What is the most boring book ever?

[Zee.]

I think that Jane Austen's Pride and Predjudice is the most boring book ever written. It is an overrated cheesy romance that appeals mainly to adolscent girls with nothing else to do on Saturday night. If published today, it would be featured at the checkout stand next to Sweet Valley High and Baby Sitter Club books, complete with a lurid cover of Elizabeth swept back in Mr. Darcy's arms and wind blowing through her hair. How did this book ever become "Classic" literature? Does anyone else feel this way?

Wow.
See it's beliefs like that which give Pride and Prejudice the title "chick lit"
Mr Darcy and Elizabeth's relationship is only a minor component of that entire novel.
It was brilliant. Not only was it brilliant but it was interesting and so enjoyable to read. In fact i'm reading it now. Winter nights, hot tea, Pride and Prejudice = ah yes please.

There is no boring pieces of literature. Literature is the essance of our soul and to say that it is boring is the utmost insult to our essance as a supurerior human race.

Says the person who has probably yawned on numerous occasions whist reading literature.
Don't lie, i know it's true!

[A Siege]

It is important to note that Hitler did not sit at a desk to write Mein Kampf, it was dictated to Rudolf Hess while Hitler was serving a prison sentence in Landsberg Prison, Bavaria. Hence the well-known disjointed style of the writing.

Yes, but I've read that the unpublished sequel to Mein Kampf, which I think was written rather than dictated, was also desultory.

[Scheherazade]

R e m i n d e r

Please keep in mind that it is ideas that we discuss, not the people behind them.

If you feel unable to refrain from personalising arguments, please feel free to ignore this thread.

Posts with inflammatory message will be deleted without further notice.

[Emil Miller]

Yes, but I've read that the unpublished sequel to Mein Kampf, which I think was written rather than dictated, was also desultory.

That may be true but, as the book wasn't published, it may not. You shouldn't believe everything you read about Hitler.

[regularjoe]

I also find Dickens boring. I never liked "Oliver Twist" because of the false sentimentality, Copperfield was a little better and "Great expectations" (which I also managed to read only in translation) was interesting due to his female characters Estella and Mrs Hawisham (sp?). The fact is the man uses too many secondary characters to the point you get lost (I remember searching for a quarter who was the gentleman that took David for a walk to find out in the end it was a servant of his aunt 50 pages back!). So although I like his themes I never managed to like his writing.

Personally, I love Dickens. There is something very realistic and honest about the way he writes. His commentary strikes me as being heartfelt and never pendantic. His work is never cold and never void of any meaning. Oliver Twist is great. I really love the characters. you cannot EVER forget people like Fagin, the artful Dodger, Oliver himself, Mr. Bumble etc...

Some of his books are better than others: I didn't like The Old Curiosity Shop and A Tale of Two cities was not exactly as good as his other works. (though, it certainly wasn't bad).

[ksotikoula]

I really hope that someday I will come to like Dickens too or some of his work. So far his style has not appealed to me, but in the future I intent on trying to again to see if there will be any change . He is not a classic writer for nothing, I just hope to find that something in him to intrigue me.

[MarkBastable]

I think there's an argument to be made for either Steinbeck or Tolkien having churned out some of the most stupefying prose in the English language, though Melville runs them pretty close.

But just when you think that you've managed to decide between them, you realise that the choice is irrelevant because the winner, once you remember him, is clear.

He romps home by several lengths, not simply because he wrote a dull book, and not even because he wrote an entire string of dull, dull, dull books - but because, despite their apparent intention to explore every facet of the human condition in all its myriad aspects, the novels and the short stories - yea, even the poetry - in short, the entire oeuvre manages to avoid expressing the slightest glimmer of wit, the faintest echo of any sense of humour, irony, fun or even light-heartedness. It's all unrelenting and self-indulgent gloom. It's adolescent and sulky and petulant, and you just want to send him to his room until he gets over it.

I speak, of course, of the work of DHLawrence, the po-faced old miserymonger.

[Scheherazade]

I speak, of course, of the work of DHLawrence, the po-faced old miserymonger.

Interesting description of Lawrence there!

[mtpspur]

I have never ever had a reason to change my mind about Ethan Frome by Edith Wharton. Would have the death of soap opera if it had ever been made a TV presentation. Now on a particularly gloomy day I would add Wuthering Heights to the list except I have never been able to finish it. Perhaps the fact I was reading it while visiting my father-in-law in which it turned out to be the last time I ever saw him this side of the grave has an impact on that evaluation. Got about half way through and I have to like a character in order to car and Heathcliff just didn't do it for me.

[Dark Muse]

As of right now I have to say All the King's Men. That book was near torture to try and read. When I first started it I thought to myself, I do not think a person could write a book more boring if they were trying to.

It moves very slowly, and virtually nothing really happens, and it has long rambling passages that serve no true purpose.

[jinjang]

In my humble opinion, there are books for male and female readers. I am sure there are exceptional males and females who do not belong to my generalization. There are also exceptional books that attract both males and females or that dispel both males and females. The perfect storm by Junger was obviously well-written. But, when he started describing details of fishing tools, I could not go on. It was equivalent to reading sports magazines. The same way many great books are lost to me, a female.

Here are some that drive away female readers: Mobydick, many of Hemingway except his short stories, all of James Joyce, hardcore science fictions

Here are some that put male readers to sleep: Jane Austen, Henry James , recent Cohelo books like the Witch of Portobello

[MissScarlett]

The Shadow of the Wind is the most boring book I've ever almost read. It's not the worst in terms of writing, but it's been the most boring for me.

[pinkkdaisy]

There is no boring pieces of literature. Literature is the essance of our soul and to say that it is boring is the utmost insult to our essance as a supurerior human race.

no-one said 'it' is boring- we are talking about particular novels that are boring. the only simple way to define what you mean by 'literature' or 'a novel' as opposed to a 'prose work of fiction' is to talk about which works have been called 'literature' or 'novels' by their authors- if literature and boredom are mutually exclusive, then boring 'novels' are not novels.

I agree with your statement about literature while it pertains to literature as a whole, but I think novels can be very literary, or work as literature in very complex ways, and still not interest one or other particular reader

I think that Jane Austen's Pride and Predjudice is the most boring book ever written. It is an overrated cheesy romance that appeals mainly to adolscent girls with nothing else to do on Saturday night. If published today, it would be featured at the checkout stand next to Sweet Valley High and Baby Sitter Club books, complete with a lurid cover of Elizabeth swept back in Mr. Darcy's arms and wind blowing through her hair. How did this book ever become "Classic" literature? Does anyone else feel this way?

I can see your point about its not deserving to be a classic, but I think its the satire in it that makes it good literature. It is quite indulgent- I think novels considered 'classics' ought to be innovative, either in a literary way, or in their treatment of a particular subject matter- Jane Austen isn't innovative in either way, but I would argue that it can boast being an excellent social critique of regency society

Oh, Tender is the Night is my favorite Fitzgerald... ay, how it stings but to each his own

can I ask you what you liked about it?
because I was going to mention that as one of the most boring books I'd ever read

the most boring book of all I've read that claims to be a novel is Bonjour Tristesse- that was the most self-indulgent, air-headed drivel I have ever read- and it really makes me despair that that book is generally considered literature!

I've never heard anyone say 'eh'.

I don't think there's anything indifferent about calling a book 'the most boring I've ever read'
I think there is passive boredom, where the reader for whatever reason has not understood the merit of a book, and boredom that is the result of a considered opinion that a piece of literature is pointless, nonsensical or void of meaning.

ps: I have to agree with you about Dickens

Some years ago I tried reading Kafka's The Trial, and I just could not finish it .The story just did not interest me enough to continue past the half-way mark and the premise of the book was already known to me from reading various criticis over a number of years. I have not read Kafka since but I doubt if my view would be different now.

I think Kafka really has to be read in german. I find the way german works in literature the most interesting aspect of reading german literature- I would argue that most great works of german literature (Mann, Brecht, Goethe) are the same- lose the language and you lose the essence- they are usually purely intellectual- the story tends not to be interesting in its own right- it is a means to an end

[sharpie]

I'm not sure it was the most boring, but just finished it and well..... it was boring lol

The Immoralist - Andre Gide

[Emil Miller]

I think Kafka really has to be read in german. I find the way german works in literature the most interesting aspect of reading german literature- I would argue that most great works of german literature (Mann, Brecht, Goethe) are the same- lose the language and you lose the essence- they are usually purely intellectual- the story tends not to be interesting in its own right- it is a means to an end

I was reading it in German but I never found Mann or Goethe boring in the original language.