Bad books.

[Vampuric_acid]

What books have you read that you thought were awful?

[Nicola]

Hard Times - Charles Dickens

Anything by Charles Dickens. No, seriously, I don't like him. However, when I began reading Hard Times I thought the narrative was witty; verging on funny, almost. It quickly got irritating, however, with its repetition and its quite bland characters. 'Trying too hard' is a tag I normally put on modernist writers but I think Dickens earns it here. It's great that a writer has a set theme, and they want to put across their views on a subject, but we do not need to be reminded every other sentence... and then have that sentence repeated. And then again.

The Da Vinci Code - Dan Brown

Also, I remember tonnes of people recommending this brand spanking new book that was absolutely "brilliant". The Da Vinci Code. It read like a film script. Chapters were extremely short (a cunning way to get the reader to carry on reading) and they all seemed to end with a "DUN DUN DUUUUUN!!!" Things were convenient, or random. Man fucks girl at end true Hollywood style when there was only one brief mention of chemistry between them throughout the whole story. He lacks diversity, sophistication and the likes. For me, I don't like reading a story where the language seems to indicate that a fourteen year-old had written it. I was constantly annoyed by the lack of characterization (I like to feel for the characters when I am reading a story), the predictibility, the stupidity of the characters who apparently couldn't recognise mirror writing, and the script-like style.

Shadowmancer - G. P. Taylor

The worst book I have EVER read has to go to G.P. Taylor's Shadowmancer. There was a lot of hype on it's release. A critic says on the back of the book 'Biggest thing since Harry Potter'. He lied. I don't know about the person who wrote this but I know I don't like him. He shoves his beliefs down your throat. It takes up the whole book and you're sitting there thinking 'Where's the plot?' The villian is boring, the side kick is predictable, Thomas (protagonist) has no personality and Rhubak is the author's religious voice always preaching. I had high expectations for this book, since I thought a book that would be compared to Harry Potter would be at least worthy, it isn't. Being an atheist, it was just boring from beginning to end. When I painfully finished the book a voice inside my head said 'And...?' The author is just rewriting the bible through some characters and a typical plot of man trying to take over world. NEVER EVER read Shadowmancer.

[Spike Marshall]

The Historian is like a sub Dan Brown Novel. It's just longer and more boring and lacks the exciting pace of the Da Vinci Code. I actually gave up reading it halfway through because it was such a miserable piece of work.

[Zaden Star]

Catch 22 its just a book about a bunch of people in the army calling each other crazy.

Lately I can't get into any books outside of the HP series Golden Compass and Snow Falling on Cedars just haven't appealed to me.

[Valkyrie]

I second the Da Vinci Code.

Eragon - Christopher Paolini
Whatever, everyone finds the book completely amazing and crap because it was written by a 15 year old and it supposedly 'lures the reader in'. The book flows like a 15 year old wrote it, it's horrible. The writing is boring, vague, and uncreative. It's a story we've all heard before, except that he kills off the only likeable character.

The Jungle - Upton Sinclair
I can't say this book is badly written, because it was written 100 years ago and writing style has changed drastically since, but I can say it's the most depressing and dragged-out story i've ever read in my life. I can't go into detail, I would end up writing an entire novel just to explain the horrible experience...just take my work for it.

Zaden star, are you saying that the Golden Compass (Phillip Pullman, right?) isn't interesting?

[Nicola]

I think he is saying anything OUT of TGC, HP and SFoC is not interesting. If that's the case, then that's really sad on his part.

I have to agree with Eragon. I tried to read it, but couldn't get past the first two chapters. When I read reviews I learned how much worse it actually got.

And you can say books are badly written if they were written 100 years ago. Aphra Behn in the 1600s wrote a book called Oroonoko, and that is terribly written. It depends how familiar you are with the period so can compare what is good writing, and what falls short, personally for you.

[Vampuric_acid]

John Marco's Tyrants and kings series.

[Zaden Star]

No I sad that I couldn't get into The Golden Compass or Snow Falling on Cedars. Really for the Golden Caompass it's starts really slow and it's not that very descriptive i don't know much about the main character's appearance apart from that the person's female no age, hair color, height, anything.

[Valkyrie]

No I sad that I couldn't get into The Golden Compass or Snow Falling on Cedars. Really for the Golden Caompass it's starts really slow and it's not that very descriptive i don't know much about the main character's appearance apart from that the person's female no age, hair color, height, anything.

Really try to continue with the Golden Compass. The book starts simple, with a simple character living in her small little world, lol. The book basically explodes in the end...it's kind of like the first Harry Potter, you just have to get past all the introductions, and then it kicks off about halfway through the book.

[Nicola]

I actually don't like Phillip Pullman either. 'Northern Lights'? was is called?

I read that book all the way through because of all the hype and recommendations and I remember thinking to myself two thirds of the way through 'when is it going to start'? I was very disappointed. I didn't like it at all.

Zaden Star, if you are looking for a fantasy series with the same readability as HP, go for Trudi Canavan's The Black Magician Trilogy. The first half of the first book is slow, but after that it's absolutely brilliant. Definitely my favourite series after HP. :D The first book is called 'The Magician's Guild'. Check it out.

EDIT: Just thought of another terrible book.

Pamela - Samuel Richardson
It honestly shocks me that this was a best seller at the time and it caused a storm with the eighteenth century audience. Were they brain dead? It reminds me how the audience now went crazy over the Da Vinci Code, but really, it's just a load of rubbish.

Granted, it was different at the time. 'Robinson Crusoe' was also madly popular, and the public wanted more of this new 'novel' form. This book is mainly an epistolary novel (pioneering attribute in the novel) that tries to convince its readership that there is truth in the words, and that the readers should go away and think about what a good girl Pamela was, and how she was rewarded in the end. So, ladies of the eighteenth century, did you get that? Be pathetic, a lap dog and worship and love those that try to rape you and kidnap you, and you will be rewarded by marrying your kidnapper! Great one!

What is terrible about this book is the character of Pamela, who is overly pure and perfect, who takes everything that is thrown her way, is tormented by Mr B constantly, but then decides, that in fact, she loves him! So she goes back, and takes torment from his sister instead! Very good. The character is immensely unbelievable and serves only as a message to the women of the time to obey their men and be like Pamela (which they wouldn't and couldn't have been; no human being can be like Pamela).

The worst part of this novel isn't even the issues or morals it sends out, rather, it's the form and style of story telling that it uses. There is no denying that it started the epistolary trend and gave yet more forms of narrating for novel writers, but the context in which it is written in makes the story laughable. Pamela is constantly writing letters. That's right. She writes letters even when she knows no one will read them, and she writes letters as things are happening. She must be writing 20 hours a day. How does she have time to be raped and kidnapped? It's a wonder. It's just common sense. It astonishes me that an author in the time where novel writing was highly looked down upon, and so tried to make their novels seem real, adopted the very narrative that made his book ridiculous.

There is hope, however; not all eighteenth century readers were duped by this. If you do get yourself through this awful, dull and boring novel (which is about 500 pages long of nothing), you must reward yourself (you deserve to be rewarded when you torture yourself, remember?!) and read the humorous 'Shamela' and 'Joseph Andrews' by Henry Fielding who took 'Pamela' for what it was: a novel that lacked any credibility.

[kyndig]

The Historian is like a sub Dan Brown Novel. It's just longer and more boring and lacks the exciting pace of the Da Vinci Code. I actually gave up reading it halfway through because it was such a miserable piece of work.

Are you joking? the historian was being written before dan browns crappy predictable books. Its one of the greatest books ive ever read.

"The Historian is like a sub Dan Brown Novel" rofl

[Nicola]

Are you joking? the historian was being written before dan browns crappy predictable books. Its one of the greatest books ive ever read.
Erm, he didn't say The Historian was an emulation of Dan Brown, he said it was like a Dan Brown novel, which, irrespective of which book came first, is a valid opinion.

[Punishment]

Catch 22 its just a book about a bunch of people in the army calling each other crazy.

Lately I can't get into any books outside of the HP series Golden Compass and Snow Falling on Cedars just haven't appealed to me.

No offense but if that was the only idea you got out of Catch 22 you really have to read it again. It is one of the best works that involves sarcasm. The book dealt with corruption amongst the military and how they used a simple clause to keep soldiers within the army. Cleverly written imho.

[kyndig]

Erm, he didn't say The Historian was an emulation of Dan Brown, he said it was like a Dan Brown novel, which, irrespective of which book came first, is a valid opinion.

He said "sub dan brown novel" meaning derived from.

[Nicola]

Again, he said like a sub Dan Brown novel. :hmph:

[kyndig]

Again, he said like a sub Dan Brown novel. :hmph:

He is still implying that historian is derived in some ways from Dan Browns books which is false. And coming from someone who only managed to read half of the book how can he possibly give an accurate judgement of the book?

Anyway its not worth arguing over.

[Mord Sith]

Let's not forget that sub can also imply inferiority (in terms of standard), and let's face it; anything worse than the Da Vinci Code has to be terrible!

Incidentally; it is one of the worst books I've read. Sure, it was full of drama; twists and turns, but it was hardly exciting. That's not the worst though, I think the whole book as a written piece of work is just poor.

Also, I had a lot of trouble trying to read Dean Koontz's Velocity. I swear, it's the kind of thing a kid would write; language, plot and character description.

[Nicola]

And coming from someone who only managed to read half of the book how can he possibly give an accurate judgement of the book?
If a book is so bad, for whatever reason, in one's opinion to the point where they can no longer continue, I'd say that it's fair for that person to say that the book lacked something.

Anyway its not worth arguing over.
No, it's not. :)

[Spike Marshall]

As soon as the Team had an arbitary conversation with the first Hungarian they met, who happened to be the Key to getting to their next destination I gave up.

[DrBernie]

Earthsea series - (Usula le guin)
Complete borefest. Excessive descriptions about wether they'll use the world's wind or the mage's wind. Slow, any action seens last a page or two.

Master of the Grove -( the guy that wrote taronga)
easiest way to descripe it: zzz

Lord of the flies - william golding
I know it's a "classic" but this book was jsut too hard for me to relate to. I liked parts of it, but overall i wouldn't consider reading it again.

[Valkyrie]

*adds The Phantom of the Opera by Gaston Leroux to the list*

Maybe it's the translation, but what a way to ruin a great idea.

In response to Lord of the Flies - the book is very depressing and hard to read, that I can understand. It left a weird feeling in my gut when I finished it, I was pretty disgusted (frankly it was because Piggy (was that his name?) died). but it teaches plenty about how society works. I believe all the copies have an afterward about 50 pages long...I recommend you read it, it's fascinating stuff.

[Nicola]

I've read The Phantom of the Opera twice by Gaston Leroux.

I actually like that book. Granted, it was quite poorly written, and some aspects to the story were just bizarre, but as a fan of the musical, I found the extra information on Erik quite intriguing. The musical story is better though. More romantic and more magical, whilst the book rationally explained everything the Phantom could do.

It could just be down to the transalation, but the original french version was never met well by comtemporary critics either. If the silent film of POTO never came out in the 20s, Gaston Leroux's name would be forgotten. In fact, his books were already out of print by then.

[Amry]

There are no such thing as "bad" books.

However, I do have an aversion to reading the Malay classical literature (prosa klasik); I know you're supposed to value your heritage and stuff, but it's hard to do that when the said book is written in a language you can barely comprehend, which sends me to a near-catatonic state.

And don't get me started on anatomy textbooks; they're a downright bore.

Fiction... well, to be frank, I've never read a fiction I didn't like, ha.

[Spike Marshall]

There are no such thing as "bad" books.



Of course there are bad books, there are some books which are just laughably bad. And even if some cretin does gain some enjoyment out of it, it doesn't automatically make it a great piece of literature. It's like saying that because 1% of the world likes to be shot in the knee at close range, that knee capping is a good thing.

[Punishment]

I on the other hand though "The Phantom of the Opera" a piece of literary merit.

Sure you had to read a couple of chapters few times to get what was going but the general idea and plot was amazing. The idea of an Angel of Music to the Persian had a mystical aura to it.

From my experience or what I read critics actually praise this book. But I guess it is who you ask.

[Sartori]

I don't have the time or patience to finish or actually read a "bad book". I have enough trouble sitting down to read actual good books. There are several I want to read terribly, but I never get around to it.

So I will mention something out of the comic book world that gets to me, because I have read many of those and I actually have the time for those small self-contained moments. Anything and everything I've ever read by Howard Chaykin has been interminably droll. There are many Chaykin turd nuggets out there but "recently" he demonstrated just how much you cannot judge a book by its cover with... Bite Club. Frank Quitely's sensationalistic, detailed, and deliciously sadistic covers were just amazing, and yet they contain the most depressingly boring story about a priest cum two-bit hood slash vampire... ever. How in the fuck could there be a boring story about a priest/gangster/vampire? Chaykin manages to do it beautifully! Everything I've read by Chaykin contains this dry, boring, mish-mash of "controversial" bullshit with uninteresting storytelling. It's a travesty to even call it storytelling because if there was a story to even tell than maybe it might be available for the moniker. The nihilistic and morose individuals he populates his books with manage only to run on hamster wheels with no purpose whatsoever. There are some books that can get by brilliantly with sparse story, by sheer virtue of their design and message (i.e. We3, Chosen, Wanted, etc.). The only message Chaykin really has is, "I can write some seriously fucked up and uninteresting books about people who are seriously fucked up and uninteresting.... mmmmkay."

Done ranting...

[DrBernie]

In response to Lord of the Flies - the book is very depressing and hard to read, that I can understand. It left a weird feeling in my gut when I finished it, I was pretty disgusted (frankly it was because Piggy (was that his name?) died). but it teaches plenty about how society works. I believe all the copies have an afterward about 50 pages long...I recommend you read it, it's fascinating stuff.

I was disgusted and i understand what the message was but i just think it was so dry... i suppose it was written 50 odd years ago. still, it wasn't to my liking xP

EDIT: well now that i reread this, i feel that i'm being a bit bias. Although i dislike the book, its still 'well-written' and has a good message.... but i thought it was awful :)

[Thorn]

There were some books... But basically i just stop readin' if the book's bad, if it's really bad i just read it to the end to make fun of it, and if it's tragicaly-bad it just lands out the window (like my cd of st.anger of metallica, which is also tragical indeed).

From the first category that i've just stopped reading were many history books written by communists and some american bullshit about Hitler and World War II (it's funny 'cause the impact of America at WWII was pretty... small) 'cause they basically don't really know what they're writting about. OR they are finding some 'revelations' right now - that there were Jews in the army of Hitler... wow guys! European history-folks know it for 20 years now!
But american history books about europe can't beat communists bullshit. It's an opera of laughter and just... paranoia. I don't believe people believed such things. The rest is just silence.

The books i've read to the end just to make fun of them... There were some, but i can't recally any right now, it's mornin' and i'm asleeeeeep ;)

And those that fell through the window?
Oh god. You don't know that book for sure, it's local author dorota masłowska (poland) and it's just CRAP CRAP CRAP. Couldn't pass through that book, it's just a rape on books at all. At the language, and so on. It's a rape.

---

And there's another cathegory i've just figured out some time ago when i started to read in english. These are books that are 'done bad' by translations. I haven't read the Dragonlance saga in english, but i guess it's not so bad after all - but the polish translation has been done by somebody on drugs propably.
The worst translation i've ever seen? - Goddamn, that was "Fight Club" in my language, polish. THIS IS TRAGEDY. The guy/girl that done it shall be dead by now, cause it's so bad i have no words for it.

Also, despite that Pratchett is pretty good in polish translations, there are 2 people doing them. Main Discworld saga is done by a guy and some minor books by a girl. And this guy is really good at it, and of course has some lowdowns (he've done a terrible work with Jingo and Thief of time... i never liked Jingo... as long as i've read it in original) and that girl is just freaking crazy. You wouldn't get the idiotism of the translation 'cause you don't know polish, but believe me - it's shit, shit, shit. ;)

[Hydro]

Confessions of an Ugly Stepsister by Gregory Maguire - I shouldn't decide if a book is bad until i read the whole thing but in this case I just couldn't read any longer. I found it to be very slow and boring and every time i would try to read it I would fall asleep. It wasn't interesting although it could have been original if Maguire didn't write every single one of his books about the evil character of fairy tales.

[S.K]

He said "sub dan brown novel" meaning derived from.

It doesn't mean "derived from" at all.


Errrm bad books eh? I tried to re-read the Narnia books lately and found them to be pretty much tripe. I'm aware they're meant for children but that doesn't mean they have to be so shockingly unsubtle.

[Thorn]

I've never passed through Narnia. It was so... infantile i never had strength to survive it. I consider it a bad book then. :D

[DrBernie]

i only ever read the lion the witch and the wardrobe because it was a "class reading" in year 3 i think...

but strangely my brother loves them.


but for the list, not a whole book, just the introduction to Pawn of Prophecy by David Eddings (that's all i've read so far, i still think im going to like it when i get around to reading it).

A Separate Peace - Forget who, again.
This book was nothing more than a bunch of minor schoolboy events tied together with the fact that they involved the same characters. it flowed so terribly and had no storyline that compelled me to read on.