Highly regarded but overrated in your opinion....

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.

ThirdMan

Samuel Beckett's Molloy. Parts of the first monologue are laugh out loud funny, and I honestly felt I was reading something truly different. But it is almost entirely void of paragraphs, and has sentences that go on for pages (seriously!). Meaning I was very quickly out of my comfort zone. I'm sure if you 'understand' literature you could wax on about what it achieves, what it represents, etc. But for someone looking for an introduction to his work it's probably best to start with his plays.

hidinginthebush

When I opened this thread I was terrified I'd be shot for mentioning slaughterhouse 5 and catch: 22, good to see I'm not alone!
I recently went back to reread lotr, it kinda made me sad to see how much I've grown to dislike a book I used to love.

ViveLaVie

The Catcher in the Rye. I didn't dislike it, I was just a bit underwhelmed. Bit 'meh'.

Monkeybonkers

I think it's highly rated by some but I found 'Moby Dick' very boring indeed. I just could not get in to it at all. Long, meandering explanations of whales and the like just did not do it for me. Where was the battle of wills between Ahab and MD that I had heard so much about? Answer: There was none that I could see. One chapter interested me in the whole book, the final one, and I think that was because I was so happy to know that it was finally ending after spending a long time struggling through it.

Aenaes

"Of Mice And Men", I thought was overrated. It's quite a good story but just not a classic, which seems to be the consensus.

I've always been skeptical of "great" American authors anyway. I seem to think America being the new kid on the block regarding world culture, it wanted to lay claim to having great artists.

biohaiid

The Great Gatsby.
The biggest load of crap I have read, tbh.

wilkie2006

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

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


Pure shi*e!!

Absolute sacrilege!! O Brien is amazing!!!!

Out Of The Night wrote: »

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

Did you finish Cloud Atlas? I agree that it's hard to get into but it just gets better and better and better. Never have I read a more appropriate blurb:

"David Mitchell entices his readers onto a rollercoaster, and at first they wonder if they want to get off. Then - at least in my case - they can't bear the journey to end.' (AS Byatt, Guardian )"

Mahna Mahna

I really don't like Nick Hornby, all his characters are so unlikeable, but I have only read High Fidelity, How to be Good and A Long Way Down.
Everyone talks about how hilarious he is but I just don't see it, there are a few good one liners but he really does not impress me.

Monkeybonkers

wilkie2006 wrote: »

Absolute sacrilege!! O Brien is amazing!!!!

So everyone keeps telling me. I've read 'At Swim-Two-Birds' and 'The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother' and I hated both of them. Maybe I'm missing something so I've decided to give the honourable gentleman one more go with 'The Third Policeman' and if that doesn't do it then I'm afraid I'll forever be on the outside looking in at all the O Brien fans. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that this will be the one to open my eyes to his supposed brilliance.

Sorry this is a bit OT but what is the winking eye in your post supposed to signify? After the mis-spelling of the word 'lose' as 'loose', for me this has to be the most annoying thing on internet forums.

Edit: Not having a go at you particularly wilkie, I just find the use of that particular smilie very annoying and was wondering what was your purpose in using it? What are you trying to convey by putting it in your post?

wilkie2006

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

So everyone keeps telling me. I've read 'At Swim-Two-Birds' and 'The Various Lives of Keats and Chapman/The Brother' and I hated both of them. Maybe I'm missing something so I've decided to give the honourable gentleman one more go with 'The Third Policeman' and if that doesn't do it then I'm afraid I'll forever be on the outside looking in at all the O Brien fans. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that this will be the one to open my eyes to his supposed brilliance.

Good idea. I think that "The Third Policeman" is far better than "At Swim..." or "The Various Lives...".

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

Sorry this is a bit OT but what is the winking eye in your post supposed to signify? After the mis-spelling of the word 'lose' as 'loose', for me this has to be the most annoying thing on internet forums.

Edit: Not having a go at you particularly wilkie, I just find the use of that particular smilie very annoying and was wondering what was your purpose in using it? What are you trying to convey by putting it in your post?

No worries. To be honest, I don't generally use smiley faces. The exception is on boards, where there's a culture of people calling on them to clarify the tone of a potentially aggressive post. The subtext of "that's sacrilege" could be read as either "you're a philistine" or as mock outrage. I agree it's lazy but it's also what a lot of people expect to see. So when in Rome and all that...








On the other hand, maybe I was just getting fresh with you. x



EDIT: If you're asking what a winking face means specifically, I don't really know. I assume it serves the same function as someone physically winking after teasing you. That's how I use them.