paid-by-the-word system was definately not the brightest of publication ideas.Quote:
Originally Posted by RococoLocket
I think James Fennimore Cooper deserves a spot on the worst list. Twain's essay on his literary crimes was hilarious, and right on target.
Lucky this thread was asking me of my own opinion then ;) But I respect yours too m'dear; There'd be little point in a literature forum if we all had the same tastes :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosalind
Plus I was expecting a tirade or two anyhow, you can't expect any less when you rubbish any authors of Classics.
almost anything by Shakespeare. I'd rather trawl through Poetic Edda than read one of his plays.
James Copper wasn't a writer - he was a storyteller and a damned fine one at that.
Nicholas Sparks is a one-trick pony. If you are into mushy, staid, middle-aged angst than he'd fit right up your alley - most others will find him meandering and repetitive.
Not that he doesn't manage to tell powerful stories sometimes. 'Notebook' was a compelling story (If only to get a measure of the genre of books It spearheads), and 'A Walk To Remember' was an excellent deviation from the usual style, one of the sweetest books I have ever read. The insights it offer are pretty basic so no wonder it gets overlooked so much.
Alice Sebold is just vindictive - her reviews of Rowling's books make for an amusing read.
I know, I know! :) That's actually what I was saying--it's such a subjective matter of opinion that I wasn't going to argue about boringness. And, though I personally happen to like Dickens...well, the man could wax a bit dull. Imagine what a pleasant book 'David Copperfield' would be, were it about two hundred pages shorter.Quote:
Originally Posted by RococoLocket
And drat, now I'm about to embark on another 'tirade or two.' But come on, the Bard? He works absolute magic with words, he does comedy, tragedy, adventure, the lot, and most of his plays never get old. I think the biggest problem with Shakespeare is the way he's taught today. Thousands of middle school and high school students are poisoned against Shakespeare, because his works are meant to be seen, not read, and because most teachers won't go into the interesting stuff, like the puns, the sexual innuendo, and the great characters. And then, half of its just a matter of attitude. No one likes required reading. But if someone's exposed to really good Shakespearian drama early on, then how can they help but enjoy it? I'll never forget the first time I saw 'A Midsummer Night's Dream.'
That has been Rosalind's ten second tirade. Opinions are good! ;)
^ Now I must agree with you on ol' Shakey! I adore his work! The Boyf & myself went to see a new production of The Tempest on Saturday night infact! I've visited his house & we have a mini statue thingy of it too :lol: I played Hermia in A Midsummer Nights Dream & our sister youth theatre is a part of the RSC in Stratford.
His wordplay is quite wondeful :D
I'm absolutely envious! I take it you're quite in to drama? Do you do everything, or mostly Shakespeare? It must be wonderful being connected to the RSC--I've only seen one of their productions, but it was the most incredible version of 'MacBeth' I'd ever seen. I love that play, but I'm perfectly aware that it's long and has a few superflous scenes floating around that never get performed. But they did the whole thing, unabridged, and pulled it off in spectacular fashion.
Shrugs.
I tried Shakespeare in an abridged version. Did not work. I tried reading the original plays. I nearly fell asleep. I tried watching the BBC adaptations (Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet). It was promising initially but once the story got into the flow... I nearly fell asleep again.
Leaves of Grass Walt Whitman To quote Dorothy Parker: "This is not a book to be lightly tossed aside. It should be thrown with extreme force!" Preferably into a waste receptacle... Can you say, "Boring"? :as-sleep:
I've said it before and I'll say it again Orlando by Virginia Woolf. Bleck!!
Hear, hear!!! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by papayahed
But wait till you read Mrs Dalloway by... one and only Virginia again!
I remember trying to read a book by Jules Bonavolonta called The GOOD GUYS: How We Turned the FBI 'Round Q and Finally Broke the Mob. I really tried to read it because it was a gift from my Dad on my 12th or 13th birthday. I spent like two months trying to read it but it was just basically profanity with the author butt-kissing his superiors. After stopping my Dad asked how the book was going. I told I stopped reading it and let him read a couple of chapters. After reading the chapters he came by asked if all the chapters were like the last two. After confirming that they were, he said he was sorry for getting such an awful book. I put it in my bookcase where it collects dust till this time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scheherazade
Why would I do that? And don't think of nominating it either!!! :eek:
I'm aware i may make some enemies by saying this, but Catcher in the Rye is probably the worst book i have ever read.
It's just really irritating, and ultimately pointless.
Shakespeare is over-rated; his comedies should have been laid to rest years ago, but some of his work is sheer genius.
I guess 'Catcher in the Rye' was momentous and provocative at some point, but now it just seems whiny, not that well written, and as you say, really irritating.
But I still differ on Shakespeare. Maybe some of his comedies aren't "sheer genius," assuming that you mean great works about human nature, but they aren't supposed to be. After all, half the time Shakespeare was catering to the peanut throwing groundlings. They were only meant to amuse and entertain, and their brand of genius lies in the fact that, half a millenium later, they continue to amuse and entertain.
I ahven't read it cause i've heard it's so sad... or am i thinking of "Where the Red Fern Grows"?
Two very different things, fever! ;)
With most books, even the most, in my opinion, detestable, showing the least talent, imagination, and/or intelligence, I try to discover some kind of respect; yet, with certain works, I cannot help but feel annoyed.
As I have said in a similar thread, Creation by Gore Vidal really irritated me, along with Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert Heinlein, and most fantasy and science-fiction books. A few selected poets also tend to bother me, too, specifically Billy Collins, though he remains the U.S. poet laureate.
With most literature, something really, really has to bother me in order to earn my disliking, yet the ones I do dislike stay very distinguished.
Awakening by kate Chopin this is one bad book
I remember that.... o, yes, the book The Red Pony by i think by the guy who wrote the grapes of wrath... i'm drwaing a blank... But it was senseless
I think Catch-22 is way over-rated. It's considered to be a great piece of satire but it's too long, repetitive (to the extent of getting on your nerves at times) and really not very interesting writing. The basic plot may possibly have had merit(even if only in the author's head) but the book got too loud and obnoxious. I think satire works best when it's kept short and to the point.
Steinbeck?Quote:
Originally Posted by yellowfeverlime
The worst book i ever read was
The Last of the Mohicans - Fenimore-Cooper
or any Henry James
Well I love this book alot..and as I realize that this thing is totally subjective, I won't argue with you. Same as I don't want to argue with Rowling's fans when I told them that Harry Potter series are overrated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cruciverbalist