Books you just didn't "get"

gaf1983

We've all read them. Those lists of Books You Must Read Before The Apocalypse - the lists themselves, I mean, not the books. Now I was just wondering are there any others out there who've read books that are highly commended by many others, or would be categorized as a classic, but for one reason or another you didn't understand why it was so highly thought of or the main theme/life-changing message just flew right over your head?

Here are my books that I didn't get what all the fuss was about:

Catcher in the Rye - JD Stalinger

L'Étranger - Albert Camus

What is to be done? - VI Lenin

Vernon God Little - DBC Pierre

John

gaf1983 wrote:

Vernon God Little - DBC Pierre

Didn't get this at all. It was very poor altogether.

The Idiot by Dostoevsky did nothing for me either. I finished it and all but it really did nothing for me but kill any interest I had in reading anymore Dostoevsky.

finlma

gaf1983 wrote:

Catcher in the Rye - JD Stalinger

Thats my favourite book of all time.

For me it has to be The Alchemist - Paulo Coehlo.

Each to their own I suppose.

Bard

I didn't see what the fuss was about the Discworld novels to be honest.

Dades

finlma wrote:

For me it has to be The Alchemist - Paulo Coehlo.

I second The Alchemist.

It felt to me like an extra long Sunday sermon.

Closing Doors

Bard wrote:

I didn't see what the fuss was about the Discworld novels to be honest.

Couldn't even finish one myself!

finlma

Bard wrote:

I didn't see what the fuss was about the Discworld novels to be honest.

I read half of one book and thought it was rubbish. For children like Harry Potter is.

p.pete

In defence of discworld if ye didn't read the whole book then I don't see how you can say you didn't get it. Fair enough if it's not your cup of tea.

I once read through half a page of David Eddings before having to put it down, I wouldn't say I didn't get it though.

Karoma

Any Kerouac.. maybe it's lost in translation (i.e. American -> English) .. or, i suppose,by American standards ..he's up there.. still ****.

Mr E

George RR Martins books. Bored me silly, yet everybody raves about them.

dudara

There's a whole lot of books that I just didn't "get"

1. The Catcher in The Rye, J.D. Salinger

2. On The Road, Keraouc (?)

3. Catch 22, Joesph Heller

4. The English Patient

All of the above just seemed average to me. None jumped at me and caught me by the throat the way that other books have.

gaf1983

I remember sometimes in school when we were studying a novel I would have completely missed something when I read it on my own but then the following day someone would say something in class about it that would really strike a chord with me but I just overlooked whatever aspect it was when I was reading it myself.

I thought Catcher in the Rye had nothing really wrong with it (although it's a good 8 years or so since I read it) - basically a story about teenage misfit indulging in a weekend of debauchery - was there anything more to it? As the last poster said, I also found it to be a bit average, what was supposed to have jumped out at me?

pbsuxok1znja4r

Baudelino - Umberto Eco; this book just felt like I was on drugs, and not in a good way.

The Power And The Glory - Graham Greene; IDK, it just never really 'grabbed' me nor made me think about it. I was probably a bit too young when I read it though.

Ulysses - Joyce; Don't get me started.

Tiriel

dudara wrote:

3. Catch 22, Joesph Heller

oh I am sooo glad someone else wasn't impressed with this. Trying my best to read it at the moment, it was given to me to read by someone who loved it.. and it has been painful trying to get through it. Only just reaching half way.. and I'm not sure that I can keep going!! Wierd thing is that it has great reviews, and people seem to love it. It just does nothing for me at all.. boring.

Laguna

I don't think the "Da Vinci Code" is as half as good as so many think, Dan Brown is documented to be a creative writing professor at harvard and I felt I could almost see the standard formula he used to write this book, everything was too convenient, characters were able to decipher indecipherable clues and pointers in a matter of seconds, no matter how obscure.

This book is structurally identical to his other book "Angels & Demons", there's the love interest who happens to be a specialist in the field the book deals with, the evil/bad guy perpetrator ends up being the person who is closest to what you'd regard as the good guy, the assassin in "Angels & Demons" is Silas in "Da Vinci Code" in all but name... It reminds me of the saying "If 100 people like a painting, it's ****", I think Dan Browns books are so well received and sell millions is because they're simple and easy to digest, with tidily implemented plot points with no amibiguity.

John

Dan Brown does my nut in. Especially his idea of a chapter being 2 pages long. That and his characters are as two dimensional as they come.

As for Catch-22, I loved it. It seems to be one of those books that you either want to marry it or bury it in the garden down by the shed out of sight.

Dades

Laguna wrote:

I don't think the "Da Vinci Code" is as half as good as so many think ... I think Dan Browns books are so well received and sell millions is because they're simple and easy to digest, with tidily implemented plot points with no amibiguity.

I don't think anyone has ever suggested they are masterpieces. They are the literary equivilent to a Jerry Bruckheimer movie. The original airport novels.

But you have to give a certain amount of respect to the man that wrote the best selling adult fiction book of all time.

Oh and Catch 22 was one of the funniest books I ever read.

John

The Atheist wrote:

But you have to give a certain amount of respect to the man that wrote the best selling adult fiction book of all time.

I've no respect for people who put out crappy blockbuster movies that do well nor crappy songs that sell well so why should I have respect for the literary equivalent?

gaf1983

John2 wrote:

As for Catch-22, I loved it. It seems to be one of those books that you either want to marry it or bury it in the garden down by the shed out of sight.

It was love at first sight with me.

My copy's buried at the end of the garden beside Chopper The Labrador RIP.

"Yossarian - the very sight of the name made him shudder. There were so many esses in it. It just had to be subversive. It was like the word subversive itself. It was like sidicious and insidious too, and like socialist, suspicious, facist, and Communist. It was an odious, alien, distasteful name that just did not inspire confidence. "

Amazotheamazing

Loved catch-22, didn't really get On the Road though, it was fine I suppose.

Desmoulins

scouser.tommy wrote:

Baudelino - Umberto Eco; this book just felt like I was on drugs, and not in a good way.

Ulysses - Joyce; Don't get me started.

Umberto Eco in general, and Joyce too. Boring, just so painfully boring.

I loved Vernon God Little though.

The books I really don't get are:
'Middlemarch'- George Elliot
'War and Peace'- Tolstoy- I've tried to read it about 6 times, its imposssible.
and all the 'Harry Potter' books. He's a kid with a scar. Its as over-rated as Dan Brown.

johnny_ultimate

There's not many I didn't get - I suppose Discworld (which i admittedly didnt finish) would be up there. And while it doesn't really make any 'ones to read before the Apocalypse' lists, How Many Miles To Babylon which I just did in school. Oh yeah and Ulysses, which I just stopped comprehending around 150 pages in.
But On The Road and Catch 22 are in my top three books ever. On The Road just makes you want to do something, and catch 22 is the funniest, most laugh out loud, completely genius book I've ever read (next to Fear and Loathing)

ratboy

johnny_ultimate wrote:

There's not many I didn't get - I suppose Discworld (which i admittedly didnt finish) would be up there. And while it doesn't really make any 'ones to read before the Apocalypse' lists, How Many Miles To Babylon which I just did in school. Oh yeah and Ulysses, which I just stopped comprehending around 150 pages in.
But On The Road and Catch 22 are in my top three books ever. On The Road just makes you want to do something, and catch 22 is the funniest, most laugh out loud, completely genius book I've ever read (next to Fear and Loathing)

What's there not to get about How Many Miles To Babylon, its plot is fairly simplistic, actually most people over the age of 12 would have no problem comnprehending it.

Dades

John2 wrote:

I've no respect for people who put out crappy blockbuster movies that do well nor crappy songs that sell well so why should I have respect for the literary equivalent?

Are you that much of a creative snob? To get any script made or any book published is an achievment in itself - and more than most of us here will ever do.

John Eddison

The Atheist wrote:

Are you that much of a creative snob? To get any script made or any book published is an achievment in itself - and more than most of us here will ever do.

Hmm, I would say that many writers of music or books, as well as many makers of movies, lack the distinction of possessing a good self-criticism. The most of the rest of us concede that we are not good enough at it, and have the good sense of not drowning the literary, musical, or cinematic world in trash.

The sad truth is that the more people show respect towards, or make, just anything the more "just anythings" is published.

That has actually led to this current phenomenon that many literary fields are becoming narrower and narrower, the real artists can't find publishers for their works anymore, everything is becoming dull, and devoid of diversity. Fantasy fiction already has. This is particularly distressing, since fantasy has traditionally been a genre from where you could find the most eccentric visionaries, even geniuses, or simply the writers who didn't much care for literary trends, or what sells well, but wrote their own stuff like true artists. In the first half of the 20th century there were, to name but a few, such unique artists--masters of their trade, true fantasists, each with his own distinctive style, complete with a lot to say about meaningful subject matters--such once renown yet now almost forgotten writers as Lord Dunsany (W. B. Yeats, and Arthur C. Clarke, among many, many others, adored him), James Branch Cabell (who was, among many other things, the favourite author of Mark Twain), E. R. Eddison (whom Cabell considered the greatest "pure fantasist" of the time, and of whose "Mistress of Mistresses" an Irish novelist, poet and historian James Stephens wrote: "From whatever heaven Mr. Eddison comes, he has added a masterpiece to English literature."). The second half wasn't without its share of new writers of almost equal, if not equal, artistic significance, but the last ten years have been a steep downhill.

Branoic

The only Umberto Eco book I've read is Foucoult's Pendulum, and I gotta say I really enjoyed it. The intelligent man's Da Vinci code. That said, I perfectly enjoyed the Da Vinci Code too, it was diverting fun fluff. Although 'Angels and Demons' is better.

Also, I though Vernon God Little was excellent. I really really felt for the poor b*stard towards the end of the book.

I will, no doubt, get lynched for this, but the book I really just didn't get was....yes.....LOTR. :eek:

I really enjoyed the films, but I read the book many many years ago and it just irritated the FCUK outta me. Like I say, i like the films so I like the plot and the characters and the world he created, but his style of writing, with all the endless songs and poems, just bugged the hell out of me. I can fully appreciate that it's considered a classic and I can understand why, but it just didn't do it for me. I'll stick to George RR Martin.

John

The Atheist wrote:

Are you that much of a creative snob? To get any script made or any book published is an achievment in itself - and more than most of us here will ever do.

It's an achievement but it doesn't mean it's good. It just means that the publishers think it will sell. Dan Brown sticks to a formula and it's safe, people will buy it and yes it works as brain candy but I don't have respect for brain candy. A junior cert student could probably rival it. I am not a creative snob, I have standards but I don't boycott all bestsellers and all blockbuster movies. I just value quality over anything else. Dan Brown is not quality. Quality involves having characters you care about, a decent plot, some writing skill (being Shakespeare is not necessary) and some orginality.

Spicy Lauren

Metamorphosis - Frank Kafka.
Didn't get it AT ALL.

Any Oscar Wilde books. As for James Joyce - Dubliners. Ahem, no sorry.
Too surrealist for me

Mein Kampf by Hitler. Was curious to read it. Had to put it back on the shelf after chapter 2.

arac

I loved the alchemist! But I have to say I tried and failed to finish life of pi..could not get into it at all!!

pretty*monster

American Psycho, mind numbingly boring.

NoDayBut2Day

Catcher in the Rye

Catch-22

ehh.. just didn't like it. Painful to read.. haha

Earthhorse

Pratchett eh? Never saw the appeal myself.

Then again he's not exactly regarded as classic literature.

F Scott Fitzgerald is but this didn't save The Great Gatbsy from being one of the least illuminating reads of my life. Completely vapid (which some might argue is the point).

johnny_ultimate wrote:

On The Road just makes you want to do something...

Yeah, like throw it out the window.

Cake Fiend

p.pete wrote:

In defence of discworld if ye didn't read the whole book then I don't see how you can say you didn't get it.

Also, if you try to jump into the series halfway through, you should expect not to get half of it. Although tbh, the first two books aren't very interesting.

Sleepy

This could be quite a list, maybe I'm slower than I think myself to be but I've never understood the hype surrounding quite a few books:

• The Life of Pi - Maybe it's because I'm agnostic but I found it to be completely sacharine and just couldn't warm to to the protaganist.
• A portrait of the Artist as a Young Man - How is this drivel regarded as a classic? Joyce's writing style is horrendous!
• Lord of the Flies - Maybe it's just aged badly, or maybe the Irish education system took the beauty out of it for me but I just didn't enjoy it.
• The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe - I got about three chapters into this as a child before ditching it. Might give it another chance now as I've warmed to fantasy books more as I've gotten older.
• Anything by Steinbeck - the plots go nowhere, are completely predictable and while I can see that some might like the minimalist, clipped style of writing, I just likened it to a Junior Cert student's lack of vocabulary.

BossArky

I see a lot of people knocking DiscWorld books. They are actually pretty clever and not as childish as made out. Like the Simpson, etc, they can be take at face value or for a deeper underlying meaning. I've read about half the series in the past year, usually as some light reading between other more weighty tomes, e.g. Bill Clintons autobio, Ulysses, etc. Discworld is great for that kind of break fun reading. There are some dodgy books in the series, but check out "Nightwatch" as an example of a pretty funny one.

Crash

The Life of Pi is one i really cant get into at all.

another one would have to be a fair bit of Hemingway - it can really destroy me at times because if i'm in the wrong mood his writing style really grinds on me.

Hip

Spicy Lauren wrote:

Metamorphosis - Frank Kafka.
Didn't get it AT ALL.

You wouldn't be the first, that's just Kafka.;) I didn't like it myself, but The Trial impressed me a lot.

durandal

East of eden by John Steinbeck. What was he trying to achieve. Its almost documentary in its narrative, without offering more than fleeting interpretation of the events.

Richelieu

the alchemist.
What on earth is the appeal? Talk about being patronised! Moreover it was woefully written (possibly woefully translated admittedly...)

odhran

i don't get the whole mystique surrounding "on the road"- totally overrated in my opinion. as for lotr, i found it insufferably boring, although i did only read the first two books.

Birdofthread

People said:
Discworld- "childish/for children like Harry potter" (or words to that effect, i really cant going all the way back to check or quote.)

mostly these comments are made by people who read a bit of a book, got a bit confused and gave up.:eek: if youre going to to that dont go making judgements about a whole (very long) series.:v:
i wouldnt agree that discworld novels are childish or even that they were WRITTEN for children.
how many children know about Macbeth or many of the other things referred to in the books? i think the stories are many-layered (not just humourous but often making an interesting social commentary) and your enjoyment of them depends largely on your sense of humour. so no-one HAS to like them.

Catcher in the Rye? good yes, lifechanging, no. as with most things.:)

treefingers

catch 22 is probably my all time favourite book! but some friends of mine who have borrowed it have hated it, so i guess its just one of those love it/hate it type deals.

i really liked catcher in the rye as well. maybe a bit overrated though.

for me, i really struggled through all of the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy series. the first one was ok i suppose, but every other one took me ages to get through....

Dave!

'Catcher in the Rye' is definitely the one that springs to mind... My older brother loves it, it's his favourite book, but I found it terribly irritating. The plot was pretty interesting, but the narrative and the characters were unbearable! The novelty of Holden's cynicism or whatever quickly wore off.

I'm not sure what the point of the book was... What I got from it is that Holden thinks he has insight into everyone, and that he's able to see something that others can't, but in reality he's no different and he's just a cynical pr*ck tbh! Which is something I can relate to alright... Dunno if that's what Salinger was going for.

My brother said "you're too young to understand it" when I told him I didn't take to it... 2 years later and I've still no more appreciation of it

Can someone let me know the point of the book?

BossArky

DaveMcG wrote:

'Catcher in the Rye'

Can someone let me know the point of the book?

The fellow in that book totally reminds me of someone I know - the cynical thought process and general lost feeling he seems to have.

Misty Moon

Thought I'd only have one or two books to mention here but having read through some of the above post I realise there are quite a few. Do have to admit that these are books that I just couldn't get into and never finished. It's possible that I may go back to them at some stage and find a completely different story than the one I thought - this has happened to me before. I think to a certain extent you have to be in the right mood, right place, right time to read some books and enjoy them.

Hunchback of Notre Dame - I've tried this one a few times and just found it so boring have never gotten more than a few chapters in. My French brother-in-law claims it's one of the most amazing books so maybe if I ever learn to speak French properly I'll give it a go in French and see if it's any better.

The Dubliners

War and Peace - think I may need a good five or six hour uninterrupted time to get into this but would enjoy it if I could. Keep meaning to bring it on holidays and forgetting.

Hitchhiker's Guide - part 1 was great, couldn't get into the rest of it at all.

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

100 Years of Solitude

Catcher in the Rye - liked it more when I re-read it recently but as a teenager it had the same effect on me as watching Rebel without a Cause and just seemed entirely pointless (or at most that the point was that it was entirely pointless if you know what I mean)

Robinson Crusoe

hepcat

Life of Pi was very disappointing, certainly did not see what the fuss was about.

Also cannot get into that guy Houllebeq - Atomised I tried and hated. Anyone else??

I'm sure there are many more - just can't recall them.

DublinWriter

That's weird - I was thinking about this question all week before seeing this forum.

I never got On The Road either, but then again, I was 16 when I read it initially and I think it's one of those books that you may have a bit of life experience (and mid-life spread) under your belt to appreicate.

Lord of the Rings I got, but I wish I didn't. It's the kind of book that impresses you early in life for the amount of rich detail that Tolkein uses to describe Middle-Earth, but it's a hell of a lot of reading just for a basic good vs evil allegory.

Ulysses I loved and took me five years to hack through. It's one of those love/hate books. Joyce never offers the reader any consession, it's like being landed in a foreign country without a map or guide, but the satisfaction in discovering the complexities for yourself.

Finnegan's Wake? No thanks. This is the one book that splits Joyceans down the middle. Personally I think it's was a self-indulgant waste of 18 years of his life.

beans

Often I won't get a book, but still enjoy the reading of it; and the hope that I might get a little more of it on subsequent reads

One example - The Place of Dead Roads by William Burroughs. Enjoyable to read, about as bizarrely f*cked up as you're likely to get. This went so far over my head

Another - a short story called Champagne by Anton Chekhov. I'd love to be able to figure it out, but I'm mystified by the ending and what it ultimately had to say.

For what it's worth, I just plain did not enjoy Life of Pi. It was interesting up to a point, then was just a story about a dude on a raft. Woo. Hoo.

neacy69

ann and barry

I mean wat in the hell was going on there those crazy kids always getting into adventures.....

Stark

Gravity's Rainbow - okay, the rocket is a phallic symbol, got it. It's an okay read, but there are far better books out there for less effort.

Life of Pi - enjoyable but overrated.

Hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy - I liked the adaptations, but the book was just irritating.

Lord of the Rings - what ****e.

Cork_Girl wrote:

oh I am sooo glad someone else wasn't impressed with this. Trying my best to read it at the moment, it was given to me to read by someone who loved it.. and it has been painful trying to get through it. Only just reaching half way.. and I'm not sure that I can keep going!! Wierd thing is that it has great reviews, and people seem to love it. It just does nothing for me at all.. boring.

I enjoyed the book immensely but for the first half of the book I felt the same way you did. Read the book to its finish, I think it's worth the effort. At a certain point about half way through, the book just "clicks" with you, and from that point to the end, you love it.

gracehopper

beans wrote:

For what it's worth, I just plain did not enjoy Life of Pi. It was interesting up to a point, then was just a story about a dude on a raft. Woo. Hoo.

thought the life of Pi was really good i have to say, i've read better books theres no doubt but 10/10 for the writers imagination