The Awakening I was forced to read also. Only I didn't. I read the Cliffs notes. I got a one hundred on the test. Their were 3 other books tested on that day. Those I read. I didn't get a one hundred on any of those. Just a little bit of irony.
As for worst books, I hated the Great Gatsby until we discussed it in class. I hated the Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman, though I suppose their was a point to that. I'll probably post later when I think of my all time worst book.

I have to confess I'm not very well read so,when the BBC recently aired a programme concerning peoples top100 choice of books ,I decided to make a short list of "classics" to get me on the road, so to speak.
One of my choices ,because it was in the top ten,and it was a title that had been rattling away in my head for years was "Catcher in the Rye" .Sorry if I'm being contraversial here but when I finished I just shrugged my shoulders and said "so what ". It was short and easy to read but of no substance what so ever.I hope my next "classic" holds my attention a lot better ......."Catch 22"

Oh, I completely agree with you on "Catcher In The Rye". For a while there I thought,"Maybe it's ME. Maybe I'm just too shallow to get the deep important symbolism of it all!!" *laughs* deep symbolism....I crack myself up.....

I've heard the thing about Catcher is how the reader's perception of Holden will change over time. On first reading, (in the teen years, ideally) the reader will probably be in favour of Holden's reactions and identify with him. In a later reading, the more mature reader will probably conclude that Holden has some problems and needs help. On yet a later reading, a different conclusion will be drawn.

I wouldn't know. I didn't read it until I was in my 20s.

There's a couple things to bear in mind about Catcher IMO. First off, it's more or less a boy's book. More specifically, a sensitive American baby boomer boy's book, about a boy who's ashamed of his sensitivity. It's not hard to see why it gets recommended to young readers by the current crop of teachers and critics (a generation influenced by sensitivity-shamed icons like Mailer and Hemingway) and why it has a good deal of nostalgic good feeling associated with it. Second, it's a "modern classic", which is a wonderful oxymoron. Is it really a classic? Maybe, but it's way too early to know if it has much to offer to later generations. IMO it's a popular book that has more to offer than most; also it probably was unlike the books that preceded it. I think it must have to account for it's status. Maybe it's like "Citizen Kane". Modern observers often think it's nothing much, unaware of how influential and original the work was at the time.

Speaking of modern classics, I didn't enjoy "Portnoy's Complaint". A buddy recommended it after he read it for a class. I complained to him about the recommendation after reading it and he had changed his mind about the book by then. I bet it set the record for percentage of pages devoted to masturbation in a mainstream novel, though. WTG, Roth.

I'm going on too long, but I'll say this anyway. "The Old Man and the Sea" was a crap intro to Hemingway. I don't know if it's still assigned to students the way it was when I was growing up but don't let it put you off Hemingway if you had to read it for school.

Isnt it funny that the books we were forced to read at school get the thumbs down. I got stuck with a whole bunch of teenage coming of age rubbish. Cant remember any except The chocolate war by robert cormier i think. Blah! I lved the great gatsby cos i read it of my own free will, my friends read it at school and hated it. Same applies for books by Hemingway, Satre and Camus. If you dont have to write a report on em they much more enjoyable!!
Oh and speaking of worst books ever The Naked Lunch!!! Wot the...??

Having gone back and read the entire thread before posting, I have to say I'm not at all surprised to see so many people who didn't like Lord of the Rings. I myself love them, and read them about once every two years or so. It takes me about a week to get through the Hobbit and all three books in the trilogy. But I'm the kind of person who gets very descriptive when I tell stories, and I like that sort of thing. My husband has never made it through any of the trilogy, but did manage to read the Hobbit. He simply can't stand to wade through Tolkien. I guess he's just not for everyone.

I also tend not to dislike very many books. Most of the books I was "forced" to read in school I liked rather well. Wuthering Heights and Jane Eyre, Animal Farm and 1984, Gone with the Wind, Les Miserables, The Great Gatsby, The Scarlett Letter, I loved them all. But one author sticks out like a sore thumb. I enjoyed Of Mice and Men and the Pearl, but I swear to you, the Grapes of Wrath was the longest, most boring, most preachy and horrible book I was ever forced to trudge through. After having to read it, I felt very much as downtroden and dust-covered as the unfortunate characters in the book. The great dustbowl described in the book, the bleak and colorless landscape, and everyone covered in dusty drab... His characters had about as much color as that. Oh such an awful book.

When I was a senior in high school I had to read "Heart of Darkness". Now, I'm sure that this book is known as being good, but I couldn't understand a word of it. I had to have somebody who already read it explain it to me. It just went entirely over my head. But then, maybe I'm not deep enough!

Anything by Thomas Hardy, the Brontes (name one - hate 'em all), Stephen King (the plots may be dandy, but the man can't write!), Margaret Atwood (she can write, but she never finishes a book - there's never any denouement!), all sci-fi - most of which is so pretentious it's gag-making, (except for John Wyndham's books, which are so well-written and plausible), Ernest Hemingway (those bullet-like sentences make me feel as if I'm being machine-gunned), Ulysses by James Joyce (twaddle!), 'Pilgrim's Progress' religious twaddle), Catherine Cookson (they're all the same book, except she changes the names of the characters. However, 'Rooney' is a good one!) and I'm so pleased to see that I am not the only non-fan of LOTR (my husband and two sons who all love the LOTR books think I'm out to lunch!), and anything by Danielle Steele and authors of her ilk - soft porn at its worst.

Cym, I quite like Hardy and the Brontes. However, I agree with the rest of your comments, particularly about science fiction. John Wyndham and Ray Bradbury are good - but forget the rest.

I read the Lord of the Rings many times in my youth but have never gone back to it. Guess i'm worried the magic might not be the same. But if you really want to read bad books you must enter the Fantasy/Sci fi genre. Fans of the genre seem to believe they too can write a novel. Sadly many of these books reach my hands and due to my always finish a book I start policy, I am forced to wade through them.
I should also mention the diabolical Tom Clancy, who told this guy he could write, and why haven't they been dragged before an International Court?

"Sadly many of these books reach my hands and due to my always finish a book I start policy, I am forced to wade through them."

I used to have the same policy when I was younger, but then I decided life was just too short for that. Now, if a book doesn't grab me by the time I've finished chapter 1, to the second hand bookshop it goes!

Yup, me too. I've got more of a one chapter policy, also.

In general terms, I have found that if an author's books are consistently best sellers, they are probably not very good. That is, they may have an interesting story, but the style is most likely plodding and the characterization stereotypical. I suspect this is due to the 'blanding down' which is necessary for anything to have a broad mainstream appeal - it applies also to food, movies, music....

In books as in food, I mostly prefer mine highly seasoned.

At the time, I really resented having to read Catcher in the Rye for Homors English. I thought I had expressed as much in my essay for that course, but my instructor and peer grader thought otherwise

Hello all I am new to the site and was thrilled to see a book board as I am an avid reader and love to talk about books with others - The Catcher in The Rye was a huge disappointment to me and I re read it recently to see if that was still the case - readers it was I just dont get all the hype surrounding it !
however the worst ever book I read was The House of Leaves - I stuck it out to the end but didnt a) get it and b) enjoy it at all - has anyone else read it ?

Lord of the Rings is more geared for males~ stupid it's not. Now having spent two years to get through Ulysses by James Joyce is my pick for worst book.

I've read the lord of the Rings many many times and love it dearly, but its not the most interesting books to read i am sure, lots and lots of boring long chapters going nowhere. I can see why some people find it boring, but i think the idea behind it was to create a new world and its history and language.
right thats the lord of the rings discussed. lol.
I dont think that i have a worst book ever, i pick one up give it four or five chapters and if it doesnt bite me i put it down and read something else.
If it dosnt interest me i stop,
I remember being in school and had to read this awful long poem, cant remember its name though that was awful to understand and comprehend. glad i dont have to do that anymore.
Sometimes i read a book and am slightly disappointed at the end or think it was pointless, but thankfully thats very rare indeed.
sunday

Quote:

---

Lord of the Rings is more geared for males

---

Ummm - I don't think so. I've read the trilogy a few times over the years and loved it very much...and I'm pretty sure that I'm not a male!

On the other hand, I also enjoyed Ulysses, but not as much.
A book I recently found incredibly boring was 'Memoirs of a Geisha'. I left it in my doctor's waiting room by accident, and by the time I was able to retrieve it, I couldn't bring myself to pick it up again and finish it.

"Fear of Flying" by Erica Jong.

Vastly overrated.

Senseless.

I just wasted two hours reading "Puberty Blues". If the book had been any thicker, I probably wouldn't have finished it but, being the eternal optomist, I kept waiting for it to get better - but it never did.

What a load of rubbish (I'd use another word instead of rubbish but Rufus would have a fit)!

I found this book in a second-hand book shop and was sucked into reading it because it claimed to be a true depiction of what it was like to be a teenager in Australia in the 1970s (as I was) and it was described in glowing terms like "cult classic" on the cover.

For those who are unfamiliar with it, here's the Amazon summary:

Book Description
Bestselling author Kathy Lette's debut novel is available in Britain for the first time. Written twenty years ago, "Puberty Blues" is the bestselling account of growing up in the 1970s that took Australia by storm and spawned an eponymous cult movie. It also marked the starting point of Kathy Lette's writing career, which sees her now as an author at the forefront of her field. "Puberty Blues" is about top chicks and surfie spunks and the kids who don't quite make the cut: it recreates with fascinating honesty a world where only the gang and the surf count. It's a hilarious and horrifying account of the way many teenagers live and some of them die. Kathy Lette and Gabrielle Carey's insightful novel is as painfully true today as it ever was.

About the Author
Born and bred in Sylvania Waters, Kathy Lette is regarded as a national treasure in her native Australia. She is the author of 'Girls Night Out', 'Llama Parlour', 'Foetal Attraction', 'Mad Cows', 'Altar Ego' and 'Nip an' Tuck'. 'Mad Cows' was made into a film, starring Anna Friel, Joanna Lumley and Greg Wise which came out in Autumn 1999.


I grew up in this era (the 1970s) but I found little to relate to in this book. I think my childhood was as normal as anybody else's and I certainly wasn't a goody-two-shoes when I was a teenager but I felt this book wasn't as representative of the era as the authors claim. I really doubt whether the average Australian 13-year-old was as much into drugs and sex as is depicted in this book. I didn't find the characters authentic and the conversations weren't natural. It didn't have much of a plot and the ending is rather weak. It wasn't hilarious either. They made it into a movie but I don't think I'll be bothered watching it.

A huge disappointment!

No, don't bother MotherGoose, the movie is as bad as the book.

Marx did not directly enslave people (unless you count being a servant in a Victorian middle class household as being a slave) but some horrible things have been done in his name.

There is a huge amount of Science fiction - I think it is a bit much to make a blanket condemnation of it all execept 2 authours.

I agree - my worst books are the ones I was forced to read at school.

On fantasy - surely all fiction is a form of fantasy - the characters might seem like real people & their only connection with magic is a few card tricks but they are no more real than a 2 headed ogre rampaging through the elf woods with a flaming sword & a magic wand.

In re-reading this thread, I see that I previously posted that "if a book doesn't grab me by the time I've finished chapter 1, to the second hand bookshop it goes!" So with "Puberty Blues", I broke my own rule. However, in my defence, it was a very thin book and able to be read in a couple of hours. If it had been any longer, I am sure I wouldn't have finished it.

It's in the second-hand book shop now. I am lucky enough to have a wonderful second-hand bookshop nearby which is owned by a lovely lady named Jan. Jan knows what I like to read and always emails me when something good comes in to ask "do you want this one?" She knows me so well that she actually laughed when I brought "Puberty Blues" in to trade. (I didn't get it from her shop).

I usually stop reading a book when it doesn't grab my attention, the only exception to that were most of the books in high school. Two books that I can remember are:
Of Mice and Men (can't remember the author), had to read it for english and we got an edited/shortend version to read. Glad we got that or I'd never managed to finish it.

Jonas by Jens Bjørnebo. It's about a poor young boy in Oslo, Norway in the middle of the 1950s who is dyslexic, and the trouble he has in school because of it, since in the beginning nobody knows it and the teachers think he is stupid.