I asked this question on a different forum and got some interesting responses. I'm curious as to how this forum will respond.
It's one of the foundations of Western Literature, and the author is right up there with Shakespeare. In fact, there are rumors that Shakespeare was really just this guy's alias. So you read it and say to yourself, why did I bother reading that?
Ever happen to you? It just happened to me. I just finished both the A-text and the B-text of The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus by Christopher Marlowe. What a waste!
Faustus sells his soul to Mephistopheles, and gets unlimited power for 24 years. How does he celebrate? He goes to Rome, steals the Pope's dinner and hits him on the head. Then he gets out-of-season grapes and resurrects Alexander the Great and Helen of Troy. And then he repents but is still taken down to Hell.
The B-text was a lot better, but it's still too short. There's no real insight into the character or drives of Faustus. I've read that Goethe's is better, and after having read the prologues of Goethe's version, I'm convinced that what I read was right. In any case, I think I'm going to take a little break from Faust, which means that I'm going to take a break from Pratchett, too, since FaustEric is the next book in the series (sigh).
As to the theory that Marlowe was Shakespeare, I think I only need to point out that Marlowe had to have someone else write the comic scenes for him, while Shakespeare wrote The Comedy of Errors two years after Marlowe wrote Dr. Faustus.
... FWIW, Eric is worth reading. The references to Faust are merely a sideline.
There are rare times I ever regret reading something...
...Well, once. In Literature class in High School we once had to read Tess of the D'urburvilles (I think it's spelled right...) But I think you can look up the plot synopsis.
Don't read it. Too tragic even for me. :rolleyes
Wuthering Heights.
Hated the book. I'm sure if I'd given it more of a chance, it might have revealed itself to be the timeless classic it was supposed to be, but what I read was so largely pointless, rife with social norms that I did not understand, and with language that was so archaic as to nearly remove all feeling, that what I did read was very painful.
Ivanhoe. I was given it to read as a punishment by my English teacher back in 12th grade for constantly voicing my opinions in contrast to hers. (My dad was an english teacher at my highschool and I had already read most of what was on the curriculum by that point and discussed it at length with him and his fellow teachers.. she was a temp for the year and didn't like my input) So I was off to a bad start as it was meant as a punishment. Beyond that, it was one of the driest reads I have ever in my life encountered. It just about soaked up any and every ounce of my soul in the week it took me to read it.
Never again will I read Sir Walter Scott. Never.
Quote from: Cogidubnus on September 22, 2008, 08:18:31 AM
Wuthering Heights.
Hated the book. I'm sure if I'd given it more of a chance, it might have revealed itself to be the timeless classic it was supposed to be, but what I read was so largely pointless, rife with social norms that I did not understand, and with language that was so archaic as to nearly remove all feeling, that what I did read was very painful.
^That one.
The whole time I was reading it I was attempting to find a reason behind
something. But I couldn't. And that was just painful. That and I don't think anyone in my class actually understood it either. So discussions about it were very one sided. And the whole story was so convoluted that half the time it was difficult figuring out simply
why something happened.
A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole.
Probably the worst (yet well written) book I've ever had to read. It's about a man living in New Orleans in the 60's, who's lazy, still living with his mother at age 30, and really never worked a day in his life. But then he has to get a job. Alleged hijinx ensue. It had to be the most boring piece of literature I've ever read. Dictionaries are more entertaining. I had to read this back when I was in high school. My english teacher at the time gave great praise to the book (she was a bit of a loon anyway, I should have seen it coming) and wanted to use it as a teaching tool. Very few people passed that particular test. She wondered why. She later changed the required reading for the class to The Dead Zone, by Stephen King.
Later when I was in college, an english prof wanted us to read A Confederacy of Dunces and write an essay on it. She was using it as an example of how a book could be very well written, yet be completely uninteresting and unlikable. I liked that prof.
I'm not a real book reader, therefore I hadn't read enough books to be regretful about one. But back in high school, it was utterly painful when I was forced to read David Copperfield. Just horrible.
It was so boring I just had to go to wikipedia to remember what the book is even about. Nearly everything about it is just unmemorable.
Quote from: Cogidubnus on September 22, 2008, 08:18:31 AM
Wuthering Heights.
Hated the book. I'm sure if I'd given it more of a chance, it might have revealed itself to be the timeless classic it was supposed to be, but what I read was so largely pointless, rife with social norms that I did not understand, and with language that was so archaic as to nearly remove all feeling, that what I did read was very painful.
This, except with Jude the Obscure, which had the bonus of being incredibly depressing.
Also, Faust owns, bro.
While nowhere near as erudite as yours, the one book next-but-one book I most regret reading has to be "The Swords of Night and Day" by David Gemmell. This is the sequel to 'White Wolf', which was, IMHO, an awesome read.
I have to wonder what was going through his head when he wrote it. It reads like he woke up one day and thought "Hmm, I've been a successful swords and sorcery writer for about 25 years now. I know! I'll try some science fiction instead!"
Basically he does pretty much everything that went wrong with the film Highlander 2. Bringing a popular but dead character back to life on a flimsy pretext. Retroactively trying to change the mechanics of the world and breaking continuity with everything he's written since 1986 (specifically, moving the setting from a fantasy world to a far-future Earth and then trying to explain magic as super-science driver by some kind of ancient power satellite).
It's been a while since I've read it, so these are just the things which stick in my mind most.
The was also a book I read last year on the way back from Anthrocon which was so horrifically bad I have mercifully forgotten the title and author. But not the plot, unfortunately. It was as though someone had adapted Tomb Raider or something into a novel, only even less plausible and with even less regard for what is physically possible in everyday life. If anyone is morbidly curious I can probably dig up the details.
Heh. Does fanfiction count? Cause I once read a fanfiction account based on Resident Evil 4, I think.
It wasn't so much the vague lack of a plot, the complete lack of grammar or spelling or typing ability, the thinly veiled porn, or the horror segments in themselves... more the entire collection put together...
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 22, 2008, 10:41:12 AMfanfiction account based on Resident Evil 4
I think you only needed that to describe how bad it was.
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on September 22, 2008, 09:40:38 AM
A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole.
Probably the worst (yet well written) book I've ever had to read. It's about a man living in New Orleans in the 60's, who's lazy, still living with his mother at age 30, and really never worked a day in his life. But then he has to get a job.
So it's about furries? Was the guy a fatass too? >:3
My most hated book was "The Stranger", by Camus. The character made absolutely no sense. I understand he was a sociopathic retard with apparently a numerical IQ equal to my show size, but his actions constantly contradicted themselves. Not to mention the whole trial scene was idiotic. The prosecution made a point of mentioning he had milk in his coffee during his mother's funeral wake as evidence of his evil...
...
Ok, I know the French are stupid, but even I have a hard time with that one.
And then at the very end this guy who has shown absolutely no emotion throughout the entire story suddenly goes on a raging tirade and some sociological rant. Which is completely inconsistent since he's been proven dumb as rocks and always speaks and narrates in short, simple sentences throughout.
The only thing I could think to rectify the inconsistency was that he was actually very clever and was trying to pass himself off as stupid in this recount of events for an insanity defense. But that is never even hinted at in the book, and so it must be excluded as a reason. Therefore, we're just left with that it makes no sense.
Meh, Camus was French too. Stupid Frenchies. :B
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 10:02:18 AMQuote from: Cogidubnus on September 22, 2008, 08:18:31 AM
Wuthering Heights.
Hated the book. I'm sure if I'd given it more of a chance, it might have revealed itself to be the timeless classic it was supposed to be, but what I read was so largely pointless, rife with social norms that I did not understand, and with language that was so archaic as to nearly remove all feeling, that what I did read was very painful.
This, except with Jude the Obscure, which had the bonus of being incredibly depressing.
Well, Wuthering Heights was pretty depressing, too, if I recall correctly. Maybe it was just so bad that it made me depressed.
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 22, 2008, 10:41:12 AMHeh. Does fanfiction count?
I'm certainly not going to stop you from counting it.
Though it's probably more interesting if it's something that you expected to be good and you chose to read of your own volition.
The worst I've read was Great Expectations, by Charles Dickens. I might be slightly insane and blasphemous for saying so, but goddamn it, I had never been so thoroughly and hatefully bored during any other reading assignment for school in my life. Granted, I was thirteen and very stressed out at the time I read it so that might explain my hatred of the novel.
I haven't read the Twilight series, but good heavens, it sounds like all my worst fears personified from what people are saying.
I've read stuff that I thought wasn't worth my time, which I regret wasting. But to me, at least, even poor literature provides some use, and it really makes the good stuff stand out for me, so I don't think I really regret reading anything.
That being said, there was one book I simply could not finish, a novelization of Baldur's Gate (same title) by Philip Athans. It was just irreedemably awful. It wasn't even in the "so bad it's funny" category. It was just lame.
And *I* liked Wuthering Heights. Although Jane Eyre (or however it was spelled) was pretty bad.
Quote from: Alondro on September 22, 2008, 10:52:29 AM
Quote from: Ryudo Lee on September 22, 2008, 09:40:38 AM
A Confederacy of Dunces by John Kennedy Toole.
Probably the worst (yet well written) book I've ever had to read. It's about a man living in New Orleans in the 60's, who's lazy, still living with his mother at age 30, and really never worked a day in his life. But then he has to get a job.
So it's about furries? Was the guy a fatass too? >:3
Nah, just New Orleanians in the 60's. But yes, he was depicted as being overweight. I suppose if the furry community existed back then, he'd fit right in, huh?
I hate everything Yukio Mishima wrote with such a burning passion.
Also, I hate Yukio Mishima.
God.
I hate Yukio Mishima.
Add another 'that trash they through at us in school, and was a really famous book/story by some famous author' to the mix.
Top of the list (or bottom), i think it was pride and prejudice (for the same reasons people gave as Wuthering Heights). One of the shakespeare plays, and some regional 'famous' mystery author who I can't remeber .. but I do remember we had to write them a letter saying how good their terrible book was.
Rename thread to "Classic Authors That Suck"
Willa Cather sucks. O Pioneers! is the most boring book jesus christ. I heard
Death Comes... is better, but O Pioneers! left such a bad taste in my mouth, that I'll probably hate it before I even get past the title page.
Quote from: rt on September 22, 2008, 11:52:48 AM
post
It is illegal to not like Shakespeare. Sorry.
Stephen King, The Dark Tower Saga, Book VII, The Dark Tower.
The whole last half of the book was trash. Utter trash. And god dammit that ending was such a cheat. The concept of why he did that ending doesn't bother me nearly as much as the WAY he did that ending.
But I'll avoid spoilers just in case someone out there is reading it now and, for some masochistic reason, doesn't want that shitty book ruined.
Quote from: Keaton the Black Jackal on September 22, 2008, 11:28:25 AM
The worst I've read was Great Expectations, by Charles Dickens. ... I had never been so thoroughly and hatefully bored during any other reading assignment for school in my life. ...
I agree with that. Even though I wanted to read it just because. And I couldn't stop because I kept holding on to the hope that it would get better. Oh, God, but it didn't! I believe that Great Expectations turned me off of Dickens forever. Proof positive is that I didn't particularly like Hard Times, either.
Everyone here needs to stop hating on Dickens now. :C
I'm not hating on Dickens. I'm just stating my opinion. Since your experience with Dickens was obviously different from mine, you can refute what I've said and provide your own opinion on the classic author.
By no means am I saying that he's a terrible author. I enjoyed A Christmas Carol.
I love Tale of Two Cities. One of the few High School Shitty Reading Assignments that I loved, cover-to-cover. It helps if you think the French Revolution is interesting, of course.
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 12:20:35 PM
I love Tale of Two Cities. One of the few High School Shitty Reading Assignments that I loved, cover-to-cover. It helps if you think the French Revolution is interesting, of course.
A Tale of Two Cities was pretty good. I've heard good things about Bleak House also.Dammit Bill, stop ninja-ing my posts.
I liked the ending better. Dickens wrote in serial, and I think it kinda shows in the beginning.
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 12:00:55 PMIt is illegal to not like Shakespeare. Sorry.
Unless it's Titus Andronicus.
A Tale of Two Cities wasn't very good, in my opinion, but I would by no means say I regretted reading it.
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 11:45:18 AM
Quote from: Keaton the Black Jackal on September 22, 2008, 11:28:25 AM
The worst I've read was Great Expectations, by Charles Dickens
:<
Yeah, it wasn't everything I'd hoped for.
"Eragon" and "Eldest" were hilariously god-awful, but I don't regret reading them, for I got many laughs out of them. I think I'd have to say "Amara" by Richard Laymon, because I loved that guy's writing. "Amara" was published after he died and it was a real kick in the teeth for fans, a shoddy mess of three unfinished stories all lumped together.
Sometimes I wonder why I read as much of the DaVinci Code as I did.
Quote from: rabid_fox on September 22, 2008, 12:32:48 PM
Yeah, it wasn't everything I'd hoped for.
"Eragon" and "Eldest" were hilariously god-awful, but I don't regret reading them, for I got many laughs out of them. I think I'd have to say "Amara" by Richard Laymon, because I loved that guy's writing. "Amara" was published after he died and it was a real kick in the teeth for fans, a shoddy mess of three unfinished stories all lumped together.
I kinda regret reading Wheel of Time, because I spent weeks and weeks reading over eight thousand pages of text, only to have the author die before the last conclusive book.
I'm hoping that the 'army of authors' who are working with his notes don't end up pulling something like what you described.
Well, it's hardly RJ's fault that he got Amyloidosis. And here's hoping that Sanderson doesn't mess things up. Besides, it's in his best interest. RJ fans are rabid, and if he deviates too much, there might be a savage beating or something:P (WoT sites send their best)
Quote from: Corgatha Taldorthar on September 22, 2008, 12:38:49 PM
Well, it's hardly RJ's fault that he got Amyloidosis.
This line confused me for a moment, because we also have a
member known as RJ (http://clockworkmansion.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=179).
...who hasn't posted for a while :<
RIP, RJ. :C
Never Forget (http://img139.imageshack.us/img139/4369/emotaustraliaix0.gif)
Quote from: rabid_fox on September 22, 2008, 12:32:48 PM
"Eragon" and "Eldest" were hilariously god-awful, but I don't regret reading them, for I got many laughs out of them.
Oh damn, I forgot all about Eragon. Haven't read it myself, but I haven't really heard any encouraging things about that book.
Plus the author seems like a bit of a jerk.
I don't read fantasy at all, so I wouldn't know, but didn't that get published because the author's parents owned the publishing company?
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 01:33:34 PMI don't read fantasy at all, so I wouldn't know, but didn't that get published because the author's parents owned the publishing company?
Wikipedia says Eragon was self-published, then Knopf bought the rights when it started selling.
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 01:33:34 PM
I don't read fantasy at all, so I wouldn't know, but didn't that get published because the author's parents owned the publishing company?
According to an interview, Christopher Paolini and his parents self-published the book because he wanted to maintain financial and creative control over it.
Books I've regretted reading, huh? There are two books I remembered reading and absolutely hated, but one doesn't fit since it was required. The other one I picked up on my own time was by Yukio Mishima, so I'm agreeing with Zina. It was pretty forgetable for the most part, until it got to what looks like a vore fantasy. Then I was repeating the word "freak" for the rest of the day. I forget the entire title, but it had Mask in it should anyone be morbidly curious about it.
I think I've read almost a library's worth of horrid literature, but when I think about it, there are 2 that come to mind.
The first is 'The Pinballs' by Betsy Byars. It follows the original trail of thought that plotlessness and 2 dimensional, horribly stereotyped main characters actually make a good book. I read the book a long time ago, I think in seventh grade, so most of the details are hazy, which I should probably be thankful for. The fact that I was actually required to read this caused plenty of irritation as I think I had more fun banging my face into a brick than I did reading that.
The second one which I can think of is (Bhuuuuargh)... sorry about that, 'The Sun Also Rises' by Ernest J Hemmingway. The book is hugely repetitive and has no cohesive plot to it whatsoever. In fact, it can be more closely described as the boring everyday life of the main character. About the only thing that I remember giving any hope of giving this novel any redemption is when the main character and his friends decide to go watch some bullfighting, which might have developed into an "oh, this is horrible, blablabla" type thing, but that turned out to be as monotonous and repetitive as the rest of the book. It shouldn't take a book 300 pages to start to have something remotely interesting happen.
I think the best part of it was my revenge, when I wrote my book report on the thing, I actually still have it, here is my introductory paragraph:
QuoteErnest J Hemmingway is a writer of classic novels that somehow enter status as masterpieces of literature. His "lost generation" story called "The Sun Also Rises", features many classical themes, such as lack of a plot, complete lack of continuity, and a decent buildup of character development followed by a series of random events that seem to be more of a diary of a person's everyday life rather than an acceptable classic novel.
Oh... those days my writing... ah... here is my conclusion paragraph:
QuoteThis book really does not have any redeemable qualities. It is repetitive, boring, has no plot, has very little action, and an overemphasis on character development. The story is only an on and on setup of random event after random event, and a progression like that would make for a biography, not a classic novel. This book is downright horrible, and if I had some support, I would also name it a leading cause of brain cancer. The book is that bad, turning every page will make the reader want to throw the book in a cesspit, and spend a long time admiring the rocks in their shoes. It is that bad. Read this book at your own peril.
I'm not sure if that deals it justice.
any of the anita blake novels I've read... I deeply regret that...
I mewan the first one I read seemed decent... *I don't know which one I just sort of came in in the midle* so I bought the next 2 and it seems right after that first one they turned into bad vampire porn
Honestly, I'd like to be proven wrong, but if you buy vampire novels, you ought to know what you're getting into. :U
I didn't realise they would be so intensly vampire novels I mean the dust jacket seemed interesting about demons and zombies... I picked it up in an airport so meh
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 03:57:11 PM
Honestly, I'd like to be proven wrong, but if you buy vampire novels, you ought to know what you're getting into. :U
Gothic horror masterpieces about horrific blood-sucking undead fiends who are incapable of love or even genuine emotions? Or alternatively soul-sucking monsters who stalk and pursue innocent victims only to kill them?
If you have recommendations, go right ahead.
Ok, I subject myself to potential mass beatings by informing you all that I LOVE Laurell Hamilton's Anita Blake novels, although I started off in the vampire genre with Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles, so I think I can be allowed that particular vice. In my defense, however, I have true dislike for Micah, which is one of the volumes in the Anita Blake series, and named after one of the eventual main characters, because elements that usually get spread out and interwoven with other plots were watered down to comprise the entire novel. I was massively disappointed, but since I am (almost) current on the series, I will confess that the zombie and police elements eventually die off, although the series is fantastic if you enjoy following complex lines of thought and keeping track of multiple intermingling relationships, which I do.
Other books I regretted reading: Invisible Man, by Ralph Elison. Maybe it was just me, but that book, in AP Lit, was just so irritatingly mind-numbing, especially since the author constantly cited the reasons everything that had gone wrong with his life could be blamed on white people. I wanted to shoot the main character(Who NEVER gets a name), Elison for writing it, and my teacher for actually LIKING it.
Last on my list: Crime and Punishment, by Fyodor Dostoevsky. Driest read EVER. Also, it was nearly impossible to follow the storyline, because EVERYONE had two names, which I only learned halfway through the book to be their birth names and then names that described who's children they were. Then, the main character goes nuts and at the end? Finds salvation in some random woman who should have no reason to be at all associated with him. Beating yourself in the face with a brick is more fun than reading this book!
I have a fairly intense dislike for most of the classical authors of American (U.S.) literature, but it is mostly based on subject matter more then anything else. I am just not interested in the periods, themes or premises. My bias has always been towards science fiction.
In recent times, I sorely regret delving into the
Wheel of Time series. It should be cast in gold as a testament to poor writing, characterization, plot... everything.
Eragon is also rather bad... good example of a Mary (Marty) Sue though.
Quote from: Zina on September 22, 2008, 11:52:30 AM
I hate everything Yukio Mishima wrote with such a burning passion.
Also, I hate Yukio Mishima.
God.
I hate Yukio Mishima.
I am inclined to agree. I particularly dislike
Confessions of a Mask.
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 03:57:11 PMHonestly, I'd like to be proven wrong, but if you buy vampire novels, you ought to know what you're getting into. :U
What about I Am Legend? Would you know what you were getting into if you bought that book based on the fact that it's a vampire novel?
Quote from: superluser on September 22, 2008, 05:15:04 PM
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 03:57:11 PMHonestly, I'd like to be proven wrong, but if you buy vampire novels, you ought to know what you're getting into. :U
What about I Am Legend? Would you know what you were getting into if you bought that book based on the fact that it's a vampire novel?
That's more sci-fi, isn't it?
Quote from: bill on September 22, 2008, 05:20:22 PM
That's more sci-fi, isn't it?[/quote]
It is, technically, a vampire novel. The diseased humans are averse to sunlight, crucifixes and garlic, and those that the vampires infect become vampires themselves.
a) My brother bought me the first two Anita Blake novels... last year, for my birthday, due to a lack of not really knowing my reading habits and the blurbs being interesting. I read them. And traded them back in the next day. Ugh. Horrid things. (The store now has a section FULL of 'fantasy romance' - all vampire stuff. UGH.)
b) Praise, Andrew McGahan. University reading text, Australian novel. It is arguably well written, but it is written in a very in your face and terribly crude fashion, and is pretty offensive. Half the class that semester admitted to not reading it because it was just so horribly blech.
---
I am also, unrelatedly, the only person out of everyone in my extended family (cousins, aunts etc.) to like Stephen King, and the whole Dark Tower series. Cop-out ending yes, but it was fun on the way.
Nah, that gave me a big Sci-Fi vibe, especially because of the post-apoc setting, though I should have been more specific.
I'm talking about those paperback romance vampire novels that you find in the "Fantasy Romance" (and occasionally YA) sections of bookstores. I can't take any of that seriously at all.
Hm. I can't really say whether I've ever regretted reading a book, regardless of whether I liked it or not. But there are a few books I wish I'[d been given at a different time, when I would've possibly understood them more and maybe even enjoyed them. I guess you could say I regret reading those. On a side note, I did a report on how forcing kids to read certain books before they are mature enough as readers to handle them may be affecting the attitude of this generation towards reading at all. But on to the books.
The Old Man and the Sea is the first on the list. I can respect its status as a classic, but really. Did they honestly expect an eighth-grader to fully understand and appreciate that kind of depth and symbolism? Maybe if they'd had us read that in sophomore year instead of Fences by August Wilson. Or used that instead of Death of a Salesman. As it was, it ranked as the most boring, tedious book that year. And I tried to like it. I really did. But it wasn't until we read Hemingway's short stories and The Sun Also Rises that I was willing to forgive him. (I will admit, for The1Kobra's sake, that they could've done much more with the plot on TSAR, gotten deeper into Brett and Jake's relationship, etc.)
Les Miserables. I read the very, very short version of this when I was a kid, and enjoyed it. I saw the musical on Broadway, and came damn close to crying. But if you plan on reading the Victor Hugo novel and are thinking it starts out with Valjean and Javert and prison and excitement, be warned: it is akin to reading Dracula without knowing that the excitement comes later. It starts out with the bishop who gives Valjean the silver, tells his entire history, and bores thrill-readers to tears. If you can slow yourself down while reading it, and appreciate it, good for you. If not, learn how. It's a vital skill when reading classics that I finally mastered while reading The Scarlet Letter, and was vital to my enjoyment of Frankenstein the year after that.
I haven't "read" Twilight yet, but I've had the first two chapters read aloud to me over the phone by a friend who likes to do that. So far, I like it. It's got a nice contemporary writing style, and vampire stories (the good ones) are always fun for me. (Though I do regret trying to read Dracula in the seventh grade...should've waited. I intend to try again now that I'm more mature as a reader.)
Firstly, I must say that even though I somewhat dread the up and coming, most likely hamhandedly abrupt conclusion to the Wheel of Time series, and I sometimes find the characters so absolutely stubborn, selfish and narrow-sighted, and the situations they are placed in so despicable, not to mention that the whole story is permeated with misogynistic and bitter undertones that I often found myself wanting to bite the books whilst reading, I actually enjoyed it for the most part while it lasted. Mainly for two reasons; clear talent, dedication and thought on part of Mr. Jordan, and the fact that I've encountered so many people like those in his books in real life that I realize that it is rather the experience of having to put myself in their perspective while reading than any incredibility in the characters that aggravates me.
I consider The Butlerian Jihad and many follower novels in the Dune series bland and tasteless and not worthy of Frank Herbert's original epos.
I completely steer clear of anything authored by Robin Hobb after having suffered the dirt-dragging Soldier Son novels, especially Forest Mage. While the characterization and credibility is excellent, there is just something fatalistic and desolate and apathetic about it, both the characters and the obviously declining and stagnated world that the books are set in, and that makes me loathe both.
I could probably go on with more examples, but these three came quickest to mind.
Quote from: Stygian on September 22, 2008, 06:57:03 PM
I completely steer clear of anything authored by Robin Hobb after having suffered the dirt-dragging Soldier Son novels, especially Forest Mage. While the characterization and credibility is excellent, there is just something fatalistic and desolate and apathetic about it, both the characters and the obviously declining and stagnated world that the books are set in, and that makes me loathe both.
His
Farseer Trilogy is a fun read. As are
Liveship Traders books. Past that, I've not seen much good out of Hobb, honestly.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 22, 2008, 10:13:02 AM
The was also a book I read last year on the way back from Anthrocon which was so horrifically bad I have mercifully forgotten the title and author. But not the plot, unfortunately. It was as though someone had adapted Tomb Raider or something into a novel, only even less plausible and with even less regard for what is physically possible in everyday life. If anyone is morbidly curious I can probably dig up the details.
"Seven Ancient Wonders" by Matthew Reilly. It truly is abysmal. Apparently the author has written five previous novels, at least one of which was a bestseller. Supposedly he now writes and produces TV serials for a living - if they are anything like this shit, I think I'm in the wrong business.
The one and only highlight of the story is the ritual at the climax, which is itself gravely marred by the fact that it violates astrophysics on such a basic level that a ten-year-old could spot the problems with it. I can live with a certain suspension of disbelief, but let's face it, this one doesn't require suspension of disbelief, it requires a lobotomy.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 22, 2008, 07:09:35 PM
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 22, 2008, 10:13:02 AM
The was also a book I read last year on the way back from Anthrocon which was so horrifically bad I have mercifully forgotten the title and author. But not the plot, unfortunately. It was as though someone had adapted Tomb Raider or something into a novel, only even less plausible and with even less regard for what is physically possible in everyday life. If anyone is morbidly curious I can probably dig up the details.
"Seven Ancient Wonders" by Matthew Reilly. It truly is abysmal. Apparently the author has written five previous novels, at least one of which was a bestseller. Supposedly he now writes and produces TV serials for a living - if they are anything like this shit, I think I'm in the wrong business.
The one and only highlight of the story is the ritual at the climax, which is itself gravely marred by the fact that it violates astrophysics on such a basic level that a ten-year-old could spot the problems with it. I can live with a certain suspension of disbelief, but let's face it, this one doesn't require suspension of disbelief, it requires a lobotomy.
Self published, looks like a uni student honestly. Australian author, so I have a certain leeway towards liking his works. His Scarecrow novels mostly - the others are a collection of so-so works. Unrelatedly, I have never liked the argument re: suspension of disbelief. If you're nitpicking a fiction novel for inaccuracies you're reading the wrong material.
Actually, now that I mull it over, there was this one "series" that I absolutely consider, not only a waste of my time, but has actively lessened me as a student of the written word, and that's the "Dawn of Amber" series by John Gregory Betancourt. It's not so much that they're awful. They're bad, but I've read far worse. What makes them truly abominable is that this guy vultured off the carcass of the absolutely wonderful multiverse that Zelazny came up with and turned it's latest taste into a pile of garbage.
Quote from: Janus Whitefurr on September 22, 2008, 07:12:48 PM
Unrelatedly, I have never liked the argument re: suspension of disbelief. If you're nitpicking a fiction novel for inaccuracies you're reading the wrong material.
If I wrote a straight-up action novel set on present-day earth and had a scene where a character managed to stay submerged for three hours or so without drowning, would you not think "WTF?"
That's not an example of what he did, but it's that basic level of 'wrongness' where it fails.
An example of what he
did do was have the characters simply march happily into Guantanamo Bay to rescue a terrorist. Using an aircraft that broke Newtonian mechanics on a primary school level, and was for some reason not shot down even though it was unidentified.
Heck, I bought the thing hoping for something slightly fantastical - Wilbur Smith's
Warlock was a random pick that turned out to be awesome (it was definitely magic-oriented). What this one did was just... just flat out bad. Honestly, if it was written for pre-teens I might have been able to let it slide, but the language and violence indicated it was definitely aimed at adults.
I've got a fair few books and in my time I've read hundreds, if not thousands. But this is one of the only ones I'd like to un-read.
Quote from: Black AngelLes Miserables. I read the very, very short version of this when I was a kid, and enjoyed it. I saw the musical on Broadway, and came damn close to crying. But if you plan on reading the Victor Hugo novel and are thinking it starts out with Valjean and Javert and prison and excitement, be warned: it is akin to reading Dracula without knowing that the excitement comes later. It starts out with the bishop who gives Valjean the silver, tells his entire history, and bores thrill-readers to tears. If you can slow yourself down while reading it, and appreciate it, good for you. If not, learn how. It's a vital skill when reading classics that I finally mastered while reading The Scarlet Letter, and was vital to my enjoyment of Frankenstein the year after that.
I have to say that I loved Les Meserables, and I actually felt like it was the beginning that was the best part - without spoiling too much, I felt like by the middle and the end, Hugo had already told one story and was moving on to tell a closely related, but different story for the rest of the novel, somewhat making the whole thing feel stretched.
Quote from: Cogidubnus on September 22, 2008, 10:40:08 PM
Quote from: Black AngelLes Miserables. I read the very, very short version of this when I was a kid, and enjoyed it. I saw the musical on Broadway, and came damn close to crying. But if you plan on reading the Victor Hugo novel and are thinking it starts out with Valjean and Javert and prison and excitement, be warned: it is akin to reading Dracula without knowing that the excitement comes later. It starts out with the bishop who gives Valjean the silver, tells his entire history, and bores thrill-readers to tears. If you can slow yourself down while reading it, and appreciate it, good for you. If not, learn how. It's a vital skill when reading classics that I finally mastered while reading The Scarlet Letter, and was vital to my enjoyment of Frankenstein the year after that.
I have to say that I loved Les Meserables, and I actually felt like it was the beginning that was the best part - without spoiling too much, I felt like by the middle and the end, Hugo had already told one story and was moving on to tell a closely related, but different story for the rest of the novel, somewhat making the whole thing feel stretched.
As I said, I didn't hate it; I just wish I had known how it started so I wouldn't have been so impatient to get to Valjean's story, and that of Cosette and Marius. I've never completely hated any book; even
The Old Man and the Sea started out well, no matter how much the middle part bored me. I didn't really get that far in
Les Miserables, having other things to do and not enough free time to slow myself down like I should have to enjoy it. I might try reading it again someday. A friend of mine who loves the musical said the book is just as good, once you get into it.
I have to agree with the people that hate the Anita Blake series. The first 3 or 4 books were okay (although a bit of a mess from a writing perspective), but they do just devolve into vampire porn (which, for anyone that was actually interested in the mysteries, was a big disappointment).
Worse, though: it's not even interesting vampire porn.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 22, 2008, 07:31:07 PM
If I wrote a straight-up action novel set on present-day earth and had a scene where a character managed to stay submerged for three hours or so without drowning, would you not think "WTF?"
That's not an example of what he did, but it's that basic level of 'wrongness' where it fails.
An example of what he did do was have the characters simply march happily into Guantanamo Bay to rescue a terrorist. Using an aircraft that broke Newtonian mechanics on a primary school level, and was for some reason not shot down even though it was unidentified.
Since you're playing with hypotheticals at the top here? I would imagine that he found underwater air pockets perhaps. Or found some sneaky way to come up for air - a popular version of that is the old "breathing through a reed" trick. Either way, perfectly feasible if you consider the options.
And this is where I think you should probably stop reading Reilly's books, then. I mean... let's be frank. Not everyone reads fiction (be it science/fantasy or not) and thinks to nitpick at scientific laws not being correct. That's the whole point of the 'fantastical' thing, it doesn't necessarily have to obey the real world. So what if it couldn't work in real life? It's the whole point of fantasy.
If we really want to argue this further, I suggest we go to PM. If you want to let it lie, that's okay too. We're just two different people with vastly different opinions. :3
It's odd when talking with my therapist we often stray into the relm of science fiction and fantasy novels. While we both have the same exact opinion on the anita blake novels (interesting concept that devolved into bad vampire porn) and have almost Identical taste in books over all we differ on a few other things mainly Terry pratchett... He thinks Pratchett is boring... to me thats almost sacrilege.
why do I bring this up... well I just find it fascinating how people even people with such similer intrests can veiw something differentially
STEINBECK.
The Pearl and Of Mice and Men are among the worst books I've ever finished. I couldn't just drop them as I so very much desired because it was for school.
Quote from: Janus Whitefurr on September 23, 2008, 01:23:10 AM
If we really want to argue this further, I suggest we go to PM. If you want to let it lie, that's okay too. We're just two different people with vastly different opinions. :3
We'll let it lie, I think. As you say, it doesn't look like we're going to be able to reconcile our opinions easily >:3
It may well be that his other books are okay, but as an introduction to the author, it really left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I'd be interested to know what you make of it if you do pick the thing up yourself.
As strange as it may seem- the Narnia saga(first two books to be exact). I started reading them after I saw the movie, thinking the book has to be better. I was wrong- the book was worse. First time this had happened to me, for the book to be inferior to the movie. Big downer.
Quote from: Kipiru on September 23, 2008, 06:29:55 AM
As strange as it may seem- the Narnia saga(first two books to be exact). I started reading them after I saw the movie, thinking the book has to be better. I was wrong- the book was worse.
What utterly ruined Narnia for me was the last book. It was so horribly depressing.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 23, 2008, 06:32:49 AM
Quote from: Kipiru on September 23, 2008, 06:29:55 AM
As strange as it may seem- the Narnia saga(first two books to be exact). I started reading them after I saw the movie, thinking the book has to be better. I was wrong- the book was worse.
What utterly ruined Narnia for me was the last book. It was so horribly depressing.
It was. In ways, it was a lot like the 5th book of the Hitchhiker's Guide.
I haven't read the Narnia books in forever. I was young enough when I did that the flaws weren't apparent. Of course, if I read them now, it would be from the jaded angle of "what in this book is a Christian metaphor?" and I probably wouldn't enjoy them nearly as much as I did back then...
The Narnia books were great for me when I was a young christian youth growing up and still vastly unaware of the living world around me. I'm pretty sure if I went back now and re-read them I'd be looking at them more as a rather poor programming tool to be used on young minds. So I won't go back. I loved them as a child and would like to remember them as a great story that I felt good about reading at the time.
Quote from: Tapewolf on September 23, 2008, 06:32:49 AM
Quote from: Kipiru on September 23, 2008, 06:29:55 AM
As strange as it may seem- the Narnia saga(first two books to be exact). I started reading them after I saw the movie, thinking the book has to be better. I was wrong- the book was worse.
What utterly ruined Narnia for me was the last book. It was so horribly depressing.
I haven't read the Narnia books, but I do have them in my closet. I saw the two movies; I loved the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, but I
disliked Prince Caspian after a long period of contemplation.
I like to pretend that Prince Caspian doesn't exist. :<
*makes a mental note to skim the father's Reilly collection in the future.*
On the topic of disliked books once more, I have no real complaints about the way he writes - perhaps I simply don't enjoy the plot - but George R.R Martin's work is... ugh. Some people might enjoy it, but when he crushes good character after good character in the name of brutal (fantasy) realism... aiigh.
I'm surpirsed no-one mentioned the predictable lump of novella-trash that is the Da Vinci Code. The only reason this tripe sold as well as it did is because the religious made a big fuss about it.
It's largely un-exciting fiction in which only the lives of the protagonists lie somewhat in the balance at certain plot-conveniant points. There are no interesting plot-twists, since all of them are easily predicted about 5 pages into the book, and if you make it haf-way through, you will be rooting for anyone who wants to kill the protagonists so that it will finally be over.
Also, if I ever have to read paragraph after paragraph about a "smart-car" ever again, I will gauge my eyes out.
Edit: Oops Zina did at the first page. Me tired. Me brain not worky good.
Actually, Zina did. Bottom of the first page.
I actually adored Da Vanci Code, although I'll be damned if I can remember why...it was probably the language involved. Also, on the issue of Narnia, I read the entire series in senior year way too fast, so I rather adored it, but I do think I'll avoid re-reading the series anytime soon, although I will confess to finding the ending quite uplifting, in spite of not being Christian.
Once I found out that the DaVinci Code was based on the Holy Blood, Holy Grail nonsense, it became the book I loved to hate. It's really fun to watch the people who still believe the HBHG hoax.
Quote from: Darkmoon on September 23, 2008, 07:09:27 AM
... it would be from the jaded angle of "what in this book is a Christian metaphor?"
What wasn't would be a harder test. Anyone for a Narnia drinking game? ;-]
Oh oh, that might preserve my love for the Narnia series. If nothing else it'll give me warm and fuzzy feelings while reading it. I'll go get some scotch...
Quote from: llearch n'n'daCorna on September 23, 2008, 12:47:53 PM
Quote from: Darkmoon on September 23, 2008, 07:09:27 AM
... it would be from the jaded angle of "what in this book is a Christian metaphor?"
What wasn't would be a harder test. Anyone for a Narnia drinking game? ;-]
That depends. If the game is "whenever something that isn't a Christian metaphor in on screen, drink a pint of Jack Daniel's", you will end up stone cold sober. However, if the game is "sip some low alcohol beer whenever a Christian metaphor is on screen", then prepare the body bags. No-one could survive that!
I know, low alcohol beer is just lethal... ;-]
The Awakening (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Awakening_(novel)), by Kate Chopin. It's supposed to be proto-feminist. I understand that, I just can't stand the protagonist. A mother of two, with a husband who quite obviously loves her but [emo]just doesn't understand her :kittydepressed [/emo], has to deal with the imprisonment of being a stay-at-home-mother in the late 1800's. She almost has an affair, actually does have an affair with another man, and eventually takes a vacation by herself, swims naked out into the ocean until she's exhausted, and drowns..... and these are supposed to be viewed as good things. Great Expectations is the one book I regret never finishing. The Awakening is the one book I regret finishing.
Quote from: superluser on September 23, 2008, 12:11:54 PM
Once I found out that the DaVinci Code was based on the Holy Blood, Holy Grail nonsense, it became the book I loved to hate. It's really fun to watch the people who still believe the HBHG hoax.
Whether HBHG is a hoax is a topic better left for another discusion( I actually think there is some truth behind it all), but learning that the DaVinci Code was a brutal rewrite of that with added minor action elements is what really ruined Dan Brown's book for me. Without the whole Grail revelation the DaVinci Code is absolutely lousy as a thriller.
the most beautiful girl in the world- required reading at school and made me physically ill, gave me nightmares, and for a week it was hard for me to eat. anorexia is just plain creepy
lord of the flies- a decent book that was killed by having a literary teacher dissect it to a pulp and repeatedly asking us to find symbolism in everything. gee, idunno, maybe they all had diahrea because the only thing to eat was fruit, and it was not in fact symbolism of their expulsive behavior left unchecked.
i know of faustus, i also know that its such an oooooolllllddd story that figuring out who wrote it is like picking who wrote 'cinderella', you only find someone who published a specific version, ive heard of versions far more enjoyable and make a lot more sense. for example reading the brothers grimm is an education as to how much things have changed, its just weird to read the way they talk about things and how bizzare their humor was.... also the limbs raining down like confetti
Quote from: Janus Whitefurr on September 22, 2008, 07:12:48 PMUnrelatedly, I have never liked the argument re: suspension of disbelief. If you're nitpicking a fiction novel for inaccuracies you're reading the wrong material.
Quoted for truth.
Also,
Wuthering Heights. Wtf. Seriously. I want my 3 months of studying that piece of pure boredom back.
Quote from: Brunhidden on September 25, 2008, 06:26:52 PM
lord of the flies- a decent book that was killed by having a literary teacher dissect it to a pulp and repeatedly asking us to find symbolism in everything. gee, idunno, maybe they all had diahrea because the only thing to eat was fruit, and it was not in fact symbolism of their expulsive behavior left unchecked.
I had an english teacher that did the same exact thing. She even went so far as to get us to make board games from the book. Then she wondered why we all became overly bored with the book.
anyone ever read something called "Chess with a Dragon?"
It's a bizzare mishmash of criss crossing storylines and confusing races.
I know a bunch of people like this book but it's just not for me I guess
Quote from: thegayhare on September 26, 2008, 11:08:47 PM
anyone ever read something called "Chess with a Dragon?"
It's a bizzare mishmash of criss crossing storylines and confusing races.
I know a bunch of people like this book but it's just not for me I guess
is it anything like the dragon knight books? i recall them including 'the dragon, the earl, and the troll' and some other titles all of which started with 'the dragon'.
books in my file of 'i read one chapter and sent it back to the lybrary'. some of them are kind of ludicrous, often trying put rules to magic and thus making some kind of horrible spazum that they hope will replace good writing with a magical computer program. in the dragon knight books i think this took the form of a character transported from our world to another dimension, where he for no real reason is a dragon, and there is some kind of magic system where by transporting to this world he brought new magic, which is allotted out to people based on merit.... how did i find this out in under one chapter? someone TALKED TO THE SKY and received an answer about how much magic they were allowed, bonus due to them bringing so much new magic to their world..... yeah, the covers snapped closed there, although earlier in the book it had talked about hobgoblins that live in chimneys who were normally benign but randomly went on insane binges, the main character solves this by giving the hobgoblin a name- hob1, and the hobgoblin rewards him by opening some kind of instant chimney based delivery system, which shows me this seems to follow a childs logic from the early 80s given a swollen head by the fact someone published six of their books
its books like this i prefer to avoid
Quote from: thegayhare on September 26, 2008, 11:08:47 PM
anyone ever read something called "Chess with a Dragon?"
It's a bizzare mishmash of criss crossing storylines and confusing races.
I know a bunch of people like this book but it's just not for me I guess
"...swore for ten minutes without repeating himself once, in fifteen languages, including Pascal. He could also break chairs, tables, and other furniture with surprising strength and agility."
Pascal is a programming language. Being able to swear in that is a gift.
Having said that, while I enjoyed the story, I will admit it's aimed at younger adults; it's not expected to stand up to anyone with a serious idea of what physics or biology works like.
And no, Brun, it's not. Chess With A Dragon is a novella at best, and is mostly a series of smart-alec jokes. The Dragon Knight books are much longer, and don't have as many twisted ideas in them. Some smart points, but not much more than that.
Whilst I enjoyed both of them, I don't know that I'd recommend them to anyone else, since my sense of humour is not your average. In fact, it's probably three standard deviations away from average...
(disclaimer- this is a drunken post on a laptop. I am not responsible for any typos that may appear)
I love to read, but I don't have nearly as much time as I would like anymore. As a resutl, I tend to put down books that I dont find interesting rather quickly. Overwhelmignly, I can't think of any books I regret reading, although I do have to say that Danielle Steel is on author I love to hate.
She's a terrible author. Awful. Can't string a coherent sentance together bad. And she writes in a weird tense I have yet to identify. Yet, I am inexplicably drawn to her work, and continue to read it occasionally. Obviously, there is something wrong with me.
I just hope that one day she learns proper usage of tense. I will obviously wait a long, long time.
I'd say any book I was made to read in school that was chosen by the teacher. Luckily I can only remember three: The Iceberg Hermit, the Giver, and The Great Gadspy. Hermit wasn't intended for symbolism, but the other two were and I despise programmed symbolism. A test question: "what does the yellow car (Gadspy) symbolize?" Freakin' a... :januscat
one thing literary teachers need to realize is that it is incredibly rare for an author to stop mid sentence and ask themselves 'how can i cram random symbolism into this scene?'
no, the author tells a story, thats his job, and part of that job is to fill it with details that make sense. does it make sense? probably NOT symbolism
Quote from: Brunhidden on September 29, 2008, 01:02:11 PM
one thing literary teachers need to realize is that it is incredibly rare for an author to stop mid sentence and ask themselves 'how can i cram random symbolism into this scene?'
no, the author tells a story, thats his job, and part of that job is to fill it with details that make sense. does it make sense? probably NOT symbolism
Which is why I was one of the few kids who was thrilled when we read "The Stranger" and "Waiting for Godot." My English teacher in senior year was a good guy who realized that most writers aren't really trying to make something look symbolic just for the sake of tormenting students. They may be trying to represent something, as with Hawthorne, or they might be writing symbolically without really meaning to, as I believe Mary Shelley was doing. But with Waiting for Godot, symbolism was purely in the minds of the readers. Beckett himself never explained the play, knowing that that would ruin the whole purpose.
Symbolism is a bitch of a concept, really. Every time you look at the concept of it, you change your definition of it.
I just finished Interaction of Color, and while I don't regret reading it, I do wish I could have read it with a bunch of other people and had the materials to try out the experiments that were suggested in the book.
Just thought I'd mention it.
I'm an English teacher. Woe.
...I'm not sure whether to envy you or give you a sympathetic hug.
I've read quite a lot, but it's rare that I read a book that I take nothing good from, even if it's just an example of how not to write. Pilgrim's Progress is one of those few. Utterly horrible.
And Stephen Donaldson should never be let near anything that can make marks on paper again.
Quote from: Black_angel on October 01, 2008, 07:21:22 PM
...I'm not sure whether to envy you or give you a sympathetic hug.
I'd accept an empathetic punch in the face.
Quote from: rabid_fox on October 01, 2008, 07:37:05 PM
Quote from: Black_angel on October 01, 2008, 07:21:22 PM
...I'm not sure whether to envy you or give you a sympathetic hug.
I'd accept an empathetic punch in the face.
Settle for a full bottle in front of you? ;-]
well, as read-it-for-school books, I regret reading roughly one each year.
9th grade: Ethan Frome. beats you over the head with "OMG THIS IS SYMBOLISM!" mostly unlikeable characters, and the dumbest suicide attempt i've ever heard of... sledding into a tree. sledding.
10th grade: Things Fall Apart. or rather, I regret reading the first half of it, because when it was STILL going on and on about Yam farming, I said 'screw this' and just guessed the rest for the tests.
11th grade: Their Eyes Were Watching God. mostly because so much of it was written in heavy dialect that took a lot of effort to mentally translate it to english, and ruined the flow of the story. (heavy dialect should be left to 1 or 2 characters at most. or short poetry, preferably scottish)
12th grade: In french class, we had to read Candide (ou, l'Optimisme). in french. I got so sick of 'we are living in the best of all possible worlds.' I know (now) that it was satire, but at the time, between reading it in french, and lack of context, it was just very very irritating.
and just a couple of the Worst Offenders I've read since I left school...
The Phantom of the Opera - The musical is a cute little romance, the book it's based on is miserable. Eric is an outright sociopath, Raoul is a spoiled, posessive brat, and Christine is so passive and weak-willed that I wanted to slap her. Plus the Opera House Basement setting is ridiculously overblown. Not just a lake and house, but a series of torture chambers as well, all supposedly hidden in the walls.
The Lair of the White Worm - It's a Bram Stoker story. I thought 'hey, Dracula was fairly good, lets try this thing. what a load of crap. Plot hooks are picked up, then never mentioned again, characters change personality drastically between chapters. Apparently, Stoker was going insane at the time due to syphillis or somesuch, which MAY explain it, but holy crap what mess!
I'm currently trying to read Goethe's Faust, but it's in verse so i'm having a hard time remembering what's actually *happening* among all the pretty flowery language. :<
Confessor by Terry Goodkind, the last book in the Sword of Truth series.
Fantastic book, simply a wonderful build up to the final climatic ending and the nail in the coffin of such a long series.
But then you get to the past few chapters and NRRRAWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM Off takes the Dues Ex Machina concord heading straight for the moon at hundred million miles an hour.
It's hard to understand how the book got published with such a strange ending. I'll not go into it for spoliers though.
Quote from: Myxini on October 02, 2008, 12:40:00 PM12th grade: In french class, we had to read Candide (ou, l'Optimisme). in french. I got so sick of 'we are living in the best of all possible worlds.' I know (now) that it was satire, but at the time, between reading it in french, and lack of context, it was just very very irritating.
I don't think we can ever be friends.
Though I suppose reading it in French would be pretty irritating.
I regret Harry Potter 7. I was seriously depressed over the crappy-ness of it all. The plot holes, the easy plot devices, the terrible grammar. :mowdizzy
Quote from: Redwing X on October 02, 2008, 05:23:26 PM
I regret Harry Potter 7. I was seriously depressed over the crappy-ness of it all. The plot holes, the easy plot devices, the terrible grammar. :mowdizzy
Heh, my ex hated the plot holes and plot devices in Harry Potter 7 as well. Personally, I still love the series. I still haven't finished the book because some troll on Deviant Art spoiled it for me :<
Quote from: Keaton the Black Jackal on October 02, 2008, 06:50:08 PM
Quote from: Redwing X on October 02, 2008, 05:23:26 PM
I regret Harry Potter 7. I was seriously depressed over the crappy-ness of it all. The plot holes, the easy plot devices, the terrible grammar. :mowdizzy
Heh, my ex hated the plot holes and plot devices in Harry Potter 7 as well. Personally, I still love the series. I still haven't finished the book because some troll on Deviant Art spoiled it for me :<
Curse them! Oh don't get my wrong, HP6 was my favorite out of all of them, but after riding that tremendous high only to land the festering puss filled boil that was book 7...I was seriously depressed for 2 days after reading it. I wanted that day and a half of my life back xD.
Quote from: superluser on October 02, 2008, 05:09:53 PM
Quote from: Myxini on October 02, 2008, 12:40:00 PM12th grade: In french class, we had to read Candide (ou, l'Optimisme). in french. I got so sick of 'we are living in the best of all possible worlds.' I know (now) that it was satire, but at the time, between reading it in french, and lack of context, it was just very very irritating.
I don't think we can ever be friends.
Though I suppose reading it in French would be pretty irritating.
I think if I'd read it in english I'd have liked it better. especially if it included a foreword explaining the ideas of the day that it was satirizing, context is vital to satire. As it was, the teacher gave no context at all. She introduced it as a famous book by a brilliant writer. And a high-school level understanding of french really isn't complete enough to catch the nuances that give something away as Satire. I'm sure that someone with only 4 years of English lessons would be similarly horrified at A Modest Proposal.
Quote from: Myxini on October 02, 2008, 10:12:41 PMI think if I'd read it in english I'd have liked it better. especially if it included a foreword explaining the ideas of the day that it was satirizing, context is vital to satire. As it was, the teacher gave no context at all. She introduced it as a famous book by a brilliant writer. And a high-school level understanding of french really isn't complete enough to catch the nuances that give something away as Satire. I'm sure that someone with only 4 years of English lessons would be similarly horrified at A Modest Proposal.
The English translation I read provided no context, but it was still pretty clear that it was satire.
One of the things that made the satire work was the exceedingly simple language. For example:
"It is demonstrable," said he, "that things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for all being created for an end, all is necessarily for the best end. Observe, that the nose has been formed to bear spectacles--thus we have spectacles. Legs are visibly designed for stockings--and we have stockings. Stones were made to be hewn, and to construct castles--therefore my lord has a magnificent castle; for the greatest baron in the province ought to be the best lodged. Pigs were made to be eaten--therefore we eat pork all the year round. Consequently they who assert that all is well have said a foolish thing, they should have said all is for the best."
If you're used to the simple constructions of foreign language primers, it would be easy to miss the fact that the language is simplistic to the point of being trite.
Quote from: superluser on October 03, 2008, 01:02:42 AM
If you're used to the simple constructions of foreign language primers, it would be easy to miss the fact that the language is simplistic to the point of being trite.
I suspect that's the main reason it wasn't obvious. The previous book we'd read in class was Le Petit Prince. when you're reading on kids-book level, the absurd simplicity isn't apparent.
Quote from: Myxini on October 03, 2008, 09:53:44 AM
Quote from: superluser on October 03, 2008, 01:02:42 AM
If you're used to the simple constructions of foreign language primers, it would be easy to miss the fact that the language is simplistic to the point of being trite.
I suspect that's the main reason it wasn't obvious. The previous book we'd read in class was Le Petit Prince. when you're reading on kids-book level, the absurd simplicity isn't apparent.
this is probably why my sister and i had a row over literary matters. the sheer contrast between books can be more then you think- two pieces may be from about the same category but sitting right next to each other its like comparing 'the cat in the hat' with 'the boxcar children'
to elaborate on the specific row
she is a teacher for special education middle school students, and thus to her harry potter was a godsend as it gave kids a reason to read, where they would later find other books also of interest (hopefully, many became so enraptured by harry that they refused to read any other books for fear of contradicting rules of magic) bur more importantly sit still for a few minutes and not bite themselves. the odd contradiction is she herself never read much at all, she was one of those 80s girls obsessed with music which, in retrospect, was not the mainstream 80s music.
I on the other hand was raised on Terry Brooks, Tolkien, and the mindblowing writing skills of scifi masters like Heinlein, Asimov, and my personal favorite Larry Niven in addition to complete nutjobs like terry Pratchett and Spider Robinson
thus she could not understand when i called harry potter a 'kids book', and she could not understand when i called LOTR 'a literary epic.
untill of course the day the fellowship of the ring came on VHS, she rented it, and the following morning she drove over to where i lived, attempted with limited success to pick me up by the scruff of my neck out of the garden, and demanded i fork over my books and a peck of raspberries
the worst book i had ever read was the true confessions of Charlotte Doyle (sp) it had the worst plot line i could ever read, i mean half way through the book she changes her gender just so that she can be one of the crew. my only condolence is that i was practically forced to read it. stupid english class.
i usually like the science fiction books, like ender's game and what not, what i like to do is take their advanced technology and think about a way to make it.
Twilight was okay.
I hate the series so much, yet i can't stop reading it.
New Moon sucked. Greatly.
Why am i not giving details? God knows when i'll be harassed by a rabid Twilight fan again =<
Twilight ruined Vampires for me.
They are not supposed to sparkle like pretty princesses.
Yet, i will read it to the end. I am not one to drop a series after 2 books.
I personally regret anything and everything I was 'forced' to read in high school. An example of this was Dean Koontz - Lightning. I had to read and write a report on this thing for tenth grade english. Liked some of the concepts at the time but couldn't really get into the book itself knowing the classwork involved. Down to road a few years I came across the book again and started skimming through it, then immersing myself in it. Loved it the second time around. Without the pressure and such it was a much more enjoyable experience. It also makes me wonder about some of those other books I 'had' to read.
I just finished The Never Ending Story.
I wanted to punch Bastian in the face multiple times throughout the second half. I'm kind of sad, since I loved the movie a lot as a kid.
Ugh, the book was like someone read The Never Ending story and then wrote a fanfic about it, where they were the biggest Mary Sue ever. I think that's what happened. I think I was tricked. Someone wrote this fanfic and snuck it into the bookstore and I ended up buying it by mistake.
Somewhere out there is the real Never Ending Story and it's a good book and I'd have a good time reading it.
Sorry to break this to you, Zina, but I've read the book too, and that is it, I'm afraid.
----
On the subject of books I'd rather not have read: One I read many years ago; the author I forget, but the the title was "Super-Folks". Being a superhero fanboy, I picked it up and read it. This was not a good thing.
I'm not sure how much detail I can go into here without breaking the forum rating, but:
The book is ostensibly about the last superhero on Earth, basically a sort of Superman pastiche. He's having a mid-life crisis, as his powers have begun to fail him. He retreated behind his secret identity, which is something of an achievement in itself, as this guy has blue hair(!). Said career as a superhero is apparently unknown to his wife and family.
From there it gets worse.
He goes to see a therapist, in costume, because he has sexual difficulties in his super-identity.
There is a scene of incest described between two characters who are obvious pastiches of Billy and Mary Batson. As a result, they have a son, who gets lamed, and grows up to be a super-villain.
The other main villain (one of them) is a man named Stretch O'Toole. He gains elastic powers. (I'll spare you the details.)
Oh, and there's an appearance by Peter Pan in the story. Who is smoking pot.
Shadow Moon, by George Lucas.... technically its a sequil to the movie 'willow' but where the movie was a heartwarming and GOOD movie the book was.... well... 'i regret reading it' sums it up about as much as possible
spoilers to anyone who loved willow
willow himself is now a powerful sorcerer, he makes a creepy enchanted teddy bear to give to Elora on her birthday, Elora is now a fat, spoiled, and bitchy preteen which seems to have for no real reason spontaneously become involved in another prophesy trying to kill her. however this time it seems like the whole world sets on fire as a result, and the rest of the book is mostly just running from doom and willow (now named thorn) randomly planting trees with his blood in the ashes.... due to the fact that it sounds like everyone's dead but the heroes i kind of thought there was no point after a while, and have no desire to read the book that comes after this one
George Lucas seems to get his jollies by raping childhood memories, but that much is probably obvious by now
Quote from: Brunhidden on October 09, 2008, 10:41:03 AM
George Lucas seems to get his jollies by raping childhood memories, but that much is probably obvious by now
Of course he likes raping childhood memories. He is a fanboi with lots of money.
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen :B
I understand it's certainly a literary classic by most definitions, but there was something so... lacking about it. And it's not that I hate 18th or 19th century novels (Wuthering Heights and Robinson Crusoe were great), but good God could I not care any less about these hoity-toity people in Virginia or Carolina or wherever the hell it was. Technically, there's intrigue with the untrustworthy lovers and possibly getting kicked out of your only home and blah blah blah, but Austen really failed in making me care about this insufferable family at all.
The movie, on the other hand, was surprisingly good.
Quote from: Tipod on October 09, 2008, 11:09:11 PM
Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen :B
I understand it's certainly a literary classic by most definitions, but there was something so... lacking about it. And it's not that I hate 18th or 19th century novels (Wuthering Heights and Robinson Crusoe were great), but good God could I not care any less about these hoity-toity people in Virginia or Carolina or wherever the hell it was.
I was lent a copy of that a few years ago. IIRC, the first half of it was extremely boring, but it picked up about halfway through.
I tend to read mostly either fantasy or hard fact (non-fiction).
The only real-life situation stories I like are ones in which the characters get in trouble through no fault of their own. I'm just not interested in stories about idiots who get into situations I never would, because I'm too smart to get into such situations.
Quote from: Alondro on October 10, 2008, 09:29:19 AM
I'm just not interested in stories about idiots who get into situations I never would, because I'm too smart to get into such situations.
In that case, you don't want to read 'Age of the Pussyfoot' by Fred Pohl. It's not a bad book - reminds me of System Shock in some ways because the character keeps dying and getting resurrected again. Pohl was also playing with a late 60s' email system at the time it was written, so he made some quite astute predictions. But the one gaping flaw in the book - which my father warned me about and I agree wholeheartedly - is that you end up screaming at the character not to be such a f___ing moron.
Quote from: Alondro on October 10, 2008, 09:29:19 AMThe only real-life situation stories I like are ones in which the characters get in trouble through no fault of their own.
Those are sort of interesting. It's a sort of Platonic dance in which the dancers move to their appointed time and place. I know it's contradicting what I said in the Marvel vs DC thread, but the plot is interesting, even if the characters aren't.
Oh! You said real-life stories? Pass.
Quote from: Tapewolf on October 10, 2008, 04:34:58 AM
I was lent a copy of that a few years ago. IIRC, the first half of it was extremely boring, but it picked up about halfway through.
The last half was fairly decent (compared to the first, anyway), but I just wasn't feeling that certain something; that
oomph, if you will.
Adding in to books that picked up nicely near the end, The Scarlet Letter. The final five or so chapters were worth slogging through Hawthorne's prose.
I regret that I spent money on 'The DaVinci Code' instead of another book that I later learned was more to my tastes. I know that the Code is really popular, hell my dad liked it, but I thought it wasn't all that interesting except for the drive through the disturbing park. And a cult based around sex? What? I'm sorry but it was just a little, eh to me.
to me it seemed the davinchi code was very popular among people who dont normally read books or people who only read books that people on TV tell them to.... not saying good things about it then is it?
Virtual Light... upon finishing that book, I mourned the hours spent reading that I'll never get back. The book completely failed to engage me. Odd, really, since I like a lot of Gibson's work, including other books in that series.
These days, being a writer myself allows me to detach somewhat from "bad" writing and treat it as a learning experience. The Da Vinci Code, for instance, illustrates how attention to pacing can save laughably bad prose. Its strengths enabled it to sell zillions of copies despite all of its shortcomings.
I probably wouldn't make it past the first chapter of an irredeemably bad book.