The worst book you've ever read or had to have read

'The Birthing House' - Not finished yet, but it's awful.


I'll ellaborate on why i've come to the conclusion that 'The Birthing House' is rubbish-

Reasons so far:

1) AWFUL establishment of characters. He clearly cannot match the characters actions with their personality. For example: 'Jo' is always away on business, a career woman. She lives in apartments with her husband and two dogs. She hasn't comitted to a house and doesn't hold much sentimental value in material things. - and yet, she is described as slobbish (when we first meet her, she has left pizza boxes out, drawn the curtains, and is laying about in her underwear) - She also, at this point, has slept with another man. So, why would a career woman marry if she's the type to sleep around? and why would she have two large dogs, if she cannot commit to a house and just moves from apartment to apartment? There's mixed values in her character and it just doesn't add up.

She also declairs that she's maxed out their credit cards buying 'nice things' - why, if she's never there and doesn't spend time decorating houses?

I wont even go into the main character - he has absolutely no brain at all, and he might aswell be a walking lump of meat for all the personality he's been given.

2) The writing is blunt to the point of nausea. He explains the characters thoughts and feelings rather than conveying them through body language and dialogue, uses vulgar language to absolutely no effect (it's their just for the sake of being blunt) and flits between thoughts and thinking-aloud, so it's never clear which is which.

3) He doesn't make it clear whether the girl he sees when looking around the house is supposed to be a ghost or real. He doesn't illustrate any confusion in the characters actions - just tells the reader bluntly instead. Also, this doesn't put him off buying the house or questioning the girl what-so-ever. He also forgets to ask the 'questions' he had - a frankly lazy way of avoiding an explanation that would ruin his plans for the story.

4) Dreams and reality have been mixed up with no divide - causes confusion.

5) The voice in italics is never actually established as being someone or something else speaking in his mind. They're produced almost out of nowhere, and I've absolutely no idea what act they're supposed to play. Also, the message 'Forget the girl, there was no girl' just again contradicts the sighting of her before - where she was depicted as being real. No hint of the character wondering if she was or wasn't.

6) - He buys a house on impulse, which potentially could've meant he was *Drawn* to it, or possessed - and yet there's no mention of that. So we're supposed to simply trust the author when he declairs that this character would randomly select a house for no reason - great. Try showing that in his personality, buddy.



SO, yeah. If you're desperate to find what not to do in a novel, then read this one. lol. I'm still going to finish it though - perhaps the story will pick up in parts. The writing is still rubbish though.

 

Skellig, by David Almond. Why they teach that detritus in schools is beyond me; the very thought of it turns my stomach.

 

The lord of the rings. Drags on too much, maybe becuase I'm young and don't understand most of the language but i forcefully finished the first and couldn't go through the pain of reading the rest.

Also the Alex Rider Series.

 

I can't really think too far back, but the latest drudgery would be "Bleak House" by Dickens. And I know it is supposed to be the best book he's ever written, and I have currently decided to watch the BBC mini series. The mini series is very good, the book had me wanting to pluck my eyes out with a spoon it is so boring.

 

One of my favs. I did listen to the audio book, and I suppose that helps.

 

I think the book I have just finnished was abysmal, Whistleblower by Tess Gerretson.
I spent today reading it cover to cover and it was PAINFUL!

Not a bad writer, but a bad book.

 

A Tale of Two Cities. Urgh. And Lord of the Rings, can't stand the films so I don't know why I thought the books might be any better!

 

I usually can get through most books I read and, in the end, I end up really liking them, but there were a few key exceptions:

Across Five Aprils. I don't remember who it was by, but it was a absolutely horrid civil war novel.

Silas Marner, by George Eliot. And along those lines, The Mill on the Floss, as well. I really just don't enjoy George Eliot's writing and I really don't think I ever will.

The Scarlet Letter, which I found overly tedious.

Moby Dick, because it was just... bad.

I mean, I have other reasons for why I don't like the above books, but I really don't feel like going into much detail.
*shrugs*

 

I've had the misfortune of reading some really awful books but if I can name one offhand, it'd be Twilight by Stephenie Meyers. Horrible character development and the purple prose was overly purple - I turned an odd shade of blue. I cannot get over Edward Cullen's scintillating arms and incandescent chest and the subsequent fits of laughter that is generated from it. If he were a shade brighter, I'd have mistaken him for a environmentally friendly lamp.

 

I absolutley HATED River Boy, by Tim Bowler...It is sooo boring....and my english teacher was crying by the end and all I wanted to say was:
'GET OVER IT!!!!'

 

Eragon by Christopher Paolini.

First, I couldn't get into it. I listened to it. My iPod skipped a chapter. I didn't even notice.

*ehem*

Oh and the Scarlet Letter. Bleh. It seems like all they say during the first two chapters is that "She looked at the letter. She looked up. She looked at the town. She looked at the letter. It was scarlet."

 

vernon god little was a BIG disappointment. It did nothing for me.

 

across five aprils, were reading it in english right now.
i dont find any intrest in it.

its about a family in the civil war, where the older brothers go to war. two go to the north to fight and one goes to the south. lots of problems occur because of that. i dont really like it, but i have to read it.

 

I honestly didn't think anyone else was forced to read that book - or read it on their own volition. I had to read it way back in 8th grade (which wasn't way back; only about 5 years back). It was the first book I was ever forced to read in an English class that I absolutely hated and could find very little in it that I enjoyed.

So, yeah. Bad book. Nobody should read it unless they have to. (Or even if they have to.)

 

I noticed a lot of people mentioned Catcher in the Rye and I just couldn't help but bring up this picture:

​

Anyhow, the worst book I've ever had to read was Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf. I also hate Jane Austin's work as well as Margaret Atwood. They're all so boring. Feminist writing is just terrible. I mean, I love women, but I'm glad that movment in literature is essentially done for...

 

I absolutely agree about the Jane Austin's work. Sure it's a classic, but it Draaaaagggssss and is written in a language that requires one to read each sentence 3 times to understand what is going on.

 

I'm going to agree with you on Neuromancer. There seems to be a lot of (poorly justified) hate for classics in this thread, but I think you're onto something here.

Neuromancer is important - it's one of the cornerstones of cyberpunk - but it's not terribly good. The characters lack depth, and the plot isn't really gripping.

I mean, OK, you could argue that the detached style is part of the gritty, cyberpunk feel, but I don't really buy that. Blade Runner is far better, and it's also an incredibly important addition to the genre.

 

I'd just like to point out that Blade Runner is actuallu\y Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
Let's not confuse a classic of science fiction (and, indeed, english literature) with a mediocre movie loosely based on it.

 

You wouldn't murder Lockwood? Really? He thinks far too highly of himself for my liking. I hated Lockwood, Linton and both Catherines at some point. Still thought the book was good though
I'm going to say Skellig as well. I hated it. It got so boring so quickly.

 

I despised Faulkner's As I Lay Dying. I got about halfway through the novel before I started Sparknoting, and my teacher was well aware of that fact. She said she understood, admitting that she didnt like it either, but it's essential reading material for the AP test in a few weeks. So we had to.

Although I will admit, I had a lot of fun with the black comedic elements. I didnt read about any of them myself, but discussing the disgustingly moronic events sure was fun. >=D

 

I remember hating Neuromancer the first time I read it. And the second. But by the third time it started to make sense and I went 'Oh, WOW!' Whether a book that requires three reads can be considered good I leave up to you.

I noticed that myself but the distinct eras of writing follow certain fashions. Jane Austin, for instance, would now probably be considered a Comedy of Manners as so much of the tension and humour in the story revolves around people misbehaving in subtle ways. The 'Picture of Dorian Gray' is more play than novel and so feels static and uneventful.

But, for all time hate, I have to say the Anita Blake novels really do it for me. A friend of mine reads them and, when there is nothing else to read over lunch, I am drawn to pick one up out of some sort of hideous fascination.

 

I find the most irritating book I have ever laid eyes on is Earnest Hemingway's 'The Old man and the sea'.

Don't get me wrong, I found the issues he was representing very interesting but HIS WRITING STYLE WAS SO INCREDIBLY BLAND AND BORING. I don't believe in 'waffling a story up' by adding unnecessary words but....Surely you need to add some??

 

Old man and the sea is full of images, allusions and amazing metaphors, not to mention all around great writing. Admittedly if you're not used to that kind of writing style it can be a little jarring, but if you didn't enjoy it the first time try it again, cuz there's definitely a lot there to be enjoyed (even though its only like 80 pages).

 

Ulysses - James Joyce.

Bloated, pretentious, quasi-poetical nonsense. There are a few carefully crafted paragraphs and sentences of poetic beauty, but why should I have to plough through fifty pages of dirge to find it?

 

lol I'm gonna leave this thread before it makes me die anymore inside...the classics, man, the classics...