Books you wouldn't recommend

[Jer]

Zona by Geoff Dyer

This just came out and since it is supposedly about my favorite film of all time it was pretty irresistable for me.

Imagine reading a whole book written by a slightly quicker version of AKRover. That's Zona. The footnotes about Dyer's anal warts are longer than the actual text. If I ever meet this guy I'm going to gouge out his eyes just in case there is ever a film produced that beats Stalker, just so this douchebag won't be able to view it. Not only does this insufferable toolbox share the same favorite film as I do, but near the end of his goddamn book he writes about how he enjoys listening to Stars Of The Lid. So make that: gouge his eyes out and ice-pick his eardrums.

What an absolutely self-absorbed, pretentious shit-fest. This is ignoring his moron commentary on the film itself.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

Pretty much anything by Ayn Rand.

I guess you have to read some of her stuff just to see what the hubbub is all about, which is why I forced down "Atlas Shrugged." At least now I understand, though honestly I don't recommend it.

[up an down]

i think the art of racing in the rain is boring treacle.

and ayn rand was insane

[PassTheDutchie]

- "Galapagos" by Vonnegut; what a pos
- "Executioners Song" by Mailer; just went on and on and on and on and on. Kill the fucker already.
- How anyone made it through "The Divinci Code" I'll never understand; talk about hackneyed

[DJSapp]

"On the Road"

Yeah, flame me. I guess I haven't done enough speed to get it. The disjointed narrative just grated on me and I couldn't get through it, no matter how hard I tried.

[doughboyshredder]

If I am not in to a book by the time I've made it through the first 50 pages I stop reading, and find something that I enjoy.
I don't understand why anyone wastes their time reading something they don't like.

[Schemeboat]

Anything by Malcolm gladwell

[Dickeymotto]

- "Galapagos" by Vonnegut; what a pos

Really? I fucking loved that book. Read it as a kid and have re-read it several times since and loved it more each time. Different strokes I guess.

I don't read enough to read books I don't like. My reading que has enough stuff I know I'll like on it to keep me going for quite a long time.

[nogophers]

--The Hornets nest books. #1 was slightly bearable, but the 2nd went to Goodwill. Author dies=Best seller.
--Running with scissors. Maybe it picked up after the first couple hundred pages, but I wasn't going to wait.

[auvgeek]

Ha, I knew when I clicked on this thread at least one person would say Ayn Rand. But personally, I love her works. I'm not gonna try to defend it, just say that I love her works and have never understood why she generates so much animosity. Also, I feel like there are very few people who truly understand her writing/philosophy, including people who claim love it (those are much worse than people who disagree with her) so going into it with an open mind and trying to quell preconceived notions is critical. Frankly, though, I think most people would be better off reading We The Living or her early unpublished fiction before trying Atlas Shrugged.

Anyway, I don't know that I've ever read a book I wouldn't recommend to anybody - if I have, I promptly forgot about it. There're many books I really didn't like, but I'll pass them on to my friends who have totally different tastes to see what they think. I hated Madame Bovary, for example, but I have friends who liked it. I also hated Kite Runner, and I know ALOT of people who really liked it. I guess I don't read enough obscure modern fiction to know really bad writing.

[dipstik]

I really didn't care for Into Africa or The Night Circus. Freakonomics irritated me as well.

I also recently finished Crime & Punishment. I'm glad I read it, but honestly I don't know who the hell I would recommend that book to.

And like auvgeek, I do enjoy Ayn Rand. Go figure. The Fountainhead is one of my all-time favorites, but I am a month into Atlas Shrugged and am having a hard time staying interested. Definitely not a book I would recommend to everyone, however anything that still polarizes people 50+ years after publication is a worthy read IMO.

[f2f]

Neal Stephenson's much anticipated REAMDE. a 1000-page snoozefest. this guy needs a non-squirmy editor really badly.

[auvgeek]

I also recently finished Crime & Punishment. I'm glad I read it, but honestly I don't know who the hell I would recommend that book to.

ME! I really liked it, but I prefer The Brothers Karamazov. Liked both of them much more than Dostoevsky's earlier works tho. Notes from Underground was a little too...odd...for me. But yeah, you have to really want to read it. First tried to read them in my early high school years, and just kinda gave up from lack of time, boredom, etc. Came back a few years later, and it just kinda clicked. If you're into those kinda books, check out Victor Hugo's Ninety-Three or The Man Who Laughs. Not sure why his works aren't more well known (besides Les Mis and The Hunchback, but that's just cuz they were turned into plays and movies). Also, you can skip the historical essays- they're great on their own, but completely irrelevant to the plot.

I know people who love Atlas, but struggled with the first 100 pages or so (my mom, for instance). I ate it up, but that's just me. I did struggle a bit with the last 100 pages, but I think I was just exhausted. Still managed to finish the book on a week-long backpacking trip. If you like AR, you should pick up a copy of The Early Ayn Rand, if you haven't already. Some really neat short stories and stuff in there that was never published cuz she didn't think it was worthy (some of them were written while she was still learning English). Sometimes I wish she would have wrote with a little more subtlety (which is why I really like her earlier works). But then again, people still misrepresent her and her ideas so I find it hard to criticize too much. And to be honest, I've read Atlas Shrugged 4 times now, and each time I still pick out something new that I didn't quite fully understand before.

Okay, off my soapbox. Carry on.

[The AD]

Juliet, Naked by Nicky Hornby. I've enjoyed his other books, but this one seemed somewhat phoned in. Not that it was bad, just a little boring and not up to his usual standards.

[DeathVan]

Chuck Palahniuk Haunted

I went on a Palahniuk kick a few years back and read all of his available novels, enjoying most.

Haunted, on the other hand is even more disturbing than his other works and it is has parts that I have tried to forget, unsuccessfully. This may appeal to some people, but for me it went over the top and became uncomfortable (and I would not consider myself overly sensitive or prudish), ymmv.

[Chainsaw_Willie]

... Also, I feel like there are very few people who truly understand her writing/philosophy, including people who claim love it (those are much worse than people who disagree with her) so going into it with an open mind and trying to quell preconceived notions is critical. ...

I didn't have any preconceived notions when I started it. I had no idea what it was about and knew very little about Ms. Rand before that.

I'd always heard that it was some great classic that everyone should read, so the only preconception I had was that it would probably have some kind of message and be well written.

I found the writing hard to read and my basic opinion of the book is this: It could have been half as long and still made the same point.

I'm not going to get into an argument about the philosophies presented, that's not the point. If something is entertaining it could be trying to sell me on any number of things I don't agree with and I'd still find it entertaining. This book was not entertaining. It was boring and repetitive and by the end she was pounding the last bits of that horse into dust.

I do think people should read this, or maybe one of those other ones you mentioned just so you know who Ayn Rand is, what's she's about, and can develop your own ideas about her philosophies, but I wouldn't recommend this book as something enjoyable to read.

If I am not in to a book by the time I've made it through the first 50 pages I stop reading, and find something that I enjoy.
I don't understand why anyone wastes their time reading something they don't like.

Well, in the case above it was to try to gain a greater understanding of why that book has so much buzz about it. I forced myself to read the whole thing just so I could have something halfwitted to say about it.

Also, being "into" a book is a curious thing. One of my favorite books features a protagonist who's really hard to like. He's a bitter, selfish asshole that most people would not be able to identify with. Despite that, I found the book compelling so stuck with it, even though I didn't think I was going to like it. The story arc involved the transformation of this character, redeeming him in the end.

[yogachik]

I'm the only person I know who didn't like Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

I also wasn't too thrilled with Juliet, Naked, although I did finish it, and very quickly.

[Chugachjed]

Wild Animus, was terrible.

[Chugachjed]

If I am not in to a book by the time I've made it through the first 50 pages I stop reading, and find something that I enjoy.
I don't understand why anyone wastes their time reading something they don't like.

You haven't spent nearly enough time with bad weather keeping you in a tent.

[TomCrac]

My short list ...

"How to Write Your Own Crib and Cliff Notes" by AKRover

"Secrets to Powder Day Etiquette ... Maximizing Your Powder Day Experience" by Luffski

"Tolerance ... One Mans Journey to Personal Understanding" by Jonathon Wade

"Celebrating Celibacy" by alias

"How to Get Hired in the Ski Industry ... A Video Manual" by Dasblunt

"Selling Black to Whites" by fd wear

"Pizza or French Fries? .... Your Childs Safety IS Hysterical" by Luffski

"Landing That Dream Job .... Tales From a 3rd Floor Mens Room Attendant" by Parvo

"Stabbing at Humor" by TomCrac

[auvgeek]

I didn't have any preconceived notions when I started it. I had no idea what it was about and knew very little about Ms. Rand before that.

I'd always heard that it was some great classic that everyone should read, so the only preconception I had was that it would probably have some kind of message and be well written.

I found the writing hard to read and my basic opinion of the book is this: It could have been half as long and still made the same point.

I'm not going to get into an argument about the philosophies presented, that's not the point. If something is entertaining it could be trying to sell me on any number of things I don't agree with and I'd still find it entertaining. This book was not entertaining. It was boring and repetitive and by the end she was pounding the last bits of that horse into dust.

I do think people should read this, or maybe one of those other ones you mentioned just so you know who Ayn Rand is, what's she's about, and can develop your own ideas about her philosophies, but I wouldn't recommend this book as something enjoyable to read.

Just so you know, none of my post was aimed directly towards you (or anyone else). Without a lengthy discussion about the book and what you got from it, I wouldn't presume to judge your motivations for reading it or anything else about your experience. (Hit me up if you ever want to make some turns and talk about it, though. ) I'm totally willing to accept that some people will never like her works (or philosophy), and that's totally cool with me. I just don't want someone else to read that she's an awful writer and write her off without so much as a second thought.

I would be curious to know if you find We The Living the same way, though I suspect you're not gonna want to read any else by her. Truth be told, I only read one each of Faulkner, Steinbeck, and Tolstoy. It was enough to know they're just not for me (pretty much the whole realism/naturalism school of literature isn't my cup of tea). But I'm willing to try almost any author at least once.

I'm curious though, what book were you referring to as one of your favourites?

[Hugh Conway]

Faulkner, Tolstoy and Steinbeck had a somewhat diverse set of works. Part of why they are "great" authors. Reading only one piece of each is selling yourself short.

Ayn Rand was an awful writer. Really. Unless you are comparing her to Michael Crichton, Dan Brown and Tom Clancy when they get all philosophical and preachy.


Don't read:
Anything by Francine Prose. Esp the Blue Angel supposedly her "best work" but mostly a shitty meanspirited knock off of Lolita with some modern twists that tells us that the "modern condition" is shitty publishers shoving this shit down our throats

[brice618]

Ayn Rand is Twilight for conservative zombies.

Don't read Blood Bones and Butter. A few hundred pages of some self absorbed dear daddy letter with genuinely little talk about food.

[Jer]

I like Anthem. The first time I read it I was about 17 and it took a couple hours. The rest of Ayn Rand's stuff says basically the same thing but with 5 billion pages too many.

Galapagos was great - not his best, but certainly in the top 5. I've read everything Vonnegut wrote at least a dozen times. It sure beats taking a chance on some potential piece of shit drivel like Zona. Sure - you know how it's gonna end up, but at least you know you won't end up wanting to kill the author.

There are plenty of books that I've read and wanted that particular time of my life back, but I can't remember one where I actually wanted to inflict violence upon the author like Zona.

footnote: A few years back I read Monster Of God (can't remember the author). A few months ago I was ordering something off Amazon and that book popped up in "also recommended". I started reading some of the reviews by regular jackoffs and one guy (who gave it a really low rating) commented that he was disappointed because there wasn't anything about God in the book. Anal warts.

footnote: Why are libs so consumed with hatred for Rand? Like the guy who posted above, I knew that she would be mentioned at least six times in the first page of this thread. I'm no lib, but like I said one of my favorite authors is Kurt Vonnegut and I also like Stienbeck and other lefty types. Then again they are way better writers than Rand. I wouldn't call Rand an "awful" writer. Admittedly I never made it through Atlas Shrugged and the only reason I finished The Fountainhead was because I wanted to prove something to myself, but I wouldn't put her in the same league as truely horrible writers like Geoff Dyer and Joseph Heller. Actually - I think Catch 22 sucks, but I wouldn't put Heller in Dyer's class either. Anal Warts.

footnote: I can't believe nobody has mentioned Moby Dick yet. On of my favorite novels, but I can definetly see why some people would want to dig up Melville and piss on his bones. Anal Warts...

[XtrPickels]

Atlas shrugged started slow for me. In my opinion, the if you are only able to take things at face value, you will not enjoy her writing because it is "insane", however the concepts are an interesting and telling experiment.

On the other hand, I cannot get through catch 22