Quote:

---

agree with Mother Goose. "Lord of the Rings" is totally stupid

---

Sorry Shrinomon, I cannot see where Mother Goose has called any book , "Stupid".
She has said that she didn't enjoy it, she has told us why this is so. I am of the opinion that if one has such a negative opinion of something, one needs to perhaps provide reasons why this is so, as MG has done,very well.

I haven't even attempted to read LOTR, I don't know what it is like. The subject matter doesn't appeal so I won't read it, or attempt to, same goes for The Hobbit and other fantasy-type books. Can I join the club of people who don't understand the fascination with LOTR?

Sorry about calling it stupid. I didn't like the book because I just didn't like it.

The worst book I have ever read is Daniel Defoe's Journal of a Plague Year. I quote a line at random:

"By this however, the Number of People in the whole may be judg'd of; and indeed, I often wondered, that after the prodigious Numbers of People that went away at first, there was yet so great a Multitude left, as it appear'd there was."

This takes the title, but other contenders include:

Women in Love by D.H. Lawrence
(How many self-obssesed, whiny, self-pitying men and women does it take to make great, praised literature in this past century? Four, apparently, but it must be profound because, like in The Awakening, there was a suicide...)

The Color Purple by Alice Walker

Frankenstein by Mary Shelly
(I tried twice to appreciate this work. I know it's supposed to be great. But ohhhhh did it bore me.)

Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes

MG, I totally agree with you on Lord of the Flies! Thinking back on it, I can't quite put my finger on what I didn't like about it, but I don't remember any fond memories of being forced to read through it.

Another book I really didn't like (another school choice) was The Razor's Edge by Somerset Maugham. BO-RING!!!

I have to agree with MG, Ren, Snm, Purple Fan, Misty and Bertho -- The Lord of the Rings was definitely a trial to read through! I got through Fellowship expecting it would get better -- it didn't. I got through The Two Towers getting only a little exasperated with the thing *yawn*. I was part of the way through Return of the King when I finally said "That's it! I'm through with this crap!" and laid the book aside. Two years later (this last winter) I picked it up and finished it, solely because I wanted to read it before I saw the movie. (With regards to the movies, I think Fellowship stayed true to the book -- boring as hell. The Two Towers was infinitely more entertaining. I'm looking forward to the third movie! Hopefully it will be better yet!)

A late addition to "worst book ever", I would include The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie. I thought it would be better, being on many a banned book list, but as far as I'm concerned, it's no big loss.

I thought I was the only one who couldn't stand "The Hobbit" and "Lord of the Flies".

I tried so hard to read Tolkein and it puts me to sleep every time. I do like the movies though. Go figure.

If I don't like a book I don't finish it. It's usually not the author's fault because I don't seek out bad books to read, except for the sort of bad books I like.

I'd say Marx's books are IMO the worst ever. Dickens might be heavy-handed and condescending, Tolkein is definately ornate and wonky, but they never enslaved anybody or caused any wars.

This one is hard because I usually only pick out books that I feel that I will enjoy in advance and if I don't like them, I put them down.
Hmmm....
I just finished "Four Blondes" by Candace Bushnell because I love "Sex in the City", which she wrote. The book went on and on and never made a point except that money does not buy happiness. I knew that already. Until I can think of something else, that gets my vote

I have disliked few 'classic' books, the exceptions being : 'Pilgrims Progress - Bunyan','Memoirs of a Foxhunting Man - Sassoon', the novels of Hardy and George Eliot. Modern authors who are despicable are easily avoided :Jeffrey Archer, Stephen King, L. Ron Hubbard et al. I rather liked 'Bell Jar' and 'Bleak House'. Regards, Tin

I thought of another one (also from school): The Pearl. Ugh!

Oh,I had to read that one too,snm. I actually liked it. But I can see why someone wouldn't,it being so sad and all. But I think it was an interesting message,and I like John Steinbeck anyway.

Hum...LOTR was a slow read---it took me months to chew my way thru it. But once I did, was glad to have read it. Same for "Lord of the Flies', 'Catcher in the Rye'. and several other classics. I've NEVER been able to digest anything by Melville or Joseph Conrad, and Charles Dickens makes me shudder just to think about.

I can't BELIEVE there's someone out there who didn't like 'The Color Purple' however!

My worst book, well it's a bit surprising... it's Gulliver's Travels.

I can't believe no one has mentioned John Knowles' "A Separate Peace." I had to read that in tenth grade. It was the only book I just couldn't bring myself to finish and get the Cliff Notes for. I still hate that book.

The worst books in my opinion are LOTR and the Island of the Blue dolphin. I had to read Island of the Blue Dolphin in 5th grade and HATED it. LOTR takes to long to get thru I've tried reading it more than 4 times and each time I doze off.

I have to agree that being "forced"to read a book can turn you against it - My English Literature O Level books were "Animal Farm" by George Orwell, "12th Night - or What You Will" by Wiulliam Shakespeare, and "The Nun's Priests Tale" Chaucers Canterbury Tales. It wasn't until many years later that I understood the nuances of the tales.
So I suppose your worst book is the last stinker that you read!

Perhaps this is the place I need to put a question before you. I get the impression that many of the books put on the worst list are assigned ones: "I had to read such and such for this course or in this grade." What's a teacher who's required to teach (not just assign independent choices for a book report or test) at least two novels apart from that in the literature text to do? I'll give you specifics if you'll let me know what you think. Hit me between the eyes with it if I'm messing things up royally for my 13-year-old students. Moderator, if this needs to be moved elsewhere, I'll understand.

1. Marguerite Henry's King of the Wind. Simple read to start off. Before we begin the book, I discuss handicaps (the main character is mute). For one day, students can role play being mute, deaf, blind, wheelchair bound in classes in which the teachers have agreed to participate. We discuss domesticated animals (the horse in the story is the Godolphin Arabian), fill in diagrams on the parts of a horse. We discuss surprises one finds in traveling to different countries (Morocco, France, and England in the novel).

2. Lilies of the Field. I usually do this one during Black History Month. Prior discussion involves the Civil Rights Movement, desegregation of the military. Sometimes I think that knowing they'll see the Sidney Poitier movie after the reading spurs some of them on. Discussions of learning another language for the few German, Spanish, and Latin items that pop up. It can be hilarious when we try to communicate in pig latin for twenty minutes or so in class.

Students who want to fly through the books on their own can go to the library on the days silent reading or dramatized reading is done in class. In each class that averages 75% on a quiz of the first three chapters, I will read the next three chapters aloud to them.

Evaluation is a written test, a book REVIEW (rather than a report), or the creation of the "next" chapter. Student choice of one, two, or all.

Dixie, that sounds really nice! Makes me wish I'd had you for an English teacher! I've had to read 8 English, 8 German, 8 French and 20 Dutch books. Although not all of them were chosen by the teacher, none of the books were discussed in class with regard to the content. Only difficult grammatical constructions were dealt with!
(OK, I have to admit we were taken to theater once, to see "Who's afraid of Virginia Woolf", but the play lasted 'till 1 a.m., way past the usual bed time for a 15-year old. I fell a sleep and subsequently failed the test on the play, because I'd missed half of it... And I had read the entire book! )

I bet I would have enjoyed the required reading much more had I known more about the background of the stories, so in my opinion what you're doing can't be wrong.

I loved every assigned book at school except one: "For Whom the Bell Tolls" by Hemingway. I can't put my finger on why it did less than nothing for me. It's not Hemingway himself; I read "The Old Man and the Sea" in just one night when that was set. It's the only set book I never finished. I got a quarter of the way through it and did the assigment from the Cliff notes (the only time I've ever looked at them).

Aside from set books, my worst book ever is "Yeager", the autobiography of Chuck Yeager, former Air Force general, airman and stunt pilot. He is undoubtedly an incredibly accomplished man. That is made even greater when one considers his personal background and circumstances. But the bottom line is that I was 15 and reading a book written by a much older man and the style of writing was that of a 7 year old child. The simplicity bored me stupid. So I put the book down and went back to playing his flight simulator game on the computer. Much more entertaining I assure you!

Dixie, I think the reason for the disproportionate number of assigned books on the "worst books" list is simple: if you're not interested in a book you're not likely to read it unless you have to, therefore your worst book is quite likely to be one that you only read because you were forced to do so.

"Bleak House" hmmmm. I've read quite a lot of Dickens and think this is easily the best I've encountered. It IS a long old slog though.

I've just started "The Two Towers" and found "The Fellowship of the Ring" riveting. I'm quite surprised to be enjoying it a much as I am and I can easily see why lots of people wouldn't like it.

Worst books:

Elizabeth Smart's appalling "By Grand Central Station I Sat Down And Wept". By all means have an affair with a married man but don't crack on like you're being persecuted like the Jews in Nazi Germany.

Samuel Richardson's execrable "Pamela". I swear I will never touch another of his books for the rest of my life.

I've just had to read 'The Signal Man' by Charles Dickens for school. It's supposed to be a ghost story, and Dickens is apparently known for his ghost stories. But aren't ghost stories meant to be scary, or atleast a little bit unnerving? So why isn't 'The Signal Man' any of these?! I just thought it went on a bit too much.

I never read "Bleak House", but as far as Dickens goes I really loathed "Great Expectations". I alos hated "The Call of the Wild" by Jack London and "The Old Man and the Sea".

As for more popular literature I thought "The Celestine Prophecy" was pretentious and silly. I also read "The Source" by James Michener because it came very highly recommended. I guess if you have already studied different religions it is a waste of time. I threw it in the garbage after I was done with it.

A book I just couldn't stand and took me FOREVER to finish was "The House of the Seven Gables" by Nathaniel Hawthorne. I saw the 1940 film and just loved it, so I decided to give the book a shot. The way Hawthorne just dragged everything out was horrid. Another author probably could say in 1 page what Hawthorne did in 4. I'll stick to Vincent Price and the movie version.