Books You Shouldn't Read

[mosaix]

There are bad books? As in not just poorly written?

That's my view. I've identified one, I think it's thoroughly unpleasant - anyone else read it?

Some people do have unpleasant ideas and opinions - racism for instance. Just because they put them in print doesn't necessarily make them any better.

 

[YOSSARIAN]

OK recomendations for books that people shouldn't read and the reasons. Any genre not just SF&F.

Now this may seem a strange thread to start on Chronicles and some may say that such a list of books should be discouraged or frowned on (topic for another thread?) and until a few years ago I would have agreed with you. That is until I read American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis.

I was diminished as a human being by this book. I was a different person after I had read it and not for the better. That book put things in my head that I wish weren't there.

So top of my list, and the only entry on mine so far, don't read:

American Psycho by Bret Easton Ellis

I fully agree with you on this one. This book is the literary equivalent of a snuff film.

 

[Paige Turner]

Question Paige, have you read all three books?

Nope, just the Bible, and by extraction, the Torah, I guess. To be perfectly honest, I've probably only read about three quarters of the Bible. Never read the Koran, but I can see what the enlightened followers (of all three) do with the valuable knowledge they've obtained, and I have a hard time imagining how the world would be worse off without them. The books, I mean, not the people.

For more astute explanation of the effect of bad ideas on faulty minds, I refer you to Breakfast of Champions. Since we seem ill-prepared to weed out the faulty minds, I think we should start with the bad ideas.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

I agree with Alia, Shoegaze, that was very well said.


You know, if I find that something in somebody else's religion is morally indefensible, I just might say so ... if I thought it was likely to make them change their minds (a shaky proposition in itself).

But flippant remarks mocking their religion and their sacred books? I don't quite understand what that is supposed to accomplish.

 

[mosaix]

OK, can we get back on topic now?

 

[Alia]

But flippant remarks mocking their religion and their sacred books? I don't quite understand what that is supposed to accomplish.

I agree, Teresa.

And I have to add, that I'm sorely disappointed that books, of any genre are recommended that haven't been read yet. I can see how religious books can be dry and drawn out and one would assume with all the conflict in the world concerning religion nowadays might believe that the books aren't any good, but are they poorly written or is the content so dismissable that they would deserve to be recommended not to read? The issues that people might have with religion, I have observed, are necessarily the books they read from, but the interpetation of those books and what they people do with them. Doesn't mean they are bad books and don't deserve to be read. They might give us some insight into someone else's thoughts and views... how can that be bad?

But enough about religion and back to the books. I have read the Bible and the most part of the Koran. Neither are badly written books. Again I agree with Shoegaze on this issue... And... I support what J D said.

Speaking as an (technically) agnostic (practically speaking, atheist), I've no use for religion; but I do think that the Bible, or the Koran, or any other such book can indeed be read both for insight and for pleasure. Depending, for one thing, on the translation. The King James version of the Bible, for instance, is an exquisite work of English literature. Many of the newer versions, however, are dreck. Period. They may have more "accurate" translations, but they are tiresome and about as entertaining to read as a badly-smudged list of ingredients on a cereal box. So, no, I wouldn't condemn any of the "holy books" outright ... just as guides for living one's life.

That said, I'm not too certain about the whole idea of condemning any book outright, as what some have found uplifting and inspiring, I've found pushing me close to slitting a wrist; and vice versa. It all depends on what the individual takes from a work; and so I'd be loath to put my own personal hatreds out there and possibly deprive someone who might have found something very important but for my opening my big mouth.

 

[Alia]

OK, can we get back on topic now?

We still are on topic, Mosiax. We never left.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

That sounds like an excellent idea, Mosaix.

And I have a strong feeling that if Brian were reading this thread he would say that the kind of discussion Paige is suggesting would be better addressed in his Comparative Religions forum, as a more appropriate venue.

I can think of some books that I probably shouldn't read (as likely to gross me out while teaching me nothing that I don't already know) but I don't think I would go so far as to say that other (adult) people shouldn't read them either.

Maybe a better title for this thread would have been: Books I wish I hadn't read.

 

[Shoegaze99]

OK, can we get back on topic now?

I would respectfully argue that we are, in fact, on topic. We're debating the notion of "books you shouldn't read" and how that idea applies to specific books that have been brought. Seems pretty on topic to me.

 

[red_temple]

Maybe a better title for this thread would have been: Books I wish I hadn't read.

That was more my line of thinking as well. I find it difficult to discourage someone from reading anything, unless for obvious reasons such as age inappropriateness, etc.

 

[Paige Turner]

I shall excuse myself, from this thread, and for any insult to anyone's beliefs.

 

[mosaix]

OK here was my original idea about the thread.

We get many, many, posts on the Chronicles recommending books. People don't immediately rush out and buy them. But sometimes we find ourselves weighing up books in a book shop and remember a recommendation and, maybe are swayed by it.

Sometimes we buy a book and think "I wish I'd never read that!".

So here's a thread where we can say - "Don't read this." So that next time someone's in a book shop they can be swayed away from the book - nothing wrong with that.

In both cases it's just someone else's opinion.

 

[littlemissattitude]

So here's a thread where we can say - "Don't read this." So that next time someone's in a book shop they can be swayed away from the book - nothing wrong with that.

Isn't this what we have the Reviews board for? You read a book, then you write a review saying that you liked it, or you didn't, and why (the "why" part being the most important part of the review). Then, if you've been persuasive, other folks either go out and read the book, or they don't.

Just my 2 cents' worth.

 

[Trey Greyjoy]

LOL, poor Mosaix.

I think his idea is to have a filter whereby we collect all the "poor" books into one concise listing. A tool which one can use to help shelve the titles into the "maybe shouldnt buy" category on their mind's bookshelf.

 

[red_temple]

Well, Mosaix, at least you can't say I didn't try. Sorry I couldn't remember the name of that short story, though.

 

[Werthead]

Throwing this one out there, but the series I'd read and wished I hadn't was L. Ron Hubbard's Mission Earth series. All ten books. Why? I was 14 and we had to compare two book series for a project in English. I decided on SF and chose Mission Earth and Patrick Tilley's Amtrak Wars more or less at random. This meant I had to read both series from end to end. Amtrak Wars was cool, pretty much aimed at 14-15 year olds with a decent plot and worldbuilding (tried reading it a little while ago and it was cheesecorn, but for younger readers, not bad).

Mission Earth was and remains the most outrageously homophobic, elitist, misogynstic, racist work I have ever read. I felt soiled and violated on every intellectual level. L. Ron Hubbard was certainly one seriously messed up person with serious personal issues. That his moronic, sycophantic followers actually got one of these books nominated for a Hugo Award (thankfully in the same year as Ender's Game was nominated, meaning it actually had a negative chance of winning) still beggars belief. The book had one half-decent idea (being told largely through the POV of the villain) and wasted even that. The much more-maligned Battlefield Earth was actually mild by comparison (although the plot was even more stupid by comparison).

The morale of this tale: respect evil, twisted geniuses for their ability to start fake religions and make tons of cash, but never, ever read their 'pulp satire' SF novels.

 

[mosaix]

LOL, poor Mosaix.

I think his idea is to have a filter whereby we collect all the "poor" books into one concise listing. A tool which one can use to help shelve the titles into the "maybe shouldnt buy" category on their mind's bookshelf.

LOL, I'm quite happy about this.

Thanks to those who have contributed in the original spirit. There's plenty of time for more yet.

 

[Trey Greyjoy]

Good call on that Werthead! Unfortunately, until now I had the memory of reading that series blocked from my mind for my own psychological protection. Now that it is a "recovered memory" I think Im going to need some help dealing with the recalled trauma


I only got through 2 of the books before realizing it wasnt going in a direction I wanted to travel......

 

[mosaix]

Mission Earth was and remains the most outrageously homophobic, elitist, misogynstic, racist work I have ever read. I felt soiled and violated on every intellectual level.

Don't hold back Werthead - tell us what you really think.

 

[the smiling weirwood]

I think the Bible was badly written. It's repetitive, obtuse, and repetitive. This comes from one who has spent his entire life having the Bible shoved down my throat. I've read it five times, cover to cover. I won't deny it has some, SOME, good ideas, but it could stand to have about half shaved away and the rest reorganized.