Highly regarded but overrated in your opinion....

MagicMarker

Was just wondering what highly regarded books readers thought were vastly overrated? After seeing recommendations everywhere I decided to read Brave New World by Huxley and I have to say I was really really let down. I thought the writing was average, the character development almost non existent and worst of all it was sloooooooooww. I got past the midway point and had to stop, having realised that nothing of note had happened at all.

Now maybe it picks up in the 2nd half, but I just couldn't push on, and I find it hard to believe what comes in the latter half could make up for the abysmal first half!

emeraldstar

Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five. I've heard a lot of people say how great it is, so I decided to give it a go a couple of months ago as it's been sitting on my bookshelf for ages. My verdict was A Big Fat Meh. I wasn't sympathetic to any of the characters. I found the temporally disjointed narrative annoying (though I know the disjointed nature was kind of the whole point). There didn't seem to be much of a story. All in all I just thought, what is the point?

meganj

For me it was Catcher in the Rye.

I really did not enjoy that book, thought Holden was a detestable little shit who needed a slap.

For me it was a personal thing, I found the protagonist completely un-relatable.

I do realise the importance of the book though from a literary sense and I think that's important for people who love literature to remember, just because you personally thought a book wasn't enjoyable, doesn't mean that that book doesn't deserve to be held in very high esteem.

emeraldstar

^ Agreed. I didn't enjoy this book either. Though I've seen a few discussions around here where it's turned out that a lot of people feel the same.

judgefudge

The Trial by Franz Kafka.

Maybe I just didn't get it but I didn't see the point at all.

Also Room by Emma Donoghue, what a load of ****e.

And anything by Jodi Picoult.

Cherry Blossom Girl

The Bell Jar - Sylvia Plath.

I get the impotence and significance of it but I found it tortuous trying to finish it. In general I don't see the appeal of Plath at all; I'm not a fan of her poetry either. I find it all rather self-indulgent.

byronbay2

Whatever about being over-rated, Finnegan's Wake imo is the greatest waste of literary talent. I loved Portrait/Dubliners and was blown away by some sections of Ulysses - although I thought there was a lot of self-indulgent, boring "style" experiments as well. I was looking forward to reading FW but found it generally incomprehensible without reference to explanatory texts. This made the whole exercise pointless. To a lesser extent, Eliot's "The Waste Land" suffers from the same problem.

MungBean

Brave new world, Slaughter House five and Catcher in the rye were all excellent in my opinion. Slaughter house five being particularly brilliant.

Lolita by Vladamir Nabokov on the other hand I didint like at all. I didnt even manage to finish it. Seemed to me at the time to be a book that gained notoriety because of the subject matter more so than the writing or story which to me were both poor.

emeraldstar

MungBean wrote: »

Lolita by Vladamir Nabokov on the other hand I didint like at all. I didnt even manage to finish it. Seemed to me at the time to be a book that gained notoriety because of the subject matter more so than the writing or story which to me were both poor.

Wow, really? While I can't say that Lolita blew me away or anything, a lot of the prose is fantastic!

Kinski

Lolita is an excellent novel, and despite the dark subject-matter, a very funny one. Nabokov was a remarkable prose stylist; I'd also recommend his autobiography (of sorts) Speak, Memory.

Catcher in the Rye's popularity also baffles me. I found it boring, and was mystified when various friends of mine read it at around 17, and started declaring "Holden is so like me." I suppose those sort of reactions account for its enduring popularity, but I'd ask in what way all these adolescents think they're like Holden - is it the hypocrisy, the self-righteousness, or the just generally acting like kind of an asshole?

Another candidate: Othello is not one of my favourite Shakespeare plays.

Midlife Crashes

I've a few. Emma by Jane Austen. I know it's a book for chicks but to me it seemed like 500 pages of girl matures, marries and lives happily ever after.

The Great Gatsby. Fitzgerald has much better books.

The Da Vinci Code.I found that the writing seemed very amateur. There was so much hype aroung it I was expecting something brilliant I got a sup par thriller.

P.S I know someone is going to crack a joke and say the Bible but I think we can agree to stay away from that.

emeraldstar

Midlife Crashes wrote: »

The Great Gatsby. Fitzgerald has much better books.

Tender is the Night being one – great book. I found Gatsby very disappointing after that one.

Midlife Crashes wrote: »

The Da Vinci Code.I found that the writing seemed very amateur. There was so much hype aroung it I was expecting something brilliant I got a sup par thriller.

Honestly I don't think that book is highly regarded by anyone

Da Shins Kelly

Slaughterhouse Five, The Great Gatsby and Lolita are all incredible, in my opinion. The Great Gatsby is the single greatest book I've ever read probably. It just gets better with every read.

The Catcher in the Rye I could take or leave. I think it's very much a product of its time, and perhaps isn't ageing very well. I think I read it at an appropriate age, and still didn't particularly relate to it. Youth culture was different at the time of its publishing though, and the values of the youth today are very different, I think, making Catcher in the Rye seem a bit old. I also think that a familiarity with New York City is perhaps integral to relating to it, kind of in the same way that having a familiarity with Dublin is important to relating to The Dubliners. I think people who are from Dublin will love The Dubliners in a different way to people who aren't, likewise with Catcher in the Rye and people from New York.
That all said, it's a very important book. The fact that it has affected so many people, and been very influential on society in general (probably American society more-so) with regards to ideas about tensions between youth culture and society, familial neglect, and alienation. At the time, the book was also considered fairly radical, being accused of undermining family values and giving kids 'bad' ideas. I didn't love the book or relate to it very much, but like someone already said, it's still such an important piece of literature.

For me, I found Pride and Prejudice grossly overrated. Sure, there are some sharp and witty social observations, but I just find it to be glorified chick-lit. I didn't find it particularly challenging in anyway. I find that with most of Austen's work. The Brontes sh*t all over Austen, for me.

quickbeam

Catch-22 - tried two or three times to read it and never got more than 50 pages in. I do intend to get to the end one day though and may change my mind.

On The Road - just plain borrrrring!!


I loved Catcher In The Rye, but I'd hypothesize that in most cases those that loved it read it in their teens and those that hated it read it later.

rainbowtrout

Another vote for the Catcher in the Rye.

Read it when I was 12 or 13 and thought Holden Caulfield was a whiney, moany little bollox. Didn't understand what all the hype was about.

Decided to give it another go about 10 years later just in case I had been too young to 'get it' the first time. I was angry after I finished it the second time.... because I discovered he was still as whiny and I was right the first time.

Eliot Rosewater

Kinski wrote: »

Catcher in the Rye's popularity also baffles me. I found it boring, and was mystified when various friends of mine read it at around 17, and started declaring "Holden is so like me." I suppose those sort of reactions account for its enduring popularity, but I'd ask in what way all these adolescents think they're like Holden - is it the hypocrisy, the self-righteousness, or the just generally acting like kind of an asshole?

It's probably OT ... but anyone who comes out of reading the Catcher in the Rye saying they believe in Holden or see him as a genuine hero has misread the novel. A lot of people do that. As well, this "interpretation" has somehow ingrained itself in the popular perception of the novel, to the stage where the "literary critic" of the Irish Times bitched about this "interpretation" thinking it the true meaning, in a piece of ignorance I have not seen matched since. In short, I am not at all surprised Salinger turned reclusive. If I wrote such a profound and subtle work and had to endure the masses pissing on it so, I would move away too.

/aside

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

phurryphace

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Slaughterhouse Five, The Great Gatsby and Lolita are all incredible, in my opinion. The Great Gatsby is the single greatest book I've ever read probably. It just gets better with every read.

The Catcher in the Rye I could take or leave. I think it's very much a product of its time, and perhaps isn't ageing very well. I think I read it at an appropriate age, and still didn't particularly relate to it. Youth culture was different at the time of its publishing though, and the values of the youth today are very different, I think, making Catcher in the Rye seem a bit old. I also think that a familiarity with New York City is perhaps integral to relating to it, kind of in the same way that having a familiarity with Dublin is important to relating to The Dubliners. I think people who are from Dublin will love The Dubliners in a different way to people who aren't, likewise with Catcher in the Rye and people from New York.
That all said, it's a very important book. The fact that it has affected so many people, and been very influential on society in general (probably American society more-so) with regards to ideas about tensions between youth culture and society, familial neglect, and alienation. At the time, the book was also considered fairly radical, being accused of undermining family values and giving kids 'bad' ideas. I didn't love the book or relate to it very much, but like someone already said, it's still such an important piece of literature.

For me, I found Pride and Prejudice grossly overrated. Sure, there are some sharp and witty social observations, but I just find it to be glorified chick-lit. I didn't find it particularly challenging in anyway. I find that with most of Austen's work. The Brontes sh*t all over Austen, for me.

Gatsby is said to be the perfect novel but just one example of a better novel for me is Yeates Revolutionary Road....the film was ok but the book in my opinion is nothing short of beautiful.

saa

Soup.

Da Shins Kelly

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

It's probably OT ... but anyone who comes out of reading the Catcher in the Rye saying they believe in Holden or see him as a genuine hero has misread the novel. A lot of people do that. As well, this "interpretation" has somehow ingrained itself in the popular perception of the novel, to the stage where the "literary critic" of the Irish Times bitched about this "interpretation" thinking it the true meaning, in a piece of ignorance I have not seen matched since. In short, I am not at all surprised Salinger turned reclusive. If I wrote such a profound and subtle work and had to endure the masses pissing on it so, I would move away too.

/aside

An interesting opinion I heard on The Catcher in the Rye was made by a first year girl in my college who suggested that Holden was a potential paedophile, made clear by his obsession with the innocence of children, etc. Her essay on it was put into the files of some US academic archive or other, and can be read as a piece of literary criticism in academic databases. First time I ever heard someone suggest that, but it's an interesting view.

triseke

another vote for "Catch 22". I just couldn't get into it. I tried, I nearly finished it, but just couldn't make myself..

manicmonoliths

I'd echo early sentiments regarding the Great Gatsby and Catcher in the Rye.

I can't understand the love for Gatsby as I found it a highly tedious read. Catcher in the Rye I've been told has to be read during adolescence so perhaps I missed the boat.

For me I can’t understand the high regard for 1984, I saw nothing novel or unique in it, just a typical political-dystopian story which many have done better.

I highly enjoyed Slaughter-House 5 and Catch 22 is one of my favourites so it's somewhat upsetting to see those mentioned in this thread as I'm sure many are to see Gatsby and Holden featuring.

Da Shins Kelly

manicmonoliths wrote: »

For me I can’t understand the high regard for 1984, I saw nothing novel or unique in it, just a typical political-dystopian story which many have done better.

I strongly disagree with this.

Toby Take a Bow

Some of my all-time favourite novels being mentioned (The Great Gatsby, Slaughterhouse 5, Catcher in the Rye, 1984), but I guess that's the point of a thread like this.

I'd vote for Catch-22. Finally finished it recently after it being on my 'to-read' list for ages. It was a struggle, mainly because I loathe that style of writing, and what I would've thought would be its saving grace, it's humour, was non-existent. I also hated all the characters. Ah well.

Aw, catch-22 is so funny.

Nody

emeraldstar wrote: »

Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five. I've heard a lot of people say how great it is, so I decided to give it a go a couple of months ago as it's been sitting on my bookshelf for ages. My verdict was A Big Fat Meh. I wasn't sympathetic to any of the characters. I found the temporally disjointed narrative annoying (though I know the disjointed nature was kind of the whole point). There didn't seem to be much of a story. All in all I just thought, what is the point?

Agree to this comment, I found it annoying with the constant jumps (esp. as I've had the author's comment afterwards about the story of who he was etc.). I can understand the story in part but still I'll have to give a big meh to it.

Midlife Crashes wrote: »

The Da Vinci Code.I found that the writing seemed very amateur. There was so much hype aroung it I was expecting something brilliant I got a sup par thriller,

I think I made the mistake of reading Foucault's pendulum first; after that it is a pale teenage copy by comparison.

quickbeam wrote: »

Catch-22 - tried two or three times to read it and never got more than 50 pages in. I do intend to get to the end one day though and may change my mind.

Takes getting used to but once you're in the swing it's funny (esp. the last pages).

Bodhidharma

J.G. Ballard was a writer I had heard was very, very good. I read The Unlimited Dream Company based on this, and it was without doubt the worst book I've ever read, and I read The Da Vinci Code. It was so bad I literally had to remove it from my house.

apsalar

The Bonfire of the Vanities..I really tried, but it's just too boring for me. It's been sitting on my bookshelf for 3 years and I still haven't finished it. I found it torturous and too "clever". I don't like Wolfe anyway.

Tesco Massacre

Anything by Ayn Rand.

Particularly Atlas Shrugged (worst book I've ever read).

Sardonicat

The Blackwater Lightship by Tóbín.

Stilted, unbelievable and pointless with characters you couldn't give a crap about.

Those bloody hairy feckin hobbits and co. by Tolkein, bluergh.

And anything by Lawrence.

Monkeybonkers

The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother Flann O Brien
At Swim-Two-Birds Flann O Brien


Pure shi*e!!

Necronomicon

I felt quite let down by the His Dark Materials trilogy. I liked Northern Lights, without thinking it was anything spectacular, but the other two were just quite poor I thought.

jonsnow

Great Expectations

It wasn,t what I had hoped for

Cherry Blossom Girl

jonsnow wrote: »

Great Expectations

It wasn,t what I had hoped for

Same, I found it extremely tedious.

I also felt let down by Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close . It just didn't hold my attention and was far too dragged out in the end.

Sergeant

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother Flann O Brien
At Swim-Two-Birds Flann O Brien


Pure shi*e!!

:eek:

I struggled to read Catch-22 and didn't find it particularly funny.

meganj

quickbeam wrote: »

I loved Catcher In The Rye, but I'd hypothesize that in most cases those that loved it read it in their teens and those that hated it read it later.

I read it when I was 15.

I find this an interesting theory though. I'm not a big fantasy fan, I read LOTR Trilogy and it practically took me two years to read it. Everyone encouraged me to read it and the Hitchhikers Guide series as well, which I did and found them both excellent books but not for me.

I wonder is it something to do with the books we read as children? My Mother always read me Norse Mythology and then things like Great Expectations and Tale of Two Cities and stuff like that, not really things that were fantasy or required an imagination, to the same level as fantasy.

I read HP when I turned 13 and became hooked. I wonder is the reason I find it so difficult to read fantasy now because I know longer posses the imagination required to assemble the world in my mind while I'm reading? Where as the first HP book came along at the perfect time for me to be able to create Hogwarts in my mind.

/Maybe that's off topic, but it's interesting.

The Adventures of Tom Sawyer is another one of those acclaimed novels that just aren't for me.

OakeyDokey

Catcher in the Rye for me. I just wanted to shake Holden all the way through the book!

I read it at 20!

PurpleBee

what is this rubbish about needing a likable central charcater? would you invite hannibal lecter over for tea?

rainbowtrout

PurpleBee wrote: »

what is this rubbish about needing a likable central charcater? would you invite hannibal lecter over for tea?

Interesting is probably a better word than likeable. Hannibal is interesting, Holden caulfield (in my opinion) is not.

meganj

PurpleBee wrote: »

what is this rubbish about needing a likable central charcater? would you invite hannibal lecter over for tea?

As long as he wasn't planning on bringing his own dinner.

emeraldstar

meganj wrote: »

As long as he wasn't planning on bringing his own dinner.

I'd hope he would! :eek:

OakeyDokey

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Interesting is probably a better word than likeable. Hannibal is interesting, Holden caulfield (in my opinion) is not.

I agree, I have read countless of books where the main character(s) have been uninteresting and annoying and they haven't made me dislike the book. I just really didn't get why this book was so highly regarded because for me I don't see it as anything special. The only reason why I read it was to see why it's rated so high!

MagicMarker

I'm reading 'The Sun Also Rises' by Hemingway and I am deeply disappointed. I am over halfway through and I really dislike his style of writing, I don't think I will finish tbh, I just don't care for it.

Out Of The Night

Cloud Atlas by David Mitchell. All of Jane Austen's work. Jodi Picoult. Anita Shreve. Ayn Rand.

norrie rugger

meganj wrote: »

For me it was Catcher in the Rye.

I really did not enjoy that book, thought Holden was a detestable little shit who needed a slap.

For me it was a personal thing, I found the protagonist completely un-relatable.

I do realise the importance of the book though from a literary sense and I think that's important for people who love literature to remember, just because you personally thought a book wasn't enjoyable, doesn't mean that that book doesn't deserve to be held in very high esteem.

Was coming to post exactly this.

Also, No Country for Old Men, I am not a fan of McCarthy's style. Found The Road a chore to read but, as it was a great idea with great set pieces, I made myself finish it.

I am a sci-fi/fantasy nerd but I just could not take to Hitchhikers Guide and downright disliked His Dark Materials.

grohlisagod

Necronomicon wrote: »

I felt quite let down by the His Dark Materials trilogy. I liked Northern Lights, without thinking it was anything spectacular, but the other two were just quite poor I thought.

The first one is the best one alright. I liked The Subtle Knife as well but The Amber Spyglass gets worse and worse the more of it you read.

Bill Shock

Anything and everything by Roddy "smug****" Doyle.

PurpleBee

Bill Shock wrote: »

Anything and everything by Roddy "smug****" Doyle.

The Van was one of the funniest things I ever read but then the whole Black Dog St Patrick's Day parade thing I found nauseating so I'm inclined to agree with you.

Forest Demon

The Da Vinci Code

Giselle

Forest Demon wrote: »

The Da Vinci Code

I can't think of anyone who rated that highly tbh.

Aenaes

MagicMarker wrote: »

I'm reading 'The Sun Also Rises' by Hemingway and I am deeply disappointed. I am over halfway through and I really dislike his style of writing, I don't think I will finish tbh, I just don't care for it.

Please don't let it put you off Hemingway altogether. "The Old Man And The Sea" is fantastic.