Worst Book Ever?

[oggbashan]

Henry Handel Richardson: The Fortunes of Richard Mahoney. An Australian set book as an example of Australian Literature. After reading it I was almost convinced that Australia didn't have any literature.

I was wrong but the early 20th Century Australian critics ignored Banjo Patterson and C J Dennis because they were writing in the vernacular. Prigs!

 

[SamScribble]

Same, I've still got V and Gravity's Rainbow from pretentious under-graduate days. I keep thinking, should try to read them again. All I can remember is alligators in NY sewers, but I'm damned if I know the context.

Same with Lawrence Durrell. Jesus wept, he's a slow read. I forced myself just this year to get through the Alexandria Quartet (for the third time, and did make it, finally, to the end), but I've abandoned the other two long ones, twice. It's like wading through mud. There must be a point to it all, but I'll be damned if I know what it is.

I have never read V, EB, but I seem to recall that I quite enjoyed Gravity's Rainbow. It took a few attempts to get into it, but once I stopped trying to 'read' it and just let it wash over me, we got along quite well. Oh, and I did have to give up trying to keep track of all the characters. But I get the feeling that Mr Pynchon probably didn't mind too much.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Probably Fitzgerald's "The Beautiful and Damned." I was required to read it in college. It was so bad, I didn't read Gatsby until a few years ago. Which I loved, ironically.

Not the worst books ever, but major disappointments in my view from writers who could have done better.

Fitzgerald's first novel: This Side of Paradise. Far too much about the trivia of being a Princeton undergraduate. Then what could be interesting experiences - his time in the Army, his work in an advertising agency - are mostly glossed over. No real ending that I remember.

Philip Roth: American Pastoral: Roth, surprisingly, seemed to have a bug up his ass about attacking the "counter-culture." Mostly unconvincing.

Jack Kerouac: On the Road: Pretty good start, then it meanders around without a point.

 

[BelleCanzuto]

Philip Roth: American Pastoral: Roth, surprisingly, seemed to have a bug up his ass about attacking the "counter-culture." Mostly unconvincing.

Ooh. I read "The Plot Against America" and found it so tedious, and it oozed with contempt for all the female characters. And then, it just ended, bang, everything sort of tied up in some weird package, like he'd gotten sick of the story, chucked it at his editor and said "make of this what you will." I actually double checked a couple of editions just to make sure my kindle version wasn't missing a chapter or two. But honestly, I've found several of the "great [male] authors" of the mid century not to my liking.

 

[gunhilltrain]

Ooh. I read "The Plot Against America" and found it so tedious, and it oozed with contempt for all the female characters. And then, it just ended, bang, everything sort of tied up in some weird package, like he'd gotten sick of the story, chucked it at his editor and said "make of this what you will." I actually double checked a couple of editions just to make sure my kindle version wasn't missing a chapter or two. But honestly, I've found several of the "great [male] authors" of the mid century not to my liking.

Let's face it, Roth had trouble with his female characters. I don't think he could do it any other way. His second wife, Claire Bloom, would probably agree.

Leaving a Doll's House

 

[DouglasFinney]

Uncle Tom’s Cabin, despite being the best-selling novel of the 19th Century and being co-authored by God, is a shit-show of continuity errors and melodrama.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I had never read Hemingway before reading this one. I read a few synopsis of his books online (read into this similar to watching a trailer to see if you'll like a movie) and decided that a war story would be an interesting read. As you said, very tedious. His other works might be better, but I've not read any others. Bad first impression I guess. I might revisit him at some point, but there's a lot of other authors I've got on my list first.

Same for me that it was my first Hemingway and the complete opposite of what I had expected, but I have since read Old Man and the Sea and it reads much more the way that you've been told that Hemingway reads. Bell Tolls seems to be a one-off.

 

[Wifetheif]

My first nominee, "Antigua: The land of Heroes, Faries, and Dragons" is 120,000 words long and has 4,374 exclamation marks! Basically one in every four sentences. That HAS to be the all-time record for punctuation abuse.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

Probably Fitzgerald's "The Beautiful and Damned." I was required to read it in college. It was so bad, I didn't read Gatsby until a few years ago. Which I loved, ironically.

I hated Gatsby. It was a soap opera. At times I thought it was going to rise above and have a point, but in the end it was really not much more than a melodrama. When they got to the mint julip scene I was ready to vomit. None of the characters seemed the least bit endearing and so I didn't care what happened to them. The only one that I was remotely interested in was the red-headed golfer and she was barely in it and makes me wonder if she was merely intended as a secret token lesbian. (shrug)

 

[Agiel]

I can't put a book down that I've started to read or I can't put it on the list and will have wasted that reading time. So, if I start it, I finish it, no matter how bad I find it to be.

You have far more patience than myself, Keith, in continuing to read a book you think isn’t very good.

In the distant past, before VHS, I’ve watched films thinking it must get better and it didn’t. Thankfully, now I can fast forward to make a judgement. How that would work with a book I’m not sure. Would jumping, for example, fifty/sixty pages and reading a couple of pages work?

I admire your perseverance and commitment. Five stars.

 

[KeithD]

You have far more patience than myself, Keith, in continuing to read a book you think isn’t very good.

Most of the books I read are ones off my preferred authors lists, so not many duds there. I work in publishing and do a regional annual anthology in a region where a lot of authors live, though, so I get prepublication books to read and review. I'll have to say some of them can be pretty dreadful and I'm not just reading them, I have to review them as well. And a some of them (increasing fewer as I sink into final retirement) are nonfiction foreign policy books, which I'm no longer that interested in. If I commit to a book, though, I finish reading it. Reading books that were actually published raises few duds than when I was in the business as a second career of assessing books for mainline publishers that were being considered for publishing.

 

[ElectricBlue]

How that would work with a book I’m not sure. Would jumping, for example, fifty/sixty pages and reading a couple of pages work?

When I get a book and get half way through and think, really? wtf? is this shit serious? I jump to the last chapter, and if that doesn't resolve it sufficiently I read the second last chapter, and so on. There's been a couple of books (not many) where I've read backwards to where I was up to, before it made any fucking sense.

Try that, it's easier than jumping ahead a few chapters.

Why you would continue to read junk is beyond me. Even at my age (although old KeithD has a decade or so on me) life is too short to do that!

 

[Zeb_Carter]

That is why my insurance quotes are impossibly high. An elderly disabled male with a terminal disease? - Go away and never darken our door again!

Hey, I didn't sell the stuff, just calculate the things... the prices were already set by someone else. What I did is show what you would get from a large group of people over time.

 

[NC_Coastal]

I hated Gatsby. It was a soap opera. At times I thought it was going to rise above and have a point, but in the end it was really not much more than a melodrama. When they got to the mint julip scene I was ready to vomit. None of the characters seemed the least bit endearing and so I didn't care what happened to them. The only one that I was remotely interested in was the red-headed golfer and she was barely in it and makes me wonder if she was merely intended as a secret token lesbian. (shrug)

I agree somewhat, though I'd suggest that was exactly the point of the book. The Jazz Age was all drama played out by a shallow, enabled and clueless generation that existed only because the previous and next generation of young Americans fought in world wars.

 

[Auden James]

I hated Gatsby. It was a soap opera. At times I thought it was going to rise above and have a point, but in the end it was really not much more than a melodrama.

I couldn't agree less! At least about the point that the book supposedly has no point: it sure has, I think, as it is a rather tragic or "sad" story of failed love; you might even call it cynical in its depiction of "love" and romantic relationships in general. And then there are the more or less philosophical themes about the American way of life or the "American Dream" (see the rather abstract ending especially for that).

By no means would I rate that book as the or one of the worst books ever written!

 

[gunhilltrain]

Probably a controversial nomination, but; Catcher in the Rye.
All the trees killed to force that twaddle upon defenseless adolescents. Wanton cruelty. If I want romanticized story of pathetic, sullen, pointless, adolescent angst, I will reread Dostoevsky's Notes from the Underground.

Not that controversial; it was a minor work at best. And Salinger's later books didn't have much of an impact.

I know you're being tongue-in-cheek, but the narrator of Notes from Underground was definitely not an adolescent!

 

[Kumquatqueen]

Most overrated is very different from worst, but at least with the latter you would never be made to write an essay about them.

 

[pink_silk_glove]

I couldn't agree less! At least about the point that the book supposedly has no point: it sure has, I think, as it is a rather tragic or "sad" story of failed love; you might even call it cynical in its depiction of "love" and romantic relationships in general. And then there are the more or less philosophical themes about the American way of life or the "American Dream" (see the rather abstract ending especially for that).

By no means would I rate that book as the or one of the worst books ever written!

For the record I would not put it on a worst ever list neither. Someone else brought the title up and I added my opinion. Fitzgerald was gifted with words. His imagery for instance was very strong. He also did tell a plot. I just felt that any substance that the book may have had was overshadowed by the campy boring characters. Why should we want Daisy and Gatsby to get together? Why should we invest any time to see if they do have a happy ending or such? They do absolutely nothing to endear us. Gatsby is this boring guy who keeps an armslength form his own parties and Daisy is a spoiled little brat princess with no redeeming backstory or even side story.

 

[EdwardsOtherSide]

Not that controversial; it was a minor work at best. And Salinger's later books didn't have much of an impact.

I know you're being tongue-in-cheek, but the narrator of Notes from Underground was definitely not an adolescent!

And yet he communicated snotty, sullen adolescent angst so effectively.

 

[shakna]

I was wrong but the early 20th Century Australian critics ignored Banjo Patterson and C J Dennis because they were writing in the vernacular. Prigs!

And here I had to memorise the Man from Snowy River, and if you meet any Aussie today, there ain't much chance that they haven't belted out Waltzing Matilda at least once.

Though... Living on the site of Eureka, and a stones throw from Kelly, might have influenced just how much my schooling listened to government advice.

 

[oggbashan]

And here I had to memorise the Man from Snowy River, and if you meet any Aussie today, there ain't much chance that they haven't belted out Waltzing Matilda at least once.

Though... Living on the site of Eureka, and a stones throw from Kelly, might have influenced just how much my schooling listened to government advice.

The simple answer is that my schooling in Australia was probably decades before yours.

Henry Handel Richardson's Fortunes of Richard Mahoney was a set book in 1961 and there were complaints from students and teachers that it wasn't worth the effort. We spent as much time on it as on Macbeth...

 

[gunhilltrain]

And yet he communicated snotty, sullen adolescent angst so effectively.

Arguably that's true; I read it probably forty years ago. One of the few things I remember clearly is the description of the big canoe from a Northwest tribe that sat in the lobby of the Museum of Natural History. (Is it still there?) It seems like it captured a small piece of American history from about 1945 to 1965. Yet somehow I'm not in a rush to revisit it.

 

[creativeboyinspring]

I actually was a librarian for many years so I have a strange love/hate relationship with books. The worst book ever to me may be surprising, but I stand by it. NEW MOON from the Twilight series. I had to read it for work and hated it. That book was the reason for breaking up the relationship I was in at the time too. Hated the selfish characters, the...well, I won't lists all the reasons as I know I'm about to be jumped on here. But in short, NEW MOON is my vote for worsts book ever. Best book, at least to me, is John Dies At The End.

 

[GreenandGolden]

It’s a book called ‘find me’ which is a sequel to the beautiful coming of age romance ‘call me by your name’ (popularised by the stunning Timothee Chalamet and his cannibal co-star)

The original was stunning, but the sequel is truly dreadful. Felt rushed, like the author was just desperate to make a few more £££ after the success of the original.

 

[gunhilltrain]

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the Fifty Shades of Grey books. I admit I haven't read any of them, but I've read a detailed review of the first one. (Having gone to college, I can fake it when I have to.) Perhaps it would have been better if they had switched once in a while and Anastasia Steele had given Christian Grey a good spanking on his own behind. Perhaps he would have liked it. (Great character names, by the way.)