Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet

BossArky

We have threads for:

- 10 books to read before death
- books we are currently reading
- general book threads and queries.

How about a thread which highlights books to be avoided at all costs? - i.e. waste of reading time, no educational value, biased, waste of ink, paper and some poor writers nerves.

Of course, most books no matter how bad teach us something.... but there must be a few gems out there ready to clobber the unwary reader into an early snooze.

Try to give a brief desciption of why you want the book on this list.

_blank_

Mills and Boon.

Deer

Rule of Four - oh what inconsistent rubbish....

_blank_

Really?

It's here beside me waiting for me to read it - should I not bother?

Deer

It just didn't do it for me - I'll put it like that. There are two writers and I just felt that even if I hadn't known that before it I read it that was blatently clear. A lot of people I know felt the same.

BossArky

It does get some dodgy reviews on amazon:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0099451956/202-5501369-6253431?v=glance&n=266239

cashback

Dan Brown - Deception Point - Quite liked Da Vinci Code but this is muck.
Jonathan Frantzen - Strong Motion - Unpleasant.

Karoma

Any tripe from Dan Brown.

BopNiblets

Doris Lessing - The Grass is Singing.

Depressing bore fest.

punka

Deer wrote:

Rule of Four - oh what inconsistent rubbish....

Agreed! Shockingly written and essentially a poor man's da Vinci Code (incidentally, does one capitalise the "da" when referring to the book/film?). The best of those "literary detective novels" is Matthew Pearl's The Dante Club, btw, but this thread is meant to be about awful books, so...


Atomised by Houellebecq. Sorry, but I detested it. I really expected to like it, but it was the first book in a long time I found difficult to finish. Mid-life crisis pseudo-intellectual nonsense.

The Lake of Dead Languages by Carol Goodman. Avoid at all costs. A "mystery" set in a private all-girls high school. It's very self-conscious (in the bad sense) about its debt to The Secret History, and by drawing attention to the (tangential) plot connection (it's about a Latin teacher) simply serves to highlight its own deficiencies. One of the worst books I've ever read. In particular, the use of Latin is inserted into the narrative in an incredibly contrived way that seems merely intended to show off the author's erudition and doesn't feel natural.

I also hate Gibson's Neuromancer with a passion, but I'm sure I'm in a minority on that one.

theCzar

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.

dudara

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.

Dades

I found "The Historian" by Elizabeth Kostova really turgid.
A lot of words but very little happening.

Half way through now, I only read it when I can't sleep.

Beruthiel

Do womens magazines count?
I weep for the poor trees wasted on that muck

Tchocky

I loved Atomised

Patricia Cornwell managed to make me angry after 7 pages, I'm not sure why but I won't be reading her again.
The aforementioned 'code.
Any Dickens at all.
Most 'crime' novels I find dull...
Wilbur Smith

Earthhorse

Dracula - influential and incredibly boring.

Terry Pratchett - unfunny and can't write to save his life.

Charles Dickens - bloated prose and heavy handed social commentary! Fun!

Lord of the Rings - the template for fantasy literature and a seminal book but it's lack of proper characterisation coupled with the infinite detail makes for a slow and uninspiring read.

Tom Clancy - just write essays about the CIA so we can cut out the crap.

Mentioning the likes of Brown on these threads is an insult to the reader's intelligence. I think it would be better if people focused on literature that's been popular for sometime rather than faddy stuff which is easy to avoid.

pbsuxok1znja4r

I thought Ian McEwan's Atonement was a complete waste of my time. Some serious rubbish toward the end and it was never really enjoyable to read. It's been a long time since I read it, though, so I forget exactly why I found it so bad and I shan't be rereading it!

wrote:

Terry Pratchett - unfunny and can't write to save his life.

Seconded.

BossArky

Steer well clear of Paulo Coelho's "The Valkyries", a joke of a book.

It is his autobiographical notes on going to a desert with his wife in an attempt to meet his angel. He meets his angel alright, she is the leader of a group of skanger bikers who drive around the desert. The book culminates with a cermoney where he climbs into a cave and the bikers wave mirrors around.

Absolutely the worst book I've read in a long time. Paradoxicaly I'd actually recommend reading it to see how bad it is. It will make you cringe turning the pages.

theCzar

Earthhorse wrote:

Tom Clancy - just write essays about the CIA so we can cut out the crap.

Mentioning the likes of Brown on these threads is an insult to the reader's intelligence. I think it would be better if people focused on literature that's been popular for sometime rather than faddy stuff which is easy to avoid.

I'd agree there

Earthhorse wrote:

Terry Pratchett - unfunny and can't write to save his life.

Charles Dickens - bloated prose and heavy handed social commentary! Fun!

Lord of the Rings - the template for fantasy literature and a seminal book but it's lack of proper characterisation coupled with the infinite detail makes for a slow and uninspiring read.

Dickens, Tolkein and Pratchett listed as authors to be avoided! You can't say that! I've reported the your post to the thought police who'll be along shortly to start all sorts of muppetry.:eek:

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

Shaybo

Labyrinth by Kate Mosse - an absolute disgrace that this ever saw the light of day and a real indictment of the media mafia in the UK that Mosse's (who's a literary biwig at the Sunday Times and in the UK in general) book has been so lavishly praised. Bady written, badly plotted and badly edited.

The Good Life by Jay McInerney - a major disappointment. The middle section is particularly badly written and the most clichéd piece of fiction dealing with a relationship that I've ever read.

And, of course, The Da Vinci Code.

Dades

Earthhorse wrote:

Mentioning the likes of Brown on these threads is an insult to the reader's intelligence. I think it would be better if people focused on literature that's been popular for sometime rather than faddy stuff which is easy to avoid.

Not sure why you'd get your knickers in a scholarly twist when Dan Brown is mentioned on a thread called "Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet".

Or maybe there should be a different forum called simply "books" for the plebs who think reading is for enjoyment.

case_sensitive

The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand.. billed by a godo friend as one of the best books he'd ever read, I've been trying to finish it for months, but every time I pick it up I'm irritated or bored with it.

The story is absolutely preposterous, the characters are fantastical and impossible to relate to or like, and lives of the main protagonists flow in a way that makes your head spin.
Oh, and on a personal note, the architecture references the book is stuffed with leave me very cold. Yuck yuck yuck.

chigli

Shaybo wrote:

Labyrinth by Kate Mosse - an absolute disgrace that this ever saw the light of day and a real indictment of the media mafia in the UK that Mosse's (who's a literary biwig at the Sunday Times and in the UK in general) book has been so lavishly praised. Bady written, badly plotted and badly edited.

Just finished that book and would have to agree with you - it is absolute rubbish

Earthhorse

The Atheist wrote:

Not sure why you'd get your knickers in a scholarly twist when Dan Brown is mentioned on a thread called "Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet".

Or maybe there should be a different forum called simply "books" for the plebs who think reading is for enjoyment.

I'm not really getting my knickers in a twist. I just think there have been enough warnings about the Da Vinci Code for people to take note. The thread will be better service by sacrificing a few sacred cows.

Bigeamo

Bridget Jones Diary. What a load of tripe. God it was terrible.

I have to say, I quite like Pratchett, don't see much to admire in Dan Browne, can appreciate Dickens (Tale of Two Cities is brilliant)...

I remember a number of years ago reading Force Majeure by Bruce Wagner and being so angered by it that as soon as I finished it, I ripped it up and put it in the bin.

Deer

Although I personally enjoyed the book I think that one to avoid if you are in anyway squemish would definately have to be American Psycho. It can be quite disturbing.

Tree

ALRIGHT, whoever dissed pratchett stand up while i slap your knuckles

JaneHudson

Tree wrote:

ALRIGHT, whoever dissed pratchett stand up while i slap your knuckles

I always expect Pratchett to be funnier because of all the hype. Enjoyable to read though. But I digress.. My most hated author must be Jane Austen.
"Naked Lunch" although criticaly acclaimed was a bit of a non-starter for me.

Valmont

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.

Voltaire?

Tar.Aldarion

Earthhorse wrote:

Dracula - influential and incredibly boring.

Terry Pratchett - unfunny and can't write to save his life.

Charles Dickens - bloated prose and heavy handed social commentary! Fun!

Lord of the Rings - the template for fantasy literature and a seminal book but it's lack of proper characterisation coupleot bd with the infinite detail makes for a slow and uninspiring read.

You can not be serious, I actually wont believe you.
You've even listed two of my favourites out of the thousands of books I have read...

Tom Clancy - just write essays about the CIA so we can cut out the crap.

Agreed.

Voltaire?

Hyperchicken from Futurama?

Mrs. MacGyver

Anything by connolly the crime writer, what a lot of rubbish...avoid!!!

aoifeme

its been said already but the da vinci code

quazzy

Mrs. MacGyver wrote:

Anything by connolly the crime writer, what a lot of rubbish...avoid!!!

Is that John ( the Irish guy ) or Michael ( The American ) ?

'Cause I really like John's novels.

Anyhoo back on topic.

One of the worst book I have read was Spycatcher by Peter Wright.

ugh

Merrick

Amongst Women by John McGahern.
I had to study it for school. It led to some of the worst English classes I have ever experienced.

Faerie

Earthhorse wrote:

Dracula - influential and incredibly boring.

Terry Pratchett - unfunny and can't write to save his life.

Charles Dickens - bloated prose and heavy handed social commentary! Fun!

Lord of the Rings - the template for fantasy literature and a seminal book but it's lack of proper characterisation coupled with the infinite detail makes for a slow and uninspiring read.

Tom Clancy - just write essays about the CIA so we can cut out the crap.

Ok I have to disagree with everything on your list! (Except Tom Clancy - I haven't read any of his books.)

Dracula is one of my favourite books, I love Terry Pratchett and Charles Dickens and Lord of The Rings is amazing!

Anyway my list:

Anything by Anita Shreve
I normally love historical books but I hated Kingdom of Shadows by Barbara Erskine
The Country Girls by Edna O Brien
Already been mentioned, but the Rule of Four is really boring
Anything by Maeve Binchy
Actually most 'chick lit'

r3nu4l

Mrs. MacGyver wrote:

Anything by connolly the crime writer, what a lot of rubbish...avoid!!!

Yeah, which one?

John Connolly or Michael Connelly?

I like them both but John Connolly's stuff is better!

Avoid Isle of Dogs by Patricia Cornwell even if you really love her other stuff!

Definitely avoid Labyrinth, rave reviews for a really poor book!

The Long Fellow

Earthhorse wrote:

Mentioning the likes of Brown on these threads is an insult to the reader's intelligence. I think it would be better if people focused on literature that's been popular for sometime rather than faddy stuff which is easy to avoid.

It's an insult to what readers intelligence???
What would you say of the quite literally thousands of people if not more who would never have picked up a book to read out of their own free willuntil the Da Vinci code and who are now trying to read maybe a book a month and trying to rediscover a joy from reading they didn't think they had? You think it's a bad thing? can a book not just exist for people to read, enjoy and forget about? does it have to have underlayers of meaning and innuendo?

this is not just directed at you, or anyone here, but i can't understand the backlash by people who would regularly read to the Da Vinci code. Especially by the very people (usually in the media) who moan and give out that people aren't interested in reading and when a book comes along that has everybody reading it it's not good enough either. am i missing something??

Earthhorse

The Long Fellow wrote:

It's an insult to what readers intelligence???

To the reader of this Literature forum, specifically the reader of a thread entitled "Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet".

I absolutely agree with what you say about Brown. I can't understand why well read people seem to be personally insulted by his book and its success. Indeed, the reason I posted what I did about Brown was to prevent this turning in to ten pages of "The Da Vinci Code - crap" type replies. Bashing Brown is something of an international pastime on the net, and probably in certain quarters of the press, so anyone who has the skill to navigate here and read this thread will have been warned by the time they arrive. That, and only that, is the reason it's insulting to their intelligence.

I specifically posted the authors I did because they come highly recommended and when I read them I found them wanting. I think that warning might be useful to a reader, new or old. We could let this become another Dan Brown bashing thread but I think that would be quite redundant, don't you?

The Long Fellow

Earthhorse wrote:

To the reader of this Literature forum, specifically the reader of a thread entitled "Books to avoid like a bookworm on a diet".

I absolutely agree with what you say about Brown. I can't understand why well read people seem to be personally insulted by his book and its success. Indeed, the reason I posted what I did about Brown was to prevent this turning in to ten pages of "The Da Vinci Code - crap" type replies. Bashing Brown is something of an international pastime on the net, and probably in certain quarters of the press, so anyone who has the skill to navigate here and read this thread will have been warned by the time they arrive. That, and only that, is the reason it's insulting to their intelligence.

I specifically posted the authors I did because they come highly recommended and when I read them I found them wanting. I think that warning might be useful to a reader, new or old. We could let this become another Dan Brown bashing thread but I think that would be quite redundant, don't you?

well in fairness i cant dissagree with anything you've said there, but i just didn't get the same impression from the first post to be honest, maybe perception was the key? i mean it's hard to have a discussion anywhere in the world about reading without the name coming up. whether thats a bad thing or not, i wouldnt be prepared to decide.

Earthhorse

Perhaps my initial post was a little curt as you're not the first person to get the wrong impression from it. Don't worry though, if ever there was a thread where it's popular to disagree with me, this is it!

Attractive Nun

The Trial by Franz Kafka. Oh God that was uninteresting, never have I read such a slow-moving and bland novel. Oh God. His short stories are good though.

And, not that anyone would, or that it counts as 'literature', but 'Israel & Palestine' by Bernard Wasserstein is absolutely the worst book I've ever read. I have no idea why I finished it, and I can still recall the feeling of sheer relief as I finished the last words and threw it across the room. Dire.

Brave New World by Aldous Huxley is a pretty poor book as well, despite many swooning reviews, although my central complaint would be that it's overrated, rather than terrible, which is hardly the book's fault.

tbh

For the love of God, don't go near this one: THE RAPTURE: In the Twinkling of an Eye Tim LaHaye & Jerry Jenkins. I bought it on a whim in Atlanta airport and it stinks to high heaven.

I mean look at the blurb:

Time seems to slow as the clock ticks down. Pan-Con Airlines captain Rayford Steele prepares for a flight to London with beautiful flight attendant Hattie Durham. Because of his wife's newfound faith, Rayford looks forward to time, and the possibilities, with Hattie. Journalist Cameron "Buck" Williams is in Israel when the Russians attack, and he experiences for himself the miraculous deliverance of the Holy Land. Buck cannot deny Chicago bureau chief Lucinda Washington's insistence that the event was prophesied in Scripture, though he dares not consider the personal ramifications.Meanwhile, Nicolae Carpathia eliminates any obstacles in his path to power. As the newly appointed president of Romania, Nicolae is invited to speak before the U.N. Without warning, millions disappear and are welcomed into the unspeakable presence of God
http://www.armageddonbooks.com/behind.html

what was I thinking?!?

Geranium

Terry PRATchet. And of course, Pride and Prejudice, just a bad chick flick style book with no actual happenings and a confusing style of writing. Unfortunately, someone once decided that it was a "classic" and poor scholars have been subjected to it ever since.

Tar.Aldarion

Confusing style of writing...you sure ripped it apart!
Nobody disses teh legen of Terry...

galactus

As a rule I am not in favour of burning books but I'd like to make an exception: Ulysses which for belongs on the bonfire next to The DaVinci Code.

Joyce - "It'll keep the professors busy for years". What a con man.

fasterkitten

I would like to sue Nicola Barker for the time it took me to read the pretentious waste of paper, Clear: A Transparent Novel.

oxygen_old

I just finished Dean Koonz "The Taken" last nite, only finished it cause I couldnt get to sleep. Im actually a lesser person now for having read it.

Pure rubbish, he just lumps fantastical event on fantastical event, with no even science fictiony explanation. And then just sticks a band aid on at the end of the novel which is dissapointing

Faerie

oxygen wrote:

I just finished Dean Koonz "The Taken" last nite, only finished it cause I couldnt get to sleep. Im actually a lesser person now for having read it.

Pure rubbish, he just lumps fantastical event on fantastical event, with no even science fictiony explanation. And then just sticks a band aid on at the end of the novel which is dissapointing

TBH I have found every Dean Koontz book I've read boring, unexplained and disappointing since I read From The Corner Of His Eye - which is amazing!

Dagnir Glaurung

Geranium wrote:

And of course, Pride and Prejudice, just a bad chick flick style book with no actual happenings and a confusing style of writing. Unfortunately, someone once decided that it was a "classic" and poor scholars have been subjected to it ever since.

Since when were chick flicks satires?

I wish I had avoided Lolita. Repulsive characters, plot peters out after 120 pages or so and the lavish writing style really grates from that point.

fasterkitten

Dagnir Glaurung wrote:

Since when were chick flicks satires?

I wish I had avoided Lolita. Repulsive characters, plot peters out after 120 pages or so and the lavish writing style really grates from that point.

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

buck65

S by John Updike
Good as Gold - Joseph Heller
Pagan Babies -Elmore Leonard
Ulysses - Joyce
The Banyan Tree - Christopher Nolan
The Dante Club - Matthew Pearl(?)

Don't agree with Dickens - loved Great Expectations