# Difficult authors to read, but you still enjoy them?



## Ty Johnston (Jun 19, 2009)

Everybody has their favorites, right? For me it's James Joyce and Mervyn Peake. Anybody else?


----------



## dkgould (Feb 18, 2013)

Victor Hugo and later H.G. Wells.  All the commentary to slog through, but I do it anyway!


----------



## cinisajoy (Mar 10, 2013)

At the moment I would say Ayn Rand.  Atlas Shrugged to be exact.


----------



## mikelynch (Apr 6, 2013)

I've always been a fan of Jack London


----------



## Grace Elliot (Mar 14, 2011)

I've just finished  which was harrowing in places. The backdrop of the novel is the Reign of Terror in revolutionary France and there are some difficult to read passages. That said, there is no gratuitous violence - it's all used to build sympathy for the protagonists.


----------



## Craig Allen (Apr 2, 2011)

I find Dan Simmons difficult to read sometimes, but I always enjoy what he does. Same goes for Gene Wolfe too.


----------



## Carrie Rubin (Nov 19, 2012)

cinisajoy said:


> At the moment I would say Ayn Rand. Atlas Shrugged to be exact.


I really need to tackle that one some day. It's waiting on my book shelf for me...


----------



## Hilary Thomson (Nov 20, 2011)

Sir Richard Francis Burton is my pick.  He could speak several languages fluently, and he wrote like it.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

Stiegg Larsson. It's an effort, but worth it. 2 down, 1 to go.


----------



## CoraBuhlert (Aug 7, 2011)

Thomas Pynchon and William Faulkner


----------



## jeffaaronmiller (Jul 17, 2012)

I'll second the person who said Victor Hugo. He inserts such long discourses into his novels that you almost lose track of the story. Forty pages on the battle of Waterloo just to make a quick reference to Thenardier and Pontmercy at the end? Forty pages on the history of the sewers in Paris? But I made myself read every word and try to understand his point, because he clearly had things he wanted to say.


----------



## Vagueness (Jan 27, 2011)

Craig Allen said:


> I find Dan Simmons difficult to read sometimes, but I always enjoy what he does.


Got to go with the above. I love Dan Simmons' work, but need a quiet space for it, him and China Miéville.


----------



## RLC (Mar 19, 2013)

Anything by James Joyce. The only other one I can think of at the moment that I struggled with was 'The Atrocity Exhibition' by JG Ballard.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

Yukio Mishima. Forbidden Colours to be exact. A brilliant book, but one that someone could easily give away in the first twenty pages.

John Fowles. "The Collector" sounds like such a great idea for a novel of suspense, and then you read it, and at some point you realise that this "is" totally real, and it's awful. But even more brilliant is his "The Magus" - another of those books that you could give away easy on as it doesn't seem to be going anywhere, and then, at a certain point, it's suddenly gripping and you can't put it down, but there's maybe a word in every 500 that you've never seen or heard of before.

Wilkie Collins. Not because he's difficult so much as that I just find 19th century fiction difficult these days. It's so long-winded. His books were sensation novels, and they'd be sensation novels still if someone could edit a third out of them.


----------



## edmjill (Dec 19, 2012)

I found Malcom Lowry's "Under the Volcano" to be a very difficult read (both in terms of content and style).  However, I was glad I read the book and would recommend it to others.


----------



## Klip (Mar 7, 2011)

Ty Johnston said:


> Everybody has their favorites, right? For me it's James Joyce and Mervyn Peake. Anybody else?


Totally Mervyn Peake. What an awesome writer.


----------



## ramsey_isler (Jul 11, 2011)

William S. Burroughs. It's always an odyssey getting through his non-linear stories.


----------



## Todd Young (May 2, 2011)

ramsey_isler said:


> William S. Burroughs. It's always an odyssey getting through his non-linear stories.


Yes, William S. Burroughs. I've only read "Cities of the Red Night" but that was a challenge and a half.

I was also going to say Nadine Gordimer, but with her work the effort is well paid off.


----------



## Zackery Arbela (Jan 31, 2011)

Dorothy Dunnett and Neil Stephenson.


----------



## TWErvin2 (Aug 7, 2010)

The Problem of Pain by C.S. Lewis. Some chapters were easiser than others, but it took me three times to get through it all with a solid understanding.


----------



## LovelynBettison (Aug 12, 2012)

For me it's Toni Morrison. Beloved was a struggle for me, but in the end I was glad i read it.


----------



## brianjanuary (Oct 18, 2011)

James Joyce for me!


----------



## dkrauss (Oct 13, 2012)

Umberto Eco. Guy just blows me away. Right now I'm reading _The Island of the Day Before_, and it is jaw-dropping.


----------



## nightdreamer (Oct 8, 2012)

What comes most prominently to mind is not fiction at all, but Immanuel Kant.  Even translated into English, it's like reading Sanskrit, but if you can wade through it and figure out what he's saying, you discover the man was spectacularly brilliant.


----------



## Lee (Nov 7, 2008)

Franz Kafka. Not exactly easy reading, but worth the effort.



Todd Young said:


> Wilkie Collins. Not because he's difficult so much as that I just find 19th century fiction difficult these days. It's so long-winded. His books were sensation novels, and they'd be sensation novels still if someone could edit a third out of them.


My experience is different -- I love Wilkie Collins, and find his stuff very easy reading and un-put-downable.


----------



## SidneyW (Aug 6, 2010)

I concur on Faulkner. Tough going, but "Absalom, Absalom!" is great.


----------



## balaspa (Dec 27, 2009)

I was reading HG Wells as a kid.  So, I guess he is my fave.


----------



## David Clarkson (Apr 20, 2013)

The most challenging book that I have read has to be Milton's Paradise Lost. I found myself referring to the study notes after every line, but it was worth the effort. The imagery and the story telling are utterly sublime. Pale Fire by Vladimir Nabokov is also difficult, but for entirely different reasons. The narrative is just so bizarre, yet it really drew me in.

Among contemporary authors I would say that Irvine Welsh is difficult to read. Novels such as Glue and Trainspotting have almost indecipherable dialogue (the Scottish accent is reproduced with flawless accuracy), but the stories make the effort worthwhile. He also wrote a novel titled Filth, where every so often a tapeworm eats up the narrative and as the story progresses, begins to develop a viewpoint of its own (this really is as strange as it sounds and the only way to fully understand what I am talking about is to take a look at the novel yourself).


----------



## Julia444 (Feb 24, 2011)

I've read several books by Ian McEwan; he's definitely worth reading, but he's a cerebral writer and his prose is dense.  Getting through a paragraph is tough work for me mentally, but it's always rewarding because he is so clever.  It's worth the effort; he makes you use your brain.  Both ATONEMENT and SATURDAY had really interesting themes, and the occasional payoff of dry humor.

Julia


----------



## MineBook (May 31, 2013)

Jack Kerouac who wrote that he is like black sheep in white sheep crowd with his writing style.  

Difficul to read authors need gread editor, who liked writers genre and his story - that is it. Everything can be qualified.


----------



## Biss (Jun 3, 2013)

> I found Malcom Lowry's "Under the Volcano" to be a very difficult read (both in terms of content and style). However, I was glad I read the book and would recommend it to others.


Agreed. The first thirty or so pages are a pure slog but after that - amazing book.


----------



## lmroth12 (Nov 15, 2012)

For me it's Charles Dickens. He creates some of the most colorful characters ever to be found between the pages of a book, but his style can be off-putting. I find some of it to be overly sentimental, such as a scene between Nancy and a fine young lady in Oliver, where they almost instantly understand one another and bond like sisters, wholly unrealistic as most fine young ladies of that era would not have dreamed of dirtying their silken garments by contact with a girl of the streets as Nancy was. However, Dickens was a journalist, and it is clear that he wanted to draw attention to the plight of the poor and underprivileged in London, so I forgive him for occasionally writing unbelievable scenarios in his attempt to get his message out.

Jane Austen occasionally gets a little preachy when trying to make a point, best example is Sense and Sensibility where Eleanor and Marianne speak to one another in a way that no two sisters of my acquaintance would ever do, as they discuss their friends and suitors in all of their strengths and weaknesses with the astuteness of philosophers and compare their own shortcomings. Louisa May Alcott usually wrapped up each chapter of Little Women with a moral homily from Marmee which always made me grit my teeth, but the more I read of nineteenth century literature the more I discover this tendencies with authors. It seemed they did not wish to just tell a story, they also wanted to make a point, so I would say the preachiness was a hallmark of the era in general and not just a few writers in particular. And both of these ladies were daughters of ministers so that explains a lot. However, their humor and vivid characterizations kept me turning the pages and coming back for re-reads, especially Little Women. Anyone who thinks this is just a sugary novel for teen girls must have never read it and has seen only the insipid movie editions. I challenge anyone to find another nineteenth century book where a girl says to her sister, "I will kill you" and means it in her terrible rage. Or where that same girl goes to her parents after the death of another for answers, only to have them say, in effect, "We have no answers to give you." Another book would have just given a pat answer to a heart-rending question.


----------



## gdae23 (Apr 30, 2009)

I'm another William Faulkner fan. Many years ago, I spent one summer reading all of his books. I enjoyed the total immersion. His writing style is challenging, but I agree with the posters above that it was worth it. I've bought several of my favorites for the Kindle as well.


----------



## Dina (May 24, 2013)

Dickens. Bleak House, specifically, but so worth the read. Ray Kurzweil, too. Brilliant but I can only read in short bursts.


----------



## anguabell (Jan 9, 2011)

Virginia Woolf. I can never quite figure out how her mind works. And, even after decades in reading in English, some of the English poetry is still a bit of a challenge (can't hear some of those words in my head), although contemporary poets are of course much more accessible. I just recently stumbled upon Robert Frost, and it is just amazing and worth a bit of an effort. Shakespeare is still difficult but I "cheat" a bit because I remember the translated text. But - isn't Shakespeare a bit difficult for native English speakers too  ?


----------



## meh (Apr 18, 2013)

Victor Hugo, Chaucer, and Dante.


----------



## Iolanthe (Mar 7, 2013)

I was reading everyone's answers and thinking about what authors would fit into this category for me. I feel like everything I read these days is something I enjoy, and I'm not sure if that's because I've shed the books which feel like swimming upstream when you're reading them or if I've learned to enjoy a wider range and therefore it doesn't feel Sisyphean. Or I may have found my comfort zone post-college and need to challenge it a bit more.

I read Fowles' The Magus recently, which someone mentioned upthread, and I agree it was difficult in spots (a lot of switchbacks) but very worth it. I admit most of the postmoderns don't do it for me and although I've tried, I can't go with it. I find eighteenth and nineteenth-Century novels soothing to read. The cadences are so pleasing with the best of that lot. Then the Victorians I find harder to get through and not until around 1900 am I back on board. Love around 1900 through 1940. It's strange that we think of these writers as so of their time period (at least I do) but for them, they were just writers living in the present.

Alan Hollinghurst's A Stranger's Child was dense but enthralling. I just reread Atonement, which has such gorgeous prose, but the story felt emotional and close to the bone, which can be difficult to read.


----------



## Mahree Moyle (Jun 19, 2013)

Charles Dickens, but I love him. Franz Kafka, he's a little dark, but "Das Schloss" was good.


----------



## 67499 (Feb 4, 2013)

SidneyW said:


> I concur on Faulkner. Tough going, but "Absalom, Absalom!" is great.


----------



## Derendrea (Sep 4, 2012)

George R R Martin with all his names!! But I still love him.


----------



## bhazelgrove (Jul 16, 2013)

David Foster Wallace Infinite Jest ...lot of work but man it is a great ride. His essays are difficult easier than Jest, but still worth it.


----------



## Casper Parks (May 1, 2011)

Most recent book that comes to mind is "The Road" by Cormac McCarthy.

​
A father and his son walk alone through burned America. Nothing moves in the ravaged landscape save the ash on the wind. It is cold enough to crack stones, and when the snow falls it is gray. The sky is dark. Their destination is the coast, although they don't know what, if anything, awaits them there. They have nothing; just a pistol to defend themselves against the lawless bands that stalk the road, the clothes they are wearing, a cart of scavenged food-and each other.


----------



## James Everington (Dec 25, 2010)

Just finished _Crime And Punishment_ for the first time, which is a long read with some really dense prose(and those confusing Russian names) but really atmospheric and powerful, even in translation. I wasn't sure how much I'd like this one, but once I got into its rhythm it was a really great read.

Onwards to the next gloomy Russian masterpiece!


----------



## Teri Hall (Feb 10, 2013)

One for me was The Road, by Cormac McCarthy. The first time I read it I thought it was so stylistic as to be pompous, but I read it every couple of years now. One of my absolute favorites.


----------



## Linda Barlow (Jul 5, 2013)

Dorothy Dunnett is difficult to read--dense, allusive language, subtle plot hints that often don't pay off for hundreds of pages, references that require extensive historical and literary knowledge, not to mention her interlingual puns. Nonetheless, she is my favorite author (ok, she's tied with Austen). All six novels in her historical series, the Lymond Chronicles, rank among my all-time favorite books. Totally worth the effort, in other words! My own paltry attempts at historical novels were inspired, in large part, by my love of her far superior work.


----------



## lh422 (Jul 21, 2012)

Faulkner for me. _The Sound and the Fury_ was hard work, but well worth it.


----------



## Gabriel Morcan (Mar 19, 2013)

For me it's Dostoyevsky. I love the "good" parts in his novels and I just find my self shouting "Man, this guy is a genius", but then I go over five-ten pages where nothing happens. And this is the case especially when I re-read his works and I already know where the interesting parts are.

Who knows, maybe is just the contrast between the "excellent" bits and the "kind of good" parts.


----------



## Gabriel Morcan (Mar 19, 2013)

gdae23 said:


> I'm another William Faulkner fan. Many years ago, I spent one summer reading all of his books. I enjoyed the total immersion. His writing style is challenging, but I agree with the posters above that it was worth it.


I've read only one book by Faulkner, Flags in the Dust, and I really enjoyed it, although it was a Romanian translation  . The rest of his works are on my 'to read' list. Everybody told me "Don't stop here. You'll love his other books!!" and now the idea with the total immersion sounds very tempting.


----------



## Malcolm Henry (Jul 19, 2013)

I found Toni Morrison hard to begin with but every one of her books is worth the effort.

Dickens was tough as a teenager but even then I realised that Bleak House was something special and re-reading as an adult has confirmed that. Same goes for Joseph Conrad.

Umberto Eco is extremely difficult for me. Maybe it's the translation. After a couple of attempts I struggled through The Name of the Rose but didn't feel it was worth the effort. I gave up with Foucault's Pendulum.

Thomas Pynchon is hard work, too. His prose isn't particularly dense but it just takes a long time to get anywhere. 

Virginia Woolf sends me to sleep so I've never managed to get through anything she's written.


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

I find JR Tolkien pretty difficult, yet enjoyable.


----------



## Nimbuschick (Jan 15, 2012)

I find Terry Pratchett takes more focus than some books to really absorb his humor, but I love him more because of that.


----------



## Gabriel Morcan (Mar 19, 2013)

Nimbuschick said:


> I find Terry Pratchett takes more focus than some books to really absorb his humor, but I love him more because of that.


Terry Pratchett is great. I just recently discovered him even though my friends recommended him for some time. I've read Wyrd Sisters and Pyramids from the Discwolrd. Pratchett's humor is so subtle and makes me chuckle at every page.


----------



## danielpatrick (Jul 28, 2013)

Sometimes I can find Cormac McCarthy a real slog, but he's a magnificent author. Blood Meridian was one of the toughest books I've ever read, very bleak, very dark, but absolutely excellent at the same time!


----------



## Benjamin (Dec 26, 2008)

Joyce and Umberto Eco. Both great authors though.


----------



## brianjanuary (Oct 18, 2011)

I've always been a big James Joyce fan.


----------



## EvilTwinBrian (Jun 20, 2013)

Patrick Skelton said:


> I find JR Tolkien pretty difficult, yet enjoyable.


Me too. It took quite a while for me to reach the halfway point of The Fellowship of the Ring, when I started it, but once I was used to it, the other two books flew by. But all the songs...the songs... 

I forgot how tedious he could be when I reread the Hobbit last year, but I still enjoyed it. I just wish he would have ended his stories much sooner. Sometimes the climax is way too close to the 65-75% mark, and you've still got so much story to get through.


----------

