Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet

buck65 · 25-09-2006 8:54pm

oh forgot the biggest pile of crap
Saturday - Ian Mc Ewan

Demetrius · 26-09-2006 12:04am

Geranium wrote:

Terry PRATchetQUOTE]

You don't mean that.:)

"Rincewind often had orgasms, sometimes in the presence of other people...":)

Pratchett, in my opinion, is a genius:his creation almost surpassing Tolkien's roundworld. (Was Tolkien's world round?)

Anyway, books to avoid like the plague:

Closing Time by Heller.

Cell by King.

elivsvonchiaing · 26-09-2006 12:15am

Joseph Heller's "Closing Time" made me think about Waugh's last book - but it wasn't as bad as that. (I can't remember Waugh's last book! IT was that bad!).

I really think if I was an author, I'd like to be eaten by the circus animals; before they desert me!:eek:

Dagnir Glaurung · 26-09-2006 8:52pm

buck65 wrote:

oh forgot the biggest pile of crap
Saturday - Ian Mc Ewan

I totally agree. I couldn't even be bothered to finish it.

Anton17 · 28-09-2006 2:17pm

The good life was one of my least favourite McInerney books,but i was still surprised i enjoyed as much as i did, seeing as it was about the affairs of middle aged people. The whole 911 thing didnt bother me as much as i thought either.

Sgt. Sensible · 03-10-2006 12:19am

Anything by Will Self. Shockingly dull Oxbridge junkie bore marketed successfully as a clever interesting person. Nothing ever happens in his books. Nothing.

elqu · 12-10-2006 1:56pm

dudara wrote:

I tried to read Quicksilver by Neal Stephenson, and I got 300 pages into it, but I had to give up. It moved at the pace of a very very slow snail on crutches.

oh i love neal stephenson! Reading The System of the World at the moment and have read Cryptonmicon (fantastic book READ IT). They are big reads tho - need a crane to carry them around :rolleyes:

elqu · 12-10-2006 1:58pm

buck65 wrote:

oh forgot the biggest pile of crap
Saturday - Ian Mc Ewan

Dant Club YES shocking pile of rubbish as was the Da Vinci Code but Saturday?

that was good surely?

elqu · 12-10-2006 2:01pm

fasterkitten wrote:

I agree. I attempted it a few times because it's often lauded as a classic but gave up

Agreed, lolita is horrible - maybe that's the point tho?

BossArky · 12-10-2006 4:13pm

I loved the style of writing in Lolita.

galactus · 13-10-2006 1:57pm

BossArky wrote:

I loved the style of writing in Lolita.

I blame the synesthesia myself.

That previous poster is entitled to their opinion but for me Lolita is a work of art.

N. is comfortable in any style of writing. Beat this Mr. Hemingway!
"Once upon a time there lived in Berlin, Germany, a man called Albinus. He was rich, respectable, happy; one day he abandoned his wife for the sake of a youthful mistress; he loved; was not loved; and his life ended in disaster."

- from Laughter in the Dark

fasterkitten · 16-10-2006 11:35pm

Dagnir Glaurung wrote:

I totally agree. I couldn't even be bothered to finish it.

oh no stick with it. i did feel it repeated more than a few elements of enduring love though.

bowsie casey · 17-10-2006 9:21am

dudara wrote:

I tried to read Quicksilver by Neal Stephenson, and I got 300 pages into it, but I had to give up. It moved at the pace of a very very slow snail on crutches.

I agree completely. After reading Cryptonomicon, one of my favourite books of all time, this prequel went down like a lead balloon with me.

I second "Atomised" by Houellebecq as another to avoid. Perverted drivel masquerading as literature...

amen · 29-10-2006 9:03pm

I'm a long time board user but just noticed this forum and thread.

I'm just reading though the posts and I would have though that books to be avoided would have been due bad writing style or bad plot etc.

Saying that you should avoid American Psycho because its a bit squamish itsn't a good reason to avoid a book you should avoid if its bad. After all someone who can describe a man getting dressed for the day and take approx 5 pages to do so must qualify for literature. :-) For anyone who has read the book
Spolier below:
is it all in his mind or not?

As for Pratchett I would think his early books are fairly funny and not to be taken seriously but his new books have started to have political undertones which is good. (Solider Soldier)

As for Lolita disturbing subject matter but a brilliant read. Must be one of the classic books of the century.

humbert · 11-11-2006 2:15pm

Gravity's Rainbow, tried and failed:( Parts of it are really really interesting but then it's spirals endlessly into what must be drug fuelled surrealism.

rain on · 11-11-2006 4:44pm

humbert wrote:

Gravity's Rainbow, tried and failed:( Parts of it are really really interesting but then it's spirals endlessly into what must be drug fuelled surrealism.

haha, there's a guy in my department doing his PhD on that. not Pynchon in general, mind, just that one book. imagine studying that and nothing else for four years.

i tend not to respond to literature in the "it was good/it wasn't good" type way -- i like something about pretty much every book that i read, probably cos i read most fiction for education rather than entertainment. i did think atomised was pretty poxy though -- maybe it lost something in the translation but it just seemed very clumsily written. "man feels vague sense of discontent, impending doom" pretty much sums up most of the writing. there was one bit where the chapter ended with a sentence along the lines of "He looked out the window. He waited for the storm" which just made me go, come on michel, that's so hackneyed and clumsy, please just stop.

humbert · 13-11-2006 12:44am

rain on wrote:

haha, there's a guy in my department doing his PhD on that. not Pynchon in general, mind, just that one book. imagine studying that and nothing else for four years.

i tend not to respond to literature in the "it was good/it wasn't good" type way -- i like something about pretty much every book that i read, probably cos i read most fiction for education rather than entertainment. i did think atomised was pretty poxy though -- maybe it lost something in the translation but it just seemed very clumsily written. "man feels vague sense of discontent, impending doom" pretty much sums up most of the writing. there was one bit where the chapter ended with a sentence along the lines of "He looked out the window. He waited for the storm" which just made me go, come on michel, that's so hackneyed and clumsy, please just stop.

Well I suppose if he's got three years to read it it might just be possible:eek:

I really enjoyed the movie of atomised, never read the book though. Bad second date movie it has to be said:o

BopNiblets · 30-11-2006 8:58pm

theCzar wrote:

I'll simply say that while I disagree with what you say I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

Valmont wrote:

Voltaire?

That's a misquote, Voltaire never said that. It was Beatrice Hall.

nesf · 01-12-2006 7:18pm

bowsie casey wrote:

I agree completely. After reading Cryptonomicon, one of my favourite books of all time, this prequel went down like a lead balloon with me.

It's "heavier" than Cryptonomicon but that's not a very good reason to tell others to avoid it. A caveat about it's lenght and it's "density" might be wise, but it's a damn good book if you're the type of reader who doesn't mind such things.

Psychedelic · 04-12-2006 11:17pm

some of the most repetitve, boring and sleep-inducing books i've read:

bret easton ellis - american psycho
joseph heller - something happened
umberto eco - baudolino
umberto eco - name of the rose

these are badly written 400+ page books, which are basically the same paragraphs repeated ad nasaeum with no real plot, 2d characters and a lousy ending.

buck65 · 06-12-2006 11:08am

Psychedelic wrote:

some of the most repetitve, boring and sleep-inducing books i've read:

bret easton ellis - american psycho
joseph heller - something happened
umberto eco - baudolino
umberto eco - name of the rose

these are badly written 400+ page books, which are basically the same paragraphs repeated ad nasaeum with no real plot, 2d characters and a lousy ending.

Aw come on , American Psycho though admittedly not for everyone is brilliant!
Name of the Rose is a taut thrilling book.
Also previous posters disliked Atomised! I also thought that was fantastic ok call me perverted and Lolita? Lads lads lads thats great stuff. Also read the Luzhin Defence by Nabokov because I am a chess nut - not a patch on Lolita.
But then again I also enjoyed Yellow Dog by Amis eventhough that was harpooned in the reviews.

Psychedelic · 06-12-2006 6:48pm

buck65 wrote:

Aw come on , American Psycho though admittedly not for everyone is brilliant!
Name of the Rose is a taut thrilling book.

i'm not turned off by the violence or anything, it's just really boring coz most of the book is the narrator describing clothes the whole time.

as for name of the rose, there's too much stuff about religion which i find boring and the murder mystery plot isn't complex or interesting enough to justify the endless boring passages on religious topics.

Giruilla · 07-12-2006 6:26pm

Life Expectancy - Dean R Koontz

Esmereldina · 14-12-2006 3:41pm

BopNiblets wrote:

Doris Lessing - The Grass is Singing.

Depressing bore fest.

I liked this! I like all her books...

My book to be avoided would be American Gods by Neil Gaiman. I liked some of his other books a lot, but this one had a distinct lack of plot... I got bored less than half way through, but plodded on to the end (I hate to leave books unfinished), almost losing the will to live along the way...

r3nu4l · 14-12-2006 3:58pm

Esmereldina wrote:

My book to be avoided would be American Gods by Neil Gaiman. I liked some of his other books a lot, but this one had a distinct lack of plot... I got bored less than half way through, but plodded on to the end (I hate to leave books unfinished), almost losing the will to live along the way...

Really? I liked American Gods...although it was overlong in places

Esmereldina · 14-12-2006 4:47pm

I qwanted to like it... as I really liked the premise, and had loved most of his previous books (especially Neverwhere:D ) but I just found the book to be meandering and trivial, and really in need of a plot!! By the time it finally got to the revelation at the end, I just didn't care...

I only read some of the more recent posts to this thread after I wrote my past post (note to self: read all of thread next time instead of just reading 2 or 3 comments and then replying to them

) ... about The Name of the Rose, theis was one of my favourite books... I thought it was a really well written, compelling story, and that Eco managed to blend ideas about philosophy, history and medieval theology with a mystery/detective story really well.
I completely agree that Atomised was one of the worst books ever written though.

supernic · 29-01-2007 3:06pm

Auuuggh, Lolita??!!! don't diss Lolita. Lolita is amazing. the most beautifully descriptive evocatively written book i've ever read about the most disturbing subject, how many people could pull that off?!!! so many layers... yeah, it's not always the easiest book to read but it's worth it.

as for bollocks, alot of sequels in general, especially the ones written to follow a movie 'based on the book' where everything that happened in the movie that didn't happen in the book is crammed in to the first chapter to cash in on the popularity. 'Gump & Co' is the prime example after the very funny and enjoyable Forrest Gump (book i say, not movie!). and don't ever ever even think about reading 'Scarlett', leave it at Gone With the Wind.

most recently i read 'A Spot of Bother' by Mark 'Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time' Haddon (great original wonderful book) and it was pretty terrible in comparison. Very typical dysfunctional family story, could have been written by Marian Keys, so disappointing.

supernic · 29-01-2007 3:09pm

oh yeah, and even if you're not into 'American Psycho' it's worth it for a bit just to read something that defys every traditional story writing convention. i mean, what the hell is wrong with that guy?! (Ellis i mean). i like all his books although they definitely aren't for everyone.

keeffe2001 · 31-01-2007 12:45pm

nick hornby - a long way down

which was really dissappointing because I loved about a boy and high fidelity.

maidofthemist · 10-02-2007 4:59pm

Sgt. Sensible wrote:

Anything by Will Self. Shockingly dull Oxbridge junkie bore marketed successfully as a clever interesting person. Nothing ever happens in his books. Nothing.

In defence of Will Self, I'd say put "How the Dead Live" on the list of books you have to read before you die. It is one of the most memorable books I've ever come across ... imaginative, zany, very funny, it made me laugh out loud and the images it conjures persist for a long time ...

Zaph · 10-02-2007 5:11pm

It's already been mentioned, but I'd second the inclusion of American Gods by Neil Gaiman on the list. I read it while I was in hospital and it made my week there feel like three. Annoying characters, a rambling "plot" for want of a better word and about 400 pages too long.

DavyD_83 · 16-02-2007 9:05pm

BopNiblets wrote:

Doris Lessing - The Grass is Singing.

Depressing bore fest.

Gotta agree. My most hated book of all time. Mainly cos i had to read it in one night and write a book report(about 15 pages) directly after. Clearly the situation was my own fault, but still reckon its a woefully boring book.

Esmereldina · 18-02-2007 9:53pm

DavyD_83 wrote:

Gotta agree. My most hated book of all time. Mainly cos i had to read it in one night and write a book report(about 15 pages) directly after. Clearly the situation was my own fault, but still reckon its a woefully boring book.

I really liked this one... I've read a few Doris Lessing books, and I liked them all. I especially liked The Sweetest Dream, one of her more recent ones. London in the 60s... probably a bit more fun than Grass is Singing if you want to try give her books another try!!

To my list of hated books I would add Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. This was one of those books that loads of friends told me to read, cause it was 'so great'

I tried to read it for months and then just had to put it down due to extreme apathy, confusion and lack of funniness

Zaph · 19-02-2007 4:25pm

Esmereldina wrote:

To my list of hated books I would add Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett. This was one of those books that loads of friends told me to read, cause it was 'so great' I tried to read it for months and then just had to put it down due to extreme apathy, confusion and lack of funniness

:eek: That's the only book I've ever bought twice, because some idiot lost my original copy when I lent it to him. It's still the funniest book I've ever read, even after several re-readings, and is one of my all-time favourites.

dr.bollocko · 19-02-2007 5:32pm

amen wrote:

Saying that you should avoid American Psycho because its a bit squamish itsn't a good reason to avoid a book you should avoid if its bad. After all someone who can describe a man getting dressed for the day and take approx 5 pages to do so must qualify for literature. :-) For anyone who has read the book
Spolier below:
is it all in his mind or not?

You know I am still trying to work it out. On the whole, the conclusion of the book points that it was all just in his head, the product of a mind over-obsessed with status and narcissism. After reading Psycho first I was convinced that Ellis was a loon masquerading as a fiction writer. His writing style in Psycho is excruciating. I loved the book, but anyone who has read it will know what I am getting at.
The ridiculously long musical descriptions, the huge trips deep inside Patrick Bateman's head. But after realising that this book was still in my head some 5 years after first reading it, I thought that I must have missed a trick with Ellis.

Since then I have gone back and bought the rest of his books. Less than zero, his debut, really reads like a debut novel and TBH is missable unless you are a fan of the author and want to see the storm that he started. Also his first sentence in print ever is one of the most fascinating I have ever read for a debut published sentence. It still bounces around in my head now from time to time and I like to play with its different meanings.
Rules of attraction was a great book. if for the way it finished alone. Also its throw-away philosophy from flawed characters is astounding, the rambling nature of the writing is very relaxing. The fact that it is an eighties book about early eighties college in America really makes you think about how stagnant we have been for 20 years, because it is still a template for university dystopia in the 21st century. If anyone has seen the movie, they will know that the movie was reset in a modern college culture. I think that this was a travesty. Why is it so important for every generation to think that they invented recreational drugs and depression?
I also couldnt stop reading Lunar Park, though as a literary work it is incredibly criticisable, as an exercise in breaking and rewriting most of the rules of 1st person fiction in what could essentially be fluff it is irresistible. Wading from Ellis' own nihilistic tendencies as a post-drugboom post-success depressed author looking for a thrill with nothing new to do, including himself in the novel and then swinging seamlessly to a Stephen king writing style for the bizarre continuation... I just loved the writing style and it really made me begin to see the merit in the author.

I also must hop to the defence of Atomised and Naked Lunch. I loved both these books for their deconstruction of humanity into a lonely machinic existence, one with sex, the other with drugs.

For me, though it has been repeated fairly regularly through this thread, my least appealing books tend to be those penned by Pratchett. I knew he had a huge fan base, I just had no idea that so many other people also didnt like the guy.
**ducks**

Zaph · 20-02-2007 3:43pm

Romanitas by Sophia McDougall

If you see this book in a shop, run away from it very fast. It's a Fatherland style alternate history novel, one where the Roman Empire never fell and now rules two thirds of the world. While the premise appeared interesting, it truly is a godawful book, a poor plot, characters with ridiculous and unexplained "powers" and a scarcely credible "Romanised" version of the world today. However, bad and all as these things are, the worst thing is the writing which is absolutely appalling. It rambles on for hundreds of pages as if it had never landed on an editor's desk and is enough to make the most hardened anti-environmentalist weep for all the trees that were cut down so this book could be printed. As one reviewer on Amazon said - Being crucified actually might be more fun than reading this.

Mrs. MacGyver · 25-02-2007 5:32pm

Any books by Michael Connolly (terrible indeed!!! hard to follow and not up to my espectations) Sorry but i'm a fussy yolk when it comes to crime/detectiv novels.

Also anything by Nuala O'Faolaoin (sorry cant spell it) really painful to read and had to put down on numerous occasions) and i'm not the type to put a book down unless it is surgically removed from my hand!

Also anything by Maeve Binchy - has the woman ever heard of womens lib? It's like shes's stuck in a 1950's timewarp.

WindSock · 07-03-2007 1:38am

Junky by Burroughs. Pants. Didn't think much of On the road by the other beat fella either.

dr.bollocko · 07-03-2007 12:16pm

boreds wrote:

Junky by Burroughs. Pants. Didn't think much of On the road by the other beat fella either.

Jack Kerouac was that other fella.
And that is about the best book I have ever read. I know it can be difficult to break down, I know the writing style is strange, but you have to read it at 100 miles an hour, it is the only way to get in touch with the breathless fast-paced style of the novel. But I love the way it is written. It's stylish, ballsy writing done in a unique manner about universal and timeless subjects.

bowsie casey · 10-03-2007 11:25pm

Psychedelic wrote:

some of the most repetitve, boring and sleep-inducing books i've read:....
bret easton ellis - american psycho
....
these are badly written 400+ page books, which are basically the same paragraphs repeated ad nasaeum with no real plot, 2d characters and a lousy ending.

Hit the nail on the head there. American Psycho is one of the only books I have abandoned before I'd even hit halfway. I'[m not squeamish, but the violence described doesn't fall into my understanding of literature, nor do the incessant long-winded descriptions of characters' clothing, furniture, etc, etc.
This novel had no merit in my opinion. Avoid like the plague!

I would also add Stephen Fry's book "The Liar" to the list. I had read another of his books some years ago, and found it funny, if not particularly challenging. However, he seems to have knocked out "The Liar" over a bored weekend, after stealing the plot line from some B-list screenwriter. First half is vaguely funny, but second half is tripe.

Trix · 12-03-2007 5:46pm

'the third person' steve mosby. A pile of pants.

pwd · 12-03-2007 6:05pm

theCzar wrote:

Something Happened by Joesph Heller, I just. Can't. Finish. I have never ever ever not finished a book so technically, I'm still reading it. been reading it for two years now, woeful.

What disappointment from the man who wrote my fav book.

don't finish it. I thought it was quite good - but really really depressing. And the ending is significantly more depressing than the rest of the book.

spoiler:

The protagonist's son is in a crash. The guy is extremely upset and hugs his son so tightly that he smothers him to death. Doctors tell him that the son wasn't too badly hurt before he smothered him. He goes on with his depressing life without telling anyone what happened and is significantly more depressed than before

horrible huh?

dudara · 12-03-2007 8:16pm

zaph wrote:

Romanitas by Sophia McDougall

If you see this book in a shop, run away from it very fast. It's a Fatherland style alternate history novel, one where the Roman Empire never fell and now rules two thirds of the world. While the premise appeared interesting, it truly is a godawful book, a poor plot, characters with ridiculous and unexplained "powers" and a scarcely credible "Romanised" version of the world today. However, bad and all as these things are, the worst thing is the writing which is absolutely appalling. It rambles on for hundreds of pages as if it had never landed on an editor's desk and is enough to make the most hardened anti-environmentalist weep for all the trees that were cut down so this book could be printed. As one reviewer on Amazon said - Being crucified actually might be more fun than reading this.

I wish I'd read your post before I read the book. You could have saved me my E5 from Chapters

is_that_so · 12-03-2007 8:20pm

This story from The Guardian today amused me but it also reminded me how subjective a thread like this can be.

Zaph · 13-03-2007 5:28pm

is_that_so wrote:

This story from The Guardian today amused me but it also reminded me how subjective a thread like this can be.

When I saw that article, and specifically the mention of Vernon God Little in it, I realised that I should have included it on this thread. I did actually finish it, but it's apalling rubbish. I'll never read another Booker Prize winner again having endured that crap if that's the sort of thing they give out prizes for. And yes, I know it's a subjective opinion, but I've got 35% of the readers on my side

dudara wrote:

I wish I'd read your post before I read the book. You could have saved me my E5 from Chapters

You have my sympathies.

mathias · 13-03-2007 5:42pm

Anything by Pratchett ,
heres a true story ,
My 9 year old niece was brought to a book signing in England , With pratchett , she loves him , must have gone through all of his books , she wanted his latest signed , anyway , she got to the front of the cue and he immediately started slagging her hair , he must have been the only guy in the room that didnt realise she had cancer !! What a complete and Utter Tool , When my sister said it to him he was seriously embarrassed and took the book back and wrote " Cribbins" in it , some kind of in Joke !!

None of his books are funny to me anymore !!

sineadw · 13-03-2007 8:16pm

I realise this is going to be an incredibly unpopular first-post-ever-in-forum, but 100 years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. I tried, I really did. I *wanted* to love it. I have been 'reading' it now for almost two years. I keep picking it up and putting it down and getting so confused and bored I have to stop and then start all over again. There are some flashes of sheer brilliance in it, but that just annoys me more about it - it could have been one of those ones that really left me with something. Oh for an actual plot and proper development of character. Such a shame.

dr.bollocko · 13-03-2007 8:23pm

I'm with u sinead. That book should have been called 100 million years of solitude. Even if I had that long I wouldnt have gotten through it. It was like steinbeck cubed, but not in a good way.

pwd · 13-03-2007 10:13pm

zaph wrote:

It's already been mentioned, but I'd second the inclusion of American Gods by Neil Gaiman on the list. I read it while I was in hospital and it made my week there feel like three. Annoying characters, a rambling "plot" for want of a better word and about 400 pages too long.

I agree too. overrated muck

Esmereldina · 13-03-2007 10:22pm

dr.bollocko wrote:

I'm with u sinead. That book should have been called 100 million years of solitude. Even if I had that long I wouldnt have gotten through it. It was like steinbeck cubed, but not in a good way.

I liked it, but I agree that it was a bit difficult to get through at times. If you have not already been put off Garcia Marquez for life, you should try reading his Love in the Time of Cholera, which I found much more readable than the other. I am told though that magic realism is a bit last century at this stage... old fashioned me

Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet

Comments