Books that sucked

School stuff everyone has to read :
Gustave Flaubert : [B]L'éducation sentimentale[/B]
Molière's plays

Very disappointing pseudo-spiritual silliness :
Robert Pirsig : [B]Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance[/B]

The Catcher in the Rye
The Naked Lunch
I want my money back on those two

[QUOTE=film_freak;954650]
* Donna Tartt - [B]The Little Friend[/B], 555 pages later and you feel like little has been achived
Ok whats yours??[/QUOTE]
This one is seriously on the top of my "next to read pile." Damn. Any spoiler-less reasons you can give for this book sucking? I had such hight hopes for it.

I was extremely dissapointed after reading Coupland's Generation X and Pynchon's The Crying of Lot 49. Christ almighty was that a chore to get through.

I couldn't even be arsed to finish American Psycho. Talk about driving the point home with a railroad spike, over and over again.

A lot of Irvine Welsh's books I find really dull.

[QUOTE=film_freak;954650]* Donna Tartt - [B]The Little Friend[/B], 555 pages later and you feel like little has been achived[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=thirstygerbil;954669]This one is seriously on the top of my "next to read pile." Damn. Any spoiler-less reasons you can give for this book sucking? I had such hight hopes for it.[/QUOTE]

I loved The Secret History. But I've never seen a good review of The Little Friend. I was kinda looking forward to reading it too.

[QUOTE=film_freak;954650]shiny Richard & Judy stickers (personally they are more a warning sign for myself).[/QUOTE]

You're best off just ignoring these stickers altogether. There have been some great reads in the Richard & Judy Book Club; Cloud Atlas, The History of Love, et al. If you can't reconcile yourself with buying an R&J endorsed book though, just bear in mind that they probably weren't chosen by Richard and Judy personally, they probably have people who know what they're doing to do the picks.

eragon. cant believe I read the whole think. like swallowing something nasty.

[U]As I Lay Dying[/U].

'Twas shitté.

[QUOTE=the midas touch;954686][U]As I Lay Dying[/U].

'Twas shitté.[/QUOTE]
NOOOOOOOOOO!!

Whenever I read Faulkner I'll be saying to myself: Uuuugh...this is torture...why am I doing this to myself [I]again[/I]...
But then after I've finished the book I won't be able to stop thinking about it and it'll be like one of those old screwball comedies where the guy and the gal snipe at each other for an hour then get together at the end.

The only time it wasn't like this was with As I Lay Dying. Compared to something like The Wild Palms, As I Lay Dying is like eating a delicious souffle.

[U]American Gods[/U] by Neil Gaiman - this book was not what i was expecting at all. for about 3/4 of the book you dont even really know whats going on. i dont like the authors style of writing. good idea. bad writing

Perfume - now that was a shitty novel.

At least I finished it though to give it the benefit of the doubt, I don't think you can seriously judge a book's worth until you've finished it.

I too must go with Catcher in the Rye on this. I think it is one of the most overrated books ever...at least among the angsty teen/young adult demographic. For all the praise that is heaped upon it, I think it is just ok.

When I read Catcher in the Rye I'm still shocked that came from the late 40s; I mean Holden's language is almost contemporary. I don't typically imagine people from that time period speaking that way. Guess I'm always seeing it through "golden age" films that are very conservative, so Catcher is refreshing and relatable in that sense.

For me, Lunar Park. I absolutely loved the suburban social satire and domestication-of-the-boho-writer stuff, but the actual plot he tried to weave into it just bored the hell out of me. In that way, it's like Haunted: loved the stories, hated the narrative thread.

cell. great the first quarter but just gets ridiculuos.

Penny Dreadful [I]sucked[/I]. I mean it, I think it fucking blows.
And also Ballard's Crash.

oh i hated that charlotte simmons book, i couldn't stand her, and didn't finish it, i used to like tom wolfe but now i think he's a total fag.

[QUOTE=LoneKnypher;954704][U]American Gods[/U] by Neil Gaiman - this book was not what i was expecting at all. for about 3/4 of the book you dont even really know whats going on. i dont like the authors style of writing. good idea. bad writing[/QUOTE]

I'm going to have to disagree with you on the bad writing. It's suppose to uncertain as to what is happening. Shadow has a particular purpose as to what he is suppose to do yet even though he has vague inclinations of what this thing is via visions and dreams he is still mystified by the very nature of everything that is happening. He's stepped into a entirely new realm of shit he never thought possible.

Consider yourself an absolute non believer of god. You believe it with your entire body and then all of a sudden an angel appears before you and gives you a holy quest from god to save let's say the anti-christ from dying or else the end of days shall come to pass. He's laid witness to miracles and beings that defy(sp) logic and science, yet he slowly comes to accepting these things as fact and comes to question his currently beliefs with these apparently true ones and the wacky rules that follow with them. He's given a quest yet doesn't understand why an atheist would be given such a task to begin with until sequence of events come to giving said individual the reasoning behind such a thing.

Plus, if you knew what was going to happen the story itself wouldn't really work.

Its part of the of the realm the book lives in, it suppose to be mysterious because you need to be slowly brought into it to appreciate it.

Well at least that is how i saw when i last read it.

I thought American Gods was pretty good too
Anansi Boys though was a let-down
it was just blah, blah, blah and oh yeah blah. the end.

I think the strength of that book is the brother dynamic and the realization of finding ones strength as oppose to seeing your weakness'es.

[QUOTE=Vendetta;954681]You're best off just ignoring these stickers altogether. There have been some great reads in the Richard & Judy Book Club; Cloud Atlas, The History of Love, et al. If you can't reconcile yourself with buying an R&J endorsed book though, just bear in mind that they probably weren't chosen by Richard and Judy personally, they probably have people who know what they're doing to do the picks.[/QUOTE]
who are richard and judy? as you well know, those are two of my favorite books of all time...i need to know if my recommendations are tainted by the approval of these two.

[QUOTE=UbikRex;954815]I think the strength of that book is the brother dynamic and the realization of finding ones strength as oppose to seeing your weakness'es.[/QUOTE]

There were some great characters in there, he just didn't really do anything with them in the story. which struck me odd as it supposed to be about Anansi and all his stories!
I think I was expecting more Anansi and less Boys

[QUOTE=moe.ron;954819]who are richard and judy? as you well know, those are two of my favorite books of all time...i need to know if my recommendations are tainted by the approval of these two.[/QUOTE]
I can't even explain it. It's a husband and wife team that presents a talk show.

"...and now we have these...these [I]vulgarians[/I] telling us what to read and what wines to drink!"

Google them.

they're British Oprah's

[QUOTE=nathaniel parker;954821]There were some great characters in there, he just didn't really do anything with them in the story. which struck me odd as it supposed to be about Anansi and all his stories!
I think I was expecting more Anansi and less Boys[/QUOTE]

Well to do such a thing with Anansi would have taken away from the story of the boys to begin with. I mean the gods have always been the supporting cast to both novels. The main characters have always been a human one, how or why am I going to want to see something in the views of a god much less a trickster god in a book....on second thought that would be entirely interesting, but it isn't really the story Gaiman likes to tell though.

[QUOTE=Vendetta;954824]I can't even explain it. It's a husband and wife team that presents a talk show.

"...and now we have these...these [I]vulgarians[/I] telling us what to read and what wines to drink!"

Google them.[/QUOTE]
their selections are hit and miss...like notes on a scandal and the bookseller of kabul back in 2004 and then the robbie williams biography in 2006.

You know this thread is really what the book club needs in my opinion. You guys want to spend time talking books right?

Well I say pick a book that people are going to be fifty fifty on. That way well, discussion will have two sides and everyone won't be.

Well I liked this.

You too, but what about this?

Yeah I saw that the same too.

But really why did he go about this?

Oh yeah that is a thought,

i'll have to go back and reread to find that underlining bit.

That book was great. Anything else you'd recommend from him?

*****

Am I the only one that sees things like that with discussions? Or are people just lazy about finishing books they don't find interesting. Cause I tend to stick to a book despite my thoughts and then find someone who liked it so I can take my frustrations of the book out on them and have them prove me wrong for feeling that way and if I change their view of the book then I most certainly have a point to viewing things that way or them proving me wrong and rereading it with their thoughts plaguing my mind as i read.

[QUOTE=nathaniel parker;954663]The Catcher in the Rye
The Naked Lunch
I want my money back on those two[/QUOTE]

Ahhh! Those are 2 of my favorite books!!!

On the other hand, Olive Ann Burns, [I]Cold, Sassy Tree [/I]is a real turd.
As is ANYTHING by the author whom I will refer to only by his initials...S.K.

[QUOTE=furleyguy;954725]When I read Catcher in the Rye I'm still shocked that came from the late 40s; I mean Holden's language is almost contemporary. I don't typically imagine people from that time period speaking that way. Guess I'm always seeing it through "golden age" films that are very conservative, so Catcher is refreshing and relatable in that sense.
[/QUOTE]

You're right...I guess my problem isn't really with the book, but rather the fact that teens/young adults seem to read it and latch onto it and sing its praises just because they feel like they're supposed to...I feel like the people who list Catcher in the Rye as their favorite book are people who read nothing except what they're forced to read for school, and Catcher in the Rye happens to be the one book they identify with and think is pretty cool, but continue thinking its the greatest book ever because they still won't read anything they're not forced to.

I hope that made sense.

[QUOTE=UbikRex;954851]You know this thread is really what the book club needs in my opinion. You guys want to spend time talking books right?

Well I say pick a book that people are going to be fifty fifty on. That way well, discussion will have two sides and everyone won't be.

Well I liked this.

You too, but what about this?

Yeah I saw that the same too.

But really why did he go about this?

Oh yeah that is a thought,

i'll have to go back and reread to find that underlining bit.

That book was great. Anything else you'd recommend from him?

*****

Am I the only one that sees things like that with discussions? Or are people just lazy about finishing books they don't find interesting. Cause I tend to stick to a book despite my thoughts and then find someone who liked it so I can take my frustrations of the book out on them and have them prove me wrong for feeling that way and if I change their view of the book then I most certainly have a point to viewing things that way or them proving me wrong and rereading it with their thoughts plaguing my mind as i read.[/QUOTE]

I haven't been on the forums long enough to know what book club discussions have been like dating back any length of time, but I know the current book club book, [I]Remainder[/I] by Tom McCarthy, has caused some frustrations and mixed opinions. Seems ok to me...but that could just be due to my noob-ness.

I kept waiting to see what was so controversial about the book. I can see people being in an uproar over it way back when and if someone from that age said it was their favorite book I could see why. But it's got zero impact on anything nowadays.

i tried three times to read contortionist handbook, and i've decide i'm right, i'm not missing anything, its just not engaging in any way, and i felt like i was reading something i've already read, or dreamt, or saw on tv, or someone told me about.

[QUOTE=tom9d;954926]the people who list Catcher in the Rye as their favorite book are people who read nothing except what they're forced to read for school, and Catcher in the Rye happens to be the one book they identify with and think is pretty cool, but continue thinking its the greatest book ever because they still won't read anything they're not forced to..[/QUOTE]I read a report that like 50% of people will never read another book after high school. And it only drops to like 40% for college grads. Sad, sad.

Ah. Found it [URL=http://parapublishing.com/sites/para/resources/statistics.cfm]here[/URL].

You people all complain too much. I thought [I]Of Mice and Men [/I]was boring. I really didn't enjoy that. The best thing about it was hearing my English teacher, a pretty little conservative lady, say nigger. Other than that, it was boring and tedious and it was obvious how it was going to end.

Richard and Judy's book club selections I still avoid, especially after I thought I would try one of thier recommendations with "The Book will change your Life" when we lost the store keys at work and I had to hang around.
I read three quarters of it and nothing really happened and didn't bother finding out how it ended, which is rare for me as I will normally read books through to the end, same with movies as I've never walked out of a movie......this of course could just be because I'm cheap though
[B]The Little friend [/B] does have some good writing with its characters, its just she doesn't seem to know what to do with them and ends up throwing multiple storylines and adding characters for the sake of local colour. Even Harriets quest to find her brothers killer, seems kinda random as she just chooses the known bad guys in the village and says its them!!
[B]I am Charlotte Simmons[/B] I still want to read other Tom Wolfe Books like "Bonfire of the vanities", so I'm hoping this was a rare miss. I just hated the way he just had such a cleshay ending, where its all wrapped up with the super happy ending.

I tried reading Naked lunch a couple of times, but couldn't make head or tale of it (much like anything Irvine welsh has written, Its all written in accent!!) I mean is it short stories or is all interconnecting or what?

Catcher in the rye is a great book, which I wish I'd read in school but never got to, as we got was "Rats of Nimm", "Buddy" and "Brother in the land" and never anything really intresting, it has to be said, the other class got "Lord of the Flies" which I wish I'd read when I was younger as still such a great book and really suprised me, like when I read Jaws after having seen the movie a few hundred times previously.

[QUOTE=nathaniel parker;954809]I thought American Gods was pretty good too
Anansi Boys though was a let-down
it was just blah, blah, blah and oh yeah blah. the end.[/QUOTE]

Agreeing with you. Loved American Gods, thought Anansi Boys was shit.

I loved The Little Friend. Even more than The Secret History.

As for Richard and Judy's recommendations, yes they are mostly trite, but Born on a Blue Day was quite enjoyable. Vendetta, did you hear about Richard's mouth-out at Ricky Gervaise at those tv awards? Hilarious.

[QUOTE=nathaniel parker;954663]The Catcher in the Rye
The Naked Lunch
I want my money back on those two[/QUOTE]
I couldn't stand [I]Naked Lunch[/I], so I didn't bother to finish it, and [I]Catcher in the Rye[/I] was far, far from what I'd expect from a great book.

To add to the list, [I]The Plot Against America[/I] by Philip Roth was farking awful. I still can't believe I bought the hard cover of that.

If you thought Angels and Demons was bad I dare you to try and read Assassini by Thomas Gifford, it was easily the worst book I read last year and it was a whopping 600 pages, I just have to finish every book I start.

[QUOTE=SnowWhite;954993]I loved The Little Friend. Even more than The Secret History.

As for Richard and Judy's recommendations, yes they are mostly trite, but Born on a Blue Day was quite enjoyable. Vendetta, did you hear about Richard's mouth-out at Ricky Gervaise at those tv awards? Hilarious.[/QUOTE]
Yes I did! Was it aired? I was watching that awards show for about five minutes before the "ugh"s set in.

Whathappenedwhathappened?

It was the book awards I think. And he called him a smug bastard or something similar. Both confirmed It was a joke.

Look:
[QUOTE=Wikipedia]On Thursday 29th March 2007, Madeley verbally abused a bewildered Ricky Gervais as he was accepting the British Book Award for Children's Book Of The Year for his cartoon Flanimals Of The Deep. The abusive outburst was a result of the frustration Madeley suffered when Gervais poked fun at the phone vote scam which has recently cast shadows over Madeley's Richard and Judy show. Madeley told the comedian to "fuck off" and labelled him an "ungrateful bastard." [/QUOTE]

Brilliant. You might expect this kind of shenanigan at the NME awards or what have you, but for a guy picking up a children's book award to get told to fuck off by a housewife idol...grand!

[QUOTE=LoneKnypher;954704][U]American Gods[/U] by Neil Gaiman - this book was not what i was expecting at all. for about 3/4 of the book you dont even really know whats going on. i dont like the authors style of writing. good idea. bad writing[/QUOTE]

agreed, i didn't make it more than 1/3 of the way through.

another good idea/book writing: Jennifer Government. i had been looking so forward to it and finally got a copy and started reading, and it reminded me of the shiite i wrote when i was sixteen trying to write books with "sweet action scenes" and anti-big-government themes.

My mom told me to read a few from Carl Hasissen [sp?]. So far I have read Nature Girl and Skinny dip. The book themselves aren't too bad, full of sarcastic humor and such. The only problem is, once you read more than one of his works you realize how bad he sucks. I have skimmed the rest of his works and realized every one is exactly the same. The story may be different, but it is still the exact same situation witht he exact type of characters.

[QUOTE=188416;954709]At least I finished it though to give it the benefit of the doubt, I don't think you can seriously judge a book's worth until you've finished it.[/QUOTE]I'm the same way. I can't tell you if I hate a book or love it until I've finished it. I've had too many books totally change my view point of them - for good or bad - in the last few pages.

[QUOTE=furleyguy;954725]For me, Lunar Park. I absolutely loved the suburban social satire and domestication-of-the-boho-writer stuff, but the actual plot he tried to weave into it just bored the hell out of me. In that way, it's like Haunted: loved the stories, hated the narrative thread.[/QUOTE]Dang! I thought Lunar Park was really good. It conveyed exactly what he was trying to do with it. He wasn't trying to write another American Psycho or Rules of Attraction. He was trying to do a Stephen King-like horror novel. I thought he did a pretty good job of it.

[QUOTE=xec8;954776]Penny Dreadful [I]sucked[/I]. I mean it, I think it fucking blows.
And also Ballard's Crash.[/QUOTE]I thought Penny Dreadful was great. I don't think it quite fits in the trilogy, but it's a great stand alone book in my opinion.

Although I will agree with you on Crash. I had to drag myself through that book and it never really did it for me.

[QUOTE=furleyguy;954968]I read a report that like 50% of people will never read another book after high school. And it only drops to like 40% for college grads. Sad, sad.

Ah. Found it [URL=http://parapublishing.com/sites/para/resources/statistics.cfm]here[/URL].[/QUOTE]

i've read more and will continue to read more on my own than during school or for school. in my final yr of college and i can say that less than a handful of books i've read for classes i can i thoroughly enjoyed and would read again.
100 Years of Solitude is the foremost book that comes to mind.

[QUOTE=izen;955038]agreed, i didn't make it more than 1/3 of the way through.

another good idea/book writing: Jennifer Government. i had been looking so forward to it and finally got a copy and started reading, and it reminded me of the shiite i wrote when i was sixteen trying to write books with "sweet action scenes" and anti-big-government themes.[/QUOTE]

Man, thank you. Lots of people on this site seem to love that book, but it felt so...blatant. Damn the man, all that. I just read Max Berry's [I]The Company[/I]
and enjoyed that quite a bit more.
[I]Cloud Atlas[/I] by David Mitchell was disappointing. I was slogging through hoping that everything would come together in some big way.

I honestly start a lot of books I don't finish. There's this guy who comes into the library where I work and he always checks out a stack of 15 or so books. This happens about once a week. I commented that he must spend a lot of time reading and he said, "Hell, I'll probably only finish two of 'em. Most of them are crap. And there's no award for reading bad books."

[QUOTE=UbikRex;954851]You know this thread is really what the book club needs in my opinion. You guys want to spend time talking books right?

Well I say pick a book that people are going to be fifty fifty on. That way well, discussion will have two sides and everyone won't be.

Well I liked this.

You too, but what about this?

Yeah I saw that the same too.

But really why did he go about this?

Oh yeah that is a thought,

i'll have to go back and reread to find that underlining bit.

That book was great. Anything else you'd recommend from him?

*****

Am I the only one that sees things like that with discussions? Or are people just lazy about finishing books they don't find interesting. Cause I tend to stick to a book despite my thoughts and then find someone who liked it so I can take my frustrations of the book out on them and have them prove me wrong for feeling that way and if I change their view of the book then I most certainly have a point to viewing things that way or them proving me wrong and rereading it with their thoughts plaguing my mind as i read.[/QUOTE]

I was hoping to get something like that going with that book club secret santa thing but it didn't really pan out that way

I actually registered on this site just to post in this thread.

[U]Naked Lunch[/U] is indeed a horrible book. The story is chaotic and follows no logical steps. I honestly started thinking that perhaps I need to get drunk for the book to make a bit of sense. I read about 70 pages, 1/3 of the book and I gave up.

You know how sometimes you get mentally side-tracked while you are reading and you end up finishing a page only to realize that you missed what was said? That is how the entire book felt to me.

I am not even going to mention the pedophilia sections of the book. Granted I can appreciate the shock factor created but it serves no purpose to further the story or enrich the plot its just there, like the rest of the book. Paragraphs upon paragrahs that are not connected to anything.

A good comparison would be [U]Trainspotting[/U], both books deal with the same subject, drug use, the affect it has on your life, how it corrupts your values and ethics. [U]Naked Lunch[/U] is disjointed with no plot. On the other hand [U]Trainspotting[/U] actually has a logical plot progression, with the zenith being the end of the book.

---------------------------------

Another book I really did not like and never finished reading was Bram Stoker's [U]Dracula[/U]. The plot is quite good however the style of writting was really hard for me to follow. I felt like I was reading a blogger's diary. As a reader I like imersing myself in the book, become the hero, the anti-hero, reading a book that is written like a diary/letter was pushing me away. It was a constant reminder that I am not part of the story.