Books that disappointed you

Swiper the fox

ankles wrote: »

Wow, talk about opposing tastes. The opening section of Underworld is a piece I regularly recommend as one of the best opening pieces to a novel I've ever read. Totally wound me in and dragged me through the rest of the novel, which doesn't always achieve the same heights but is nevertheless one of the finest attempts at the Great American Novel.

Also On Chesil Beach was a book I got for Christmas a few years ago and I eventually appeared mid Stephens Day after being literally unable to put it down. And I'm not necessarily a McEwan fan either

On Chesil beach could well be my favourite novel ever, it is absolutely beautiful and the last few pages are worth the entrance fee alone, if anyone struggled with it I would urge them to read on to get to the finish.

I also love the beginning of Underworld, great book but challenging enough at times.

Monkeybonkers

The Kite Runner. Loved the first half of the book, thought it was really moving and a brilliant portrayal of Afghan life. Was so disappointed when it turned in to a Hollywood blockbuster film type of thing. Haven't read anything by Hosseini since. I was devastated by the turn it took. It was like I had picked up another (crap) novel. I've never got over it

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

I was extremely disappointed by Borstal Boy. I have an interest in the history of the IRA so I thought I'd enjoy it but I really couldn't get into it at all. Behan's writing style did nothing for me at all.

JohnMearsheimer

Shantaram is easily the most self-indulgent book I have ever read. I thought it was terrible. I never got the love out there for it. Gregory David Roberts says the book is not an autobiography but is influenced by real life. He wishes I think.

First_October

I read Lolita over Christmas and was very disappointed. Many segments of the novel are farcical and essentially detracted from the emotional impact the novel should have had. The `twist' was ridiculous, and the bit about Lolita's voice being absent from the concord seemed to conflict with Humbert's characterisation. And what of the acclaimed Nabokovian word play and prose style? While there were undoubtedly some nice flourishes, on the whole it came across like the work of an English Literature undergrad trying too hard.

czechlin

mav79 wrote: »

I think I heard too much hype about Life of Pi and The Alchemist, after reading them I just felt a bit meh. I can understand why people thought they were great, just not for me.

You have no idea how glad I am to read your post! I read The Alchemist a few years ago when everyone was going on about it, it was forced onto me by a friend, who insisted that I definitely should read it and that it's a book for me and will change my life. I did read it, but it wasn't a book for me, it didn't change my life, it actually bored me at most parts. Maybe it was the hype or I didn't read it at the right time. But the looks I got from people when I dared to say out loud that I found it just about ok. You'd swear I had 7 heads...

HeadPig

The Alchemist is a terrible, terrible book.

EDIT: It might actually be the worst book I ever read to the end. I was foolish to persevere.

Monkeybonkers

Moby Dick was another that disappointed. I thought it was going to be a roaring tale of the struggle of a man against the famed whale. Instead it was (as another poster said) a manual of whaling in times past with a single chapter devoted to the struggle, not a very interesting one at that.
Then again, all enjoyment of literature is subjective and I'm sure there are others who enjoyed it. I enjoyed The Alchemist, however I didn't really like some of the authors other novels that I read. Each to his/her own I suppose

r3nu4l

The Road - Cormac McCarthy

I liked the book as an experiment in fiction but overall it was lacking and way overhyped.

marienbad

r3nu4l wrote: »

The Road - Cormac McCarthy

I liked the book as an experiment in fiction but overall it was lacking and way overhyped.

I must say these sentiments are expressed quite frequently here and initially I assumed I would agree .I am long,long term Mcarthy fan and I though a post -apocalyptic novel was just outside his oeuvre . Moral - never judge the capabilities of the masters

it was a brilliant book- one of his best.

Disappointing books

Catchin In The Rye/Anything by Jack Kerouac./The Great Gatsby/,Most things by Steinbeck. this guy wins the Nobel and Roth didn't !!

astonaidan

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

Moby Dick was another that disappointed. I thought it was going to be a roaring tale of the struggle of a man against the famed whale. Instead it was (as another poster said) a manual of whaling in times past with a single chapter devoted to the struggle, not a very interesting one at that.
Then again, all enjoyment of literature is subjective and I'm sure there are others who enjoyed it. I enjoyed The Alchemist, however I didn't really like some of the authors other novels that I read. Each to his/her own I suppose

Bought it about a year ago, trying to read more classics, Im now on page 250 its been a real struggle to get into it, I do however know I could never be a whaler if its as boring as this book.

Get off my lawn!

This is How You Lose Her by Junot Diaz was such a letdown, especially since I thought Drown was an amazing collection of short stories.

I HATED NW by Zadie Smith.

Add me to the "Never able to finish One Hundred Years of Solitude" club.

DMcL1971

JohnMearsheimer wrote: »

Shantaram is easily the most self-indulgent book I have ever read. I thought it was terrible. I never got the love out there for it. Gregory David Roberts says the book is not an autobiography but is influenced by real life. He wishes I think.

I was given Shantaram as a present. I really tried my best to read it. I gave up twice and only went back because I didn't want to admit to the giver that I didn't read it. But at around page 350 I completely lost the will to live and had to finally give up.

In my opinion, absolutely dreadful, thankfully I didn't pay for my copy.

DMcL1971

Monkeybonkers wrote: »

Moby Dick was another that disappointed. I thought it was going to be a roaring tale of the struggle of a man against the famed whale. Instead it was (as another poster said) a manual of whaling in times past with a single chapter devoted to the struggle, not a very interesting one at that.
Then again, all enjoyment of literature is subjective and I'm sure there are others who enjoyed it. I enjoyed The Alchemist, however I didn't really like some of the authors other novels that I read. Each to his/her own I suppose

astonaidan wrote: »

Bought it about a year ago, trying to read more classics, Im now on page 250 its been a real struggle to get into it, I do however know I could never be a whaler if its as boring as this book.

Try reading 'In the Heart of the Sea: The tragedy of the Whaleship Essex' by Nathaniel Philbrick instead. It is the true story of the sinking of the whaleship Essex which was the actual event that inspired the book 'Moby Dick'. The first 10% of the book is also about whaling. Then the whale sinks the ship. The rest of the book focuses on the attempt of the crew to make it back to dry land over thousands of miles of open ocean. It is a gripping true story of survival. It is currently being made into a film by director Ron Howard, due for release in 2015.

haveabanana

Have to agree on The Alchemist, life changing my hole. City of Bohane was tough to get through, a noble enough effort though. I thought Wuthering Heights was muck.

Tombo2001

ThirdMan wrote: »

Another vote for The Catcher in the Rye. I thought it was awful. Danny the Champion of the World is a better book. No, really.

That's from the 'The best humour is underpinned by truth' category. Danny The Champion of The World is a better book; indeed I can remember it quite vividly not having read it for nearly 30 years, there are very few books I could say that about.

Tombo2001

On The Road would be mine.

I remember when I picked it up, I read the introduction first, which was about 30 pages long and written by some American professor.

The introduction was brilliant and got me really pumped up for the book. Then I started reading the novel, and quickly realised 'The emperor's got no clothes'.

I don't believe this book will stand the test of time, it may have been revolutionary, but if that's the case it is more of historical value because I don't think its literary value is great.....

Bobby42

For me its the Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan.

Think there's about 14 books in the series. I made it halfway through book 4.

Awful stuff. Its meant to be this massive fantasy epic with the threat of this dark power wanting to destroy the world but literally nothing happens!!!

There's so many characters and sub plots you have no idea who is who or what is going on. You have a general idea of whats happening to the main characters but you really couldn't care less what happens to them, but what makes it worse is that nothing happens to them.

You're on book two and there's this looming threat of a final showdown between good and evil, but first the characters have to follow pointless subplots for 500 pages and nothing happens!

Awful stuff.

pwurple

Heh, I had forgotten the wheel of time series. I think I got to about book 7. The female characters are so mind-numbing. I think that is what made me chuck them in the end. Couldn't take any more braid-tugging!

People are telling me that the new writer finishing up the series is much more concise... so I might try it again some day.

+1 for On the Road. Not for me.

Atlas shrugged... I had liked The Fountainhead, but once I read Atlas Shrugged it just made me realise Ayn Rand was a one trick pony. Way too self indulgent, and diminished my impression of The Fountainhead.

implausible

I have attempted to read F.Scott Fitzgerald's Tender is the Night on three different occasions as I hate having a book lying there that I haven't read. I loved Gatsby, (once you get past the first few pages) and can't even pin down why I can't finish it. It must be the characters - I cannot seem to retain any information about them or develop any empathy or interest in them.

JohnMearsheimer

DMcL1971 wrote: »

I was given Shantaram as a present. I really tried my best to read it. I gave up twice and only went back because I didn't want to admit to the giver that I didn't read it. But at around page 350 I completely lost the will to live and had to finally give up.

In my opinion, absolutely dreadful, thankfully I didn't pay for my copy.

I was give this as a present as well from an Indian housemate I had from Mumbai. I had it for about 5 years before I read it. It's a big commitment in reading time and effort for little return. The whole I became more Indian than the Indians themselves thing wore thin very fast. I only kept going because I like to finish books that I've started. It's overly long. 100 pages from the end the book reaches what I would think is a good natural conclusion to the story....but he keeps on going. I have read that Roberts is working on a sequel, God help us!

BlutendeRabe

I remember someone telling me that you'd be better off reading Catcher in the Rye and To Kill a Mockingbird when you're younger.
I had to do To Kill a Mockingbird for the Junior Cert and I loved it.

As for dissapointing reads:
1) Anything by Jane Austen. Its aspirational romantic crap for Georgian Britain.
2) Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe - Was an ok read.
3) Between Summers Longing and Winter's End Lief Persson - way too long and a bit convuluted. Parts of it were enjoyable.

Ormus

JohnMearsheimer wrote: »

Shantaram is easily the most self-indulgent book I have ever read. I thought it was terrible. I never got the love out there for it. Gregory David Roberts says the book is not an autobiography but is influenced by real life. He wishes I think.

It's completely self indulgent, the language is too flowery, the love element is comically bad and he thinks way too highly of his ability as a philosopher.

But it's a great story and he tells it at a great pace. I loved it. It also rings true of my experience of the people of India.

Given that in real life he was in jail in Australia, escaped, and went to exile in Bombay, I think it would be weird if he didn't admit the book is influenced by real life. But that is all he claims. It's a fictional novel based on some things which happened in his life, embellished for dramatic effect, and some things which didn't happen at all.

Nero707

The Catcher in The Rye. I had heard so many good things about it, but I just couldn't get into it. I found the Holden to just be a whiny bitch most of the time, and the writing style kind of annoyed me.

Harry Angstrom

Nero707 wrote: »

The Catcher in The Rye. I had heard so many good things about it, but I just couldn't get into it. I found the Holden to just be a whiny bitch most of the time, and the writing style kind of annoyed me.

Holden Caulfield is a tortured soul. Read it again with that in mind, and it might make a bit more sense to you.

Nero707

Tortured? More like twat. In my opinion, he's ****ing stupid, he literally couldn't get laid in a whorehouse. The story really doesn't seem to go very far. Maybe you have to read it while your at the same age as Holden when you feel like that to get the full effect, but it felt more like work to read it than for my own personal enjoyment. I just feel like reaching into the story and bitch-slapping Holden and yelling at him to stop being such a self-obsessed dick.

Harry Angstrom

Nero707 wrote: »

Tortured? More like twat. In my opinion, he's ****ing stupid, he literally couldn't get laid in a whorehouse. The story really doesn't seem to go very far. Maybe you have to read it while your at the same age as Holden when you feel like that to get the full effect, but it felt more like work to read it than for my own personal enjoyment. I just feel like reaching into the story and bitch-slapping Holden and yelling at him to stop being such a self-obsessed dick.

Right......... So you did your Junior Cert last year and you come from Longford.....?
You haven't fcuking lived. Come back to me in a few years time and tell me what you think of the book then.
Salinger wrote Catcher In The Rye when he was in his 30's. He wrote it from an adult perspective. You haven't got a fcuking clue. You'll understand it better when you've grown up.

Nero707

Oh wow, pulling the Longford card on me. That's low bro, low.

I read the book outside of school by the way, I just didn't enjoy and maybe I will understand it better when I'm older. But when I read it, I just didn't enjoy it. All I did was give my opinion on the book now, maybe in a few years time I'll understand it better, maybe I won't, until then you can go and fcuk yourself.

Harry Angstrom

You might be better off reading The Beano or The Dandy. Probably more your level.

Nero707

You should stop being a condescending twat. Yeah, I'm 15, yeah I'm from Longford, but at least I ain't a prick.