nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Critically acclaimed books you hate?

BLITZ_Molloy

Everybody likes different things so it's only natural that some people hate what are generally regarded as classic pieces of literature. I'm probably going to be a bit vague cos I haven't read these books in ages.

Catcher In The Rye
The protagonist is boring, pretentious and just drifts about in a morose angsty teenage fashion. He's a mopey, self pitying little tosser and I'd rather not listen to his moaning. The 1950's dialogue is horribly dated. It feels 10 times longer than the 250 or so pages.

Lord of the Rings
Admittedly I'm not a huge fan of fantasy novels in general, but the ones that I do enjoy like Wizard of Earthsea ramble less and make a hell of alot more sense. Gandalf is the only good guy who's able to take care of himself, yet he tends to feck off at various points for no reason, despite the ring being the most important thing to him. So you've got the Hobbits left to save the world by themselves, which they do through pure luck because they're utterly powerless, or because Gandalf decides to magically reappear and save the day.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

MultiUmm

Romeo and Juliet, if it counts.

The story is just appalling, true love? Suuuuuure. One second he's swooning over his lost love Rosaline, being oh-so melodramatic (because well, Romeo exaggerates like hell in general) then Juliet, his next piece of eye candy, sweeps him off his feet.

She's about 13, nearly 14, he's 16. My God, a few centuries ago or not, they're still too young to be deeply in love, especially after one night for less than an hour or two?

If it wasn't for Shakespeare's mastery of words this would've been forgotten long ago.

RedDragonJack

Do androids dream of electric sheep by Philip K. Dick. Because of all that crap about mercer, that wasn't in the film.

Since everyones talking about LOTR, I've got an observation of my own too. Why is every character so god damn paranoid all the time. It's like, "NO! STOP!, I dare not speak the name of the enemy here." Don't speak that language here, who knows what evil lurks near by." "No frodo, don't walk like that, Who knows what evil it will provoke upon us." I think they're all paranoid from smokng so much weed.

Klingon Hamlet

Ulysses: pretentious and boring
War and Peace: gigantic, long-winded, far too many characters to follow
Dracula: overrated, pulpy

OxfordComma

Mardy Bum wrote: »

It's a pretty big deal according to most critics. One word; Innovation.

But it's not really all that innovative, is it? It's essentially the same idea as the film Cast Away (the one where Tom Hanks is stranded on an island with only a ball to keep him company). And you also have the fact that a Brazilian author accused Martel of plagiarising a book he had written several decades earlier (although I don't know if there's any truth to that accusation).

But my main problem with Life of Pi was that I simply found it boring. I didn't particularly like the protagonist, and the central message behind the narrative, revealed right at the end of the book, was pretty cringe-worthy I thought. Just my opinion...

Edit: Here's a link about the accusations of plagiarism: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/08/bookerprize2002.awardsandprizes

allprops

Brooklyn by Colm Tobin
The Gathering by Anne Enright
While I'm all for encouraging indiginous talent over hyping indiginous crap seems to go on all too frequently. Neil Jordan spoke recently about how Irish Films are given an easy ride by critics but Irish "literature" gets an even easier shoulder up.

indough

MultiUmm wrote: »

Romeo and Juliet, if it counts.

The story is just appalling, true love? Suuuuuure. One second he's swooning over his lost love Rosaline, being oh-so melodramatic (because well, Romeo exaggerates like hell in general) then Juliet, his next piece of eye candy, sweeps him off his feet.

She's about 13, nearly 14, he's 16. My God, a few centuries ago or not, they're still too young to be deeply in love, especially after one night for less than an hour or two?

If it wasn't for Shakespeare's mastery of words this would've been forgotten long ago.

those flaws in their relationship were intentional, its not really supposed to be a story about true love, or at least ive never read it that way

Caveat

Anything by Paolo Coelho. Didn't The Alchemist win a few things?

Terrible. Complete lack of any lyrical quality whatsover. Plus, awful condescending vibe throughout.

goose2005

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

Ulysses: pretentious and boring
War and Peace: gigantic, long-winded, far too many characters to follow
Dracula: overrated, pulpy

Dracula originated many of those pulp stereotypes - see http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny

Mardy Bum

1fahy4 wrote: »

But it's not really all that innovative, is it? It's essentially the same idea as the film Cast Away (the one where Tom Hanks is stranded on an island with only a ball to keep him company). And you also have the fact that a Brazilian author accused Martel of plagiarising a book he had written several decades earlier (although I don't know if there's any truth to that accusation).

But my main problem with Life of Pi was that I simply found it boring. I didn't particularly like the protagonist, and the central message behind the narrative, revealed right at the end of the book, was pretty cringe-worthy I thought. Just my opinion...

Edit: Here's a link about the accusations of plagiarism: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/08/bookerprize2002.awardsandprizes

Sorry should have explained my meaning. It is innovative in terms of the way the narrative is structured among other things. I have this off a critic who voted for it for a big award in Ireland which it won.

girvtheswerve

The Catcher in the Rye - was expecting so much, horribly disappointed.

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Anything by Kafka

JohnMearsheimer

The Alchemist. Hate would maybe be too strong a word to use but I struggled to make my way through it.

jackthelad321

TheBandit wrote: »

I wasn't a big fan of "on the road". I thought it was a good book but the characters annoyed the hell out of me. A lot of them came off as pretentious pricks who i could not be around for more than 5 minutes without wanting to smack them, especially Dean....(shakes fist)

I finished on the road a few days ago. The whole beat generation appears to be full of remarkable pretension. I did, however, love that book. I saw the flaws when reading, there are plenty (overwriting, for one) but i felt the pulsating drive and sleepy madness of the book as its greatest attribute. Dean is a prick, but, as a friend once pointed out to me, people simply like pricks, and that's why he is interesting.

As for over-rated, someone said Bill Bryson. only neither here nor there is really bad. the life of Pi was.... well some of you read it, right! Awful. Atomised. I used think it was decent. Quite good. But when i think now, no. Not really. Not at all.

Maglight

Denerick wrote: »

You have no soul!

[Deleted User]

Anything by Charles Dickens.

Ive read and reread all of his books to see exactly what I am missing out on, and I just dont get it. Is there something wrong with me? He's supposed to be brillant but I just think its boring tripe to be perfectly honest.

questioner

Mardy Bum wrote: »

It's a pretty big deal according to most critics. One word; Innovation.

what was innovative about it? I found it middle of the road, paulo coehlo-esque sentimental self indulgent tripe.

Mardy Bum

questioner wrote: »

what was innovative about it? I found it middle of the road, paulo coehlo-esque sentimental self indulgent tripe.

Narrative Structure.

questioner

Bootsy. wrote: »

I absolutely loved Life Of Pi! Brilliant book.

No Country For Old Men on the other hand, absolutely bored me to tears... "He went here and did this, then he went there and did that, then he drove over here for something else, then zzz zzz zzz ..."

I only got three chapters into The Satanic Verses before getting distracted but the writing is brilliant so I will persevere one of these days.

just reading back through the thread and saw this, i guess if your the sort of person who likes life of pi then you probably wont have much time for McCarthy and his sparse dystopian themes. Anton Chigurh is one of contemporary literature's most finely conceived villains.

I loved blood meridian as well although i didnt find the road great, a bit lacking in substance.

questioner

Mardy Bum wrote: »

Narrative Structure.

because a story within a story is innovative? Or is it the arbitrary 100 chapters? or the oh-so-innovative preachy religious symbolism? Or was it innovative in that the author managed to make a novel out of what John Irving would have included in a paragraph?

I'm amazed this wasn't on Oprah's book club actually.

It's ironic that you consider the book innovative when the author as much as admits he plagiarised the story.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

Mardy Bum

Sorry for getting you hot and bothered, I was just quoting what I heard from a critic, I've only glanced through the book.

Caveat

Case Big Vector wrote: »

Anything by Kafka

Ah c'mon.

What was the problem?

epgc3fyqirnbsx

Caveat wrote: »

Ah c'mon.

What was the problem?

They just seem so bleak to me, as I'm sure they are supposed to, but they depress the hell out of me. And I struggle to read them. And it's not like they invoke those feelings, I would enjoy them if they did, I just really dont like them.
It's hard to explain and I'm far from eloquent, they're just not to my taste

Giselle

I've abandoned nearly everything by Jane Austen that I started, but apart from Emma I haven't been able to sustain enough interest to finish anything.

Its boring chick-lit with added corset, and the characters are annoying as hell.

sponsoredwalk

The only thing worse than the Victorian prose/storyline/outlook/cave of Jane Austen would be the terrible poetry of Emily Dickinson. To me she is poet - for poet's - sake... :rolleyes:

Giselle

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

The only thing worse than the Victorian prose/storyline/outlook/cave of Jane Austen would be the terrible poetry of Emily Dickinson. To me she is poet - for poet's - sake... :rolleyes:

If only Death had Stopped a little sooner.;)

1071823928

The Secret Scripture = TORTURE!!!!!!
seriously awful book!

thebullkf

monkey9 wrote: »

Cormac McCarthy's The Road.

I just finished it and God, it was a struggle. I really hated it and the thought of reading another one of his novels depresses me. It was just so boring! The same thing, repeated over and over.
I've read a few 'end of the world' type novels like I Am Legend and Girlfriend In A Coma and really enjoyed them, but this was just tedious.
I realise i'm in a minority here completely cos i haven't heard one bad thing about it. but it was a major disappointment to me

surprised......****in loved that novel(la)
....now the grapes of wrath........:rolleyes:

Mardy Bum

thebullkf wrote: »

surprised......****in loved that novel(la)
....now the grapes of wrath........:rolleyes:

A masterful book which perfectly captures American society in the dust bowl at the time and a brilliant critique of government and society. The level of thought put into the book is crazy (bits written in biblical prose along with many other types, evolution theory etc, full of symbolism). Without doubt one of the best novels of its time.

But yes a tough read and can be boring to say the least, there isn't really a plot in the book.:o

live.life

I agree with the OP's choices. Catcher in the Rye is definitely the worst book I've ever read! I thought the protagonist was a spoiled whiny creepy little twit and the book didn't even have a plot for God's sake! I really hated this book and it completely put me off reading any of J.D. Salinger's other books.

I was forced to read the Lord of the Flies by William Golding when I was doing my Leaving Cert years ago. I don't understand how people can like this book. I thought it was incredibly boring. Over half the book is just the author describing the scenery of the island! I thought the storyline was a great idea for a book but the author killed it by going overboard describing the island. This much detail wasn't needed - we all have imaginations and know how to use them! It almost feels like Golding wrote the entire storyline in 50 pages, realised it was too short but couldn't think of anything else to add to the story so he wrote another 200 pages of pure description!

dazza_480

the wheel of time series
those books aren't good