Gimme 1 book that you read in its entirety, but absolutely hated. (1 Viewer)

[Andy Dufresne]

The Tommyknockers caused me to stop reading Stephen King.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

I actually like the ending to IT, except for that one part of course. This is one of the vanishingly few Stephen King books that I actually ends in kind of a cool, satisfying way.

 

[massraider]

A Prayer for Owen Meany

I liked this!

American Psycho, by Bret Easton Ellis. I'll watch the movie on repeat. The book was painful. You know the guy from the Fyre Fest? Billy Whatshisface? If he wrote books, he'd be Bret Easton Ellis.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

I actually like the ending to IT, except for that one part of course. This is one of the vanishingly few Stephen King books that I actually ends in kind of a cool, satisfying way.

That surprises me. You had this big build up between good and evil, and then no battle. Nothing the good characters did made any difference.

To me it would be like watching the first Rocky movie and after all of Rocky's prep, and all the training, the bell rings and as Creed steps towards the middle of the ring he slips and breaks his leg. Leaving Rocky as the champ.

 

[scoobus]

The Scarlet Letter. Woooooooooooooof.

 

[Val Rannous]

Now, I'm a huge Heinlein fan (have been since I discovered his juveniles in like the 3rd grade), so this answer is going to be extremely painful to me, but even somebody's favorite author can have an "off day". In Heinlein's case, his off day for me was probably his most famous book - Stranger in a Strange Land.

Gaaaaah, this is just dreck. A load of "What if the Messiah was an alien?" nonsense surrounded by (even by his standards) Heinlein at his most preachy. None of the characters are that interesting, the story doesn't go anywhere, and the 1st half of the book doesn't even match the back half. Now, admittedly he got ill during the writing and there's about a 2 year gap in time where he had it on pause, but that's not an excuse.

It's like the worst of 60's counter culture clap trap decided "Hey, Man, let's talk about religion between tokes. Cool!" - and makes about as much sense.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

I actually like the ending to IT, except for that one part of course. This is one of the vanishingly few Stephen King books that I actually ends in kind of a cool, satisfying way.

That surprises me. You had this big build up between good and evil, and then no battle. Nothing the good characters did made any difference.

To me it would be like watching the first Rocky movie and after all of Rocky's prep, and all the training, the bell rings and as Creed steps towards the middle of the ring he slips and breaks his leg. Leaving Rocky as the champ.

I might be biased by the fact that I like the rest of the book so much. My main recollection of the ending is the way that everybody just forgot again. That's really poignant and hits differently when the book as an aging adult. Or at least it did for me.

I hate James Joyce, so I'm totally fine with "I don't care for this" as a sufficient explanation. No worries.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

I liked it so much so that I ended up reading basically everything Steinbeck ever wrote. For the most part I thought they were all hits.

Have you read The Red Pony? I had to quit after about three chapters because it was so bad. Flat out refuse to try any more.

 

[Rustoleum]

Rebecca
by Daphne du Blahblahblay

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Ulysses by James Joyce. It was assigned in an English Lit class when I was in High School. A few years later, I thought "maybe I was just too young to get Joyce" and read Finnegans Wake. Nope. 14 year-old me was right.

Also, anything by George Orwell. I gave him two chances, too.

I originally gave this a Like for the James Joyce hate, but I removed the Like for the Orwell hate.

I don't think I've ever met someone who disliked both of these gentlemen. They are about the most diametrically opposed writers that I can imagine, in terms of style. Well, maybe Joyce and Hemingway.

I have to come back to this post just to explain why I like Orwell so much. I know people are naturally going to assume that it's because of the political themes of 1984 and Animal Farm, and that's not unreasonable. But lots of writers far inferior to Orwell have tackled "dystopian future" scenarios. It's not just that.

One of the things that makes Orwell wonderful is his prose. Everything this guy ever wrote is straightforward and direct, with no unnecessary fluff. Even in his fiction, he's not the sort of person to rely on imagery or metaphor to slip one past your net. He wants to speak plainly and persuade you with his honesty. I didn't especially care for Homage to Catalonia because I just can't force myself to be interested in the Spanish civil war. But anybody who feels put off by 1984 might try that as a second attempt to understand why Orwell is so beloved.

The other thing I like about Orwell is that he was a prescient observer of human nature. He was absolutely gifted at being able to set aside his own political beliefs -- he was a man of the left, let's remember -- and see humans as they are. You can read through the "Newspeak" section of 1984 today, and point to real-life examples 75 years after he wrote it. We use terms like "memory hole" today because they capture something true about how a certain type of human society operates.

If their lives didn't overlap, I might be talked into the proposition that Christopher Hitchens was George Orwell reincarnated. The two of them are so similar it's eerie.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Rant on.

Books I had to read for class: The Scarlet Letter, The Old Man and the Sea, and The Bridge of San Luis Rey (Thornton WIlder).

Books that I figured life was too short to bother: Moby ****, War and Peace, and Siddharta. (I went through a Hesse period; but when I got to the pointlessness that is Siddharta, I quit forever.)

Also, Time Enough for Love by Heinlein. Creepy and pointless. And Rendezvous With Rama by Clarke. The only thing that book had to say was, "Aliens exist." It only needed the one sentence. Nothing else happens.

 

[rockaction]

Everything this guy ever wrote is straightforward and direct, with no unnecessary fluff

His essay about writing is brilliant.

"Good prose is like a windowpane. I cannot say with certainty which of my motives are the strongest, but I know which of them deserve to be followed. And looking back through my work, I see that it is invariably where I lacked a political purpose that I wrote lifeless books and was betrayed into purple passages, sentences without meaning, decorative adjectives and humbug generally." - George Orwell, "Why I Write"

Or this one, which is perfect. From "Politics and the English Language"

"Now that I have made this catalogue of swindles and perversions, let me give another example of the kind of writing that they lead to. This time it must of its nature be an imaginary one. I am going to translate a passage of good English into modern English of the worst sort. Here is a well-known verse from Ecclesiastes:

"I returned and saw under the sun, that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favour to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all.

Here it is in modern English:

Objective consideration of contemporary phenomena compels the conclusion that success or failure in competitive activities exhibits no tendency to be commensurate with innate capacity, but that a considerable element of the unpredictable must invariably be taken into account.

-George Orwell

 

[rockaction]

If their lives didn't overlap, I might be talked into the proposition that Christopher Hitchens was George Orwell reincarnated. The two of them are so similar it's eerie.

Didn't Hitchens write a book called Why Orwell Matters?

Indeed he did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Orwell_Matters

Maybe you'd enjoy it?

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

The DaVinci Code. I'm dumber for having read it.

Dan Brown is like M Night Shyamalan.
Great ideas, but someone else do the writing and filming please.

 

[rockaction]

One thing people are correct about in their skepticism of Orwell; however, is that he was likely aware of the plot of Evgeny Zamyatin's We, which he was seemingly heavily, um, influenced by in his portrayal of Big Brother as a party and the total submission of the individual to the state.

Zamyatin had seen the 1917 Russian Revolution and had witnessed part of the aftermath when he began to pen his dystopia, which is utterly brilliant. Orwell was not alone. If one can believe it, Zamyatin wrote a book that is half-1984 and half-Brave New World, combining the two elements that run throughout those books into one great whole. He, having had combined those themes and their same eerily similar characters and actions (and even settings) into one book about the individual and our yearnings as creatures with free will, is the rightful master of the dystopia, and his book predated and came long before either Huxley or Orwell's masterworks.

 

[Gordo]

I once told myself I was going to read more of the classics so I picked up Anna Karenina. Hate may be a bit of a strong word, but man it was a slog to finish it.

 

[shuke]

The Tommyknockers caused me to stop reading Stephen King.

I wouldn't say I hated it but it's probably my least favorite King book.

 

[shuke]

Vineland by Thomas Pynchon
A Canticle for Leibowitz by Walter M. Miller Jr.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Not to turn this into an Orwell-fest but I find it so interesting how someone who ascribed to leftism could be so critical of it.

Homage to Catalonia details his disillusionment with the cause he thought he was fighting for.

Keep The Aspidistra Flying skewers the idea that money acquisition shouldn't be a driving force in humanity.

Just an interesting dichotomy.

 

[Psychopav]

I liked it so much so that I ended up reading basically everything Steinbeck ever wrote. For the most part I thought they were all hits.

Have you read The Red Pony? I had to quit after about three chapters because it was so bad. Flat out refuse to try any more.

I don't think so. I may have to check it out, thanks!

 

[Spartans Rule]

I liked it so much so that I ended up reading basically everything Steinbeck ever wrote. For the most part I thought they were all hits.

Have you read The Red Pony? I had to quit after about three chapters because it was so bad. Flat out refuse to try any more.

The Red Pony is easily the worst book experience I ever had.

In 7th grade, we had this thing called electronic bookshelf where you read books, took a quiz to prove you read them, and then got points which determined your grade. Most books were worth 1 point, but long books or classics were worth 2 or 3. The Red Pony was the shortest 2-pointer by far, so I saw it as a nice shortcut to an A.

Awful read. The red pony dies early on, taking with it any semblance of a plot, and the last quarter of the book or so is just an old man rambling about injuns.

We also had to write book reports on 2 of the books we read, and since I was trying to game the system I had only read 2. I was so intent on not writing about The Red Pony that I frantically plowed through an entire additional book the night before the deadline.

 

[Psychopav]

Rant on.

Books I had to read for class: The Scarlet Letter, The Old Man and the Sea, and The Bridge of San Luis Rey (Thornton WIlder).

Books that I figured life was too short to bother: Moby ****, War and Peace, and Siddharta. (I went through a Hesse period; but when I got to the pointlessness that is Siddharta, I quit forever.)

Also, Time Enough for Love by Heinlein. Creepy and pointless. And Rendezvous With Rama by Clarke. The only thing that book had to say was, "Aliens exist." It only needed the one sentence. Nothing else happens.

Never did read Moby **** but Billy Budd and Bartleby the Scrivener are enough Melville for me thank you very much. I would prefer not to.

I liked War and Peace but Anna Karenina was more enjoyable for me. Siddhartha is a regular read for me. I pick it up again every few years.

 

[Psychopav]

I liked it so much so that I ended up reading basically everything Steinbeck ever wrote. For the most part I thought they were all hits.

Have you read The Red Pony? I had to quit after about three chapters because it was so bad. Flat out refuse to try any more.

The Red Pony is easily the worst book experience I ever had.

In 7th grade, we had this thing called electronic bookshelf where you read books, took a quiz to prove you read them, and then got points which determined your grade. Most books were worth 1 point, but long books or classics were worth 2 or 3. The Red Pony was the shortest 2-pointer by far, so I saw it as a nice shortcut to an A.

Awful read. The red pony dies early on, taking with it any semblance of a plot, and the last quarter of the book or so is just an old man rambling about injuns.

We also had to write book reports on 2 of the books we read, and since I was trying to game the system I had only read 2. I was so intent on not writing about The Red Pony that I frantically plowed through an entire additional book the night before the deadline.

What book, and did you like it?

 

[rockaction]

Just an interesting dichotomy.

It's either an intellectual rigor or completely dour temperament. Or both of those.

 

[rockaction]

Never did read Moby **** but Billy Budd and Bartleby the Scrivener are enough Melville for me thank you very much. I would prefer not to.

"Paradise of Bachelors," when read as a diptych with "The Tartarus of Maids" is one of the funnier, more prescient, cutting, and witty short stories you'll ever read. Melville was a master of slipping past the censor in double and triple entendres and meanings. He was a mad genius, son-in-law of famous jurist Lemuel Shaw in Massachusetts, who helped shaped American jurisprudence like few others in his scope and influence. Melville could hang with Shaw, to use a colloquialism, and his tempestuous relationship with Shaw's daughter was a thing of legend and consternation in the high arts society of the area of Pittsfield, Massachusetts, an area that Nathaniel Hawthorne called home for a bit. Thoreau bounced around the area also. What a triumvirate!

 

[ChiefD]

A Confederacy of Dunces

I’m sorry. I know a lot of you love this book. I own a copy. Every 5 years or so I pick it up and give it an honest try.

But it’s a rambling combination of words that end up being a crap salad. Terrible book.

 

[Spartans Rule]

What book, and did you like it?

I don’t remember the title, but it was about a high school baseball team, and I was enjoying the book up until the star player died in a car accident the night after they won the championship. I was exhausted from the all-nighter and totally unprepared for the dark twist, and I couldn’t hold back the tears.

 

[BobbyLayne]

Two-volume set that is an absolute slog

• Army of the Heartland: The Army of Tennessee, 1861-1862 (1967, 336 pages)
• Autumn of Glory: The Army of Tennessee, 1862--1865 (1971, 578 pages)

Written by a historian from LSU, Thomas Connelly. I must have spent six months falling asleep to those every night. It's considered the definitive complete history of the Confederacy's main army of the Western Theater. Absolutely the dryest sawdust I have ever endured.

---

I think I tore through Shelby Foote's Civil War trilogy (2984 pages) in one winter. Started around Thanksgiving and finished by Presidents Day. Weekends I would read 200+ pages. Best narrative history of the ACW for my money. The character development is amazing. I will admit the third volume was the hardest; by then I was rooting for the rebels and deeply saddened by their fate.

Grant said it best in his memoir:

I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least excuse.

Despite the fact they were treasonous traitors, I have great admiration for the brilliance of some of their campaigns. Plus they had fascinating leaders who were quirky as the day is long. They had far less industry & infrastructure, way less available manpower - the issue should have never been in doubt because mathes: 19.2m v 8.7m.

But it was a near thing.

 

[rockaction]

A Confederacy of Dunces

I’m sorry. I know a lot of you love this book. I own a copy. Every 5 years or so I pick it up and give it an honest try.

But it’s a rambling combination of words that end up being a crap salad. Terrible book.

Not here to tell you YOU'RE WRONG, but that maybe if you look at the book from the point of view of a man suffering a deep depression—a man who writes a deeply-felt, humorously madcap picaresque adventure novel that attempts to explain the growing pains of a person with deep sympathies to his hometown of New Orleans and all its contradictions you'll find yourself thinking differently about the book.

If you imagine the context and background; a troubled, Louisiana Catholic who cannot figure out the debauchery (gluttony, vice, sin, sex, money, criminality, betrayal) he sees all around his home city, especially when considering the deep religiosity and conservative sociopolitical outpourings from where the author grew up. The author might have simply done what many of us do. He might have called that hypocrisy and adopted a cynicism of some sort, or he might have done what he did, which is written a book whereby we are allowed to see that we're all really fragile human beings in a dynamic society that can act as a diamond bit on our souls with all the pressures and vices we face every day.

And the story is a product not just of its locale, but of its time, too. It happens in a time period where the late sixties were being anticipated from the beatnik fifties, and the characters in the book cannot help but reflect the seismic social changes about to happen. Toole wrote the book around '61-'63, but the characters sound straight out of 1968, so in addition to a lay of the land nonpareil, he was incredibly prescient and foresaw these things very much before they were widespread.

And if you keep all that in mind; that it's supposed to be funny but is tragic in its own way, then maybe then you'll come to a new appreciation of the book.

Then again, it could just be crap salad, which is as eloquent term as any that I've seen for the books and descriptions people have been giving.

 

[BobbyLayne]

There’s probably several that we were forced to read for English Lit but I’m assuming you mean more for pleasure. If so, then I can’t think of any as I would have stopped reading if I hated it.

I was forced to read Grapes of Wrath. But, then again, there were many books that I was forced to read that I really liked - Vonnegut is awesome, loved Shakespeare, and Night is the most impactful book I've ever read and probably ever will. I don't regard this as a disqualifier.

As an addendum I feel totally vindicated since Steinbeck is the lead in this unreadable dreck thread.

One of the best happy accidents of my childhood was a clueless aunt (I believe Uncle Rod, often in our foursome, referred to his spouse as a dingbat) bought me Breakfast of Champions for my 11th birthday. She thought it was a book about sports, and she knew I loved books and I loved sports.

Opened up a whole new world for me.

There's a lot of picks in this thread I loved when I read them, though I can also identify with people who hated inaccessible books which were a chore. But some of the characterizations seem offbase? Steinbeck is maybe not the best author for young boys, but one thing he is not (IMO) is pretentious. He writes in a natural, realist style with great economy. He often writes about ordinary folks and does so without drowning them in romantic flourishes.

I also love Hemingway. Simple, direct style appeals to my nature.

Joyce or Pynchon can go jump in a lake though. I hated having to read both of them.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Bartleby the Scrivener

Oh, dog, no.

Right up there with "Battle of the Ants".

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

One of the best happy accidents of my childhood was a clueless aunt (I believe Uncle Rod, often in our foursome, referred to his spouse as a dingbat) bought me Breakfast of Champions for my 11th birthday. She thought it was a book about sports, and she knew I loved books and I loved sports.

Opened up a whole new world for me.

Gee. Ya think?

Did you enjoy the drawing of a beaver?

 

[BobbyLayne]

One of the best happy accidents of my childhood was a clueless aunt (I believe Uncle Rod, often in our foursome, referred to his spouse as a dingbat) bought me Breakfast of Champions for my 11th birthday. She thought it was a book about sports, and she knew I loved books and I loved sports.

Opened up a whole new world for me.

Gee. Ya think?

Did you enjoy the drawing of a beaver?

The hand drawn * as a symbol for the sphincter made me giggle.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Catcher in the Rye is garbage.

 

[Mrs. Rannous]

Catcher in the Rye is garbage.

Yep. I forgot about that one. Didn't care for A Separate Peace either.

 

[kupcho1]

A Confederacy of Dunces

I’m sorry. I know a lot of you love this book. I own a copy. Every 5 years or so I pick it up and give it an honest try.

But it’s a rambling combination of words that end up being a crap salad. Terrible book.

You just made the list pal.

 

[bonsai]

The DaVinci Code. I'm dumber for having read it.

Now watch the movie.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

Whoa. This is my favorite book of all-time. Have happily read all 1093 pages multiple times.

I'm racking my brain for an answer, but I truly believe every book I didn't enjoy I just stopped reading. Even recalling back to college or high school where teachers required certain books to be read, I can't remember one being really awful I hate it by the end. Maybe The Odyssey if I had to pick one but, frankly, that's because I disliked my teacher and she focused on that book for a large part of the semester.

I like books (though law school killed any desire that I have to read for "fun").

I can’t stand king. He is the anti Orwell. He’ll turn “the room was dark”, into 12 pages.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

Whoa. This is my favorite book of all-time. Have happily read all 1093 pages multiple times.

I'm racking my brain for an answer, but I truly believe every book I didn't enjoy I just stopped reading. Even recalling back to college or high school where teachers required certain books to be read, I can't remember one being really awful I hate it by the end. Maybe The Odyssey if I had to pick one but, frankly, that's because I disliked my teacher and she focused on that book for a large part of the semester.

I like books (though law school killed any desire that I have to read for "fun").

I can’t stand king. He is the anti Orwell. He’ll turn “the room was dark”, into 12 pages.

When Stephen King passes, the ensuing debates about his legacy as a writer are going to be fascinating. There's no doubt that he's written a lot of mediocre books and more than his fair share of dreck. But if you pick from the upper tier, you can assemble of body of work that any author not named Hemingway or Nabakov would be proud of.

For example, I would argue that It and The Stand are legitimate all-time classics that are likely to still be read 50 years from now. Probably ditto for The Shining and Salems Lot.

Or, consider the Bachman Books. These are four novellas written under an assumed name, but look at how much cultural significance is packed into a volume that most people barely even remember:

• The Long Walk. This story has absolutely no mindshare among the general public, and it is almost never mentioned when discussing King's work, but pretty much ever male our age knows this story and has opinions about it.
• The Running Man. The movie was great, cheesy, 1980s fun. But everybody who has read the novella remembers the click-clack of the typewriters, the envelopes, the black Irish, the airplane, etc. The book barely even resembles the movie, and while the movie is good, the book is an order of magnitude better.
• Roadwork. Okay, not every short novel is memorable.
• The fourth story (Rage) is no longer available for sale anywhere, but you can make a strong argument that it had more impact on American culture than any work of fiction written by any author in the second half of the 20th century.

Did The Tommyknockers suck? Yep. Does King know how to write an ending? Nope. Is the median King novel essentially an airplane book? I think so. Should Stephen King be kept far, far away from movie sets? Definitely. But there are some real gems there.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

Whoa. This is my favorite book of all-time. Have happily read all 1093 pages multiple times.

I'm racking my brain for an answer, but I truly believe every book I didn't enjoy I just stopped reading. Even recalling back to college or high school where teachers required certain books to be read, I can't remember one being really awful I hate it by the end. Maybe The Odyssey if I had to pick one but, frankly, that's because I disliked my teacher and she focused on that book for a large part of the semester.

I like books (though law school killed any desire that I have to read for "fun").

I can’t stand king. He is the anti Orwell. He’ll turn “the room was dark”, into 12 pages.

When Stephen King passes, the ensuing debates about his legacy as a writer are going to be fascinating. There's no doubt that he's written a lot of mediocre books and more than his fair share of dreck. But if you pick from the upper tier, you can assemble of body of work that any author not named Hemingway or Nabakov would be proud of.

For example, I would argue that It and The Stand are legitimate all-time classics that are likely to still be read 50 years from now. Probably ditto for The Shining and Salems Lot.

Or, consider the Bachman Books. These are four novellas written under an assumed name, but look at how much cultural significance is packed into a volume that most people barely even remember:

• The Long Walk. This story has absolutely no mindshare among the general public, and it is almost never mentioned when discussing King's work, but pretty much ever male our age knows this story and has opinions about it.
• The Running Man. The movie was great, cheesy, 1980s fun. But everybody who has read the novella remembers the click-clack of the typewriters, the envelopes, the black Irish, the airplane, etc. The book barely even resembles the movie, and while the movie is good, the book is an order of magnitude better.
• Roadwork. Okay, not every short novel is memorable.
• The fourth story (Rage) is no longer available for sale anywhere, but you can make a strong argument that it had more impact on American culture than any work of fiction written by any author in the second half of the 20th century.

Did The Tommyknockers suck? Yep. Does King know how to write an ending? Nope. Is the median King novel essentially an airplane book? I think so. Should Stephen King be kept far, far away from movie sets? Definitely. But there are some real gems there.

OMG. I just realized that it was 'The Stand' that I meant had the poor ending, and not 'It'.

Sorry about that. I probably wasn't making much sense.

 

[tri-man 47]

Rant on.

Books I had to read for class: The Scarlet Letter, The Old Man and the Sea, and The Bridge of San Luis Rey (Thornton WIlder).

Books that I figured life was too short to bother: Moby ****, War and Peace, and Siddharta. (I went through a Hesse period; but when I got to the pointlessness that is Siddharta, I quit forever.)

Also, Time Enough for Love by Heinlein. Creepy and pointless. And Rendezvous With Rama by Clarke. The only thing that book had to say was, "Aliens exist." It only needed the one sentence. Nothing else happens.

Never did read Moby **** but Billy Budd and Bartleby the Scrivener are enough Melville for me thank you very much. I would prefer not to.

I liked War and Peace but Anna Karenina was more enjoyable for me. Siddhartha is a regular read for me. I pick it up again every few years.

I also enjoyed War and Peace, FWIW.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Stephen King's 'IT' has such a poor ending. The book started off decently enough but starts to get a little uninteresting towards the end. It seems like he wrote himself into a corner and just gives us a lazy, poor ending. Total letdown. Do not waste your time.

Whoa. This is my favorite book of all-time. Have happily read all 1093 pages multiple times.

I'm racking my brain for an answer, but I truly believe every book I didn't enjoy I just stopped reading. Even recalling back to college or high school where teachers required certain books to be read, I can't remember one being really awful I hate it by the end. Maybe The Odyssey if I had to pick one but, frankly, that's because I disliked my teacher and she focused on that book for a large part of the semester.

I like books (though law school killed any desire that I have to read for "fun").

I can’t stand king. He is the anti Orwell. He’ll turn “the room was dark”, into 12 pages.

When Stephen King passes, the ensuing debates about his legacy as a writer are going to be fascinating. There's no doubt that he's written a lot of mediocre books and more than his fair share of dreck. But if you pick from the upper tier, you can assemble of body of work that any author not named Hemingway or Nabakov would be proud of.

For example, I would argue that It and The Stand are legitimate all-time classics that are likely to still be read 50 years from now. Probably ditto for The Shining and Salems Lot.

Or, consider the Bachman Books. These are four novellas written under an assumed name, but look at how much cultural significance is packed into a volume that most people barely even remember:

• The Long Walk. This story has absolutely no mindshare among the general public, and it is almost never mentioned when discussing King's work, but pretty much ever male our age knows this story and has opinions about it.
• The Running Man. The movie was great, cheesy, 1980s fun. But everybody who has read the novella remembers the click-clack of the typewriters, the envelopes, the black Irish, the airplane, etc. The book barely even resembles the movie, and while the movie is good, the book is an order of magnitude better.
• Roadwork. Okay, not every short novel is memorable.
• The fourth story (Rage) is no longer available for sale anywhere, but you can make a strong argument that it had more impact on American culture than any work of fiction written by any author in the second half of the 20th century.

Did The Tommyknockers suck? Yep. Does King know how to write an ending? Nope. Is the median King novel essentially an airplane book? I think so. Should Stephen King be kept far, far away from movie sets? Definitely. But there are some real gems there.

I about crapped myself about a month ago when i came across a hardcover of The Bachman books at our small town library for $1. Someone must have recently donated it.

I agree with your post about 90%. Where i seem to differ from the masses is I have no love for his longer works or series. They have brilliant parts, but as a whole I think all of It, The Stand, and Dark Tower are bloated and meandering. Imo he is at his best in that 300-400 page range, or his short stories. Different Seasons needs a mention here too.

 

[beer 30]

I once told myself I was going to read more of the classics so I picked up Anna Karenina. Hate may be a bit of a strong word, but man it was a slog to finish it.

I took Advanced English in HS and the guy teaching the class came from a family of wealth and on at least two occasions flew to NYC for the weekend and taught the class on Monday in a tuxedo because he got off the plane about 7am after a couple of all nighters. Anyhow, he was a man of culture and thought we should be too so he foisted upon us his love for the classics. We read Anna Karenina, War and Peace, Crime and Punishment, The Death of Ivan Ilych and Other Stories and all the other tomes that aspiring juniors & seniors in HS relish. We had a lot fun in case but it was always a race to get the cliff notes before they all sold out so you could get your C on the book report.

 

[Don Quixote]

Rant on.

Books I had to read for class: The Scarlet Letter, The Old Man and the Sea, and The Bridge of San Luis Rey (Thornton WIlder).

Books that I figured life was too short to bother: Moby ****, War and Peace, and Siddharta. (I went through a Hesse period; but when I got to the pointlessness that is Siddharta, I quit forever.)

Also, Time Enough for Love by Heinlein. Creepy and pointless. And Rendezvous With Rama by Clarke. The only thing that book had to say was, "Aliens exist." It only needed the one sentence. Nothing else happens.

Never did read Moby **** but Billy Budd and Bartleby the Scrivener are enough Melville for me thank you very much. I would prefer not to.

I liked War and Peace but Anna Karenina was more enjoyable for me. Siddhartha is a regular read for me. I pick it up again every few years.

I also enjoyed War and Peace, FWIW.

I loved War and Peace and Anna Karenina. Tolstoy has some great short stories and novellas too if the length is the thing turning people off.

Moby **** was DNF though. Hated Melville’s writing style.

 

[kupcho1]

When Stephen King passes, the ensuing debates about his legacy as a writer are going to be fascinating. There's no doubt that he's written a lot of mediocre books and more than his fair share of dreck. But if you pick from the upper tier, you can assemble of body of work that any author not named Hemingway or Nabakov would be proud of.

Nabakov? Hemingway?

You've got to be kidding me. King has written some entertaining novels, but in no way should he ever be compared to either of these guys.

 

[kupcho1]

I also enjoyed War and Peace, FWIW.

War and Peace is a fantastic novel. I think because it is long it has become shorthand for boring. It is anything but boring.

I am pleasantly surprised that no one has mentioned Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. I assume that's because no one has actually read it in its entirety.

 

[Don Quixote]

I am pleasantly surprised that no one has mentioned Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. I assume that's because no one has actually read it in its entirety.

This one was a DNF for me, but I decided that I was reading it wrong. Had it on the Kindle, but that did not work well with all of the footnotes. Been on the list to try again fresh with a physical copy.

 

[kupcho1]

I am pleasantly surprised that no one has mentioned Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. I assume that's because no one has actually read it in its entirety.

This one was a DNF for me, but I decided that I was reading it wrong. Had it on the Kindle, but that did not work well with all of the footnotes. Been on the list to try again fresh with a physical copy.

I can't even imagine tackling that on a kindle. There's so much of the story in the footnotes

 

[-fish-]

The Tommyknockers caused me to stop reading Stephen King.

I wouldn't say I hated it but it's probably my least favorite King book.

King has said that it is embarrassingly bad, and that he was doing so much cocaine at the time that he doesn't even remember writing it.

 

[Don Quixote]

I am pleasantly surprised that no one has mentioned Infinite Jest by David Foster Wallace. I assume that's because no one has actually read it in its entirety.

This one was a DNF for me, but I decided that I was reading it wrong. Had it on the Kindle, but that did not work well with all of the footnotes. Been on the list to try again fresh with a physical copy.

I can't even imagine tackling that on a kindle. There's so much of the story in the footnotes

Yeah, I did not realize what I was getting into. I think I saw it as a Kindle Daily Deal for $1.99, and thought, ooh, good deal. Then realized why it was not.