# Popular books you just don't get?



## TiffanyMonroe (Jul 7, 2012)

With all of the excitement around Alegiant (sp?), I was wondering if there are any really popular books out there that you just don't "get"? I mean, what's the book that had the most success that made no sense to you?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

The DaVinci Code.  I never got how a run-of-the-mill  thriller (that I enjoyed) became a phenomenon.

Betsy


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Hunger Games.
50 shades of grey.
The girl with the dragon tattoo.
Nearly any popular book.


----------



## TiffanyNicole (Jul 28, 2013)

I second The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. I tried to read it several times and I just couldn't get through it.


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

There's two already mentioned that I would agree with:

The DaVinci Code
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.

Although, I did at least finish the latter.

I'll probably catch heat for this one, but The Weird Sisters... It was too weird


----------



## lmroth12 (Nov 15, 2012)

I had no interest in even starting *The DaVinci Code*, but from what I understand it sold like hotcakes because of its shock value rather than for any valuable contribution it made to literature.

Then again, I never made it through *Moby Dick*, abandoning it about a third of the way through. I mentioned this in a thread on classics and one person insisted that I try it again as it was about the best book he had ever read. Sorry, I like adventure and for me that one never started early enough to maintain my interest.

I think a lot of it has to do with personal taste, a preference for an author's style, and how you like to invest yourself in a book. Some people want to be in the know with what everyone is reading so they can join the conversation when people discuss the bestseller list at social events; others just don't care what the masses are reading and read purely for personal enjoyment.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Never heard of _Allegiant _--- have heard of _Allegiance_ the musical starring George Takei but I'm pretty sure that's completely different! 

I liked the _DaVinci Code_ -- it was a good story. But not great literature. There's definitely a negative vibe going on against the Catholic church, and I think there were some of the more conservative writers who basically said "Good Catholics shouldn't buy this book." So, of course, the media picked that up and that was all it needed. Best way to sell a book is to tell a bunch of people they shouldn't read it!  That said, it's rather alarming the number of people who read it and thought that it was all TRUE. . . . . the fact that the author claims it is true (though I've not seen him in a tin foil hat, I think he has one) without even a 'nudge nudge wink wink' didn't help, of course. 

Read the first chapter or two of _Fifty Shades_ and found the writing so poor that it wasn't worth my time to try to get to the "good" part. But, again, I get the attraction of something pretty sexy and half forbidden -- but that's also been more or less 'blessed' by the media. So you can read it and secretly enjoy it while expressing shock to the rest of the world.

In enjoyed the whole _Dragon Tattoo_ series. Again, a good story, but not great literature. I read it before reading it was cool.  Well, at least the first volume. But I liked it well enough to go on to the other two.

Never heard of _The Weird Sisters_.

_Moby Dick_ is an acquired taste, I admit. I was fortunate to read it in HS and had a very good teacher who was able to get us to enjoy the adventure parts and also focus on the literary qualities. We actually read it in connection to our American History class when we got to that period so there was a lot of crossover of information about the whole whaling culture, etc.

I don't get the _Dark Materials_ books. Well, I get it from a marketing standpoint -- it's that whole thinly disguised Catholic church is evil thing. But I read the whole of the first book and just had no interest in going on. It was dull. Maybe I found it so because it was clearly a book for young teens. And I was not (ahem) a young teen when I read it. Still, I really liked the Harry Potter books and I was not a young teen when I read those either. And I've read Harvey's YA book and quite enjoyed it. So there's something more besides the fact that it's for kids.

I also personally have no interest in the Hunger Games books . . . . that probably is mostly because it seems to me that I'm well older than the age group at which they're aimed. My son -- was in his late 20's at the time -- read them and enjoyed them. But I'm also not a fan of dystopian fiction and that's my impression of what they are.

_Twilight_ is another I read the first few chapters of -- got the sample one time when I was showing off my kindle to my niece, so since it was there, I read it. Too much teen angst. Plus I don't at all comprehend the "I'm in love with a Zombie/Vampire/Werewolf" thing.  I get that it's aimed at teenaged girls -- but I don't think I would have even liked it much when I _was_ a teenaged girl. 

James Patterson's _Alex Cross_ books are really popular: I find them full of gratuitous violence and don't much care for the character. But I do, generally, enjoy his _Women's Murder Club_ series, which are mostly written by someone else entirely, of course. Still, the last one was not up to par -- if the next one doesn't get back to the early formula it'll be the last one I read.

The Jersey Guernsey Potato Peel book never appealed to me either, though that got really good reviews. I expect it's probably a well written book -- but I'm not usually in to those 'slice of life' type things. Mabye someday I'll borrow it from the library.


----------



## Nancy Beck (Jul 1, 2011)

I read The DaVinci Code well after the hype died down, and I still don't understand what all the fuss was about. It was a fast read, I kept turning the pages, and for that reason alone, it was worth the read for me.

I also didn't get the His Dark Materials thing either. I was given the book by a woman I worked with - and as usually works with such things (for me, anyway), I didn't find anything magical or enjoyable about the first book. I think I read a few chapters and gave the book back to the woman. (My boss at the time did the same thing; one book was a complete zero for me, another was a Nelson DeMille novel that actually was pretty good, to my surprise .) Thing is, though, please, friends and colleagues, don't hand me a book thinking that I've got to like it because you do or because it's in a genre I normally read.

My tastes are all over the place, lol, so while there are those things in the fantasy genre I'll go head over heels for, there are plenty of others where I won't. Case in point as with what Ann said - I thoroughly enjoyed the Harry Potter books, even though I don't normally read YA because it's usually too angsty for me (and even one book in that series, The Order of the Phoenix, ticked me off with all those exclamation points. Okay, Harry's angsty, I GET IT. Drop the extra exclamation points. Please.) Which is why I won't read Allegiant or the Twilight series. I'm just too darned old for all that stuff.  

I enjoyed Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere, so I thought I'd try American Gods. Got all sorts of awards, a Nebula, and all kinds of hype. Couldn't stand it after the first few chapters.


----------



## SarahCarter (Nov 8, 2012)

I agree about His Dark Materials. Got about half way through the first book and gave up. Just didn't grab my interest.

I enjoyed both the Twilight and Harry Potter series...but I don't get why they were SO big and popular. Twilight's like junk food, to me. It's kind of comforting to eat/read, but you know it's not great quality. As for Harry Potter...some bits were just so annoying, or awkward, or dull, or childish. And the writing wasn't BRILLIANT, especially in the first couple of books.


----------



## NogDog (May 1, 2009)

Anything by Stephen King. He simply does not float my boat: not really my genre, and whenever I've tried to read one of his novels, one of the reasons I always end up not finishing is that I just don't care about the characters. I suspect he and I are just on very different wavelengths, have different world views, or whatever, because nothing of his ever resonates with me. (I did "finish" _On Writing_, but I ended up skipping most of the autobiographical parts, which is probably further evidence that he and I are likely not soul mates.)


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Agree about King . . . . frankly, he puts me to sleep.  I can't last long enough to get to anything scary.  Which, I don't really like that much anyway, so maybe it's just as well.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I enjoyed The DaVinci Code; I generally love those kinds of books.  And could even see it as a best seller.  But the kind of phenomenon it became--still don't get it. I have friends who think there is some truth in there somewhere.   Did love the Dragon Tattoo books.  Haven't heard of His Dark Materials....

Betsy


----------



## dkgould (Feb 18, 2013)

I don't know if it was big everywhere, but The Beans of Egypt Maine was pretty big in New England.  I've always thought it was just depressing, but maybe it's because I basically lived among those characters.  (My mother was literally convinced for years that the main characters were based on a family living next door to us)  

I don't even think I'd find it any different now.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I remember when that was big...I think my co-mod Leslie, who lives in Maine, despised it...I think.

Betsy


----------



## dkgould (Feb 18, 2013)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> I remember when that was big...I think my co-mod Leslie, who lives in Maine, despised it...I think.
> 
> Betsy


Yeah, so maybe it's just a location thing  I grew up in central Maine.


----------



## DS5408 (Oct 29, 2013)

I agree with many of those already mentioned, so I wont belabor any of them. One I will add to the list though was _World War Z._ I understand that it got a boost from being made into a movie, but found it pretty telling that the script was nothing like the novel, which to me was slow and tedious.


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

I enjoyed the first Outlander book (with some reservations) and I tried the second one -- Dragonfly in Amber -- but just couldn't bear it.  Something about going through all the things that seemed to happen off page in first one made it seem as though the story wasn't moving forward for me?  I know this series is wildly popular and I feel a little guilty given that I usually love time travel, PNR, historical, etc.


----------



## anguabell (Jan 9, 2011)

As a bit of an oddball reader, I don't "get" most popular books, so the bestseller lists are completely wasted on me  One exception - Harry Potter.


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

Nancy Beck said:


> Thing is, though, please, friends and colleagues, don't hand me a book thinking that I've got to like it because you do or because it's in a genre I normally read.


I was once given some books because I do crafts. The author was Debbie Macomber. I could not get into those books.


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

Trophywife007 said:


> I enjoyed the first Outlander book (with some reservations) and I tried the second one -- Dragonfly in Amber -- but just couldn't bear it. Something about going through all the things that seemed to happen off page in first one made it seem as though the story wasn't moving forward for me? I know this series is wildly popular and I feel a little guilty given that I usually love time travel, PNR, historical, etc.


  This is my all-time, hands-down favorite series... Ever! Second would be The Gunslinger Series, Stephen King... (Oops... We're not talking favorites--sorry)


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I have to say it, but two major book phenomenons whooshed right past me, because when I looked at the books they just seemed so...bad...I wanted nothing to do with them.

These would be the Left Behind series and the Twilight phenomenon.


----------



## Blerch (Oct 17, 2013)

balaspa said:


> I have to say it, but two major book phenomenons whooshed right past me, because when I looked at the books they just seemed so...bad...I wanted nothing to do with them.
> 
> These would be the Left Behind series and the Twilight phenomenon.


Beat me to Left Behind. I really didn't get into it, and it had such a cool premise. I also enjoyed Harry Potter, but only picked it up due to the hype, and really didn't get why it was so popular.

And while I loved Ender's Game, the followups... not so much.


----------



## Debbie Bennett (Mar 25, 2011)

_Harry Potter_. Films were watchable but nothing special, but I just don't get the books at all.


----------



## hs (Feb 15, 2011)

NogDog said:


> Anything by Stephen King.


Same here. I like horror, but King's writing just doesn't do it for me. The main reason is something that he warns other authors not to succumb to: "diarrhea of the typewriter." His short stories are OK, but the novels I've read are at least twice as long as they need to be.


----------



## Aikoi Shelomeck (Nov 2, 2013)

I would have to say Stephen King's books as well.  More talking in his books than necessary.  I once tried to read 'It' but it was so full of head scratching portions that seemed unrelated to the main story that I found myself skipping over huge chunks of the novel before I gave up.

Although I will say one thing.  His books do make great movies (at least in my opinion).


----------



## crosj (Nov 8, 2008)

I finally bite the bullet and bought 50 shades.  Biggest waste of money!
Did not get the point, writing was horrible and yet its a top seller
along with the rest of the series.  I read about half and deleted.
I have since read "My husbands secret and Gone Girl".  While I did
enjoy them while I was reading-I must say IMHO certainly not the
best I have read.  But that's just me.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

I don't get many of the really popular bestsellers:

_The Da Vinci Code_: Liked the basic story better when it was a graphic novel called _Preacher_
_Wetlands_ by Charlotta Roach: Why would I care about the semi-autobiographical erotic misadventures of a washed-up TV personality? Especially since they are rendered about as unerotically as possible.
_50 Shades of Grey_: At least _Wetlands_ actually had sex and lots of it. This is just bad fanfiction and Christian Grey must be one of the most unsympathetic romantic leads since the demise of the bodiceripper.
_Gone Girl_: Why should I care if some jerk did or did not kill his equally unlikable wife?
Any new adult contemporary romance ever: I actually like the concept of romances with university age characters, but the actual books are usually full of contrived drama and feature characters which make my 8th graders seem like mature adults by comparison.


----------



## SkyMama (Sep 26, 2012)

Aikoi Shelomeck said:


> I would have to say Stephen King's books as well. More talking in his books than necessary. I once tried to read 'It' but it was so full of head scratching portions that seemed unrelated to the main story that I found myself skipping over huge chunks of the novel before I gave up.
> 
> Although I will say one thing. His books do make great movies (at least in my opinion).


You summed up my own thoughts quite nicely.

In _The Stand_ (unabridged edition) he went on for two pages about a mustard stain on the wall. I made a mental note, figuring it would somehow become significant, or symbolic in some way, because why else would anyone in the right mind go on for two pages about a mustard stain? I read the whole book without discovering the hidden meaning of the mustard. Look at me, now I'm going on and on about mustard. Must. Stop. Now.

Yes, his books make great movies, probably because the director edits out the mustard stains and useless fluff. _Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile,_ and _Misery _are some of my favorite movies. I'll give Stephen King his due, because anyone who can inspire wonderful movies like these deserves a lot of credit.


----------



## Patty Jansen (Apr 5, 2011)

I loved Harry Potter. I liked the Hunger Games. I read the Twilight books and could see why they were popular. 

For most of the other bestsellers I haven't had the time or inclination to read them. Life's short, y'know and I'd rather spend my reading time with books that appeal to me.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

I couldn't get into the _His Dark Materials_ trilogy by Philip Pullman.

Many friends had recommended it. "Oh, you'll love it," they said.

Read _Northern Lights_. Souls walking beside you. Meh. Fighting bears. Meh. I just couldn't connect with the characters, especially the MC. But, I thought, it will get better. Read _The Subtle Knife_. It didn't get better. Now I had invested in reading two books out of three. So, I started _The Amber Spyglass_.
About two thirds in I noticed that turning another page would physically hurt me. I was bored, bored, bored out of my mind. And I _still_ couldn't give a rodent's bottom whether the MC and her companion got lost in yet another dimension. I actually _wanted_ them to disappear.

I stopped reading then and there.


----------



## MT Berlyn (Mar 27, 2012)

I was very much looking forward to reading _The Da Vinci Code_ when it first came out, because I was so intrigued by the premise of the story. I couldn't have been more disappointed. Any depth I hoped would be explored with the theme of the book, was sacrificed for the sake of a lightning fast read. 

I think I stopped listening to hype altogether after that particular burn.


----------



## RLC (Mar 19, 2013)

The Harry Potter series, anything by Dan Brown, Stephen King, popular D list celebrity autobiographies i.e Katie Price etc (why the hell are these always in bestseller lists!), the twilight series. Actually, you could just walk into any bookshop and look at the bestseller list and wonder: why do people read this stuff?


----------



## Nancy Beck (Jul 1, 2011)

Daniel Gage said:


> Beat me to Left Behind. I really didn't get into it, and it had such a cool premise. I also enjoyed Harry Potter, but only picked it up due to the hype, and really didn't get why it was so popular.
> 
> And while I loved Ender's Game, the followups... not so much.


Ender's Game - there's another one where I don't get the hype. I read it in my 40s, couldn't stand it, but managed to finish it (that was when I always had to finish a book no matter what). My thought was that it was an age thing - teenagers and those in their 20s would "get it" more than I would because of my age. But maybe it's just me.


----------



## Guest (Nov 5, 2013)

_Twilight_: I can't stomach books where the protagonist is too-stupid-to-live. I only managed to get a few chapters in before wanting to kill Bella myself.

I love early King (_Carrie, Misery, The Dark Half, Christine, Cujo, 'Salem's Lot_), but most everything since _Insomnia_ has read like he is forcing himself to meet some arbitrary word count.


----------



## LaraAmber (Feb 24, 2009)

Here is my thrown together test.

If a Book has any two of the following characteristics:

a. insanely popular
b. being recommended by someone who I don't think of as a "reader"
c. being read by large droves of teenage girls (who are also not "readers") 
d. has a devout following online who will turn on anyone who is even the slightest bit critical
e. promoted on morning or daytime talk shows

it will suck.

*"reader" defined - (because someone will jump on that) someone who enjoys reading regularly and reads to expand their mind/vocabulary/imagination.  One book a year on the beach or trashy magazines don't cut it.


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

Interesting list, LaraAmber.

On one hand, I'm not categorically down on something just because it's insanely popular, but many times I'm just not in that target audience.  If the Twilight series helps encourage some of those teenaged girls who are not "readers" to eventually become "readers" then I'm all for it.  Same with Harry Potter and the like.

I guess my definition of "reader" is a bit more broad than yours... someone who chooses reading as a form of entertainment over some other forms of entertainment at least some of the time!  I do agree with you that "One book a year on the beach or trashy magazines don't cut it." Although when I was teaching adults I encouraged them to find anything they were interested in and start reading it... People Magazine or whatever, I didn't care.


----------



## Sean L (Oct 30, 2013)

DS5408 said:


> I agree with many of those already mentioned, so I wont belabor any of them. One I will add to the list though was _World War Z._ I understand that it got a boost from being made into a movie, but found it pretty telling that the script was nothing like the novel, which to me was slow and tedious.


Another vote for _World War Z_. I tried and I tried but could only make it about 75% of the way through. I really wanted to like it...


----------



## LaraAmber (Feb 24, 2009)

Trophywife007 said:


> Interesting list, LaraAmber.
> 
> On one hand, I'm not categorically down on something just because it's insanely popular, but many times I'm just not in that target audience. If the Twilight series helps encourage some of those teenaged girls who are not "readers" to eventually become "readers" then I'm all for it. Same with Harry Potter and the like.


Believe me I have nothing against people reading. The point of that "test" is whether I would like the book. Using Twilight as an example (because it's easy) it's horrible. Not because it "isn't my cup of tea" but because the author has a horrible grasp of grammar, is highly repetitive in word choice, has giant continuity errors that should have been caught by an editor, and in general poorly structured. Someone who isn't an experienced reader or doesn't engage with the works they read may not catch it. They are saying "OMG you must read this!" and when I do, it all jumps out at me. I know it's a poor quality story before you even get into why it's not my "cup of tea" (it could be used as a training manual for spotting controlling/abusive relationships, not that the main character ever sees it). When _Stephen King_ says publicly that your writing sucks...

A well written book will stand up to scrutiny. The people who are drawn to those books are okay with others casting a critical eye to those works because even if small nit-picks are found or even another reader says "not my cup of tea", the work in general will still stand up well: characters feel fleshed out, sentences flow well, words are used correctly, actions in the story make sense, no obvious glaring errors showing a lack of research, etc.

There are definitely books/authors that I feel like publishers try as hard as possible to get lots of buzz as fast as they can because they know this will be a flash in the pan. The books won't stand the test of time or become long term favorites. If they spend more time trying to sell me the author and his/her story (she's only 16 and overcame dyslexia and wrote the whole novel on the margins of the telephone book...) then the work itself, I get suspicious.


----------



## Silly Writer (Jul 15, 2013)

Shawn R L said:


> Another vote for _World War Z_. I tried and I tried but could only make it about 75% of the way through. I really wanted to like it...


The movie sucked.


----------



## Lyndl (Apr 2, 2010)

Nicholas Sparks ... I once read something of his.  I was so underwhelmed I can’t even recall the title.

His Dark Materials  ... saw the movie first and thought maybe the book would be better.  It was dreary and overrated and I just didn’t enjoy the magic  

50 Shades...  Curiosity won and I downloaded the sample, never finished it.  Poorly written and didn’t grab at all. 

Left Behind ...  loved the premise but couldn’t finish the book. 

Gone Girl ...  unpleasant characters all around.  Not a bad read, but I don’t get the hype .  My biggest complaint was the utterly ridiculous name of husband’s sister.    It pulled me out of the story every time I came across it.


----------



## lmroth12 (Nov 15, 2012)

LaraAmber said:


> Believe me I have nothing against people reading. The point of that "test" is whether I would like the book. Using Twilight as an example (because it's easy) it's horrible. Not because it "isn't my cup of tea" but because the author has a horrible grasp of grammar, is highly repetitive in word choice, has giant continuity errors that should have been caught by an editor, and in general poorly structured. Someone who isn't an experienced reader or doesn't engage with the works they read may not catch it. They are saying "OMG you must read this!" and when I do, it all jumps out at me. I know it's a poor quality story before you even get into why it's not my "cup of tea" (it could be used as a training manual for spotting controlling/abusive relationships, not that the main character ever sees it). When _Stephen King_ says publicly that your writing sucks...
> 
> A well written book will stand up to scrutiny. The people who are drawn to those books are okay with others casting a critical eye to those works because even if small nit-picks are found or even another reader says "not my cup of tea", the work in general will still stand up well: characters feel fleshed out, sentences flow well, words are used correctly, actions in the story make sense, no obvious glaring errors showing a lack of research, etc.
> 
> There are definitely books/authors that I feel like publishers try as hard as possible to get lots of buzz as fast as they can because they know this will be a flash in the pan. The books won't stand the test of time or become long term favorites. If they spend more time trying to sell me the author and his/her story (she's only 16 and overcame dyslexia and wrote the whole novel on the margins of the telephone book...) then the work itself, I get suspicious.


Like you I have a tendency to spot errors in grammar and continuity. I have spotted them even in classics. The Daphne du Maurier novel *Rebecca* has many mistakes in spelling and punctuation, and just about every Edith Wharton novel has mistakes in continuity that annoy me every time I read one. Yet they are "classics" and deservedly so, not because they are perfect in regards to grammar and continuity, but because they contain vividly drawn characters whose stories struck an emotional chord that continues to reverberate with readers to this day. *Gone With the Wind* is a great example of a controlling/abusive relationship. Scarlett put Rhett through you-know-what yet he hung on continuing to hope until he finally realized that she had taken even his heart away from him. Perhaps that is the secret to the popularity of the *Twilight* series, that it is a "training manual for spotting controlling/abusive relationships"? That there are teenage girls and twenty-something young women who are also caught in those kind of relationships, feel they can identify with the characters, and discuss the books with others in similar situations?

While I have never read the *Twilight* series as it's "not my cup of tea" I have several young relatives who have read it *because* of the relationships in the book. A book can be utilized for other things besides the pleasure of reading. Sometimes a book can be a point of contact with others who have shared those experiences, hence all of the exposure on the talk shows where people who can relate to each other can connect. Remember that not everyone can afford to undergo therapy, and may even be afraid to address their problems with others. In those cases books can be a great tool to analyze yourself and get some insight into your own situation without the risk of exposing your problems to others, or even to bring you into contact with those who have likewise suffered it and can give some support and encouragement on how to get out of it.

Just a thought.


----------



## TiffanyNicole (Jul 28, 2013)

> Gone Girl ... unpleasant characters all around. Not a bad read, but I don't get the hype . My biggest complaint was the utterly ridiculous name of husband's sister. It pulled me out of the story every time I came across it.


Yes, especially when the name was at the beginning of a sentence. I enjoyed the story, but also found the characters unpleasant.


----------



## Carrie Rubin (Nov 19, 2012)

Lyndl said:


> Nicholas Sparks ... I once read something of his. I was so underwhelmed I can't even recall the title.


I'd agree with that. I also didn't get on the 'Life of Pi' or 'Discovery of Witches' bandwagon. Kept thinking I must be missing something not to like them more.


----------



## ElleChambers (Nov 5, 2013)

I'll probably get killed for this, but I hated John Green's _The Fault in Our Stars_. I read about five pages and thought, "This is so pretentious," and took it back to the library. I was disappointed I didn't love it because I really liked his _Paper Towns_. But TFioS was channeling Kevin Williamson circa _Dawson's Creek_ and I just couldn't.


----------



## Nancy Beck (Jul 1, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> I couldn't get into the _His Dark Materials_ trilogy by Philip Pullman.
> 
> Many friends had recommended it. "Oh, you'll love it," they said.
> 
> ...


You got much further along than ever could. And I was the "victim" of one of those "You'll love it!" talks too, for me it was a work colleague. She found out I liked fantasy, so of course I would like Northern Lights.

Bored out of my gourd. After I had it for a month and managed maybe two chapters, I gave it back to her and said it wasn't my cup of tea.

I'll pick my own stuff to read, thank you.


----------



## Gabe (Oct 9, 2013)

SarahCarter said:


> I agree about His Dark Materials. Got about half way through the first book and gave up. Just didn't grab my interest.
> 
> I
> I tried reading those too because a friend recommended them, and like you I gave up half way through.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

ElleChambers said:


> I'll probably get killed for this, but I hated John Green's _The Fault in Our Stars_. I read about five pages and thought, "This is so pretentious," and took it back to the library. I was disappointed I didn't love it because I really liked his _Paper Towns_. But TFioS was channeling Kevin Williamson circa _Dawson's Creek_ and I just couldn't.


I intensely disliked _The Fault in Our Stars_, too. It just smelled of awards bait and reminded me way too much of the "problem books" that passed for YA back when I was the target audience.


----------



## ElleChambers (Nov 5, 2013)

CoraBuhlert said:


> I intensely disliked _The Fault in Our Stars_, too. It just smelled of awards bait and reminded me way too much of the "problem books" that passed for YA back when I was the target audience.


So I'm _not_ alone. Everywhere I go people are raving about this book and I'm left scratching my head wondering why. It was so boring. I thought it was just me who didn't get the alleged awesomeness.


----------



## ER Pierce (Jun 4, 2013)

I couldn't read the 50 Shades books. I tried to read Neverwhere, and I was so freaking lost and bored. I'm not a huge King fan, and George R.R. Martins books are hard for me. (Something about the ages, all the incest...) But I do like the show... 

I read twilight, but it was ok. Then after I started thinking about it, I loathed the 'message'


----------



## Daniel Harvell (Jun 21, 2013)

The Twilight series is far from my cup of tea - but then, I suppose I'm not even remotely the target market. They did something right, obviously, but I can't think of one friend who's a fan.


----------



## JamieCampbell (May 29, 2013)

I didn't like _The Hobbit_, I could never see why it was such a big deal.

_The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo_, and _The Da Vinci Code_ I absolutely loved.


----------



## Anne Berkeley (Jul 12, 2013)

I think that because most of the "popular" books are out of my genre, I tend to engage them with low expectations so in the end, I end up enjoying them.  Wait...does that mean that they're in my genre since I'm enjoying them?


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

dkgould said:


> I don't know if it was big everywhere, but The Beans of Egypt Maine was pretty big in New England. I've always thought it was just depressing, but maybe it's because I basically lived among those characters. (My mother was literally convinced for years that the main characters were based on a family living next door to us)
> 
> I don't even think I'd find it any different now.





> I remember when that was big...I think my co-mod Leslie, who lives in Maine, despised it...I think.


I didn't despise it. I just didn't think it was that great and had no interest in ever going back and re-reading.

I did get sick of all the hype. The author, Carolyn Chute, grew up in an average upper middle class family (in Cape Elizabeth if I remember correctly) and then went all poor and poverty stricken, married an illiterate guy and wrote this book--which ironically, made her lots of money--and she didn't know what to do with all the money. But she didn't give it away. Last I heard of her (it's been a few years) she had turned into a 2nd amendment, gun vigilante type who wanted to create armed militias in every town in the state.

L


----------



## Leslie (Apr 7, 2008)

ElleChambers said:


> I'll probably get killed for this, but I hated John Green's _The Fault in Our Stars_. I read about five pages and thought, "This is so pretentious," and took it back to the library. I was disappointed I didn't love it because I really liked his _Paper Towns_. But TFioS was channeling Kevin Williamson circa _Dawson's Creek_ and I just couldn't.





> I intensely disliked The Fault in Our Stars, too. It just smelled of awards bait and reminded me way too much of the "problem books" that passed for YA back when I was the target audience.


And I loved _The Fault in Our Stars_. I was listening to the audiobook and had to buy the Kindle book to read the last 30% because I coudn't wait to get back to the car to hear the ending. (I only listen to audiobooks in the car.)

L


----------



## DixieChick (Oct 22, 2009)

_Gone Girl_. Do not get me started! ugh


----------



## RAFarmer (Nov 12, 2013)

I'm likely showing my age, here, but I just did not get Rushdie's Satanic Verses.  It's one of the few books I've abandoned part way through.

RAF


----------



## Robena (Jan 19, 2013)

I'm with the Fifty shades group.   I didn't understand the overwhelming response. I do have the first book on kindle but stopped reading at chapter four and it had nothing to do with the steamy content (I'm a romance writer) but I found it boring.


----------



## Just Browsing (Sep 26, 2012)

I sometimes feel like I'm the only person in the world who hated_ A Confederacy of Dunces._

Also did not like: _East of Eden_ or _Of Human Bondage_.

I tried reading _Twilight_ in French once, because it was the only thing I had available, and I'm way less picky in a second language because I'm not such a great reader in French. But I couldn't get through it.

I once read a Nicholas Sparks book. Dear god. Never again, I promised myself. A few years later I picked up a paperback that was missing the cover. It was dreadful. I later found out it was another Nicholas Sparks book. Then I saw a movie on a plane, awful story, just awful, and I remarked to the man next to me that it was so bad that it couldn't even have been by Nicholas Sparks. But then the credits rolled ... and it was. That man haunts me.


----------



## Brownskins (Nov 18, 2011)

I found the Eragon series to be too long-winded.  I liked the creativity of the author's imagination though, so I finished the first book.  I just read the synopses of the remaining 3 books.


----------



## LaraAmber (Feb 24, 2009)

1001nightspress said:


> I sometimes feel like I'm the only person in the world who hated_ A Confederacy of Dunces._


Oh you are NOT alone. I couldn't even make it a 1/4 of the way through before I deleted it from my Kindle in disgust. I wanted my 99 cents back!


----------



## Brian Olsen (Jan 13, 2013)

Some of the responses here are cutting me to the quick! I want to leap to some of these books' defense, but of course, it's pointless to convince someone to love a work just because you love it.

So instead, I'll add my own - as a kid I couldn't get through _The Lord of the Rings_. I got a few chapters into the first book and just found it dull, dull, dreary and dull. And it was exactly the kind of story I should have loved, since it's really the prototype for the type of fantasy I was really into at that age. Just hated it. I've never bothered going back and trying again. (Loved the movies, though.)

I had trouble with _Les Miserables_ at first - I was enjoying it and then got to the chapter on the Battle of Waterloo and couldn't slog through it. Page after page of tedious details completely unrelated to the story. After several failed attempts to pick it up again, I just skipped to the end of the chapter, read the two pages or so that were actually important to the plot, and moved on. I enjoyed the rest of it a great deal. Only book I've ever skipped a chunk of and then kept reading.


----------



## LaraAmber (Feb 24, 2009)

> So instead, I'll add my own - as a kid I couldn't get through The Lord of the Rings. I got a few chapters into the first book and just found it dull, dull, dreary and dull. And it was exactly the kind of story I should have loved, since it's really the prototype for the type of fantasy I was really into at that age. Just hated it. I've never bothered going back and trying again. (Loved the movies, though.)


I felt the same way when I tried to read them in my early 20s. I love the movies and figured out while I love the story itself, the narrative voice drove me nuts.


----------



## dkgould (Feb 18, 2013)

Brian Olsen said:


> I had trouble with _Les Miserables_ at first - I was enjoying it and then got to the chapter on the Battle of Waterloo and couldn't slog through it. Page after page of tedious details completely unrelated to the story. After several failed attempts to pick it up again, I just skipped to the end of the chapter, read the two pages or so that were actually important to the plot, and moved on. I enjoyed the rest of it a great deal. Only book I've ever skipped a chunk of and then kept reading.


I think there are waaaaay more people that skip that section than say that they did. I got through about half. Then I skipped. I went back later because I was afraid I missed something and forced myself to finish that section just to prove to myself that it was totally skippable. It is. I've always wondered if there's an abridged version that just says: "Waterloo happened. Threnardier pretends to save Pontmercy even though he's robbing him. What a slimeball. On to the next chapter!"


----------



## Brian Olsen (Jan 13, 2013)

dkgould said:


> I think there are waaaaay more people that skip that section than say that they did. I got through about half. Then I skipped. I went back later because I was afraid I missed something and forced myself to finish that section just to prove to myself that it was totally skippable. It is. I've always wondered if there's an abridged version that just says: "Waterloo happened. Threnardier pretends to save Pontmercy even though he's robbing him. What a slimeball. On to the next chapter!"


Glad to hear I'm not alone! I did wonder if there was anything important in that chapter besides the bit with Thenardier, but it didn't seem like I had missed anything. I didn't have the literary fortitude to go back and try that section again!


----------



## robertmn (Nov 14, 2013)

I see lots of references to The Da Vinci Code and Pullman's His Dark Materials series. "Code" is an interesting study.  I don't think Dan Brown can write well at all (see his latest for evidence). I remember being stuck in a car on a road trip and listening to the Da Vinci Code (audio version, of course) go on and on (and on and on) about "the theory" .  I had thoughts of driving the car into a tree just to stop the cd player.  The narrative just sounded amateurish. So did the dialog, and the plot (lots of eye-rolling). And yet, Mr. Brown struck a nerve (good and bad) with a very large audience, and I will never begrudge any author for achieving success in this crazy business (as long as the work's not dishonest).

I didn't mind Pullman's first book, The Golden Compass.  But I think the failure of the movie version says much about his plot and characters, and the way he tackled the religious subject (or should I write "attacked"?).  Maybe too extreme; over-the-top.  The rest of the series seemed to suffer from this malady.

Lots of other bestsellers make me scratch my head.  But that's the beauty of fiction: there's an audience for most books.  You just have to find them.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

robertmn said:


> I didn't mind Pullman's first book, The Golden Compass. But I think the failure of the movie version says much about his plot and characters, and the way he tackled the religious subject (or should I write "attacked"?). Maybe too extreme; over-the-top. The rest of the series seemed to suffer from this malady.


In my case it wasn't the the way he tackled the religious subject - though it _is_ for me in the case of C.S. Lewis. In fact it should have been right up my alley. I just couldn't care less about the characters.

I've also seen a televised series of other books by Pullman and it had the same problem. Neither the sleuthing heroine, nor her assistants could interest me in the least and I found the stories boring.


----------



## heidi_g (Nov 14, 2013)

I did like _The Da Vinci Code_ But many popular books get quietly shelved on my *Top Secret* DNF list!


----------



## Caddy (Sep 13, 2011)

I know I'm going to make a lot of people gnash their teeth on this one:

I didn't read Gone With The Wind until about ten years ago. It bored the livin' crap out of me. I felt no connection to any of the characters, or any empathy. They just didn't ever become real for me. I thought the whole story was a waste of time. Scarlet did nothing for me except make me wish I hadn't promised to read the book.

Also any Sherlock Holmes and Harry Potter. Couldn't finish. C.S. Lewis. Gag.


----------



## mscottwriter (Nov 5, 2010)

1001nightspress said:


> I sometimes feel like I'm the only person in the world who hated_ A Confederacy of Dunces._


Nope, you are not alone!

I also *hated* _Geek Love_ Not even sure why I finished it.


----------



## JGR (May 11, 2013)

Brian Olsen said:


> So instead, I'll add my own - as a kid I couldn't get through _The Lord of the Rings_. I got a few chapters into the first book and just found it dull, dull, dreary and dull. And it was exactly the kind of story I should have loved, since it's really the prototype for the type of fantasy I was really into at that age. Just hated it. I've never bothered going back and trying again. (Loved the movies, though.)


Agreed. I read the entire trilogy around the time the movies came out and they were really hard going. Tolkien manages to get three pages out of 'they walked a long way'. My dad says it's a metaphor for how much time was wasted by the fellowship.


----------



## lmroth12 (Nov 15, 2012)

JGR said:


> Agreed. I read the entire trilogy around the time the movies came out and they were really hard going. Tolkien manages to get three pages out of 'they walked a long way'. My dad says it's a metaphor for how much time was wasted by the fellowship.


Bless your heart! I love the *Lord of the Rings*, but find that Tolkien did get a little _too_ detailed at times. One reviewer said that "This was a man who could spend an entire page writing about a blade of grass." I, myself, always get bogged down in *The Two Towers * with the interminable passages about Frodo and Sam climbing among the rocks. And then there were more rocks. And then some more rocks. That about sums it up at times!


----------



## JGR (May 11, 2013)

lmroth12 said:


> Bless your heart! I love the *Lord of the Rings*, but find that Tolkien did get a little _too_ detailed at times. One reviewer said that "This was a man who could spend an entire page writing about a blade of grass." I, myself, always get bogged down in *The Two Towers * with the interminable passages about Frodo and Sam climbing among the rocks. And then there were more rocks. And then some more rocks. That about sums it up at times!


If I could be let at the trilogy with a red pen, it would be no longer than The Hobbit.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

Ann in Arlington said:


> I don't get the _Dark Materials_ books. Well, I get it from a marketing standpoint -- it's that whole thinly disguised Catholic church is evil thing. But I read the whole of the first book and just had no interest in going on. It was dull. Maybe I found it so because it was clearly a book for young teens. And I was not (ahem) a young teen when I read it. Still, I really liked the Harry Potter books and I was not a young teen when I read those either. And I've read Harvey's YA book and quite enjoyed it. So there's something more besides the fact that it's for kids.


I find the Harry Potter books dull and slow, but am entranced by the rich texture of the movies.

But the Dark Materials books, if we're talking about Philip Pullman's set, is not aimed at children but at their parents, and a particularly educated class of parent too, from British universities that are roughly the equivalent of the Ivy League. They're fine philosophical novels barely disguised as children's books. In fact, while I liked them very much as allegorical tales for adults, not too many of which have much action, I said to my wife when we read all three that they are particularly horrid as children's stories, very disillusioning.

I think the Dark Materials set is superior to Umberto Eco, with whom I once shared a publisher but whom I can't read either in the original Italian or in translation because he's too longwinded.


----------



## Alessandra Kelley (Feb 22, 2011)

I never got into the Harry Potter books. Yet another novel starting with an abused kid in the cupboard under the stairs was too high a hurdle for me to get past, no matter how fun the books were said to get later.

I read Umberto Eco's _Name of the Rose,_ but I felt he badly missed the point of medieval art and architecture. I could not believe the meanings he tried to impart to the architecture and its details, nor that a monk trained in the art of memory as they were would have the thoughts his MC had. I found it and Eco's other books superficial and lacking understanding.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> II read Umberto Eco's _Name of the Rose,_ but I felt he badly missed the point of medieval art and architecture. I could not believe the meanings he tried to impart to the architecture and its details, nor that a monk trained in the art of memory as they were would have the thoughts his MC had. I found it and Eco's other books superficial and lacking understanding.


You read several of Umberto's books! I must say, I admire your patience. I read a handful of pages of a couple, and moved on. Even John Irving arrives at the point sooner.

PS I have a copy of Jacob Burckhardt's The Architechture of the Italian Renaissance sent to me as a Christmas card by Fred Warburg, and now you've set me wondering whether he sent Eco the same "Christmas card". I shall have to read the Name of the Rose side by side with Burckhardt to see where Eco got his ideas from.


----------



## Alessandra Kelley (Feb 22, 2011)

A book on the art of memory might be of more use. Medieval architecture was awash in it, and an understanding of the theoretical foundations makes it so much more meaningful.

Frances Yates wrote the classic study, _The Art of Memory,_ which is an excellent overview.


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

Stephen King. I don't care for his writing style, and I don't see what the emotional appeal is. His nonfiction title _On Writing_ is worthwhile, but it's the only thing by him that ever struck me as having real value.


----------



## LGOULD (Jul 5, 2011)

I enjoyed the first of the Harry Potter books, but felt no compulsion at all to read any of the subsequent ones. I guess it's mostly kids who appreciate the entire saga.


----------



## JumpingShip (Jun 3, 2010)

NogDog said:


> Anything by Stephen King. He simply does not float my boat: not really my genre, and whenever I've tried to read one of his novels, one of the reasons I always end up not finishing is that I just don't care about the characters. I suspect he and I are just on very different wavelengths, have different world views, or whatever, because nothing of his ever resonates with me. (I did "finish" _On Writing_, but I ended up skipping most of the autobiographical parts, which is probably further evidence that he and I are likely not soul mates.)


I like King, but there's a certain detachment from the characters. They aren't usually very likable either, which also makes it hard for me to relate. His forte, is coming up with an amazing premise. _Under the Dome_--such a cool premise. Actual book was just meh.

Books I don't get: _The Time Traveller's Wife_. I love books about time travel--but I just couldn't get into that one. Another book was _Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter_. I mentioned it in a thread last week about how bad the writing was. Then I started wondering how it did in reviews, and was astonished at how many people just loved the book. I guess I just didn't get it.


----------



## Susan Alison (Jul 1, 2011)

Gone Girl - didn't like the characters enough to keep going, nor the style of writing
The Time Traveller's Wife - fell into coma almost straight away
The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo - ditto


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

I like the Harry Potter stories. And I'm most definitely not a kid.  I know many adults as well who enjoyed the world.

_Under the Dome_ put me to sleep -- and I couldn't care about any characters. Didn't care about the 'why' of the dome just figured they all deserved to be stuck there and didn't much care if it killed 'em.

Enjoyed _The Girl Who . . ._ books.

Thought _Time Traveler's Wife_ was O.K.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> A book on the art of memory might be of more use. Medieval architecture was awash in it, and an understanding of the theoretical foundations makes it so much more meaningful.
> 
> Frances Yates wrote the classic study, _The Art of Memory,_ which is an excellent overview.


Thanks, Allesandra. [HOLDS UP DUSTY HANDS] Yates turned out to be in the bottommost box, probably not taken out since I lived in Melbourne. I met Ms Yates when I was a student, before she became Dame Frances. It hadn't occurred to me to read her book side by side with Burckhardt. The obvious always escapes us until someone else mentions it... You are so clever.


----------



## Lia Cooper (Jan 28, 2014)

_Eragon_ by Christopher Paolini -- I had a teacher rec this to me and a bunch of peers who read it and raved about it. I couldn't get past ten pages, the writing was terrible. It honestly felt like someone had made a checklist of "Top 20 Fantasy Tropes" and tried to cram at least 5 or 6 of them into those first couple chapters. An old friend and I have had a long-standing "agree to disagree" ceasefire regarding Paolini just to keep things civil. lol

On the other hand, I am a rabid fan of the _Millenium_ novels by Stieg Larsson. I read portions of _The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo_ for a Women in Pop Culture class and was insta-hooked (this was several years before the American film came out). He has a spare wandering prose thats often list-heavy, which I enjoy, but I know several other people do not so to each his own


----------



## a_boo (Feb 3, 2014)

I hate to admit this because I know I ought to love them but I just can't get into the Lord Of The Rings. 

I've tried three times and each time I have to throw in the towel about of a third of the way through. 

I just can't get on with the language and the amount of detail is frankly a little overwhelming for me.


----------



## Alessandra Kelley (Feb 22, 2011)

Andre Jute said:


> Thanks, Allesandra. [HOLDS UP DUSTY HANDS] Yates turned out to be in the bottommost box, probably not taken out since I lived in Melbourne. I met Ms Yates when I was a student, before she became Dame Frances. It hadn't occurred to me to read her book side by side with Burckhardt. The obvious always escapes us until someone else mentions it... You are so clever.


Wow. I'm impressed you have a copy on hand. It's a brilliant book and I hope it proves useful.

My one issue with the book is that Ms. Yates inexplicably never practiced the art of memory herself. This is a pity, because there are a few uncertain points which would have been cleared up fairly rapidly with a little direct experience. The art of memory is not nearly as difficult an art to practice as one might think, for one.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> Wow. I'm impressed you have a copy on hand. It's a brilliant book and I hope it proves useful.
> 
> My one issue with the book is that Ms. Yates inexplicably never practiced the art of memory herself. This is a pity, because there are a few uncertain points which would have been cleared up fairly rapidly with a little direct experience. The art of memory is not nearly as difficult an art to practice as one might think, for one.


Since yesterday was Sunday, instead of editing on the exercise machines, I read most of The Art of Memory again. I don't mind that Dame Frances was not a practitioner: I appreciate her book for the scholarship and, as you say, anyone intelligent can work out the lucanae, which in any event aren't her fault but inherited from the only extant originals, the anonymous teacher of rhetoric, and Cicero, both of whom are writing for people who already know what they're talking about, and therefore don't explain everything that they would if writing for complete novices. (I sometimes write how-to books for aspirants in my professions and hobbies, and have found that the nearer the start of my own interest in the profession or hobby, the better the book, because while I have less experience, I also make fewer assumptions about underlying, pre-existing knowledge, and thus am less likely to leave out a step whose absence will trip up someone.)

I thought the progression from 360 astrological divisions used as mnemonic pigeonholes to ascribing mystical meaning to the act of memorizing something hilarious. And memory in the Dark and Middle Ages is a case study in obsession imparting to those in its grip a tunnel vision that narrows down to 1%: it is extremely unlikely that Cicero meant by Virtue, under which he classified Memory, anything like St Thomas Aquinas thought he meant. I love the way Yates rises above this intense humorlessness, and never loses her sense of delight: Dante's Inferno as a Memory Palace: what an amazing, amusing ides! I'm so glad you reminded me of her book; I find her much more palatable than junkheads like Carlos Castaneda or saccharine sentimentalists like Coelho whose The Zahir I recently read halfway, but wouldn't have read even that far if the chief character were an accountant rather than a writer. (<<<Obligatory on-topic remark about "popular books".)

But I must tell you, these days I prefer to let computers remember for me. I found the palace of memory inside my head (our house was St John Palace, so I used that as my memory space -- the hall was lined with a mosaic floor and walls sometime in the 1890s by Italian craftsmen, and as I drew the tiny tiles I memorized them as my space) quite as hard to get rid of as the speed-reading habit I picked up in business, both of which create difficulties for a writer or even for a visual artist of my present outlook. I'd be interested in hearing how your mileage varies.

Here's a visual example of what I mean. In my break I stood before a small canvas, ten or fifteen minutes in hand, with in the back of my mind an idea to sketch a bridge over the River Cooper from Mount Pleasant to downtown Charleston. I remembered it as being built of huge baulks of brown timber, and thank god for that, because I wouldn't have wanted to sketch a concrete bridge, which I learned later it actually is. Of course an illustrator will treasure precision, and other artists according to training and outlook and experience will value varying degrees of accuracy, but I care more about the serendipitous effects that result from the transformation of memory when the pigeonholes blur into each other.









Bridge over the Cooper River, Charleston, 2013, Andre Jute, oil on canvas 6x8in


----------



## TallyK (Jan 15, 2014)

Neither of these were particularly "popular" in the wider population, but there is a book called _Lullabies for Little Criminals_ that was shortlisted for a bunch of awards, including the Orange Prize for Fiction. I was very excited to read it.

It was TERRIBLE. The rambling, self-important prose-without-plot really summed up everything I hate about literary fiction, too.

Then there was a book called _Spaceman Blues_, which is about a guy who is searching for his boyfriend who has gone missing in the middle of an alien invasion. Which, YES, I was SO ON BOARD for this, but no. It was so bad. When I finished I actually threw it against the wall. At work. Same problem - pretentious literary fiction while trying to ape Kerouac's style.

I don't generally like bestsellers, with a few exceptions. My tastes are more esoteric. I almost never like books that are given to me. I have a friend who is really pressuring me to read _The Fault in our Stars_ and Rainbow Rowell's books, and I do like YA, but I am anxious. These things almost never work out for me.


----------



## Ergodic Mage (Jan 23, 2012)

Despite their huge popularity, Robert Jodan's _Wheel of Time_ and GRR Martin's _Game of Thrones_ turned me off to fantasy for years. Heck I'm still recovering from their effects, slowly, very slowly.


----------



## Lorelei Logsdon (Feb 4, 2014)

For me it was . Oh, and .


----------



## Meka (Sep 8, 2011)

I did not enjoy Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. The writing style just didn't do it for me, way too many metaphors. I made myself finish it because it was a short read, had it been any longer I would have given up on it. 

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk


----------



## Tony Richards (Jul 6, 2011)

Betsy the Quilter said:


> The DaVinci Code. I never got how a run-of-the-mill thriller (that I enjoyed) became a phenomenon.
> 
> Betsy


Interesting book, lousy novel, is the way I'd sum up The DaVinci Code. I mean, some of the factual stuff is fascinating (if too long in parts, I did a lot of skipping) but the plotting is clumsy and often weak. Why it's huge success? My theory is that -- with all its material about paganism and suchlike -- it hit a nerve in an age where people are looking for more spirituality in their lives, but aren't too much attracted by the conventional church.


----------



## Winter9_86 (Sep 3, 2013)

I am trying really really hard to get into Dan Brown. I hear so many getting swept away and I am a bit jealous, but so far after angels and demons it is just ..okay.. Still trying though. It's like trying to like beer..


----------



## ElaStein (Feb 8, 2014)

I didn't read Harry Potter series or Twilight series... they seemed like books for kids and adolescents, and I had no interest in even trying. I was always puzzled as to why all these adults were reading them.


----------



## josephdevon (Feb 6, 2014)

dkgould said:


> I think there are waaaaay more people that skip that section than say that they did. I got through about half. Then I skipped. I went back later because I was afraid I missed something and forced myself to finish that section just to prove to myself that it was totally skippable. It is. I've always wondered if there's an abridged version that just says: "Waterloo happened. Threnardier pretends to save Pontmercy even though he's robbing him. What a slimeball. On to the next chapter!"


 I think this happens because of just how momentous an occasion Waterloo was to all of Europe. Napoleon, and France itself for centuries, had everyone terrified. And then it was all broken at Waterloo. It's hard to get across what that moment must have been viewed like.

Anyway, it would be like an author setting a book in the US Civil War and casually mentioning that they were at Gettysburg. Plenty of authors would succumb to the need to SHOW SHOW SHOW the battle of Gettysburg without regard to its bearing on their story.


----------



## Alessandra Kelley (Feb 22, 2011)

Tony Richards said:


> Interesting book, lousy novel, is the way I'd sum up The DaVinci Code. I mean, some of the factual stuff is fascinating (if too long in parts, I did a lot of skipping) but the plotting is clumsy and often weak. Why it's huge success? My theory is that -- with all its material about paganism and suchlike -- it hit a nerve in an age where people are looking for more spirituality in their lives, but aren't too much attracted by the conventional church.


True, but if they were interested in that they would be marginally better off reading _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_, the ostensibly nonfiction book which supplied all of the research and background for _The DaVinci Code._


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> True, but if they were interested in that they would be marginally better off reading _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_, the ostensibly nonfiction book which supplied all of the research and background for _The DaVinci Code._


Indeed. My father has a copy of the seventies (?) mass paperback which I read. i]The DaVinci Code[/i] is a complete rip-off of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_. Mind you, _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ is complete nonsense. Its procedure is as follows: "If it isn't completely impossible, let's suppose it is true. If it is true this next thing, though equally improbable, becomes not completely impossible&#8230; and so on." The end result is preposterous.

What Brown did was weave his own characters into the plot and the very real Opus Dei. Then he sprinkled some riddles over the whole.

Simple. Simple? Yes, but he was the one who thought of it, wrote it, and made millions. So, I'm a bit hesitant to scoff while Brown is crying all the way to the bank.


----------



## Alessandra Kelley (Feb 22, 2011)

Andrew Ashling said:


> Indeed. My father has a copy of the seventies (?) mass paperback which I read. i]The DaVinci Code[/i] is a complete rip-off of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_. Mind you, _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ is complete nonsense. Its procedure is as follows: "If it isn't completely impossible, let's suppose it is true. If it is true this next thing, though equally improbable, becomes not completely impossible&#8230; and so on." The end result is preposterous.
> 
> What Brown did was weave his own characters into the plot and the very real Opus Dei. Then he sprinkled some riddles over the whole.
> 
> Simple. Simple? Yes, but he was the one who thought of it, wrote it, and made millions. So, I'm a bit hesitant to scoff while Brown is crying all the way to the bank.


I gather that the authors of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ tried to sue Dan Brown for plagiarism. But since they always had claimed that their book was nonfiction, they lost. If they were willing to admit they had made the whole thing up they might have been able to make a case, since he lifted absolutely everything from their work. By pretending it was a history, they gave Brown the perfect excuse.


----------



## Andrew Ashling (Nov 15, 2010)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> I gather that the authors of _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ tried to sue Dan Brown for plagiarism. But since they always had claimed that their book was nonfiction, they lost. If they were willing to admit they had made the whole thing up they might have been able to make a case, since he lifted absolutely everything from their work. By pretending it was a history, they gave Brown the perfect excuse.


That's what I heard (read on the Internet) as well.
However, _Holy Blood, Holy Grail_ wasn't completely fiction. E.g. the story of the Desposyni (the family of Jesus) is quite accurate. The rendition of the _legends_ surrounding them is quite accurate as well. The conclusions the authors draw are beyond tenuous though. Still, that doesn't amount to fiction. Just bad reasoning with facts and legends.

It made it possible for Brown (or his lawyers) to maintain that what he did was nothing much different from what every historical novelist does.


----------



## TAWilliams (Feb 9, 2014)

Gone Girl by Gillian Flynn

I LOVE all her other books and have read a few of them multiple times but Gone Girl just left me feeling meh.  Despite that it seems to be her most popular book and is currently being made into a movie with Ben Affleck.  Again it's not a bad book but I think it's the weakest out of all the books she has written.


----------



## lynnfromthesouth (Jun 21, 2012)

a_boo said:


> I hate to admit this because I know I ought to love them but I just can't get into the Lord Of The Rings.


I'm with you, boo. I liked the movies, but the books feel a bit painful.

I actually read Twilight before it was popular. I had one friend who had read it and went on and on about it. I read it, got to the end, and was wondering if I somehow missed the awesome. Then it turned into this big thing. 50 Shades, same deal. Friends read bits of it to me, and I was like .

I can get why everybody's mad about _Allegiant_. I wonder if the author wanted to make all her fans mad on purpose and never write again. The first two books weren't too bad, though.

Never read Dan Brown, don't really have a desire to. Saw him at a convention and was not impressed.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

Fascinating reading some of these. Loved Hunger Games. Loved Girl With the Dragon Tattoo (granted, I listened to the audiobook version - maybe that helped). I did have trouble even listening to the second book in that series. I love Stephen King and have read just about all of his works and think he creates FANTASTIC, three-dimensional characters. 

I guess those Left Behind books...  They are so awfully written, I don't get why they got so popular.


----------



## Daniel Harvell (Jun 21, 2013)

The Twilight series, certainly. Granted, I'm not in the target market for paranormal romance!


----------



## Andrew Michael (Feb 17, 2014)

Name of the Wind. I just didn't get what the big deal was. I liked the magic system, but aside from learning how to do magic, I had very little love for the story, the characters, anything. I tried so hard to love it, though. Indeed, wanted to, but alas, couldn't.


----------



## Avis Black (Jun 12, 2012)

The whole New York Times Weekly Bestselling Fiction list.  My favorite authors always seem to be mid-listers, not people whose titles sell in massive numbers.


----------



## SunshineOnMe (Jan 11, 2014)

Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time-I really really wanted to like this series. I just could not get into them.
Stephen King's Under the Dome- I usually like his books, this one, meh.


----------



## Jaya Jha (Feb 24, 2014)

I just didn't get Life of Pi. It seemed like hallucination being passed off as philosophy and everyone lapped it up too.


----------



## CecilyKane (Mar 4, 2014)

There are two popular (not uber popular like most of the books discussed here, but still popular) authors whose books I just can't get into: Sarah Addison Allen and Susan Vreeland.

It drives me nuts because I _should_ like them. Their names are mentioned in association with authors like Alice Hoffman, Amy Tan, and Tracy Chevalier, all of whom write books that I adore. And it's not like I find their writing bad. Something about the voice or the pacing or something just doesn't grab me.



a_boo said:


> I hate to admit this because I know I ought to love them but I just can't get into the Lord Of The Rings.
> 
> I've tried three times and each time I have to throw in the towel about of a third of the way through.
> 
> I just can't get on with the language and the amount of detail is frankly a little overwhelming for me.


Thank the gods, someone else! I did manage to get through the books once, when I was about 18 and a lot more patient (and stubborn) than I am now, but there was some teeth-grinding. It's not the story (because I love the movies), but the writing. I just cannot with it. And mythic fiction is my favorite subgenre! But I just can't. Argh.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

I couldn't get into Divergent. Shameful, I know. It seems like everyone loves the series but me. I think I was looking for another Hunger Games, another Katniss. But Tris left me cold.


----------



## pagegirl (Feb 3, 2014)

The Book Thief. I bought it and loved then intro, then it all went downhill from there. I couldn't finish it and so many people love that book!!


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

pagegirl said:


> The Book Thief. I bought it and loved then intro, then it all went downhill from there. I couldn't finish it and so many people love that book!!


I didn't hate it . . . . I just didn't particularly get into it.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

pagegirl said:


> The Book Thief. I bought it and loved then intro, then it all went downhill from there. I couldn't finish it and so many people love that book!!


I was exactly that way about The Lovely Bones. Loved the intro, then . . . nope.


----------



## Sydney M. Cooper (Mar 30, 2014)

I know some people get positively rabid when I say this, but I could not get into _Hitchhiker's Guide._ It was dense and just didn't grab me for whatever reason. By all rights it's a book that I _should_ like. Eh... oh well.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Sydney M. Cooper said:


> I know some people get positively rabid when I say this, but I could not get into _Hitchhiker's Guide._ It was dense and just didn't grab me for whatever reason. By all rights it's a book that I _should_ like. Eh... oh well.


I'll be honest -- I found it very funny. BUT -- I'm not sure it would have appealed as much if I hadn't already enjoyed the original British radio play and short TV series that basically covered the first book. I happened upon them at a time in my life where I just found it very funny, and ridiculous, and stress reducing. So, when reading the _book_ I was remembering the TV series and had a similar reaction. The later books were not nearly as satisfying, nor were the other series he'd written.


----------



## Andra (Nov 19, 2008)

I am trying to work myself up to reading the last two books in Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time - and it's hard going.  I really liked the first two books.  The next couple were ok, but after that - yuck!  A guy I work with says that the last two actually move the plot along and wind things up.  So it's books 1 and 2 and then stuff happened and then the last books.

For The Lord of the Rings, I always wanted to read it because I enjoyed The Hobbit.  But I would get bogged down.  After the movies came out, I got the audio version and managed to get past my personal sticking point.  I have now read through it a few times (but I still skip parts that are all songs or all description).


----------



## HoneyBadger (May 15, 2014)

Twilight, Fifty Shades, the usual suspects

'Zen and the art of ....' just seemed so pretentious. Gave up halfway through.
Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy is cringeworthy in places. I thought it overrated.


----------



## Alessandra Kelley (Feb 22, 2011)

I was disappointed in _The Name of the Rose_. It was just the genre and subject matter that should have appealed to me, but I found so much of it thin and missing the point.

By the time they got to the main character being overwhelmed by the ornate sculpture around a cathedral door the way a modern day tourist might -- instead of using them as a memory-aid to give order to and mentally open the scriptures, which is what any trained medieval monk would have done -- I was tired of the whole thing.


----------



## Trophywife007 (Aug 31, 2009)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> I was disappointed in _The Name of the Rose_. It was just the genre and subject matter that should have appealed to me, but I found so much of it thin and missing the point.
> 
> By the time they got to the main character being overwhelmed by the ornate sculpture around a cathedral door the way a modern day tourist might -- instead of using them as a memory-aid to give order to and mentally open the scriptures, which is what any trained medieval monk would have done -- I was tired of the whole thing.


I never read the book but I did enjoy the movie with Sean Connery... a bit salacious in parts but good, as I recall.


----------



## DixieChick (Oct 22, 2009)

Did anyone here read *The Night Circus* by Erin Morgenstern? I suffered through 30% then realized life was too short.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

Definitely 50 Shades. It was repetitive, poorly written, and boring - I'm still baffled as to how and why it did so well. I did enjoy 2 of Stieg Larson's books: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo and Girl Who Played With Fire. Both were slow to get going and took perseverance. While they were worth it in the end, I couldn't bring myself to go for the 3rd in the series.


----------



## sstroble (Dec 16, 2013)

Harry Potter books.

Books by bestselling authors that are 500 to 1,000 pages long. They read like the editors were afraid to tell the authors to cut the fluff.


----------



## Andre Jute (Dec 18, 2010)

sstroble said:


> Books by bestselling authors that are 500 to 1,000 pages long. They read like the editors were afraid to tell the authors to cut the fluff.


Whoa! great big thick books by bestselling authors are not an oversight or a sign of incompetence in the editorial chain but a deliberate, highly sophisticated strategy, state of the art marketing in publishing. There was a time when my contracts stated clearly that each novel should be "at least 100,000 words long". I hated it, not because I'm against long books on principle but because I think every story has a natural length, achieved by ruthless cutting of inessentials (fluff) as suggested above. But gradually I contracted only for stories that I knew would be long and wrote the short stuff on my own time, and I imagine other writers also took the repeated hints.

So why do publishers do it? Simple: it is to grab shelf space for their headline authors with name recognition in the hope that at the next launch cycle, some of that space will be retained for less well-selling books also on the publisher's list. This necessity in turn arose from the practice, which Harold Robbins told me started in the 1950s, of publishers paying bookstores for high-visibility table and shelf space, normally near the door and in corridors leading to the check-out where impulse buying could be counted on, and on other promotional spaces like the "Best Seller Table". It was natural for publishers to try and hang on to expensive space by the natural laziness of bookstore clerks, and perhaps also by the natural talents of the rest of their list.

Sorry to disillusion you, but that's just how it works.

I agree with you. There are quite a few writers I simply cannot read because of this foolish marketing practice. It has nothing to do with literature or entertainment and everything to do with sordid money-grubbing.


----------



## I&#039;m a Little Teapot (Apr 10, 2014)

Alessandra Kelley said:


> I was disappointed in _The Name of the Rose_. It was just the genre and subject matter that should have appealed to me, but I found so much of it thin and missing the point.
> 
> By the time they got to the main character being overwhelmed by the ornate sculpture around a cathedral door the way a modern day tourist might -- instead of using them as a memory-aid to give order to and mentally open the scriptures, which is what any trained medieval monk would have done -- I was tired of the whole thing.


I feel the same way. I keep wanting to love it, and feel like I SHOULD. But every time I take another stab at it, I . . . no. I've been trying to read (and love) it for about twenty years now. I don't think it'll be happening any time soon.


----------



## Sapphire (Apr 24, 2012)

Wicked. I had to force myself to finish it as it was my book club's selection one month. As much as I love Broadway shows, I had no desire to see Wicked because I disliked the book so much. Other people loved both. It must just be me.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Sapphire said:


> Wicked. I had to force myself to finish it as it was my book club's selection one month. As much as I love Broadway shows, I had no desire to see Wicked because I disliked the book so much. Other people loved both. It must just be me.


My son saw the show AND read the book: He's a theatre geek and also a bookworm. When I mentioned I might read the book, he said not to bother. He said to just go see the show when I had the opportunity. And I did. It was a VERY GOOD show! 

And, if I understood correctly from him, the show is enough different in plot that you'll still enjoy a good production if you've read the book.

So I say: if you have the opportunity to see the show, don't pass by it on the basis of not having been happy with the book.


----------



## TAWilliams (Feb 9, 2014)

Already mentioned but Girl With The Dragon Tatoo series.  I barely made it through the 1st book, forced myself to read the 2nd and just didn't have the strength to start the 3rd.  I tried but couldn't get into it.


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Gone Girl, there was just nothing even remotely interesting for me. Didn't care about anyone or anything. Horrible characters. 

Pillars of the Earth, basically same thing. The characters were like shells, I felt nothing. It was all so non interesting. It just read like, they did this than that. Wife dies, oh well, next. That is what it felt like reading. Bored the heck out of me and I love historical stuff. I did love the TV show they made out of the book though.  . I waded through about 50% of the book and finally gave up. 

50 shades, I have read erotic romance and erotica for years and didn't get that one at all. It was like whiney emo spineless characters. And the sex was so not sexy or even interesting. Lots of gasping and gaping and more gasping. I mean literally. They constantly gasped. 
I think I made it to half way on the first book. 

There are some classics I didn't get also. I try to block them out. Wuthering Heights is one.


----------



## 67499 (Feb 4, 2013)

Truman Capote's *Breakfast at Tiffany's *- it seems to me such a sad story when everyone tells me it's funny and charming. I suspect Audrey Hepburn's movie version supplied all its charm.


----------



## Jan Hurst-Nicholson (Aug 25, 2010)

I have to confess that as a child I did not enjoy Alice In Wonderland. It made no sense to me, and I also found it rather frightening.

The first film I ever saw at the cinema was Peter Pan. My mother took my friend and I as a treat. She took us home half way through it because Captain Hook terrified us and we hid under the seat every time he came on. She was rightly afraid it would give us nightmares.  To this day I don't watch or read anything late at night that won't send me to bed in a good and relaxed mood (now justified by recent research that discovered that moods, especially stress, is catching - even if it's only fiction)


----------

