Books that disappointed you

Harry Angstrom

ivytwine wrote: »

Agree! Another one we had to do for college. Hated the main character. I felt like smacking him. The more he bitched about how his wife wasn't hot anymore the more I was like "And I'm sure you're not getting tubby and thin on top either!"

I think it's unfair to target just one of the Rabbit novels in isolation, particularly the first one. The work should be judged as a whole, tracking Rabbit's personal development throughout some of the most turbulent socio-political times in American history. Updike and Roth are by far the two most important American writers in the latter half of the 20th century.

mikemac1

I'm a big John Grisham fan, his last book Sycamore Row was superb imo

The one before it was The Racketeer. The worst Grisham book I ever read and I've read pretty much all of them. It started strongly with the murder of a judge but by Chapter 2 it went downhill and just got worse. I hated the ending and I also disliked writing in the first person which I hope Grisham does not attempt again

ivytwine

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

I think it's unfair to target just one of the Rabbit novels in isolation, particularly the first one. The work should be judged as a whole, tracking Rabbit's personal development throughout some of the most turbulent socio-political times in American history. Updike and Roth are by far the two most important American writers in the latter half of the 20th century.

Fair enough. I just wanted to punch Rabbit in the face.

Also, I liked Updike's style for definite, I definitely would read other works by him. I definitely wasn't alone in disliking Rabbit, most of my classmates felt the same too.

Harry Angstrom

ivytwine wrote: »

Fair enough. I just wanted to punch Rabbit in the face.

Fair enough so.

Fate Amenable To Change

FunLover18 wrote: »

I have to say I didn't get that impression at all. I could be wrong though, I only realised The Princess Bride was a pisstake about a quarter of the way through :rolleyes:

Its not very obvious but from what I remember every time the Musketeers were lauded for their bravery or chivalrous nature they seemed to be doing the exact opposite. I'll see if I can dig it up and go through a bit of it.

FunLover18

Fate Amenable To Change wrote: »

Its not very obvious but from what I remember every time the Musketeers were lauded for their bravery or chivalrous nature they seemed to be doing the exact opposite. I'll see if I can dig it up and go through a bit of it.

I literally just finished it at the weekend and I thinking back on it I can sort of see what you mean,

they try and execute the Lady de Winter in the dead of night in the middle of nowhere and chuck her body in a river but I'm 99% Dumas isn't being ironic when he portrays this as justice given how she was portrayed throughout the book as a manipulative bitch whose only emotion seemed to be hate

I really hope you're misremembering because 1) I'll feel like an idiot and 2) I'll have to read it again in this new light

JackGM

Ken Follet's 'World Without End'. I loved the 'Pillars of the Earth', but 'World' had the same plot, character types, and motives. The difference between the two was paper-thin. I liked the first one's 'something from nothing' progression, with the slow development of Kingsbridge. Two hundred years later, the same events unfold again.
I also thought 'A Feast for Crows' was a little disappointing, the new characters were okay, but they weren't striving for similar goals like in the first three. While no less detailed, it came off as a little disjointed.
I went into 'The Catcher in the Rye' thinking it was 'Of Mice and Men', so I was confused and ultimately let down by the ''charming'' coming of age tale I had encountered a million times in secondary school.
I thought 'The Holy Bible' by an anonymous writer lacked proper motivation on the much-hyped 'God' character's part. Character development was minimal, and there were too many characters; the only thing 'JackGM' begot was a headache!

Pang

I have just finished a major reading binge and was really disappointed with a number of the books I read.

First up was 'The Disappearance of Emily Marr' by Louise Candlish. I was enjoying it alot from the start, so much so I couldn't put it down. Then I got to the final chapter which was possibly the most frustrating ending I have read in years. It felt so unfinished. I wanted to email the author and ask her why she didn't give a more complete finale.

'The King of Badgers' was a poor read. So many pages and such a laborious read.

The Committments is another book I was disappointed with. I skimmed over alot of parts of it. I found it quite monotonous.

Barna77

Bret Easton Ellis Glamorama and American Psycho. Great expectations on both of them but, couldn't wait to finish them. Read The Rules of Attarction and Less than Zero years ago, still my favorites, but the other two... meh. So I don't know if I'll get to read Imperial Bedrooms.

Also Wicked, by Gregory Maguire. Politics in Oz before and after Dorothy's Landing. So pointless. Never bothered with the other books in the series.

Fate Amenable To Change wrote: »

Was The Three Musketeers not a complete pisst ake? Thats how I read it anyway. He literally has characters abandoning their friends and then stresses how brave they were to run away from some randomers on the road who had no weapons.... when they're meant to be trained cavalrymen. As soon as the landlord is out of sight he is out of mind - every promise of rescue broken while they try and seduce his wife. The musketeers word and honour is a pile of rubbish. Its been a while since I read it but I remember how I couldn't stop laughing at how ridiculous it was. It seemed there was two books there, one for the upper classes and one for everybody else.

Loved the Three Musketeers trilogy. Couldn't put them down.

karaokeman

Currently on the 6th chapter of Niall Harbison's Get **** Done, but not sure how much further I can go.

Its not a terrible book, the author has some interesting ideas but overall I find the presentation a bit sensationalist.

Duckee

karaokeman wrote: »

Currently on the 6th chapter of Niall Harbison's Get **** Done, but not sure how much further I can go.

Its not a terrible book, the author has some interesting ideas but overall I find the presentation a bit sensationalist.

I had a much longer rant about how much I regretted buying this book but it got deleted (probably just as well!). Suffice to say I would tell people to save their money.

I had to stop reading half way through because it was making me so cross.:mad:

The basic message appears to be in order to get s**t done, one must do s**t. If you're expecting a book on how to manage all the aspects of your life - how to juggle work/family/friends and other commitments, you won't get it here.

The book is basically a not very well written autobiography of a single minded youngish guy with few commitments/responsibilities pontificating about his successes and failures to date. I can only imagine that it is selling well due to the extremely misleading title.

FunLover18

Just finished my first Jack Reacher novel. Won't be reading another. Not even remotely thrilling or suspenseful and Jack is just such a dull character.

Harry Angstrom

FunLover18 wrote: »

Just finished my first Jack Reacher novel. Won't be reading another. Not even remotely thrilling or suspenseful and Jack is just such a dull character.

It's pulp, and not even good pulp.

marienbad

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

It's pulp, and not even good pulp.

but compelling in the most inexplicable way, Can't believe I'm saying that but its true.

Jamaican Me Crazy

Gone Girl - don't know has it been mentioned already

I just couldn't get on board with either protagonist. I found the writing style slow and the secondary characters annoying.
It got good reviews but I found it disappointing and I hate leaving a book unfinished!

OldNotWIse

Douglas Kennedy: Five Days

I love the rest of his books, but this was a sore disappointment. Slow-moving and dreary.

gugleguy

The Pearl: John Steinbeck.

Steinbeck wants us to see Keeno, the peasant in a negative light after he kills a man who wants to get at the Pearl.
Also, Keeno's son dies because of Keeno's journey.

accensi0n

Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

echo beach

accensi0n wrote: »

Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman

Perhaps you could offer a reason why you were disappointed.
Admittedly it is a very difficult read for the non-specialist. It's academic origins are very evident and little attempt was made to make it more accessible to a general audience. I also found the self-congratulatory emphasis on his own research and that of his students grating but even with those gripes I would still recommend it to anybody who wants to understand human behaviour and is willing to look at their own behaviour and decision making in a new light.
I wouldn't say this book changed my life but it did result in me making changes for the better in some aspects of it.

fisgon

ivytwine wrote: »

Fair enough. I just wanted to punch Rabbit in the face.

I don't think that Rabbit is exactly meant to be a sympathetic character. He is conceited, romantic, narcissistic, lazy, idealistic and ignorant. I always think of Homer Simpson when I read the Rabbit books. I don't think you have to like Rabbit to love the books.

Also, he does some much worse stuff in later novels, including

sleeping with his daughter in law

. At no stage is he held up as a role model, more of a very flawed American everyman.

LoganRice

To Kill a Mockingbird
The Catcher n the Rye (an epidemically overrated book)
Many college prospectus books

...

Yeah...I'm sure there are many more but at the moment I can't think of any

Harry Angstrom

fisgon wrote: »

I don't think that Rabbit is exactly meant to be a sympathetic character. He is conceited, romantic, narcissistic, lazy, idealistic and ignorant. I always think of Homer Simpson when I read the Rabbit books. I don't think you have to like Rabbit to love the books.

Also, he does some much worse stuff in later novels, including

sleeping with his daughter in law

. At no stage is he held up as a role model, more of a very flawed American everyman.

I agree. Rabbit is a product of his generation, he is pretty much implacable in his views.
Updike uses Angstrom as a cypher. He juxtaposes the changing mores and folkways of certain aspects of American society of the 1960's with the more prevailing conservative attitudes of the time.
People who dismiss the Rabbit novels because they don't particularly like Rabbit are completely missing the point.

Laura Palmer

Donna Tartt - The Little Friend (her second novel after The Secret History).

To be fair, it is sumptuously written - clearly inspired greatly by To Kill a Mockingbird. For these two elements, I can sort of forgive it. But ultimately a disappointment - can't elaborate without spoiling.
Damn it, it's just a beautifully writen book - such a shame!

A_Sober_Paddy

To kill a mockingbird...so much so i spore i'd never read another book...It thought me absolutely nothing about killing a mockingbird, but it did teach me not to judge a person by the colour of their skin

SarahBM

I can't believe people were disappointed by TP Kill a Mocking bird. It's a book I thought I would not like but it surpassed all my expectations! I really loved it.
Stoner by John Williams. Won some award so my friend picked it for book club. I thought it was crap.

ivytwine

Harry Angstrom wrote: »

I agree. Rabbit is a product of his generation, he is pretty much implacable in his views.
Updike uses Angstrom as a cypher. He juxtaposes the changing mores and folkways of certain aspects of American society of the 1960's with the more prevailing conservative attitudes of the time.
People who dismiss the Rabbit novels because they don't particularly like Rabbit are completely missing the point.

I think it's kind of patronising to accuse someone of missing the point just because they don't like something. I've read plenty of books where the protagonist is an awful person, and I can get on board with it. I understand what Updike was intending, and there are some great moments in it and fantastic writing. However this thread is all subjective and we bring on board our own outlook on the world when we read something.

I really don't care for like selfish and whiny people like Rabbit in real life, and for me Updike didn't draw me enough into his world for me to suspend that prejudice. For me. Doesn't mean I didn't get it. You like the book, I don't, and believe me I know it can feel harsh when someone trashes a book you love. I've had moments reading this thread where my heart sank to hear people badmouthing books I love.

fisgon wrote: »

I don't think that Rabbit is exactly meant to be a sympathetic character. He is conceited, romantic, narcissistic, lazy, idealistic and ignorant. I always think of Homer Simpson when I read the Rabbit books. I don't think you have to like Rabbit to love the books.

Also, he does some much worse stuff in later novels, including

sleeping with his daughter in law

. At no stage is he held up as a role model, more of a very flawed American everyman.

I prefer Homer :P

Huzzah!

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Donna Tartt - The Little Friend (her second novel after The Secret History).

To be fair, it is sumptuously written - clearly inspired greatly by To Kill a Mockingbird. For these two elements, I can sort of forgive it. But ultimately a disappointment - can't elaborate without spoiling.
Damn it, it's just a beautifully writen book - such a shame!

Oh dear, I've just started this...

Harry Angstrom

Laura Palmer wrote: »

Donna Tartt - The Little Friend (her second novel after The Secret History).

To be fair, it is sumptuously written - clearly inspired greatly by To Kill a Mockingbird. For these two elements, I can sort of forgive it. But ultimately a disappointment - can't elaborate without spoiling.
Damn it, it's just a beautifully writen book - such a shame!

The problem is though, when you write a near-perfect debut novel such as The Secret History, the much-awaited second novel is never going to live up to expectations.

fisgon

Huzzah! wrote: »

Oh dear, I've just started this...

Keep going! To emphasize the subjective nature of this thread, and of literature in general, I thought The Little Friend was far superior to The Secret History, which I did think was seriously overrated.

Birneybau

SarahBM wrote: »

I can't believe people were disappointed by TP Kill a Mocking bird. It's a book I thought I would not like but it surpassed all my expectations! I really loved it.
Stoner by John Williams. Won some award so my friend picked it for book club. I thought it was crap.

I think the 'To Kill A Mockingbird' comment was a joke.

Also, I loved 'Stoner' ; p