The Worst Books Ever Written
	found on the Independent written by JackH, edited by George (Plastic) [ read unedited ] posted Wed 28 May 11:57am
		"Coming as the BBC is about to grace us with yet another Top 100 list (this time of the 100 most popular novels in English), Britain's Independent has gathered together many of the most prominent literary figures in Britain and asked them to tell the world their worst reading experiences," JackH writes. "From the Bible and Shakespeare to Harry Potter and the Lord of the Rings, few sacred cows are spared. JG Ballard's tribute to Finnegan's Wake serves as an example of what to expect: Finnegans Wake is the best example of modernism disappearing up its own fundament. "So, Plasticians, what reading experience was so jaw-droppingly awful that it drove you to the depths of despair? What book makes you wish for a return to the good old days of book burnings?"

[ more plastic... ]    

show almost all: 359 commentsbest: 5 comments by oldest first (ignore threads) newest first highest scores first oldest first newest first (ignore threads)

1.  Space Balls the Book   by Ozymandias       at Wed 28 May 12:05pm score of 1.5 astute     When I was a kid I read "Space Balls: The Book". This book is the exception that proves the rule "The book is always better than the movie." Of course I think this was an example of a book written after the movie simply to cash in, so maybe it doesn't count.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

261.  Re: Space Balls the Book   by bort13       at Thu 29 May 9:57am score of 1   in reply to comment 1     Ugh, somehow I remember picking it up and putting it down at the first chapter. I remember it having a description of the SW-spoofed opening shot: the large spaceship shot underneath. To illustrate the embellishment, the author writes something like "a section goes over. And another and another and another..." for about a paragraph. Very sharp wit.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   288.  Re: Space Balls the Book   by maml       at Thu 29 May 12:02pm score of 1   in reply to comment 1     Independence Day the book was much worse than the movie as well. I've blocked AI. I'm happier now.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   300.  Re: Space Balls the Book   by lukelightning       at Thu 29 May 1:14pm score of 1   in reply to comment 288     Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure was, shall we say, less than sterling caliber.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   334.  Re: Space Balls the Book   by Dop       at Fri 30 May 2:17am score of 1   in reply to comment 288     Although on the other hand the novelisation of the Tank Girl movie was far better than the film. And the author has quite kindly put it on his website so you can read it for free by downloading it from here.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

2.  Pull your hair out terrible....   by Andrew Dice Clay       at Wed 28 May 12:06pm score of 1.5 succinct     Worst ever: Ulysses Best ever: Ulysses Joyce lays claim to both. The book is both brilliant and annoying. The only book I keep re-reading every couple of years.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

60.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by greta       at Wed 28 May 2:26pm score of 1   in reply to comment 2     I'll second Ulysses. I've been trying to get through it for about five years and never finish more than a 100 pages before I want to tear the damned thing apart. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, I'm a dumbass   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   132.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by DropDeadGorgias       at Wed 28 May 7:03pm score of 1   in reply to comment 2     I consider myself fairly well-read, so I'm ashamed to say that I've never actually made it all the way through any of Joyce's works. I've made several attempts at Portrait of The Artist but I can't seem to force myself.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   149.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by eminem enterprises       at Wed 28 May 8:37pm score of 1   in reply to comment 2     I've read it twice (to give it a fair chance), and the only part I really like is in the middle where he flirts with the lame girl on the beach, and you hear what each other is thinking. Now that is great writing. And Molly's speech at the end is eminently readable (and pretty racy). But generally, I find Ulysses to be one big "WTF?". Undoubtedly it's because I don't get all the mythological allusions. Everybody has a share   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   287.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by Andrew Dice Clay       at Thu 29 May 12:00pm score of 1.5 helpful   in reply to comment 149     Yep. Maybe not "the worst", but a book that you need ANOTHER DAMN BOOK to help you through it!!! Arrgghhh!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   317.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by beelers       at Thu 29 May 4:34pm score of 1   in reply to comment 2     While Joyce is on the ground, let me get a few kicks in. "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" was fairly interesting until the last third of the book where the majority was composed in Latin. I didn't take Latin. I had a bit of etymological education, but never focused on Latin. Visit www.beelers.org. Check out the Occasional Rant.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   325.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by Andrew Dice Clay       at Thu 29 May 6:58pm score of 1   in reply to comment 317     Ahh... Thank Jeebus for Catholic Schools. BTW. Do they still teach Latin? (Yes. I'm a 40 year old geezer.)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   327.  Re: Pull your hair out terrible....   by beelers       at Thu 29 May 7:18pm score of 1   in reply to comment 325     No they don't, from a 31-year-old's perspective. Visit www.beelers.org. Check out the Occasional Rant.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

3.  Ouch.   by jefito       at Wed 28 May 12:11pm score of 1.5 intriguing     Worst reading experience ever? Easy. The short story from which I took my sig. I read it once and destroyed my copy. Not sure where, or if, you can find it, but unless you're in the mood for some of the most hackneyed sci-fi and horrible dialogue ever written, don't bother looking. A distant runner-up would be Never Count Out The Dead, by Boston Teran. I only finished it because I was on a plane and had nothing else to do. Want to improve the overall quality of writing in the world today? Write something great and submit it to a literary journal. Back on Earth, there was cheering. --Kerry Fray, "Gaia & Chronos"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

4.  Incoming mail...   by Tashtego       at Wed 28 May 12:13pm score of 1     The book that drove me to the depths of despair was Gravity's Rainbow. I was led to it by way of Infinite Jest, and a desire to sample some more pomo literature. I so wanted to like Thomas Pynchon, but I just couldn't finish this book, and it completely took the wind out of my sails, so much so, that for the next couple of years I only wanted to read stuff like Moby Dick and the O'Brian Aubrey/Maturin novels. Liberals apparently make huge sweeping generalizations without one iota of evidence to back them up.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

18.  Thanks!   by sglover910       at Wed 28 May 12:49pm score of 1   in reply to comment 4     The book that drove me to the depths of despair was Gravity's Rainbow No despair for me, but extreme ambivalence. There are long sections of the book that really grabbed me, that I still think of — but as a whole, it just doesn't hang together. I've gone back through it, hoping to find the uber-meaning that makes it coherent, but I just don't think it's there. Worse, the book made me all hot and bothered about the wonder-plastic Imipolex G, but my local petrochemical store doesn't carry it.... An argument isn't merely nay-sayings and contradictions! M. Python   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   257.  Re: Thanks!   by tevenson       at Thu 29 May 8:46am score of 1   in reply to comment 18     No despair for me, but extreme ambivalence. There are long sections of the book that really grabbed me, that I still think of — but as a whole, it just doesn't hang together. I've gone back through it, hoping to find the uber-meaning that makes it coherent, but I just don't think it's there. I'll second that. The only reason I got through it was that I was traveling in non-english speaking countries for 2 months, and it was the only book I had. There was a lot slogging, but there were also bits that were just superb. Years later, I ran across a "companion" to Gravity's Rainbow in a book store. This tome was at least 1,000 pages long, and a minute of flipping through it convinced me that I didn't understand *the first thing* about the novel. Ah, well.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   65.  Re: Incoming mail...   by Tbola       at Wed 28 May 2:46pm score of 1   in reply to comment 4     The book that drove me to the depths of despair was Gravity's Rainbow. Oh thank god. Someone else said this. I remember reading about this book being a classic that so many have started, and so few finished... I just had to take a shot at it. And parts of it I loved. But sweet mother of god, I think it's broken me. The bookmark is still sitting at around page 600. I humour myself sometimes, that I will finish it off... but I stopped claiming it out loud, as my wife just laughs at me. (She hid it on me a month ago, and I didn't notice!) Starve them out - block the A.I.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   79.  Re: Incoming mail...   by cloudofdust       at Wed 28 May 3:19pm score of 1   in reply to comment 4     I admit I've read Gravity's Rainbow 4 1/2 times. The first time I read it I slogged through and had no idea what I had just read when I finished. The second time I went to read it I put it down after the first 200 pages. After that it has gotten more interesting and enjoyable with every reading. I'll probably read it again in the next year. I'm not bragging or encouraging anyone to read it. I'm just saying it works for me.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   95.  Re: Incoming mail...   by Tashtego       at Wed 28 May 4:08pm score of 1   in reply to comment 79     After that it has gotten more interesting and enjoyable with every reading. Any pointers? What exactly is the appeal for you? When I was trying to read it, I kept getting the feeling that you get when attempting to eavesdrop on a conversation that's just barely out of earshot — you know there's something interesting going on, and you pick up words and even sentences here and there, but no matter how hard you strain, you just can't fucking follow it. Liberals apparently make huge sweeping generalizations without one iota of evidence to back them up.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   153.  V-2   by eminem enterprises       at Wed 28 May 9:04pm score of 1   in reply to comment 79     It's hard to be objective about books that grabbed you when you were young. After I read it three times or so, GR became a part of myself-identity. It may indeed be crap, but I am in no position to judge. Just to break it down, here are a few things that got to me: 1. Pynchon's blending of science and mysticism, tragedy and comedy, history and fantasy. I now have no patience for attempts to draw bright yellow lines between ostensibly opposite concepts. [inhales toke] "It's all connected, man!" 2. The way none of the characters are judged by the author, no matter what horrible deeds they do. I find it helped me to learn not to demonize other people, even if they are assholes, and accept whatever good they have to offer. 3. The sheer length and density of the book transports you away from this mundane life. reading it is like embarking on an exhausting but ultimately satisfying quest. "Mason & Dixon" got better as it went along, and is an intriguing portrait of America, but is too didactic. GR is a work of high art, with no obvious political agenda. I would say GR's emotional agenda is to thoroughly explore heartbreaking sadness. Even in the boat orgy scene, which probably is supposed to take place around July 1945, the thing I remember most is the Japanese guy talking about his family back in the beautiful city of Hiroshima. And let's not forget that the "filthiest toilet in Scotland" scene in "Trainspotting" is a direct lift from GR. Everybody has a share   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   136.  All These Trees Are Blocking My View Of The Forest   by cloudofdust       at Wed 28 May 7:22pm score of 1.5 helpful   in reply to comment 95     I felt the same way after the first 1 1/2 readings. My readings have taken place over 15 years during which time I read all Pynchon's other books. Other than Mason & Dixon, they are all more accesible than GR. What I realized is that I really love the way the guy writes. Many times I've found myself reading a sentence in one of his books two or three times just to enjoy the way it's constructed. It's weird but his sentence architecture fascinates me no end. I think by the time I was ready to tackle GR for the third time I had inoculated myself with his style to a point that I wasn't overwhelmed by all the detail and divergent storylines. For me, each reading has taken the details further into the background while some really interesting patterns and themes have come forward. After finishing it the last time I really felt rewarded for the time and effort I've but into it over the years. I've come to see GR as like one of those enormous murals that used to get painted on statehouse rotundas. There are all these little stories and you have to decode them and become familar with them before you can turn your attention to the larger themes otherwise the detail keeps getting in the way. So that's my slobbery fanboy rant. I think the relationship between a reader and a book is unique and personal so I don't get all bent that Pynchon gets slagged every time books get discussed on Plastic. Different strokes and all that.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   181.  Re: V-2   by slothrop       at Wed 28 May 10:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 153     Not to mention some of the lyrics to "Smells Like Teen Spirit" are clearly at least inspired by GR. Oh, one thing I've got to disagree with. While it is only one Pynchonian arc among many, the way I see it GR (along with M&D) is highly political in its agenda. How you missed the politics of the preterite, I do not know. There's a definite take on big business, globalization, economies creating their own demand, environmental pollution, genocide, cultural relativism, a-and (of course) war sucking... These are all subjects with a political tinge to them. For the folks that have given up on it, all I can say is this: the first time you read it, you've got to give up on trying to make sense of it. Things will not make sense for at least the first 150 pages, but for me that was just fine because the writing alone kept me glued. The book is incredibly deep in it's various connections and cultural/historical references, and new things pop up each time I work through it. There's a companion book by Weisenburger that's not too bad, and if for whatever reason, you're extremely motivated and determined to read GR and "understand" it, I recommend it. But of course, being the main character, I'm biased.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   183.  Jeez ...   by eminem enterprises       at Wed 28 May 11:13pm score of 1   in reply to comment 181     Serves me right for talking out my ass about a book I haven't read for many years. Of course, you're right. But Pynchon's agenda in GR isn't as obvious as it is in, say, "Vineland" (i.e. Nixon/Hoover killed the Woodstock Generation, with a little help from members of the Woodstock Generation). As you say, GR is "incredibly deep", and we can all find different aspects to appreciate with different readings. That's what I call high art. Everybody has a share   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   214.  Re: Incoming mail...   by peppyhare       at Thu 29 May 5:33am score of 1   in reply to comment 95     I kept getting the feeling that you get when attempting to eavesdrop on a conversation that's just barely out of earshot When I get that feeling, I put the book down and don't bother picking it back up. I know there's a lot of "important" literature out there I'm missing because of that, but with well over 5,000 books under my belt I can't imagine I'm missing much. I did read Moby Dick, Shakespeare, Dante, and John Frickin' Milton as part of my literature degree, but even the people who read Ulysses got on my nerves in lit classes. The book itself was intolerable. My idea of a great writer is Issac Asimov. The man did not fuck around. He wrote clearly and plainly, and I never had to go back to figure out what he had just said. There's beauty in complexity, and there's beauty in simplicity. I think expressing difficult concepts with simple clarity requires more work on the part of the writer, and I respect it more. I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club -- Pearl Jam, Satan's Bed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   272.  Speaking of Trainspotting...   by greta       at Thu 29 May 10:33am score of 1   in reply to comment 153     The book by Irvine Welsh was okay, a little mentally warped and difficult to read because it was written in dialect, but it was good enough to be entertaining. Then I read another of his works, Marabou Stork Diaries. I wanted everyone in it to die a horrible painful death. It was so bad. Not a redeeming quality in it I can think of. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, I'm a dumbass   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   179.  Re: Incoming mail...   by fleacircus       at Wed 28 May 10:48pm score of 1   in reply to comment 4     The book that drove me to the depths of despair was Gravity's Rainbow. I was led to it by way of Infinite Jest, and a desire to sample some more pomo literature There but for the grace of God... I read Infinite Jest and enjoyed it. DFW is a great writer, although I sort of preferred Inteveriews with Hideous Men but only in small, controlled doses. Anyway no doubt IJ leads to GR, but I'd read The Crying of Lot 49 years earlier and I considered Pynchon an overrated waste of time by then and so I wasn't tempted.. I think The Glass Bead Game is highly overrated, it was recommended to me as a joke, and I bought it, literally. gargamel sings   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   207.  Moby Dick?   by boogabooga       at Thu 29 May 3:34am score of 1   in reply to comment 4     On a trip to Europe, I finished a book and needed a new one. Moby Dick offered the most pages for the buck (the only way to judge a book, really) at the street booksellers in front of the Uni in (the former) East Berlin. I though, "Moby Dick, cool." Then I read past the first three or four chapters. ... It was only about a year later (as I still had it on my bedside) that a girlfriend told me you were supposed to skip all the parts about knots and sails such. Gee, thanks. Melville needed an editor, that's for sure.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   215.  Re: Moby Dick?   by peppyhare       at Thu 29 May 5:38am score of 1   in reply to comment 207     Yeah, you need to get right to the parts where he's wallowing in sperm whale oil. Had a lovely discussion in lit class on that, and what Melville was really trying to say. We also discussed extensively the need for better editing. Part of it, though, is simply context. Knots and sails were the lifeblood of plenty of Melville's contemporaries. Stories in which guns, or cars, or computers today figure largely may in the future be incomprehensibly dull to an audience that doesn't interact with those things anymore. I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club -- Pearl Jam, Satan's Bed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   208.  Re: Incoming mail...   by Rev. DOG.       at Thu 29 May 3:41am score of 1   in reply to comment 4     This isn't so much about Gravity's Rainbow, which I've (sadly...or maybe not) yet to read (tho' I would like to), but another book that I sort of got through Infinite Jest (which I'm about to read) by proxy (to clear it up, a friend of mine has IJ as his favorite book, and has been edging me into reading it, so I've been testing the waters with other pomo-type books, including some of DFW's others). This is the worst book I have read in my life: Bear v. Shark by Chris Bachelder. Basically, it's about a Typical American Family (tm) who goes to Las Vegas to see Bear V. Shark (he actually goes out of his way to clarify that it IS "Bear V. Shark", and not "Bear Vs. Shark", "Bear Versus Shark" or "Bear vs. Shark" or any other iteration on that you can think of.) 3. Which is a fight between a Shark and a Bear, only it's not actually a Real Shark and a Real Bear, but computer simulations of same. And there's all sorts of media coverage and we're becoming sheep from all the media. Whoo-ee. [NOTE: The reason I read the book was because from the blurb I read, it sounded like it was a collection of fictional essays in different styles, debating that question as if it was "Should we have prayer in school" or "Is abortion right or wrong?" or something like that. This is NOT what BvS is. If it were what BvS was, then BvS might not have been so much utter pain to read.] Good things about it: 1) If you're slow, you can read it in maybe 2 hours. Bad things about it: Everything else. First off, basically, there is no one person who loves Chris Bachelder more than Chris Bachelder. I am sure that on the day he decided to write BvS, he had it down to Showing The World How Brilliant And Clever He Is, or spending another day in front of the full length mirror physically displaying his deep, deep love for himself. Every single thing in the book is so... overly cutesy and, just... nauseating. It's basically the literary equivalent of being locked in a room with a five-year-old hopping up and down shrieking "LOOK AT ME LOOK AT ME I'M SO CLEVER LOVE ME! LOVE ME! I'M SO SMART!" On one of the techniques he uses — have you ever seen one of those music videos by a mediocre-at-best punk band, where all throughout the video there's posters or T-shirts with the names/pictures of waaaay better punk bands? With the hope that you'll go "Oh, well, I love the Ramones, I must love these guys too!"? Well, that's basically what Bachelder's doing. He name checks (I actually, while reading it, kept a tally going) David Foster Wallace 4 times and Thomas Pynchon 5. And it was always so... ingratiating. You could tell that he was name-dropping for credibility — "See, I'm a good author, because I know who DFW is!" (which was obvious, since he swiped a couple things outright (very poorly, I might add...) from _Brief Interviews With Hideous Men_, and, well, probably quite a few others, since, well, as I noted, I've not read any Pynchon, nor much DFW). Speaking of swiping, apparently the Thrust of His Book was stolen from another book, The Predators," by Mark Washburn and Robert Webb (Stein and Day, 1984) [Note: I have not read this book, although it appears the whole thing of basing a satire around "who would win in a fight: a shark or a bear" fits this novel to a T, and other people who HAVE read both books have mentioned the connection]. The sad thing is, where normally I would have wanted to read The Predators, Bear V. Shark was so goddawful, I've got my doubts that anything that could have "inspired" it could be any good. As for the writing itself? Even if you can get past the acute self-love, it's piss-poor. Bachelder has NO FLAIR for the English langauge, and it's just... utterly boring to read. He seems to think that he can confuse Gimmickry for Talent (each of the chapters are about 1-3 pages long, aside from one which is an Interview On TV With The Author, Describing The Action In The Book As A Play By Play, Which Is Really So Damned Clever, Don't You Think?; he often uses short, clipped sentences; he often mixes characters' thoughts into the prose as standard description; he comes up with Clever inventions to show that this is the Not-Too-Distant Future, etc). Even when David Foster Wallace isn't really writing about anything for the most part, he at least makes the language interesting and beautiful, and, thus, engaging. When I read it (about a month ago), I was thinking of writing a short parody of the thing to show just how awful it is. I got derailed, and unfortunately, I don't remember the style well enough to do one now. But, basically, combine Insipid Statements About Our Culture, with a new Chapter heading every couple lines. Also, keep referring to yourself in a way that makes sure the reader knows what a great and wonderful guy you are. One thing that I found amusing — I picked this book up about 3 months after it came out (Jan. 2003, I got it in March). I got it used, from Half.com, for 2 dollars. That's not the amusing part. The amusing part is that it was a cast-off from a library. That should have really read the entire comment...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

5.  The Book That All Kids Love To Hate.   by MAYORBOB       at Wed 28 May 12:14pm score of 1.5 brilliant     Silas Marner by George Eliot. God, how I hated that book when we were forced to read it in 8th grade English. The pain that I incurred from having to study every freaking chapter of what, for me, was an interminably dull book, was so intense that it might explain my reluctance to read any 19th century English author. Of course the other explanation was that I was a lazy 13-year-old lout. The thought occurred to me that, wouldn't it be difficult to name the worst book ever written as, in its sheer wretchedness, it would have been consigned to the trash heap many moons ago? Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

7.  Re: The Book That All Kids Love To Hate.   by jefito       at Wed 28 May 12:20pm score of 1   in reply to comment 5     The thought occurred to me that, wouldn't it be difficult to name the worst book ever written as, in its sheer wretchedness, it would have been consigned to the trash heap many moons ago? Definitely. It's much easier to finish, say, a bad album or movie than it is to read a terrible book start-to-finish. I don't think bad books are finished too often after one graduates. And now that I think about it, in my original post, I forgot about being forced to read Kafka's Metamorphosis in high school. Yikes. Back on Earth, there was cheering. --Kerry Fray, "Gaia & Chronos"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   220.  Re: The Book That All Kids Love To Hate.   by John the Cynic       at Thu 29 May 5:55am score of 1   in reply to comment 5     Ah Silas Marner . I think my Dad read one "classic" in his life and that was it. After hearing how awful it was growing up I was disappointed- it was boring but not awful. Now for a truly bad book skip the classics and go for trash- Flowers in the Attic by V.C. Andrews. I read this book over 20 years ago and its sheer awfulness has stuck with me since. An contrived premise, tedious writing, a lame ending; this piece of crap had everything. I'm still trying to get through Ulysses . Perhaps by this Bloomsday....   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   253.  Re: The Book That All Kids Love To Hate.   by coalcracker       at Thu 29 May 8:30am score of 1   in reply to comment 220     All this talk about Silas Marner reminds me of the other great "classic" of that era — Ethan Fromme. That's the thick book in which exactly one thing happens — a sledding accident. Compared to Ethan Fromme, Silas Marner might as well be a 1980s Schwarzenegger action flick.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   307.  Re: The Book That All Kids Love To Hate.   by k       at Thu 29 May 1:53pm score of 1   in reply to comment 253     Oooh! "Ethan Frome"! Sorry, but I loved it. All that repressed desire. Must be the Catholic youth in snowy upstate New York, but I thought it was hot.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   354.  Re: The Book That All Kids Love To Hate.   by slavdude       at Fri 30 May 12:34pm score of 1   in reply to comment 5     Actually, the one that I thought really sucked was Treasure Island. I had to read it in junior high (I happened to have bronchitis that week, so I missed out on the [sarcasm]scintillating[/sarcasm] discussion of the book). To this day I can't understand what people see in R. L. Stevenson. He's a horribly overrated writer, as is Joseph Conrad [flame-suit on]. Tomorrow I will be sober, but you will still be ugly.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

6.  Rainbow Six, by Tom Clancy   by richlove       at Wed 28 May 12:14pm score of 1.5 funny     In my youth, I was a war-porn fan, and Clancy was the best (IMHO, he lost it around _Clear and Present Danger_, but that's another thread). Rainbow Six, however, was an advertisement for the video game of the same name; the even #'d chapters were missions (Assault the Castle), the odd chapters equivalent to game cut-scenes. It was also poorly written, and poorly edited, and the characters were one-dimensional. When I hurled it across my bedroom it knocked my closet door off its rails.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

107.  Re: Rainbow Six, by Tom Clancy   by Paradigm Lost       at Wed 28 May 4:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 6     The worst book I've ever paid money for would have to be "The Bear and The Dragon" by Tom Clancy. I got it from the bargain bin for a couple of bucks, and still paid too much. I read every word of that badly constructed garbage, and despite being told how it ends (Psst! America wins!) I was amazed at the complete lack of payoff for all my reading. I still have it in my bookshelf in case some masochist ever wants to borrow a book, or I take up origami again. What I learnt from this experience is that you don't HAVE to finish the book. Sometimes giving up is the right thing to do. The World is Dying. Nexus War   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   286.  Did you notice the part...   by coryb       at Thu 29 May 11:49am score of 1   in reply to comment 107     About the American spy who was pretending to be a Japanese businessman or something like that? Everything that idiot did would have been a total tip-off that he was American. And Clancy was sure to tell us that he was one of the best... Clancy is an idiot. How did he become so popular?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   130.  Re: Rainbow Six, by Tom Clancy   by helper monkey       at Wed 28 May 6:40pm score of 1   in reply to comment 6     I second this. Great game, really sucky book.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   174.  Anything by Tom Clancy   by Nameless Cynic       at Wed 28 May 10:16pm score of 1   in reply to comment 130     I never read Rainbow 6, but I've read other Clancy. (He was the writer among military types during the Reagan years. Had to.) The man has absolutely no ability at writing people. He writes situations, and he writes hardware. He does his research, and knows exactly what each piece of equipment will do. Unfortunately, he treats his characters as just another piece of equipment. No life. They might as well be computer programs. Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   247.  Re: Anything by Tom Clancy   by Petronius       at Thu 29 May 8:00am score of 1   in reply to comment 174     Its interesting to see Clancy and Pynchon mentioned in the the same thread. Pynchon (I liked his earlier novel V. a lot)is an Official Artist, who is supposed to be Important, even if you don't really understand what he's saying. Official Art is like medicine, its supposed to be good for you, not taste nice. Clancy, on the other hand, is unapologetically a writer of potboilers, and in some of his spin-offs like the OP-Center series he doesn't even write them. He never has pretended to be an artist. He's who you want for a long plane ride. Of course, like all good businessmen he had a gift for timing. His arrival in the Reagan years with the message that the US might just beat the Bolsheviks after all turned out to be just what the market wanted. The fact that he was right was just icing on the cake. What rescues us from insignificance is the courage of our questions and the depth of our answers. Carl Sagan   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   251.  Be fair   by sglover910       at Thu 29 May 8:20am score of 1   in reply to comment 174     Among authors who own Sherman tanks, Clancy's the best! An argument isn't merely nay-sayings and contradictions! M. Python   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   258.  Sherman Tanks are one thing.   by MAYORBOB       at Thu 29 May 9:03am score of 1   in reply to comment 251     But the truly successful author needs something with a bit more of an edge to it. Say hello to Stephen King's new houseboat. Tending to final details.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   275.  Nice athletic facilities   by sglover910       at Thu 29 May 10:40am score of 1   in reply to comment 258     Say hello to Stephen King's new houseboat Lotsa space on the deck, and a catapult --that baby looks great for softball practice! An argument isn't merely nay-sayings and contradictions! M. Python   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   290.  Unusual entertainment facilities   by Nameless Cynic       at Thu 29 May 12:15pm score of 1   in reply to comment 275     What I want to know is, what kind of lob can you get off that catapult? And what kind of weight? Think of that for a summer day. Cooler of beer, a stack of burgers, and an afternoon spent lobbing engine blocks, old pianos, random neighborhood children... Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   356.  Re: Anything by Tom Clancy   by slavdude       at Fri 30 May 12:43pm score of 1   in reply to comment 174     I have to agree. I admit that I enjoyed his first 2 or 3 books (I have an original edition of The Hunt for Red October published by the Naval Institute Press), but I stopped reading his "work" after that novel about Jack Ryan being the President. His characters, especially the bad guys, become more and more like cartoons the more he writes. P.S. Did you ever notice how much the guy Bush originally picked to run post-war Iraq looks like Tom Clancy? Tomorrow I will be sober, but you will still be ugly.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   246.  Re: Rainbow Six, by Tom Clancy   by coalcracker       at Thu 29 May 7:55am score of 1   in reply to comment 6     The most cringe-inducing thing I've ever read? Any love scene in any Tom Clancy book. You'll want to take a cold shower. With bleach.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

8.  Mutant Message Down Under   by random1       at Wed 28 May 12:25pm score of 1.5 compelling     I had the misfortune of reading this horrible excuse for a book. Fortunately it's quite short, so it didn't waste too much of my life, but talk about a book with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Poorly written, stupid story, etc. I almost always finish books I start, no matter how poor(a character flaw, I suppose), but as I said, it was short.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

193.  Re: Mutant Message Down Under   by Peter Murphy       at Thu 29 May 1:18am score of 1.5 informative   in reply to comment 8     I'm glad someone brought Mutant Message Down Under up. It's a bad book not so much for her banal style, but for the deceit underlying it. Basically, she's mutated Australian Aboriginal Culture into a "Sweet-And-Easy" New Age message for the naive. Here's the story of the book. Marlo Morgan (the author) comes to Australia, and comes into contact with a Tribe called the Mutants. They take her into the desert, detoxify her, and tell her about their culture for a couple of months. Then they appoint her as their Westerner "prophetess", to spread their "Stop War Make Peace" message to the world. They dump her at the nearest large city. She writes the book. The end. The story behind the story? Marlo Morgan is a callow middle-aged woman recovering from a divorce. She visits Australia for a week or so, and decides to make her own New Age book about it. Rather than research the wide range of Aboriginal cultures available, she digs into her imagination (which is full of a mishmash of "natural healing" remedies and watered-down Native Americans pop anthropology), and then passes it off as Aboriginal culture. The ignorant but well meaning take it as authentic. The local Aboriginal groups get furious at how their culture has been misrepresented for financial profit. Some even call for it to be destroyed. Even not knowing this, I would have concluded the author is a fraud. There are several passages where my bullshit detector has gone off the graph. For example, Marlo mentions she is made to walk barefoot, and treads over spinifex to toughen her feet. She describes spinifex as "beach grass". If only. Spinifex are extremely spiny bushes with spikes growing up to two metres long. You tread on spinifex and you'll instantly have more piercings than the Jim Rose Circus. Of course, true authenticity has never been one of the New Age movement, where unpleasant details are left out if they're too distracting or disturbing. That's one of the annoying things about the book — it is extremely vague about details. Marlo refuses to say exactly where she was; all she states is that she was in an "unspecified Australian city", and left it at that. Of course, it's hard to be caught out in a lie if you are vague on details, but maybe I'm being too cynical. ;-) Actually, Marlo has recanted... sort of. In the first edition, she states it is an accurate portrayal of her trip in the desert. In the second edition, she states this as well, but then also prints on the next page that it is a "work of fiction". Nice to have her cake and eat it too, eh? But has she recanted after all? She's been back to her old tricks, writing another crap book about Australia... I think the best summary of the book was made here: Ultimately, this book is nor about spiritual matters. It is about the unscrupulous transformation of an indigenous culture already under assault. The Wild People become a commodity made palatable to Western Audiences. In Morgan's hands, Aboriginal culture is packaged into a slim book and soon, alas, probably will become a slim movie... Let us hope that Aboriginal people will attack the message in MMDU for what I believe it is: a book about misrepresentation, appropriation and concoction, about spiritless white middle-class mid-life-crisis feel goodism. Exactly.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

9.  Books, glorious books   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 12:27pm score of 1     Bel Mooney: Novelist and broadcaster American Psycho by Brett Easton Ellis I found it a revolting diatribe against women, masquerading as super-cool wit. Quite so. An awful, awful novel. Other contenders on my personal list: A Separate Peace by John Knowles. Moby-Dick by Herman Melville. The Mayor of Casterbridge by Thomas Hardy. Anything and everything by Nathaniel Hawthorne. As a bonus, some decent, but incredibly overrated novels: Beloved by Toni Morrison. Song of Solomon is much better. American Gods by Neil Gaiman. Maybe it's groundbreaking if you've never read Gaiman before — I found it to be an experience not unlike a graphic novel without the artwork. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger. Why doesn't it seem to bother anybody else who's read this book that the protagonist is just as shallow, dim-witted, and self-centered as everyone he's endlessly bitching about? Would make the other list if not for his little sister, the only likeable character in the book. "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

28.  Re: Books, glorious books   by rombuu       at Wed 28 May 1:22pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     American Gods by Neil Gaiman. Maybe it's groundbreaking if you've never read Gaiman before — I found it to be an experience not unlike a graphic novel without the artwork. I'm glad to hear someone else say something negative about that book. I found it kind of a pale imatation of things Gaiman had done before, and better, in his comics. Even in his novels, Neverwhere, runs loops around this book. On a completely unrelated note, The Body Artist by Don DeLillo made me want to go all Oedipus at the end of Oedipus Rex on myself. A book that made me envy the illiterate. http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   78.  Neverwhere   by kaemaril       at Wed 28 May 3:18pm score of 1   in reply to comment 28     Ah, Neverwhere. Whatever happened to the movie that was supposed to be... erm... happening?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   221.  Re: Neverwhere   by jandzero       at Thu 29 May 5:56am score of 1   in reply to comment 78     'Neverwhere' was the novelization of a six-part BBC miniseries. You can track down the DVD on Ebay if you're a Gaiman devotee. Much of the humor is derived from a familiarity with the London tube system. vacuum-formed and vacuum-sealed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   367.  Re: Neverwhere   by kaemaril       at Fri 30 May 5:21pm score of 1   in reply to comment 221     Erm... yes, I know. I've got it on VHS (I wasn't aware it was available on DVD). However, there was (supposedly) a plot afoot to make it as a motion picture.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   32.  Re: Books, glorious books   by gonzocanuck       at Wed 28 May 1:35pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     Why doesn't it seem to bother anybody else who's read this book that the protagonist is just as shallow, dim-witted, and self-centered as everyone he's endlessly bitching about? After I read Catcher, which I really didn't care for all that much, I read The Basketball Diaries and oddly I found both similar — but I liked The Basketball Diaries a lot better. I think there are only a couple of books I have hated with a passion, Catcher and The Mosquito Coast by Paul Theroux (had to read that one for English class). Speaking of Holden being a shallow jerk, I couldn't get through The Ginger Man by JP Donleavy either. I suspect it might make a good movie though. I read A Separate Peace on my own and found it very overrated — just didn't see what the big deal was about. :-D You've got to coax him slow, that's the only way that he'll confess.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   40.  Re: Books, glorious books   by nmiguy       at Wed 28 May 1:47pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     Shogun or any James Clavelle novel They are wordy like Tolstoy and get very tedious after a while. Tolstoy too. Freaking War And Peace was NOT a labour of love, but an exercise in vanity to get through it. Dostyevsky's The Idiot made me feel like an idiot for reading it. James Michener's Space was okay for a while, but once again it wore me down. I am wary of writers that try to do too much in a novel and don't really get anywhere with it. A novel should start off with a major dramatic question that does not get answered until near the end of the book. At least this is what I've been told. Although to the contrary, when a book has excellent prose it can carry the novel quite a long way. Personally I liked Moby Dick and I think it is definitely worthy of being considered a great work of literature. Other novels like Treasure Island, Oliver Twist and Tom Sawyer are undoubtably great novels and tremendous works of literature.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   46.  Re: Books, glorious books   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 1:55pm score of 1   in reply to comment 40     Personally I liked Moby Dick and I think it is definitely worthy of being considered a great work of literature. Other novels like Treasure Island, Oliver Twist and Tom Sawyer are undoubtably great novels and tremendous works of literature. I like those latter three novels for all the same reasons I hate Moby-Dick. Each tells a relatively briskly-paced, entertaining story and doesn't get bogged down in, among other things, completely fallacious 18th-century cetology. (Fucker thinks a whale is a fish, OK? I think we've heard all we need to about his theories. Get on the damned boat already.) "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   218.  Re: Books, glorious books   by peppyhare       at Thu 29 May 5:44am score of 1   in reply to comment 40     Shogun was OK for me. Tai-Pan started to drag. Gai-Jin was irritating. However, King Rat reads like it was written by a different person. It was positively riveting, although the ending is a bit like a shaggy-dog story. Clavell started off well. As he matured as a writer he developed the tedious aspects of his style, rather than the exciting ones. I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club -- Pearl Jam, Satan's Bed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   369.  Re: Books, glorious books   by XBonesGT       at Fri 30 May 6:20pm score of 1   in reply to comment 40     How can you say that Michener didn't go anywhere in Space? He took four characters and tracked them through forty years of the US air and space program. It's kind of interesting to read the last 50 or so pages then start at the beginning; you can see the huge difference in the characters that way.   But I'm in total agreement with you on Dostoyevsky. I think I made it through 75 pages of The Brothers Karamazov before putting it way in the back of my closet, and haven't picked it up since. --"I'm not gonna lie to you; that's a healthy piece of real estate."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   232.  Re: Books, glorious books   by eminem enterprises       at Thu 29 May 6:48am score of 1   in reply to comment 218     I think Clavell actually was in a Japanese prisoner-of war camp during WWII. The first rule of being a writer is — write what you know. "King Rat" is evidence of that. the ending is a bit like a shaggy-dog story. I just don't think Clavell ever learned how to end a novel. With "Taipan", the protagonist goes to a LOT of effort toward the end to save his sick Chinese wife, and then they both die in a storm pages later. I mean, WTF? Everybody has a share   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   43.  Re: Books, glorious books   by Misch       at Wed 28 May 1:49pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     I rather enjoyed A Separate Peace. Maybe it was just me, but I felt that I could relate to that book a lot more than some of the other fluff books that we had read. The author I cannot stand was Joyce Carol Oates. I said that her writing was so awful, I could not follow the plot of her stories. I said once that her being from Western New York made me ashamed to be from there as well; long before the Dixie Chicks said the same thing about Dubaya and Texas.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   370.  Re: Books, glorious books   by ilsa       at Fri 30 May 10:02pm score of 1   in reply to comment 43     Gee, and here I'd been thinking A Separate Peace was a serious contender for worst book I'd ever read. Either that, Red Badge of Courage or the first volume of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever. I actually didn't finish the last, having given up after the leper has his first erection in a decade and rapes a handy teenage girl, whose mother subsequently becomes this jerk's guide because he's some kinda prophesy even though she hates his guts. Oh, I also could not bring myself to finish any Michener book whatsoever. Upon reading the rest of the thread, I will add anything by Alan Dean Foster. Finally, The Reckoning by James Byron Huggins. The plot: a mega-special-ops badass retires after Something Bad happens, comes out of retirement to rescue and insure the destruction of a scroll predicting the name, time, and place where the Anti-Christ will arise. This is a Christian novel in which nobody prays, and the love interest of the main character — who has shown no previous signs of religious fervor — attempts to preach the gospel to the evil thugs who have kidnapped her to make the hero bring the scroll to them instead of insuring its destruction. I read it because it was a gift. And at some point it became amusingly bad.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   54.  Re: Books, glorious books   by derch       at Wed 28 May 2:13pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger. Why doesn't it seem to bother anybody else who's read this book that the protagonist is just as shallow, dim-witted, and self-centered as everyone he's endlessly bitching about? Would make the other list if not for his little sister, the only likeable character in the book. I read it in high school. I was an angsty teen. Even then Holden Caufield came off as a whiny bitch. So, yes, it deeply bothers other people. A decade later, I can still rant and get my blood pressure up thinking about the time, albiet short, wasted on it.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   64.  Re: Books, glorious books   by cloudofdust       at Wed 28 May 2:38pm score of 1   in reply to comment 54     I also read The Catcher In The Rye in high school. In this particular English class you would sit down one-on-one with the teacher and give an oral report on the book. I don't think I used the words "whiny bitch" but the sentiment was the same. In retrospect I have to give Salinger credit. It must be very difficult to create a character with no sympathetic traits.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   81.  Re: Books, glorious books   by ravenastro       at Wed 28 May 3:23pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     Yes! I thought I was alone in my infinite loathing of Bret Easton Ellis. Of course, I never read American Psycho , but only because I read The Rules of Attraction and Glamorama . For some reason, I thought that he would have improved from his first sophomoric attempt at writing about sex and drugs ad nauseam to his most recent lengthy tome. I was dead wrong. Glamorama was three times as long and had more name-dropping. And an absurd plot about models being spies, only terribly unfunny. My tortured screams of unrecoverable hours can still be heard today. ~ravenastro the practice of forming words to make thoughts, arranging their inevitablities into new possibility, has been one lost   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   105.  Bret only has one book   by tylerh       at Wed 28 May 4:42pm score of 1   in reply to comment 81     and he wrote it the first time out: less than zero. You can read it less than two hours, which is is about fore times as much of your life as Ellis's entire oevre is worth. The only redeeming feature of the book was the discussion with a friend about how Ellis is actually an existentialist: his characters have so much, their physical "needs" are so catered to, that their lives are utterly empty. The are every bit much trapped as Camus's "Prisoner." To which I now think, "fine, read Camus and be done with it." Courage   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   116.  Re: Bret only has one book   by dasc       at Wed 28 May 5:15pm score of 1   in reply to comment 105     Actually, that was his second book. It was just the first one to get published. Rules of Attraction was his first but rushed to publication to cash in on his fame. Or at least that's the way I remember hearing it back in the 80's. You pooped in the refrigerator and you ate a whole wheel of cheese How'd you do that I'm not even mad Thats amazing   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   129.  Re: Books, glorious books   by GiantMouser       at Wed 28 May 6:34pm score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 9     I dunno, I sorta understood why American Psycho had to be that bad. After being subjected to dozens of meaningless party scenes in the book I realized that I wanted to kill someone just from reading about them. The subtle message being that if you, like Bateman, had to live through that you would've gone serial too. Arguing online is like being in the Special Olympics. You might win, but you're still retarded.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   212.  Re: Books, glorious books   by tdahnsn       at Thu 29 May 5:03am score of 1   in reply to comment 9     I disagree about American Psycho, but could see where you get your opinion. There's a couple of things you're missing, I think. First, go reread Less Than Zero. There's a scene where Blair is about to tell Clay that she loves him and instead says that if she doesn't see him she hopes he has a nice holiday. About halfway through the book. She wants to tell him and can't because she's just as trapped in her world as he is in his and realizes that well, no, she doesn't "love" him in any sense more than a temporary desire for him. Stop reading right there. Pick up your copy of American Psycho. Find the point in the novel where there's almost exactly the same dialogue but replace characters and holidays. Realize that this time he's mocking himself. There's no "love" just the desire to be like everyone else and "be normal" and "normal" people fall in love. Except they don't and he doesn't. A bunch of these sorts of reuses appear in all of his books, but the basic gist is that in American Psycho Pat Bateman is simply going through the motions in his life, unable to do anything more. He's powerless to do anything of consequence, living in a world where he's just an interchangable part no matter how desperately he wants to be something "special" or unique in any way. For fuck's sake, he's searching for enlightenment and a higher state of being in pop music or anywhere else he can find it. Oh, and remember that Bateman's a wimp who can only live out this life in a fantasy world which becomes more and more brutal as he becomes more and more emasculated by his real life. He's not even able to really do it for his girlfriend so he lives out a fantasy world where he is some sort of predatory monster, a superhuman in the sack, and emperor of all he surveys. All the exercise in the world won't set him apart, all the right meals in all the right places won't make him different, and even his clothes are indistinguishable from those of his peers. He can't be what he thinks he should be and as he unravels his fantasy world becomes richer and richer, but also much more brutal. I dunno...maybe it's something a person can latch on to or not. Much like any other book, ever. Of course, I also liked Catcher in the Rye, specifically because Holden is a shallow, dim-witted, self-centered idiot who is as phoney as everyone he's complaining about. Why? What's the most callous thing you've said today?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   248.  Re: Books, glorious books   by coalcracker       at Thu 29 May 8:03am score of 1   in reply to comment 212     The only good thing about American Psycho is it's an excellent example of how a movie can be far superior to the book it's based on. It's almost shocking how the screenplay managed to dredge all the redeeming qualities out of a book people found almost completely unredeemable.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   242.  Re: Books, glorious books   by smackspice       at Thu 29 May 7:37am score of 1   in reply to comment 9     I remember reading A Separate Peace in high school. Couldn't say if it was a great book or not, but I give it points for the simple fact that I remember it, as I have a poor memory. As for Catcher In the Rye, I also read that in high school and remember thinking "Huh? What's the fuss all about?" Then again, maybe it resonates more for males than females. I recently tried to read The Ferryman Will Be There. I really liked the title, so pulled it from the shelf. Couldn't finish it, though, which never ever happens — I'm another one of those once I start, I'm going to finish. You can't be a non-conformist if you don't drink coffee. - Trey Parker   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   361.  Re: Books, glorious books   by crowley       at Fri 30 May 1:33pm score of 1   in reply to comment 242     I read Catcher in the Rye twice. Once when I was about 12, and then when I was 18. The first time it really didn't make much sense, just a lot of complaining and some guy getting his ass kicked occasionally. The second time, it made more sense, and I understand what was going on with Holden.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   293.  Re: Books, glorious books   by new aesthetic       at Thu 29 May 12:27pm score of 1   in reply to comment 9     I'm glad someone else hates Hawthorne. I had to read various short stories by him in the 10th grade. One was called "The Minister's Black Veil." It was about a minister...who puts on a veil! A black one. It was all about symbolizing the way that everyone sees the world through a veil, etc. But what really got to me was the description. "An Lo, the horror of the black veil!" When he wants something to be scary, instead of scaring the reader, he says: it was scary. Don't even get me started on "The Birthmark." "Unattributed quotes are cooler"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   342.  Re: Books, glorious books   by brownianmotion       at Fri 30 May 8:42am score of 1   in reply to comment 9     As a bonus, some decent, but incredibly overrated novels: i'd add anything by sylvia plath, especially the bell jar. sorry to all those un-shaved underarm types who are probably turning purple reading this... but she really was a mediocrity.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

10.  Hm.   by veschke       at Wed 28 May 12:31pm score of 1     When I was in high school I hated most of what I was being made to read. Melville — hated him. Dickens — hated him. Austen — hated her. And so on. But that was because I was in high school, and therefore an idiot. More recently than that, although hardly having pretensions to literature, Terry Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule was unfinishably bad, bad, bad. And that and the ones that followed have sold how many thousands of copies? Don't tell me, I'll vomit. Cynicism is the opposite of wisdom.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

66.  Re: Hm.   by MC Nally       at Wed 28 May 2:47pm score of 1.5 funny   in reply to comment 10     More recently than that, although hardly having pretensions to literature, Terry Goodkind's Wizard's First Rule was unfinishably bad, bad, bad. And that and the ones that followed have sold how many thousands of copies? Don't tell me, I'll vomit. I've never read anything by Goodkind, but surely it can't be any worse than the umpteenth book of Piers Anthony's Xanth series, can it? Please tell me it can't.. Perhaps there should be a special exemption for works in a genre literature series, or at least fantasy series. Otherwise you'll have to allow in stuff like "Cost Accountants of Gor" or "Thieves' World LVII: The Ghostwritten."   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   84.  Re: Pers Anthony   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 3:36pm score of 3 interesting   in reply to comment 66     ...surely it can't be any worse than the umpteenth book of Piers Anthony's Xanth series, can it? Please tell me it can't... Well, I never made up to number umpteen, but just in case any Plasticites had any lingering suspicions that I might be cool, let me disabuse them by saying: I used to be a huge Piers Anthony fan. (I wrote to him. Twice. Moreover, he wrote back, which is one thing he is/was known for. His policy, when last I paid attention, was to write real letters back to 100% of those writing for the first time, thereafter picking and choosing whom to correspond with.) But I digress. I thought the first three Xanth novels were marvelous, well-crafted and often funny fantasy novels with intriguing characters and plotlines. The next three were still fun if you were a fan of the series, but didn't have quite the same sparkle. The next three showed a lot of strain, and seemed basically stretched thinly together over a creaky framework of reader-suggested puns (a Xanth trademark, if you've never read any of them.) Then Anthony changed publishers, and that when the wheels completely came off the wagon. I personally stopped reading with #14 (!), after completely failing to be entertained by the backstory of Good Magician Humfrey, who had always been one of my favorite characters. I think that was also the one where he had mentioned six (!) more upcoming titles in the actual text of the novel and I knew it was about time I stopped. Doing a quick Google, I find he's up to...Great Guns-n-Roses! Twenty-seven of the damned things! Minor, not-very-interesting footnote to the above: I wrote my second letter to Anthony after reading Heaven Cent (#11 in the series.) One of my observations — which I'm sure any author loves to hear — was that I didn't think his recent Xanth novels had the same sparkle as the early ones. His response, essentially, was: "Go read someone else. Seriously, if you're bored with my books, read something by another author, and maybe you'll come back to one of mine when you get bored with them." So in other words, it wasn't him; it was me. In support of this viewpoint, he offered the fact that he'd heard from one fan who had read the series backwards, and claimed that the early ones didn't live up to the quality of the later ones; and that as long as half his fans (namely, the people who took the trouble to write to him) liked what he was doing and the other half didn't, he knew he was "right in the middle," where he belonged. Since I was around 14 at the time, it didn't occur to me to wonder why he didn't want more than half his fans to like what he was doing...but I guess when you've made bags and bags of money writing mass-market fantasy novels, you're entitled to ignore the occasional teenager who thinks the bloom is off the rose. Anyway, MC Nally, thanks for letting me share a long and pointless story about Piers Anthony. :) "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   101.  Re: Pers Anthony   by shadarr       at Wed 28 May 4:33pm score of 1   in reply to comment 84     There was a very definite point in his career where he ran out of ideas and became a machine, pumping out the same novel over and over as fast as he can. Incidentally, I didn't need him telling me to go read someone else, I arrived at that conclusion on my own. Probably about the same time you did, because I don't think I read many Xanth novels after #12. I've heard from other people that he's a bit of an asshole, basically saying "I'm rich and that makes me right". For good fantasy, read Robbin Hobb, George R R Martin, J V Jones, and Guy Gavriel Kay.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   122.  Re: Pers Anthony   by Osomatic       at Wed 28 May 5:49pm score of 1   in reply to comment 84     But I digress. I thought the first three Xanth novels were marvelous, well-crafted and often funny fantasy novels with intriguing characters and plotlines. The next three were still fun if you were a fan of the series, but didn't have quite the same sparkle. The next three showed a lot of strain, and seemed basically stretched thinly together over a creaky framework of reader-suggested puns (a Xanth trademark, if you've never read any of them.) Yes and yes. And sadly, this pattern applies to all of his series — the first one or two are good or at least worth reading and then they just... kinda... peter out and begin to suck very badly. "On A Pale Horse?" Kinda interesting. The rest of the series sucked. The "Apprentice Adept" series? Well, that one pretty much sucked all the way through, or at least the first 2 did. What kills me is that until recently, they were putting Piers Anthony blurbs on Terry Pratchett's books, which is like having, I don't know, a positive L. Ron Hubbard blurb on an Asimov book. Speaking of whom, Asimov writes good stories but wow, could the dialogue be any worse? If carrots got you drunk, rabbits would be fucked up.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   131.  Re: Piers Anthony   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 6:56pm score of 1   in reply to comment 122     ...this pattern applies to all of his series — the first one or two are good or at least worth reading and then they just... kinda... peter out and begin to suck very badly. "On A Pale Horse?" Kinda interesting. The rest of the series sucked. The "Apprentice Adept" series? Well, that one pretty much sucked all the way through, or at least the first 2 did. Well, I liked the first three Adept books — the second trilogy-plus-one was pretty obviously written for "cashin' in" purposes, as it actually had to generate the loose ends it pretends to be written to wrap up. And I liked about three of the Incarnations books too (the first two, plus the one about Satan, who actually turns out to be the central and most interesting character of the series). But your logic holds. By the way, it appears from that page my post above is linked to that he's actually writing another novel in the Bio of a Space Tyrant series. (Why? Who knows.) That's another one I harbor some lingering fondness for, if only because it was the first sympathetic portrait of an incestuous, cannibalistic dictator I ever read. :) "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   134.  Re: Piers Anthony   by Osomatic       at Wed 28 May 7:14pm score of 1   in reply to comment 131     And I liked about three of the Incarnations books too (the first two, plus the one about Satan, who actually turns out to be the central and most interesting character of the series). Ah, good point. I had forgotten the one about Satan, which I liked too, or at least I liked it while it was a story. Towards the end it seemed to devolve into a long, drawn-out logic puzzle. (Or am I thinking of a different PA book?) If carrots got you drunk, rabbits would be fucked up.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   144.  Re: Piers Anthony   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 8:06pm score of 1   in reply to comment 134     "Family tree" is more like it. I've always suspected that, simply out of the desire to (over-)simplify his sprawling narratives, things eventually work out so that everyone is related to everyone else. I can't remember the particular convolutions of Incarnations, but the series really blows up in the fifth book, where by the time the main character (who's actually Fate's daughter) becomes the Incarnation of Nature, it's almost beside the point, since she already has an astounding array of supernatural powers at her disposal. "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   162.  Re: Pers Anthony   by kingraoul3       at Wed 28 May 9:37pm score of 1   in reply to comment 101     you guys like Stephen R. Donaldson?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   175.  Re: Pers Anthony   by rudolfo       at Wed 28 May 10:20pm score of 1.5 brilliant   in reply to comment 122     I found a copy of Anthony's Xanth book "Ogre, Ogre" in a trashcan. After reading it, I returned it to the same trashcan.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   177.  Re: Piers Anthony   by Nameless Cynic       at Wed 28 May 10:34pm score of 1   in reply to comment 144     I started reading his Xanth series with the first one, and really enjoyed it. And it went downhill so fast. I'm not sure if I made it through six. I know I enjoyed Ogre, Ogre, but I'd thought the series was going downhill way before that. I never tried to figure out why his work was starting to suck, until my wife pointed out his misogynistic qualities (which came right to the fore with The Color of Her Panties). I tried, I really tried, to read his Tarot series. I did. He lost me in the first book. First with his semi-racist overtones in the "dozens" contest, and then when the lead character (during, I think, the same fantasy sequence) sees the mystic Chalice, where he's supposed to see a vision of his own soul. And he circles the chalice for what seemed like a month, and finally comes in for a close-up view of... A turd. Pretty much describes Mr. Anthony's writing, far as I'm concerned. Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   194.  Re: Pers Anthony   by barc0001       at Thu 29 May 1:42am score of 1   in reply to comment 162     Oh God. The Gap series? Or the White Gold books? Actaully, I didn't find the books themselves bad, it's just that he has this way of making the reader LOATHE each and every major character that's just demented. In a way it's rather invigorating to read such books because you don't care if one of the major characters gets offed.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   219.  Re: Pers Anthony   by peppyhare       at Thu 29 May 5:49am score of 1   in reply to comment 122     Speaking of whom, Asimov writes good stories but wow, could the dialogue be any worse? The dialogue is the story. Asimov didn't waste a lot of effort on description from his own mouth. If something needed to be explained, a character explained it. That's why his stories, to me at least, always moved very fast. In fact, I sometimes find myself skipping over long sections of narrative in other peoples' books, waiting for the characters to speak again. And yes, the dialogue could be worse. It could be written by George Lucas. I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club -- Pearl Jam, Satan's Bed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   226.  Re: Pers Anthony   by veschke       at Thu 29 May 6:08am score of 1   in reply to comment 84     I wrote to him. Twice. I think I've got you beat there, I did at least three times. I wonder what I did with those neat little postcards? But hell, I was thirteen. I forget where I stopped reading Xanth — I think it was around the ninth book, but I'd have to see a list of the titles. Basically, as far as I can tell, he writes for adolescents. I wouldn't go back and reread them for anything. I liked them when I read them, and I know I would not like them now. I'll save them for any kids I might have. Cynicism is the opposite of wisdom.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   243.  Re: Pers Anthony   by kingraoul3       at Thu 29 May 7:37am score of 1   in reply to comment 194     first three white gold books. It was actually revelatory for me because I was 12, and it was the first book I had ever read where the main character is just an asshole. You hate him, and you're right to. I like the other characters in the first three though; the giant and Mhoram are stand up guys.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   295.  Re: Pers Anthony   by Ozymandias       at Thu 29 May 12:40pm score of 1   in reply to comment 101     Well, it's got to be tough to be told all the time that you are a no talent hack. I imagine after a while you might start to take that personally. And yes, I did read an asshat load of Piers Anthony when I was in middle school.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   296.  Re: Piers Anthony   by Ozymandias       at Thu 29 May 12:45pm score of 1   in reply to comment 134     Nope that's the one. "You've got twelve angels, and their weight is determined by their 'goodness'. Eleven are actually holy, while one is evil. Can you figure out which one is evil in only 4 weighings on a balance?" Of course at the age I read it, I had not seen this particular puzzle 20 times already, so I thought it was kind of neat.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   303.  Re: Pers Anthony   by MC Nally       at Thu 29 May 1:29pm score of 1   in reply to comment 84     I'll cop to reading several of the damned things in middle school, too, as well as lots of other material that I'll cheerfully and un-regretfully acknowledge was crap as well. I'll read cereal boxes if they're the only thing I have handy, and devour novels good and bad by the pileful when I have free time. And as long as the crap is enjoyable crap, why not? Not every read has to be ennobling or enlightening.. But Anthony's books stopped entertaining me pretty quickly. I don't know that I can claim any personal credit due to my tastes maturing — I'll still happily read all sorts of crud — but in support of the opposing position, that it wasn't just me, well.. Coincidentally there's a summer reading thread going on Slashdot, part of which has also turned into a Piers Anthony slag-fest. I thought one of the participants was joking when they revealed that he has an upcoming erotic fantasy novel, due for publication this summer, entitled The Magic Fart, but unless someone with a sense of humor has hacked www.hipiers.com it appears to be true. What can one say to that?   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   329.  Re: Hm.   by Tessera       at Thu 29 May 8:29pm score of 1   in reply to comment 10     Wizard's First Rule was actually, if not good fantasy, at least acceptable. It did nothing new, but it was readable. From there it rapidly went downhill, until Faith of the Fallen came out, which was a unrepentant piece of anti-communist propaganda with characters that happened to have the same names as previous books in the series. Same thing happened with Eye of the World, by Robert Jordan. It could have been a good book if he had wrapped the plot up in the last 200 pages. Instead, he leaves it open and proceeds to inflict some of the most unreadable monochromatic tripe ever inflicted upon the fantasy genre. And continues to do so for another 10,000 pages.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

11.  re: The Worst Books Ever Written   by lordsatan       at Wed 28 May 12:32pm score of 1     i'm sure i'll catch hell for this, but i'd like to nominate "grapes of wrath." just because it's supposed to be a classic (and is held in such high esteem by high school english teachers everywhere) doesn't mean that reading it was any less painful.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

41.  But...but...it's my all time favourite!   by gonzocanuck       at Wed 28 May 1:48pm score of 1   in reply to comment 11     LOL no worries here. I'm a big Steinbeck fan. I loved The Grapes of Wrath dearly. I had to read it over the summer for my Grade 12 English AP course. I found it a pretty timely choice — we were making The Big Move from City A to City B and as the summer wore on I found myself identifying more and more with the Joads. We were moving for economic reasons — but found that the streets of City B were not paved with gold. City B was harsh and so unlike home. I might as well have been walking around barefoot at my new high school :-D. (and to think — we only moved 300 km south!) Besides that, I think it is Steinbeck at his narrative best. Every chapter or so seems like a self-contained little story — such as the one about the truck stop with its pyramids of oranges and banana cream pies :-) I like observational writing and hardly anything escaped Steinbeck's eye — from a crack in the soil to the way Grandpa Joad scratches his crotch. I can still remember my favourite part about the smell of rot and that classic line - In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage. Sigh! Steinbeck certainly had a sense of drama that you don't see these days. You've got to coax him slow, that's the only way that he'll confess.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   109.  Re: The Worst Books Ever Written   by tylerh       at Wed 28 May 4:58pm score of 1   in reply to comment 11     Hey, whatever floats your boat. I'm sure you've got plenty of "wrath against grapes" company. I, too, was forced to read Grapes of Wrath in high school....and loved it. It's rare a novel that can have that strong of a social message (ie be preachy) and still be grasped and enjoyed by such a wide swathe of people across 7 decades.. Even now, when I am zipping down the freeway and I see the strawberry workers toiling in the fields, Steinback's message comes back to me: Those are people out there, they are suffering, and their suffering matters. Reading is Grapes i supposed to be unpleasant — but (hopefully) Steinbeck is such a gifted author you read it anyway. And that makes is a "great book" in my opinion, even if we agree reading it wasn't as much "fun" as whatever this summer's big thriller will be. Courage   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   124.  Re: The Worst Books Ever Written   by lordsatan       at Wed 28 May 6:02pm score of 1.5 astute   in reply to comment 109     i actually enjoyed a lot of what i had to read in high school, so it wasn't a matter of hating something just because it was assigned. i think you are onto something with this statement, though: Those are people out there, they are suffering, and their suffering matters. this is something i was aware of before reading "grapes of wrath" so that message seemed to be stating what i thought was obvious (which is probably why i was bored with it). if part of the teachers' aim in assigning this book is to also teach a life lesson, then i can think of a lot more constructive ways to do it than subjecting students to another type of suffering.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   216.  Re: The Worst Books Ever Written   by pushall       at Thu 29 May 5:43am score of 1   in reply to comment 11     I loved the Grapes of Wrath, but I read it on my own. If I had to read it for a High school or College course though I to would of hated the fucker. Which says more about how academia can ruin any experience it comes in contact with then the literary worth of the Grapes of Wrath.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

12.  Two picks   by thomp       at Wed 28 May 12:35pm score of 1.5 astute     My two picks, for two different reasons: Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand — Crappy philosophy disguised as a Harlequin romance. Dagny Taggert slept her way to the top. How virtuous. Fierce Invalids from Hot Climates by Tom Robbins — This story seems like it was created by a Tom Robbins story generator script developed by an anonymous fanboy on the Internet. Tripe. Completely lacking the whimsy and 'faroutness' of early Robbins. (Or maybe I'm just getting old ...)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

35.  Re: Two picks   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 1:38pm score of 1   in reply to comment 12     Fierce Invalids from Hot Climates by Tom Robbins — This story seems like it was created by a Tom Robbins story generator script developed by an anonymous fanboy on the Internet. Tripe. Completely lacking the whimsy and 'faroutness' of early Robbins. (Or maybe I'm just getting old ...) I liked this one, though I'd agree that the whimsy seems dialed down a bit. It's got no chance of displacing my favorite Robbins novel, Skinny Legs and All, but I'd stop short of "tripe." Still beats Timescape by Michael Crichton, anyway. (Then again, that might be because I'm over-schooled both in time-travel stories and in medieval literature and lack the mainstream reader's sense of wonder at learning the difference between a glaive and a guisarme for the first time.) "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   51.  Re: Two picks   by dylanr       at Wed 28 May 2:09pm score of 2 nuanced   in reply to comment 12     Fierce Invalids from Hot Climates by Tom Robbins — This story seems like it was created by a Tom Robbins story generator script developed by an anonymous fanboy on the Internet. You'll love his latest, no doubt. It opens with a sake-guzzling dog/weasel creature landing on Earth by using his enormous scrotum as a parachute and quickly heads downhill from there. Robbins is (was?) such a gifted writer, it's too bad his stuff has become so predictable, as if it's written from a checklist: Irrascible potty-mouth aficionado of obscure facts and quite-young girls... check. Hot young virgin booty bait... check. Anal sex and/or anal object insertion... check. Outlaws, expats and people on the run... check. Wandering, often enlightening observations about the nature of the cosmos and the fatuousness, destructiveness, and utter worthlessness of modern religion... check. Use of animals and/or inanimate objects as main characters... check. Pointed critiques of materialism, militarism and other stuff that one might consider American... check. I kind of get the feeling that Robbins stopped writing books at some point and just started writing new reasons why yet another generation of Seattle-area teenage girls should seek him out for anal sex. I'm probably just jealous that's not my job... but his last three books have really left a lot to be desired. In theory there should be no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there usually is.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   52.  Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by Arcane Gazebo       at Wed 28 May 2:12pm score of 2 astute   in reply to comment 12     Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand — Crappy philosophy disguised as a Harlequin romance. Dagny Taggert slept her way to the top. How virtuous. I got about a hundred pages into The Fountainhead before I just couldn't endure any more and put it aside. I've since discovered that this is not an uncommon experience with this book. I was encouraged to read it by a girl I knew in high school, who apparently saw me as some sort of Randian hero. In actuality I was just an asshole. It's not good, Eric. It's a gazebo.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   73.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by dasc       at Wed 28 May 3:06pm score of 1   in reply to comment 52     I was encouraged to read it by a girl I knew in high school, who apparently saw me as some sort of Randian hero. In actuality I was just an asshole. You too... I hear you. Thing is her followers are still sending me spam for objectivist conferences. Damn even the Scientologists gave up on me but those people are desperate. You pooped in the refrigerator and you ate a whole wheel of cheese How'd you do that I'm not even mad Thats amazing   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   82.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by wsimpleton       at Wed 28 May 3:23pm score of 1   in reply to comment 52     I rarely put down a book once I've started it, but Atlas Shrugged was dropped after about 150 pages. From what I surmised, the world according to Rand is as follows: 99.999 percent of the population is comprised of leeches who live off the talented few that run the world. These godlike creatures are pilloried for being fabulously wealthy, though they themselves value the money little (if at all) in comparison to advancing the civilization that feeds off of them. It's a premise that, on the face of it, is so self-serving and ludicrous I couldn't read on.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   154.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by Some Guy       at Wed 28 May 9:05pm score of 1   in reply to comment 52     I've got to chime in with agreement here. I read Atlas Shrugged all the way through. I pride myself on my tenacity, even if it sometimes is dumb. I mean, it takes 800 pages to say that capitalists are better in bed. That's the summary I give to people. Verging on off-topic here, I think that Rand 'philosophy' is quietly believed by a lot of people in think-tanks and the Republican Party in the USA. It's not saleable to the general public, but it gives them a basis for believing that the rich are better people, because wealth is an Objective measure of Ability. Sincerity: the new sarcasm   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   159.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by eataTREE       at Wed 28 May 9:25pm score of 1.5 compelling   in reply to comment 52     I was encouraged to read it by a girl I knew in high school, who apparently saw me as some sort of Randian hero. In actuality I was just an asshole. The distinction is a fairly subtle one. Rand gets my vote not only for author of the worst book, but worst author, period. I think in order to like her stuff you have to read it for the first time when you are about 13, and never apply your adult sensibilities to it. And a thousand thousand slimy things lived on; and so did I. - Coleridge   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   271.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by archsloth       at Thu 29 May 10:30am score of 1   in reply to comment 52     I actually made it about 150 pages away from finishing the book before I had to put it away for good. I just kept telling myself it would get better, the redundancy would cease and something exciting would happen, it would build to a grand finale, or anything, but no... Rand just reitterates her philosophy hundreds of times per chapter, beating the reader over their head with it like a blunt weapon. I read The Fountainhead before, and I even enjoyed it quite a bit, mostly for the architectural philosophy (I was in the middle of earning my B/Arch at the time), and I just felt like she used the same exact characters and the same exact premise in the Fountainhead and Atlas Yawned. Aweful time sucker, I advise everyone to steer clear.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   164.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by kingraoul3       at Wed 28 May 9:44pm score of 1   in reply to comment 82     never mind that she plainly states in the text that the value of an individual can be weighed by the amount of money they make! Good God, so seductively angrifying!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   223.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by KOMPRESSOR       at Thu 29 May 5:58am score of 1   in reply to comment 164     "angrifying" is a GREAT word! KOMPRESSOR apple: not just a different way, a better way   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   359.  Re: Ayn Rand is a definite "winner" here.   by slavdude       at Fri 30 May 1:03pm score of 1   in reply to comment 154     Verging on off-topic here, I think that Rand 'philosophy' is quietly believed by a lot of people in think-tanks and the Republican Party in the USA. It's not saleable to the general public, but it gives them a basis for believing that the rich are better people, because wealth is an Objective measure of Ability. Well, it seems, according to Barbara Branden, one of Rand's followers from the 50s and 60s, that Alan Greenspan has an Objectivist past. (Sorry, I don't have a link. I read this in Branden's bio of Ayn Rand, which came out as a real book in the late 1980s.) Tomorrow I will be sober, but you will still be ugly.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

13.  jonny kan't rite   by jandzero       at Wed 28 May 12:36pm score of 1     you can have great content buried under piss-poor writing. Neil Stephenson's 'Snow Crash' had some great concepts but was written in eighth-grade geek. 'The Illuminatus Trilogy' is perhaps the worst book ever written, but it also screwed my head up in exactly the way it was supposed to. vacuum-formed and vacuum-sealed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

50.  Re: jonny kan't rite   by Thalia       at Wed 28 May 2:08pm score of 1   in reply to comment 13     I'm with you on Shea & Wilson's Illuminatus Trilogy. Badly written, incomprehensible, and full of conspiracy theories. But I really really hated Miller's Canticle for Leibowitz. Of course, that may have to do with the fact that I was forced to read it in high school. Judeo-Christianity: just like regular Christianity, only insincerely 5% more inclusive! -- MC Nally   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   59.  Re: jonny kan't rite   by rombuu       at Wed 28 May 2:25pm score of 1   in reply to comment 50     I'm with you on Shea & Wilson's Illuminatus Trilogy. Badly written, incomprehensible, and full of conspiracy theories. Isn't complaining that The Illuminatus Trilogy is full of conspriacy theories like going to a baseball game and complaining that there is too much of guys with sticks trying to hit the ball? I'll agree with the badly written part though... Still it has enough amusing ideas in it not to be a total waste.... http://drlunch.com The site that helps you decide where to go to lunch!   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   92.  Re: jonny kan't rite   by A. H. Cretin       at Wed 28 May 3:57pm score of 1   in reply to comment 50     I'm with you on Shea & Wilson's Illuminatus Trilogy. Badly written, incomprehensible, and full of conspiracy theories. I can't really argue the "badly written" part, but the last 2 are intentional. Also, as jandzero noted, it's really intended to muck with your head in a certain way. It worked well for me, probably not so well for you. -A Humorless Cretin   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

14.  "The Voice"   by OmnipotenceNet       at Wed 28 May 12:42pm score of 1     This book, published by some Jesus-y press in like 1998, features what may well be the worst poem ever written as kind of a frontispiece, a textual illustration that begins: There's a Voice that you've heard all of your life Telling you what's wrong and what's right and goes on ("but the voice that said "Stop." You just ignored." [sic]) until one's head explodes. The book proper features the Ethiopian air force (what, ten Su-27's and two rusty MiGs?), the Voice of God coming out of stones (blasphemy, anyone?), and the world's new worship of Jesus centered in Detroit, Michigan. Yes. It's awesome. It's terrible. It's both.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

26.  Re: "The Voice"   by JET24       at Wed 28 May 1:19pm score of 1   in reply to comment 14     I think this was written by a local Phoenix "author". In any case, I actually have a copy of this book as well, although I've never read it. A friend of mine gave it to me, saying, "Whenever you think your writing is crap, just take a look at this ridiculous garbage. It will make you feel a lot better." It worked. It only took looking at a random page here and there to keep me going... Religion don't mean a thing; it's just another way to be right. - Spoon   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

15.  So many to choose from   by BigBoote66       at Wed 28 May 12:42pm score of 1     From the article, "American Psycho" is pretty hard to top. Indulgent, repulsive, repetitive and dull hatred of humanity masquerading as cleverness. On the other hand, the movie version of it managed to produce the wit that was almost totally lacking in the book (although it left out the one bit of real, where he manages to get his equally materialistic girlfriend to eat a chocolate-covered, used urinal cake by convincing her its a Godiva chocolate). Lord of the Rings is certainly boring, long-winded, and anticlimactic. As for my own contributions, "To the Lighthouse" by Virginia Woolfe was unbearable — I couldn't finish it. I have almost no memory of it, so maybe I need to try again. However, I have all to many memories of slogging though the horrid horrid horrid "Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever" by Stephen R. Donaldson. Six thick volumes of navel gazing, dressed up in fantasy garb in order to trick my teenaged mind into believing it could be "cool". I finally gave up a third of the way through #6. Why? Because (1) I had too much time on my hands, (2) the first book had some promise, and (3) the rest were "supposed to be good". They weren't. -BbT   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

25.  Re: So many to choose from   by SpammitySpam       at Wed 28 May 1:14pm score of 1   in reply to comment 15     "Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever" by Stephen R. Donaldson Seconded. What utter crap. Ah, the things I wasted money on when I was young and stupid. Move to bring this item to a vote. Show of hands, please? Man who says It cannot be done Should not interrupt Man who is doing it.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   30.  Re: So many to choose from   by veschke       at Wed 28 May 1:31pm score of 1   in reply to comment 25     Thirded, although (she says smugly) I gave up a few chapters in, when I realized that the guy we'd been following was the protagonist. Cynicism is the opposite of wisdom.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   39.  Re: Donaldson   by Ajax       at Wed 28 May 1:45pm score of 1   in reply to comment 15     Six thick volumes of navel gazing, dressed up in fantasy garb in order to trick my teenaged mind into believing it could be "cool". Really? Loved those novels. In that case, don't try Donaldson's Gap series, loosely based on Wagner's (yes, that Wagner) Ring cycle. I loved those too. ;) "Coca-ColaŽ and ArmageddonŽ / We like it, like it, yes we do!" -- Clutch.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   165.  word   by kingraoul3       at Wed 28 May 9:50pm score of 1   in reply to comment 39     I loved them. Favorite fantasy series, cause their adult. You don't like the main character. Cause he's an asshole. I mean if you don't like fantasy you won't like these, but if you like fantasy, the dialogue, the characters (Mhoram and Covenant are both good), and the plot are better than 90% of fantasy out there. That said, compared to non-genre stuff, it's crap. I mean, if I see the word veritgo one more damned time...   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   96.  Re: So many to choose from   by A. H. Cretin       at Wed 28 May 4:09pm score of 1   in reply to comment 15     However, I have all to many memories of slogging though the horrid horrid horrid "Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever" by Stephen R. Donaldson. Six thick volumes of navel gazing, dressed up in fantasy garb in order to trick my teenaged mind into believing it could be "cool". I finally gave up a third of the way through #6. Why? Because (1) I had too much time on my hands, (2) the first book had some promise, and (3) the rest were "supposed to be good". They weren't. Eh. The first trilogy wasn't awful. The second trilogy... was. And let me second Ajax's comment: skip the Gap series, and especially skip Mordant's Need. -A Humorless Cretin   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   178.  Choice can be overrated   by Nameless Cynic       at Wed 28 May 10:45pm score of 1   in reply to comment 96     Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, the Unbeliever" by Stephen R. Donaldson... I finally gave up a third of the way through #6 You made it that far? I gave up after the leper got cured, and the first thing he did was rape the first available girl. Yeah, made me want to keep reading... Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   222.  Re: Choice can be overrated   by peppyhare       at Thu 29 May 5:57am score of 1   in reply to comment 178     He's supposed to be The Loathsome Savior. All of Donaldson's characters are. They have horrifying character faults but are put in a position where they are responsible for redeeming the world. Donaldson may be writing fantasy and science fiction, but his subtext is intense and not escapist at all. I'm not surprised some people gag on it. I think it's intentional. I shit and I stink, I'm real, join the club -- Pearl Jam, Satan's Bed   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   236.  ditto   by maml       at Thu 29 May 7:13am score of 1   in reply to comment 178     I couldn't stand Thomas. I read that and put the book down. My little brother read the whole series, but only once. If it was good, he would have read it again (we had a lot of time as kids). I've blocked AI. I'm happier now.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

16.  Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby"   by SacredGroundChuck       at Wed 28 May 12:44pm score of 1     Alone, it bored me to tears in 9th grade English. What was the worse for it was that when we finished this complete and utter waste of time on how the rich are so bad off emotionally, we read Richard Wright's Native Son. Sex, murder, booze, commies, jail — everything a 9th grader wanted to witness and read about. I read this one in two nights, wanting to see how it came out. Runner-up: anything Anne Rice has written in the past few years after wrapping up The Vampire Chronicles. I can't get past the third chapter. And I second Ayn Rand. Atlas Shrugged was tripe. I did a book report on in in high school, which seemed much longer than the book itself; the teacher looked at its heft (no upper limit to size) and just gave it an A. This is the only way Ayn Rand has contributed to my education. "Did you know that the human brain is the only computer in the universe made of meat?"   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

19.  What Maisie Knew, by Henry James   by Thornstein       at Wed 28 May 12:52pm score of 1     Generally I like thick and crunchy 19th century prose but I couldn't make it half way through this short book (and I tried because it was supposed to be the most accessable of his novels). Self-satisfied prose more interested in showing off his mastery of the language than telling the story, or creating a connection with the characters.   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

269.  Anything by James   by profpeach       at Thu 29 May 10:21am score of 1   in reply to comment 19     I can't read. I keep giving it a shot every couple of years or so, but I cannot hack my way through the prose. And I like Melville. Worst book ever is a hard call. I try to forget the really bad experiences as soon as I can. Really bad means a book tossed against the wall from across the room. I would have done that to the Convenant trilogy, but I borrowed them from a friend. it's not the bad guy as protagonist, it's the awful, awful writing. I say to them, "Tell that to the lizard people, pal." - rantor   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   284.  Turn of the Screw?   by SerpentSkirt       at Thu 29 May 11:20am score of 1   in reply to comment 19     Have you read this one? Can you give me a pep talk? Because I'm trying — I really am. And I hate it. I hate the narrator. I hate the housekeeper. I hope the mysterious man who has shown himself twice now (OK, I've only barely started it) kills them both. It's so obnoxiously "My poor feminine sensibilities are so assaulted by the thought that there might be a man skulking around, and surely he's why the other governesses died or left, and did I mention my feminine sensibilities? I'm so sensitive and feminine and completely unable to cope with the world..." Phooey. Where's my Jane Austen? I need an antidote. And the narrator needs to loosen up and find herself a man for a good roll in the hay. -SS   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

20.  Who sez the worst book...   by rdww       at Wed 28 May 12:52pm score of 1 compelling     ... has to be fiction? Anyone tried hacking their way through Marx's Das Kapital lately? btw, I do not agree on Gravity's Rainbow (think of it as 3 or 4 or 5 books all crammed into one, and Pynchon's "V" is even worse at this), but sadly must endorse placing Moby Dick on the list (impossible to read without shouting "Dammit, Melville, get on with your story!" somewhere along the way).   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

180.  Re: Who sez the worst book...   by Nameless Cynic       at Wed 28 May 10:51pm score of 1   in reply to comment 20     Pynchon's "V" is even worse Yeah, but when the lizard-aliens (a symbol for Nazi-ism) have pretty much taken over, and have managed to get most of the scientists put in concentration camps, and they have to release the red dust from balloons to kill off the aliens, and the girl from Welcome Back, Kotter limps in and shoots at the strafing alien fighter-craft, and the good alien, played by Freddie Krueger... Oh, wait... That's very different. Never mind... Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   233.  Re: Who sez the worst book...   by Nagash       at Thu 29 May 6:48am score of 1   in reply to comment 20     I'm a PhD student on Computer Science and I spend way too much time reading books about compilers, algorithms and discrete mathematics. It's a travesty that I don't read much fiction anymore, but I find I don't have the time. (I am slowly working my way through Cryptonomicon right now. I think it's a bit overrated.) Although I did read a fair bit of fiction when I was younger, by far the worst reading is bad non-fiction. While it is easy to eschew textbooks from criticism ("C'mon — it's a textbook! What were you expecting?"), there are some real bad examples of how to write one out there. The worst I have yet seen is Introduction to Algorithms: A Creative Approach, by Udi Manber. I knew I was in trouble in my third year algorithms course when the first line of the preface reads: This book grew out of my frustration with not being able to explain algorithms clearly. So why, pray tell, are you writing this book? To document the fact that you can't explain algorithms? One of his proofs actually says: If all the vertices had positive indegrees, then we could traverse the graph "backward" and never have to stop. Intuitively, it's true. Mathematically, it's complete tripe. I don't think the terms in quotation marks qualify as rigorous mathematical notation or reasoning, which is what is expected. Udi's book gets my vote. (NB: Get Introduction to Algorithms, by Cormen, Lieserson, Rivest and Stien if you want a good book on algorithms.)   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]   255.  Re: Who sez the worst book...   by richlove       at Thu 29 May 8:38am score of 1.5 informative   in reply to comment 233     I had a chemistry book in this category. I forget the name, but it was by Dr. Leonard Fine, the chair of the Chem. dept at my college. Bad sign #1 (prof. forcing his students to buy his book @ $130 / pop). Bad sign #2 was the corrections book, 70 pages thick. Bad sign #3 was the corrections to the corrections book, 10 pages thick (several re-corrections claimed that the book was actually right the first time, and that the corrections book should be ignored).   [ ...reply just to this | comment on the story... | next new ]

21.