Worst book you ever read (or tried to)

[StevieDS]

I suggest they aren't forcing it upon you, you can say no.

 

[BigYin]

it's just ink on paper, nothing more :thumb:

Worst book.. hmmm - I once read a trashy girly novel, because it was written by a family friend, and everyone was SO impressed she was a published author - it was really pretty weak, and that's saying it nicely. Can't even remember the title :lol:

 

[falafael]

true, but as for real books, i havent read in a long time, but i did like that scifi author, forget, russian i think.
Books make use of yr imagination and i will always use paper, not ebook

 

[Cononthebarber]

Isaac Asimov?

 

[falafael]

Isaac Asimov?

Thats him, thanks mate!!

 

[BigYin]

As a HUGE Terry Pratchett / DiscWorld fan, I really hate some of the spin off stuff from it - I've really struggled to wade through some of the 'science of discworld' series - they are a waste of paper really :nono:

 

[dennisdk2000]

The trouble with Shakespeare is that the language is so hard for us to understand nowadays. I had a brilliant English teacher at college, and so I was lucky enough to get a chance to appreciate and enjoy Shakespeare. But I'd never attempt to read him on my own back - for too hard-going, and not being English doesn't help!

Dennis

The language isn't the problem for me. I love Shakespeare's sonnets, and I'm also a big fan of Chaucer, who wrote in a form of English that's virtually a foreign language compared to contemporary English.

Fair enough! I don't suppose it helps matters that reading a play isn't the best way of enjoying it - they are meant to be performed.

Dennis

 

[oldbloke]

As a HUGE Terry Pratchett / DiscWorld fan, I really hate some of the spin off stuff from it - I've really struggled to wade through some of the 'science of discworld' series - they are a waste of paper really :nono:

Oh, I like them. But then, I read science books anyway. I've been known to pack a stats textbook for holiday reading (back when I was trying to write a predictor for the footie pools)

Do you like Terry's non-Disc fiction, eg The Long Earth? Quite impressed by that.

Are you coming to the Discworld Convention in Manchester next year?

 

[Cononthebarber]

Isaac Asimov?

Thats him, thanks mate!!

Yeah he is good, I've read a few of his books :thumb:

 

[Crastney]

We need to talk about Kevin - really couldn't get past the first few pages, even after several attempts.
The film of the book was very well done, so it's probably just me.

I found it a little difficult to begin with, just the way way it was written but soldiered on and ended up really enjoying it. Never seen the film but wouldn't mind. Is there a big twist in the film? In the book I never saw it coming!!!

Not exactly a twist, as the film jumps around back and forth quite a lot. I sort of expected what was going to happen, but yeah, a bit of a shock.
(you do mean the other two main characters right?)

 

[avinabacca]

I have also failed on 4 attempts to read Catch 22!

Aye, couldn't read it either. Think I gave it a couple of tries and then just gave it up...

Really enjoyed (is that the word?) we need to talk about Kevin too - the twist was strange though; kinda almost shocking yet no surprise at all at the same time, if you get me?

 

[TRXnMe]

Worst book I ever tried to read was about chaos theory, I can't even remember the title now. It was 'required reading' for some of the post grad work I did after getting my degree, ruddy 'orrible it was. I read it all but still don't understand the detail off chaos theory, happily it's no longer the theory de jour anyway :)

As to those slating Tolkien's Lord Of The Ring, stone them, and then stone them some more. I appreciate that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but being that wrong requires correcction

I've always enjoyed Asimov, started off with the robot books and just couldn't stop reading after that. Was it Asimov who sude NASA over copyright of the design for a satellite??? Must google that.

Shakespeare, really, REALLY, has to be experienced as a play, preferably by the Royal Shakespeare Company in Stratford. But yes, he did write a couple of plays that aren't quite as good as the rest.

 

[RobWalker]

Shakespeare, really, REALLY, has to be experienced as a play, preferably by the Royal Shakespeare Company in Stratford. But yes, he did write a couple of plays that aren't quite as good as the rest.

I agree there, reading shakespeare is somewhat akin to reading a film script and saying the film was ****...I've seen a RSC play in stratford, it really is interesting, the props and scenery are really unique and when we saw it, the actors shout instead of using stage mics!

 

[TRXnMe]

Shakespeare, really, REALLY, has to be experienced as a play, preferably by the Royal Shakespeare Company in Stratford. But yes, he did write a couple of plays that aren't quite as good as the rest.

I agree there, reading shakespeare is somewhat akin to reading a film script and saying the film was ****...I've seen a RSC play in stratford, it really is interesting, the props and scenery are really unique and when we saw it, the actors shout instead of using stage mics!

We try to go once a year, get a B&B in Stratford and book a show, last time we were 'ring side' and ended up with stage blood all over the place (it washes out quite well happily), as you say no mikes on that stage, the players have to make themselves heard.

Last time we were there is was 'the scottish play', hence the blood

 

[Asalpaws]

Not sure if it's mentioned here already but I would throw Gabriel Garcia Mazquez's "One Hundred Years of Solitude" in the ring. Seems to be consistently in the top 100 book lists but despite trying twice, I just can't get into it, it's just boring. More likely I'm just ignorant and am missing the point but I just couldn't finish it. T

 

[oldbloke]

As to those slating Tolkien's Lord Of The Ring, stone them, and then stone them some more. I appreciate that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but being that wrong requires correcction

Except it's worth skipping the whole Tom Bombadil section.
I used to use the 12 cassette audio version the BBC did as background when decorating: they left Bombadil out too.

 

[TRXnMe]

As to those slating Tolkien's Lord Of The Ring, stone them, and then stone them some more. I appreciate that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but being that wrong requires correcction

Except it's worth skipping the whole Tom Bombadil section.
I used to use the 12 cassette audio version the BBC did as background when decorating: they left Bombadil out too.

Bit like the fillum did then :)

I'd forgotten that bit 'til you mentiioned it. I didn't find it that bad, apart from all the songs / poems, but you have to put up with all that stuff in most of Tolkien's works.

 

[Druss]

As to those slating Tolkien's Lord Of The Ring, stone them, and then stone them some more. I appreciate that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but being that wrong requires correcction

Except it's worth skipping the whole Tom Bombadil section.
I used to use the 12 cassette audio version the BBC did as background when decorating: they left Bombadil out too.

Bit like the fillum did then :)

I'd forgotten that bit 'til you mentiioned it. I didn't find it that bad, apart from all the songs / poems, but you have to put up with all that stuff in most of Tolkien's works.

I agree about Tom Bombadil, that's probably the only thing that marred the otherwise genius Lord of the Rings. All of the other characters that have been knocking around for tens of thousands of years tend to be a bit on the fence about getting involved in the war but eventually pick a side, Bombadil even helps out the hobbits at one point but doesn't join the main conflict even though he could easily turn the tide on his own. A bit of a plot hole there, his motivations for remaining a conscientious objector and all? Maybe I missed something but he seemed a bit of a flimsy character.

 

[TRXnMe]

As to those slating Tolkien's Lord Of The Ring, stone them, and then stone them some more. I appreciate that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but being that wrong requires correcction

Except it's worth skipping the whole Tom Bombadil section.
I used to use the 12 cassette audio version the BBC did as background when decorating: they left Bombadil out too.

I agree about Tom Bombadil, that's probably the only thing that marred the otherwise genius Lord of the Rings. All of the other characters that have been knocking around for tens of thousands of years tend to be a bit on the fence about getting involved in the war but eventually pick a side, Bombadil even helps out the hobbits at one point but doesn't join the main conflict even though he could easily turn the tide on his own. A bit of a plot hole there, his motivations for remaining a conscientious objector and all? Maybe I missed something but he seemed a bit of a flimsy character.

He was, erm, otherwise occupied, with elf child / fairy / goddess type or other and not about to go off to war and leave her alone. At least that's my reading of the TB character :)

 

[Tim_Crowhurst]

I'm 2/3 of the way through A Game of Thrones, the first of the Song of Ice & Fire books, and I'm becoming increasingly bored of it. Not the worst book I've ever read, but far from the most gripping. I don't really care what happens to most of the characters, and I suspect this is one of those rare instances where the TV series is WAY better than the books.

It probably doesn't help that I'm flipping between that and my friend JL's new series, Damned If You Do, which I want to get through before we next meet up. It's about a male succubus and his half-Valkyrie lover, and given that JL can turn the phrase "plastron job" into a punch-line that will split your sides, it's probably not surprising that I was in fits of laughter by the end of the first page.

AGoT might be a much more complex story-line, but it's nowhere near as enjoyable as DiYD.