A good premise is a good start for a book, but if you're all bright ideas and no refined skill, you'll get nowhere. I say this as a smalltime published writer.TheBobmus said:
Books you regret reading
- Thread starter thebobmaster_v1legacy
- Start date
Can't think of one I actually regret reading. If boring at first, I tend not to give the book a second attempt.
And of the things I've been compelled to read somewhat against my will, as is part of our obligation when we're young, certainly I've learned from them, and do not regret even in any small way the irritation in the mean-time.
And of the things I've been compelled to read somewhat against my will, as is part of our obligation when we're young, certainly I've learned from them, and do not regret even in any small way the irritation in the mean-time.
+1 for Catcher in the Rye, though I did eventually find some amusement in supposing: what if Holden grew up to become Patrick Bateman?
For me though, I most resent the time I spent reading War and Peace. In all fairness I didn't read it in Russian or unabridged but ye gods, every action of the characters and every non-historical occurrence in the world is entirely determined by whatever philosophical point Tolstoy's trying to make. Also, aside from The Lord of the Rings I can't think of another story where the author so frequently sets aside his own narrative to write only vaguely-related 5-10 page essays.
For me though, I most resent the time I spent reading War and Peace. In all fairness I didn't read it in Russian or unabridged but ye gods, every action of the characters and every non-historical occurrence in the world is entirely determined by whatever philosophical point Tolstoy's trying to make. Also, aside from The Lord of the Rings I can't think of another story where the author so frequently sets aside his own narrative to write only vaguely-related 5-10 page essays.
In English class we had to read Twilight, and I was the first person chosen to read aloud.
O___O
Luckily our teacher seemed to forget the next day though, phew. Only read one page.
O___O
Luckily our teacher seemed to forget the next day though, phew. Only read one page.
Ah, Jesus, I know exactly who you're talking about. I read Cell a number of years ago, and had related pretty closely to the character in question, and then when...well, correct me if I'm wrong but..."cinderblock?" I still feel angry, as well as a little ill when I think about that particular part of the book.razor343 said:
As for Catcher in the Rye, I was pretty frustrated with Holden myself, but I figured that it just meant he was something of an unreliable narrator, and that by glossing over things or by not really providing any closure for certain characters the author wasn't so much saying they were unimportant, but was doing what he should have done when writing in the first person and making it nonlinear. A person like Holden's thought process is going to be a bit of a mess. As for the frequent bitching, that's really more about him being a teenager, and an angry, depressed, lonely individual.
You win.MammothBlade said:
*shakes head* It is a prize I do not appreciate. Cthulhu is laughing at me.Blair Bennett said:
You were lucky you didn't see this series out to the end, and only read the better books. Out of all the series I've read, this is the one I regret the most.Nerexor said:
The author seems to have a weird obsession with rape, since every book is filled with pages on pages of innocent civilians getting raped by thugs. Towards the end, the story is just a series of constant depictions of rape and murder on the part of the transparent effigy of communism. The author abandons any attempt to keep his political views out of his writing, to the point where the main character becomes a successful capitalist for half a book for the purpose of showing the folly of communism.
The final two books are almost entirely composed of one-sided philosophical arguments on letting humanity promote itself vs. making humanity suffer. At this point, the author, Terry Goodkind, has become the fantasy version of Ayn Rand. The awkward, forced twists of logic and story made characters that I had cared about become alien to me. The ending was a forced travesty that gave me a headache.
I'm sad to say I actually finished this series, if only because my family kept buying the books for me at birthdays under the impression that I enjoyed the series (I couldn't tell them how much I despised their gifts). If there was ever a crime against literature, it is this series. It's a shame, the first books showed such promise.
On the one hand, I think that was kind of the point. I don't think the story would have worked as well if Alex wasn't the monstrous individual he was. From what I gather, the whole idea of the story was "How far are we willing to go to punish the worst of criminals, and is it worth the price?". One the other, the ending to the British version was kind of a cop-out.Muspelheim said:
At the end, Alex decides to stop his evil ways and decides to become a normal, family man. Really? The Ludovico treatment showed that a rotten person can still be rotten, even with the treatment. Yet free will will magically make criminals reform. Maybe, but I highly doubt Alex is one of those individuals.
Nonetheless, if you want something in that vein, yet don't want to go back to Clockwork, you're probably better off renting The Dark Knight.
I absolutely hated the final Harry Potter book. It felt so slapdash and disorganized, with so many added elements to finish the story, that it actually ruined the series for me. I actually liked the first six books, but now I hate the entire series. Ugh.
Second place goes to Baldur's Gate. The author took one of the best stories I've ever heard and made a terrible, terrible novel out of it. When you already have as great a story as Baldur's Gate featured, ruining it takes a special sort of failure.
Second place goes to Baldur's Gate. The author took one of the best stories I've ever heard and made a terrible, terrible novel out of it. When you already have as great a story as Baldur's Gate featured, ruining it takes a special sort of failure.
Flood by Stephen Baxter. About the entire world being flooded, in 40 years. No, not just a large-scale sea rise of, say, ten metres. Literally the entire surface of the Earth is flooded. The last scene of the book has the characters watching the peak of Everest go under.
I don't know what's more insulting; the vague assertions by the author that this is possible because of massive water reservoirs beneath the ocean floor that might be there (despite the fact the sea level rise accelerates exponentially, because everyone knows that when you pierce a pressurised container, the contents dribble out at first, then gradually leak out faster and faster /sarcasm), the fact it takes a mere 40 years to happen, the way that every character who's trying to save humanity is treated as a villain, while the Luddite bastards who sabotage these attempts are somehow treated as the good guys.
The child of one of the main characters is such a precocious little twat I was begging for him to die in some horrible way before the end (it doesn't happen). He somehow ends up in an American nuclear submarine, and has a chance to see the submerged ruins of London. He isn't interested. All the little bastard wants to do is swim. I have never been so overwhelmed with hatred towards a character before.
It is the only book I've gladly thrown in a charity bag. It is utter cack, and I urge you not to read it.
I don't know what's more insulting; the vague assertions by the author that this is possible because of massive water reservoirs beneath the ocean floor that might be there (despite the fact the sea level rise accelerates exponentially, because everyone knows that when you pierce a pressurised container, the contents dribble out at first, then gradually leak out faster and faster /sarcasm), the fact it takes a mere 40 years to happen, the way that every character who's trying to save humanity is treated as a villain, while the Luddite bastards who sabotage these attempts are somehow treated as the good guys.
The child of one of the main characters is such a precocious little twat I was begging for him to die in some horrible way before the end (it doesn't happen). He somehow ends up in an American nuclear submarine, and has a chance to see the submerged ruins of London. He isn't interested. All the little bastard wants to do is swim. I have never been so overwhelmed with hatred towards a character before.
It is the only book I've gladly thrown in a charity bag. It is utter cack, and I urge you not to read it.
Catching Fire.
Ugh... The first book in the series is one of my favorite books, but the second one... ugh.. It made my brain cry just reading it...
Ugh... The first book in the series is one of my favorite books, but the second one... ugh.. It made my brain cry just reading it...
Word, that book, grrrr....YuriRuler90 said:
I don't know why I bought that book. I always play as a chick in games I get to choose in so I tried to just cut it some slack, but really? After the end I just kinda sat there and thought, "well that was pretty stupid" Did Revan get a lobotomy or something? that was one of the worst plans in fiction.
Yeah its good to know its a theme with Harris. I read the Sookie Stackhouse books and its the fucking same thing! True Blood entertains the hell out of me so I tried the books. Its like Stephanie Meyers grew up to write trashy novels. Harris goes all out describing things that make no difference at all, then jumps into something suddenly making me think I missed a couple of pages. Every character wants Sookie for absolutely no good reason and don't have lives or interests of their own.Paradoxrifts said:
TL
R, Watch True Blood, skip the books.
Almost everything under the classification of "Classic"
Fahrenheit 451
Pride and Prejudice
Great Expectations
Lord of the Flies
The Odyssey
Everything by Shakespeare
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Atlas Shrugged
Robinson Crusoe
Moby-Dick
The Plague
Foundation
2001: A Space Odyssey
2010 (I liked 2061 and 3001)
On the Origin of Species
The Descent of Man
Most of E. A. Poe's works
Fahrenheit 451
Pride and Prejudice
Great Expectations
Lord of the Flies
The Odyssey
Everything by Shakespeare
20,000 Leagues Under the Sea
Atlas Shrugged
Robinson Crusoe
Moby-Dick
The Plague
Foundation
2001: A Space Odyssey
2010 (I liked 2061 and 3001)
On the Origin of Species
The Descent of Man
Most of E. A. Poe's works
The Hunger Games.
Honestly, the movie was better (in my opinion) than the first book. I just enjoyed it more, but this really wasn't due to the story. The worst type of writing for me is first person writing. In many cases it is fine, eg. The Hobbit. (because the author was the "first person"... Person, not Bilbo.) But in cases like the Hunger Games, it was there to cover up the crap skill in writing of the Author. Ive heard of Susan Collins before, but I've never (or I can't remember) reading any of her books. But god the writing was crap. Even the Twilight writing was better, though they were pretty much exactly the same style. I would have loved the book if it was in third person. I would literally almost ( almost btw) Worship it. The story I found was interesting , though the first section of the book was blah. Yet I only regretted reading it after I read the series once. Not in the middle of it.
Also, the last twilight book.
Yes, I actually could somewhat stand the other books of the series, but the last book I actually considered stuffing it back into my school library. That hunk of ... Yea. I believe that I have made a point. I regret reading this book.
Oh yea, and the robin hood and the 'sword for a dark queen" or something by someone redcliffe. Glah. I can't remember what the author is called.
Honestly, the movie was better (in my opinion) than the first book. I just enjoyed it more, but this really wasn't due to the story. The worst type of writing for me is first person writing. In many cases it is fine, eg. The Hobbit. (because the author was the "first person"... Person, not Bilbo.) But in cases like the Hunger Games, it was there to cover up the crap skill in writing of the Author. Ive heard of Susan Collins before, but I've never (or I can't remember) reading any of her books. But god the writing was crap. Even the Twilight writing was better, though they were pretty much exactly the same style. I would have loved the book if it was in third person. I would literally almost ( almost btw) Worship it. The story I found was interesting , though the first section of the book was blah. Yet I only regretted reading it after I read the series once. Not in the middle of it.
Also, the last twilight book.
Yes, I actually could somewhat stand the other books of the series, but the last book I actually considered stuffing it back into my school library. That hunk of ... Yea. I believe that I have made a point. I regret reading this book.
Oh yea, and the robin hood and the 'sword for a dark queen" or something by someone redcliffe. Glah. I can't remember what the author is called.
Two thirds of Titus Groan. Two people both bought me it for the same birthday.
In the first two-thirds of the book, amounting to about one and a half Tom Clancy novels, a baby is born, two people don't like each other and one of them finds a sword-cane.
In the first two-thirds of the book, amounting to about one and a half Tom Clancy novels, a baby is born, two people don't like each other and one of them finds a sword-cane.