|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2007 7:23 pm
Here are three other books I hated reading:
Fifth Child
Animal Farm
Lost Horizon.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2007 9:24 am
Christopher Paolini - Eragon
Alice Sebold - Lovely Bones
I liked both of these lol!!!! blaugh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:12 am
Hey, I think Eragon is a good book. Kinda. Except for the surrounding explanation (I never like that part). But, overall, I think it's a good book.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2007 9:51 pm
First Mate Mud I also find Mary Shelly's Frankenstein to be unreadable. I've started it countless times and I can never finish it. Let alone give it a proper start. I wish I could read it, but her style isn't for me. I have to disagree. Mary Shelly's writing is from the early 19th century, and so the style might be hard for modern readers. I truely believe that if the reader keeps their mind open, and gives the novella a fair chance, they might be pleasantly suprised. Shelly's novella is full of hidden meanings, and allegory. It deserves a good through reading (if not two!) and a good analysis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:09 am
I quite agree, it seems that a lot of the classics have been found to be difficult to read for the 'modern day reader.' It's a shame, because they are classics for a reason.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:47 am
"The frog prince" when I bought it I thought it would be good. Because of the cute tittle... but no! It's the worst book it's about this guy who is having affairs on his girlfriend threw the hole book! And in the end he is behaving like a cry baby.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:48 am
scarletrook First Mate Mud I also find Mary Shelly's Frankenstein to be unreadable. I've started it countless times and I can never finish it. Let alone give it a proper start. I wish I could read it, but her style isn't for me. I have to disagree. Mary Shelly's writing is from the early 19th century, and so the style might be hard for modern readers. I truely believe that if the reader keeps their mind open, and gives the novella a fair chance, they might be pleasantly suprised. Shelly's novella is full of hidden meanings, and allegory. It deserves a good through reading (if not two!) and a good analysis. I think once you get past chapture 1 and 2 it's easy to read...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 8:49 am
I definitely disagree with Lovely Bones being on that list. I think it has a very good plotline and an interesting story as well. I only didnt particularly like the last part when Susie fell into the hole and got to relive being in the living world again and she chose to do THAT, instead of going to meet her family. Hah.
However, I still think its a good book 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 03, 2007 6:49 pm
Fira I definitely disagree with Lovely Bones being on that list. I think it has a very good plotline and an interesting story as well. I only didnt particularly like the last part when Susie fell into the hole and got to relive being in the living world again and she chose to do THAT, instead of going to meet her family. Hah. However, I still think its a good book 3nodding I don't know... i found some parts of the book alittle borning redface and not know whats going on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:27 pm
I absolutely loved Blood and Chocolate, But i read it when it came out? Not after everyone made a fuss about it. And Lord of the Flies i thought was genius. But i can see people hating both of those.
AND...Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell or whatever, is a horrendous book. My grandmother bought it for me when it came out and i almost wanted to burn it. I cant even get passed the first page its so boring.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moonlight Conversationalist
|
Posted: Thu Nov 15, 2007 3:28 am
Yay! Conflicting opinions.
I do have to say I enjoyed William Golding's Lord of the Flies, though. It's such intriguing subject matter, and the writing was pretty good. It's not traditional story-telling, but told in a very impassioned, spotty manner, which I think well reflects the deterioration of society and modern social conventions. And the pig! The pig is a classic image I happily heart for it's creepiness.
I love Anita Blake too, but it seems like everyone does, so I can't add it to the list yet.
I will say there is a book called Lost in Austen by Emma Campbell Webster that I picked up before I left the States to read on the plane to Japan. It's a Choose Your Own Adventure a la Jane Austen's novels. Despite being super-excited as an Austen-nerd, it's honestly not that good. If you know the plot to Pride and Prejudiced, you just follow along exactly and you end up with the best ending. Otherwise, you find yourself in a quick death or maybe in another novel - and those parts are never as well written. So, don't pick it up with high expectations. Or unless you like picking out death scenes, which can be a bit funny.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:21 pm
Any book, on any subject, by any author which expresses certain opinions as being absolute; and that presents anyone who disagrees, or alternate opinions, as being stupid / evil / / immoral / racist / sexist / etc / etc
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moonlight Conversationalist
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 7:37 am
Robahn Hobyah Any book, on any subject, by any author which expresses certain opinions as being absolute; and that presents anyone who disagrees, or alternate opinions, as being stupid / evil / / immoral / racist / sexist / etc / etc Right. So no Rousseau or Aristotle? UGH! Hideous book alert. The Pop Star by Sally Benson. AWFUL, overdramatic, unrealistic writing. It's about these three brothers who became pop stars in the 80s - and ARE STILL POP STARS. And then one of the guys' wife dies - and her ghost leads a new woman into his life. But goodness, they couldn't declare their love, much less KISS for the next three hundred pages. That would be FAR too forward! Despite the fact that by page 25, she's stayed overnight at his house. Because the street to her apartment was blocked by a tree, or something. AWFUL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 5:59 pm
Beryl Crest Robahn Hobyah Any book, on any subject, by any author which expresses certain opinions as being absolute; and that presents anyone who disagrees, or alternate opinions, as being stupid / evil / immoral / racist / sexist / etc / etc Right. So no Rousseau or Aristotle? Well, I've read some of both, but don't recall where they denounce anyone who differs in opinion as being "(insert negativity here)" , but in the case they do Yes, that includes them too
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Dec 17, 2007 9:02 pm
This thread hasn't had a response since Dec. 11th, but maybe I can bring it back to life.
Horrible books:
Eragon--Terrible writing. Too much "telling" and not enough "showing," if that makes any sense. I think part of the problem comes down to how he describes characters' emotions. For example, if Eragon is hurt, he'll say, "Eragon is hurt" rather than describing the pain he feels.
The Lovely Bones--It wasn't a horrible book: it just wasn't that good. I really did not care for any of the characters and the "Ghost"-like ending between Ray and the main character (I forgot her name) made me roll my eyes.
Blood and Chocolate--None of the characters are likable in the least. The ending, I think, is very "stick to your own kind," making it seem close minded. This, however, just depends on how it's read. Personally, this is how I read it, though others read it differently. Well, that's life.
As You Like It--I know this is a play, but I had to add it anyway. I'm not a big fan of Shakespeare. This play, of the 10-12 plays or so that I have read, is my least favorite. It starts off strong, and then descends into pointlessness. Yes, I know that's partially the point, and I know the meanings behind it and whatnot, but I found it incredibly boring and pointless.
Atonement---I dislike post-modernism in general. However, I did not know this book was post-modernism, so I read it. I was sorely disappointed to find out it was meta-fiction. Furthermore, the writing is extremely tedious, and this book makes a point of testing your patience and attention span. I regret buying it. I think I bought it during a moment of insanity, and because I wanted to see the movie, I forced myself to finish reading it. Needless to say, I won't be reading stuff by McEwan anymore.
I would add more post-modern books, but I won't. I just hate post-modernism in general (with the exception of White Noise by DeLillo), so I'll stop there.
I disagree with those who say Frankenstein is unreadable. I've read it three times in my life, and each time I have enjoyed it. But, like all books, it's just a matter of opinion.
Well, that was my two cents. Heh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
