who is the most overrated writer ever?

[Statistic]

Well that's weird, my last post showed up twice (the copy was here before I erased it).

Guess I should defame another book:

I almost contracted mental retardation from reading the first page of War and Peace. It turns out I'm allergic to infodumps.

[kasie]

Are we talking about best-sellers here, or proper books, 'Literature' with a capital L. I don't think Grisham would regard himself as a literary author and to castigate him for repetitious plots is to accuse him of failing to be something he isn't trying to be - he has a winning formula and makes a healthy living from producing stories people enjoy reading. (And you must admit there are some enjoyable variations on the theme and the stories are well written which is more than can be said of some 'best selling' authors.) I can't help feeling that the reason so many people make such a huge fuss over the likes of Dan Brown (and Rowling and Tolkein, for that matter) is that they rarely read books and are delighted to be able to say they have actually found a book they like and finished it - have you noticed that many of these run-away success books are often quite chunky tomes? That can only increase the sense of achievement for an infrequent reader. But - Great! They've finished a book! Don't let's pour (too much) scorn on them, let's quietly put other books in their way and hope they enjoy those too, and the next one, and the next one.

I suppose one needs to ask oneself who is rating this book so highly? If it is vox populi, I suspect the book can be safely treated with a certain amount of caution. If the opinion is that of a respected, well-read critic, perhaps the book should be treated with a degree more respect and effort. Ultimately your opinion of any book is down to you, your tastes and your critical abilities. If you find however that you cannot agree with serious critics, perhaps something is lacking in you as a reader, maybe critical acumen, maybe knowledge of the genre or period, or maybe just experience of life.

[Nossa]

I heard the opposite, either way, judging from The Da Vinci Code, neither are very good.

I enjoyed Angels and Demons more, it was a good thriller. But I'm still not sure if any of Brown's books, and likes of them, can be called literature. I normally read these works, without the least intention of getting a certain literary value out of them.

I didn't say that his books are bad, but The Da Vinci Code just wasn't good, at least not to me.

[johann cruyff]

I'd definitely agree with Tolkien being overrated.Also,in my opinion: Jean Racine,Balzac,Hemingway(I'm sure most of you don't agree about the last two,but please,spare me,it's just my opinion),Kerouac,Ayn Rand,and pretty much everyone who's popular these days - Coelho,Brown,Rowling,Houellebecq...

[tscherff]

ayn rand's "atlas shrugged" is the winner by 5 lengths. it is accepted as classis literature unlike potter, brown and others books of that ilk which are "light reading"

[bounty]

I can't say for sure which is the most overrated book, but as far as what I've read is concerned, I would say The Catcher In The Rye, although it's a book I've enjoyed. I would consider myself too much of a rookie in the field of literature to pick one such author though. However, if we're talking about 21st century literature (if you can call it that), I would also be interested to know if you think Harry Potter and Twilight by Stephanie Meyer are vastly overrated (haven't read that one yet).

cipher, almost everywhere its appropriate ive been taking the opportunity to condemn catcher in the rye as being vastly overrated (and i didnt like it either! smiles....)

and moby dick too.

[Ahera]

As for Harry Potter books , It seems every good reader's first reaction towards those books would be that its a childish book ,Same was the case with me until I finally began to read them some years back , And reading them was definitely worth it, They are good for sure.

I've read books of all types and Harry potter is the best of Its type.

[cipherdecoy]

To Kill A Mockingbird

I disagree, but oh wells.

[Vincent Black]

Neil Gaiman and Nora Roberts. bad thing is my girlfriend LOVES Nora Roberts, which she felt compelled to tell me at the top of her voice in a book store, the shame...

[Nossa]

I forgot to mention Wuthering Heights (I know some people will just hate me now lol)

[JBI]

ayn rand's "atlas shrugged" is the winner by 5 lengths. it is accepted as classis literature unlike potter, brown and others books of that ilk which are "light reading"

Is it? Funny, maybe if you get a degree in sci-fi, but most literary courses stick to more important works than Ayn Rand. Ayn Rand isn't light reading of course, merely mediocre reading, and it is rare to see an academic disagree with that, especially now adays when they all seem so left-leaning.

Rand was following her own philosophy, as I see it, and wrote a book that appealed to the communist scare in her era. Since the fall of the iron curtain, I think we can now go beyond looking at that book as legitimate philosophical literature. It is, to me at least, pseudo-philosophy for dummies.

[JBI]

Bravissimo to the writer who hit To Kill a Mockingbird, another Emperor's New Clothes book, because of its racist themes it is seen as impossible to criticize without seeming racist.

[Hank Stamper]

jane austen. mansfield park is the most pointless book ever written

[Joreads]

I love the Harry Potter books to, and as far as I am concerned they are not over rated. I guess this is really a matter taste and thankfully we all have different tastes.

[mayneverhave]

I never thought that the Harry Potter series was critically esteemed as to deserve the overrated title. Sure they're best sellers, but there are plenty of terrible books, movies, and musicians that are top sellers.

As for critically acclaimed writers, I never understood what was so great about The Grapes of Wrath. It's a fine period piece, depicting the Dust Bowl, great depression and what not, but outside of its culture and era it lacks anything of substance to me and isn't particuarlly moving. Steinbeck comes off far too melodramatic and aware of the "epic importance" of his novel.