Which authors have disappointed you the most?

[Kierkegaurdian]

You know what I mean, you visit the various internet forums, read through the book recommendation threads and see a lot of glowing reviews and lots of hype on particular names. So you go out, spend your money (or use your library card) get the book(s) home ..... and you're left feeling flat, wondering what you're not seeing in these authors that everyone else has.

Do you have any disappointments like that?

For me there's two:

China Mieville - I've tried my best with Perdido Street Station, The Scar and Iron Council. But even though I can see the mans talent, I can't make myself read more than a few chapters and even that's a slog!

Gene Wolfe - The big one for me, so many people recommended him to me that I thought I was onto a real winner. I struggled my way through the first book in the Book of the New Sun and a chapter or so into the second book before putting it down. I bought the Wizard Knight duology and never completed the first book. Like Mieville I can see his talent but his stories just didn't capture me.

I really wanted to enjoy both Mieville and Wolfe and am disappointed that I can't seem to get what most everyone does from them!

I can understand why you would term getting through some Wolfe a "struggle". He is not an easy writer, and a lot of his stuff is an acquired taste. I will say though, that the New Sun books and the Wizard / Knight duology are among his more difficult and offbeat books, so that might explain it! If you do ever try him again, I would read something a bit easier and shorter (The Sorcerer's House is a good choice). Hope this helps

 

[Coragem]

George RR Martin - I really liked the first two Game of Thrones books, and was looking forward to the rest. But the delays over the recent ones ...

I would add: I'd be surprised if anyone could find me a great many writers who can both (1) work at George RR Martin's level, and (2) work much quicker.

It annoys me when people complain about the delays with ADwithD. Many books are written faster, but if they're not half the length they're nearly all less than half the quality.

Many writers would be happy if they spent a lifetime coming up with something as good as a single volume of ASofIAF.

Coragem.

 

[Vertigo]

Orson Scott Card. Ender's Game struck me as very simplistic, adolescent wish-fulfillment. I have no idea why it has the cult following that it does, other than nostalgia. I was also slightly disappointed by David Foster Wallace. The amount of hype that Infinite Jest gets, and the too-many-to-count comparisons to Pynchon, made me really excited. While I enjoyed Infinite Jest overall, it was not the earth-shaking masterpiece it was made out to be, and Wallace is definitely no Pynchon. I would give IJ a 3 out of 5.

I was not hugely impressed with Ender's Game. I enjoyed it well enough except the ending which I thought dreadful. I would rate it as OK but not great enough to get all the accolades. I actually found the Speaker For the Dead a much better book and frankly a more thought provoking look at prejudice.

I was also disappointed by Joe Haldeman's The Forever War, I just couldn't see why everyone seems so excited about a book about Vietnam set in a space opera. And frankly I didn't find it to be particularly good military SF, I certainly think there is much better out there. Again I actually thought Forever Peace a better book, though I never would have read it except for people saying how disappointing it was because it was nothing like Forever War

 

[BookStop]

I have tried multiple times to get into The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo series by Stieg Larsson, but I just can't...I've heard from just about everyone who's read it that it gets better, more exciting, but I just can't seem to break that barrior.

 

[D_Davis]

I'm so sorry to hear Extollager can't get into Bester, although I must admit apart from "those two" every thing else is a bit dull.

Not true - many of his short stories are even better, as if that is even possible.

 

[Extollager]

William Hope Hodgson's "In the Nightland" was like that. Up to then I had enjoyed everything I had read by him but that book was dreadful.

I've tried more than once to read The Night Land. It has some great passages. But I can't seem to force my way past the halfway point.

 

[Extollager]

I'm so sorry to hear Extollager can't get into Bester, although I must admit apart from "those two" every thing else is a bit dull.

I probably need to try again sometime. These must be books that you really have to be in just the right frame of mind to enjoy. Seems I haven't managed to get there so far.

 

[D_Davis]

I probably need to try again sometime. These must be books that you really have to be in just the right frame of mind to enjoy. Seems I haven't managed to get there so far.

I seem to always be in the mood for Bester. I've read Stars at least 6 times, and the last time I read it I read it twice in row - I finished the last page and immediately turned to the beginning. It's the only book I've ever read twice in a row. Nothing else even compares to it, really.

Hopefully someday you're in the mood for it!

 

[J-Sun]

Robert Silverberg - I know he's legendary in SF circles, but the two novels I read were seriously underwhelming...Hot Sky at Midnight...The alien Years

Those are both recent novels and likely not the best examples of his work (I haven't read them, so I don't know). Try something from 1970-1975 (1967-75 is the canonical span but the late 60s stuff is less impressive to me, overall, than the early 70s) like Beyond the Safe Zone or similar collections, or Dying Inside or nearby, well-regarded novels. Or at least the later (1980-3) first run of Majipoor books which are probably the specific thing he's most known for or The Conglomeroid Cocktail Party which is the complementary collection, and an excellent one.

Better not to bother?

Since they are both highly acclaimed authors, and there's no such thing as a universally liked author (you will always find detractors, no matter who you are talking about), I would at least give them a try and make up your own mind.

Agreed. I personally don't like Wolfe myself and am not interested in trying Mieville, but I wouldn't let one negative review throw me off of anyone I was otherwise interested in unless it was an amazing review that specifically hit my pressure points.

As far as me, I again agree with FE on the idea that books by authors I like are more likely to disappoint than authors themselves (though I can't at all agree with the specific Weapon Shops example - the Linn books and maybe The Beast fixup would get my nod there) because, if I haven't read an author, I can only have vague hopes or worries. I also don't tend to remember books as "disappointments" but only as "dislikes". I'll agree with Kierkegaurdian's take on Ender's Game though that's an example where I can't say that disappointed me as I'm not even sure I knew it was an especially big deal when I read it. Since it was relatively new, it was an award-winner at most and not yet "legendary". I suppose Blish's Cities in Flight was a particular disappointment because, on the face of it, it should be the perfect thing for me but just didn't work for me and I've liked very little of what I've read of him, including even most of the Ballantine Best of, which I almost always like, and he is hugely famous. So Blish might be a good example of prior expectations and disappointment.

BTW, this thread is similar to a few others, a couple of which are

http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/forum/528664-books-you-should-like-but-dont.html

http://www.sffchronicles.co.uk/foru...om-the-fantasy-and-sf-masterworks-series.html

Though those take a book angle more than author, but tend to overlap.

 

[Extollager]

I suppose Blish's Cities in Flight was a particular disappointment

I liked the first book, as I recall, and then bogged down with it.

 

[Extollager]

I seem to always be in the mood for Bester. I've read Stars at least 6 times, and the last time I read it I read it twice in row - I finished the last page and immediately turned to the beginning. It's the only book I've ever read twice in a row. Nothing else even compares to it, really.

Hopefully someday you're in the mood for it!

Well, I have it in that Boucher-edited 2-volume Treasury of Great Science Fiction, so it's there when I'm ready.

 

[Heather Myst]

Erikson's Malazan books just didn't do it for me. A friend gave me the first eight books and I read them but for me this is the most over rated series ever.

Hobb's Soldier Son series. I really liked her first three trilogies but this series was so bad I am not really sure she wrote it.

Moon's Deed of Paksenarrion. I had heard good things about this series and the writing was not bad but I really found the action to be lacking and the book very slow overall.

Jordan's Wheel of Time was also not a favorite of mine. I know it is very popular but it didn't keep my interest.

Tad Williams is another writer that I can do without. I found his books to be pretty average for a guy who gets so much praise.

 

[soulsinging]

I agree. The intellectual bit sounds about right, and the reason it irritates me is because I can't shake the feeling that it's a deliberate and calculated move. In other words, Mieville writes in a way that he feels is intellectual, rather than simply writing naturally and if it's intellectual, so be it. Seems almost... fake to me. Like he's trying too hard. I could be wrong, of course, though God knows the chances of that happening are infinitesimally small.

Another Mieville critic! Woohoo!

We should start an anti-fan club.

Count me in. I didn't like Mieville either, for the same reasons you list here. It felt intentionally difficult and dense and pretentious to me. I have a similar reaction to David Lynch's movies... I can see the talent and there are some fascinating ideas at work, but the presentation is too self-indulgent to really make much sense to me.

I'll also join in the GRRM vote. The man has immense talent and the first 3 books of his Ice and Fire series are among the best books I ever read, but it became very clear to me in book four that he does not know how to bring the series to a conclusion, needs an editor, and will quite possibly die before he finishes. I couldn't care less about the delays. I'd rather he took 20 years to release the final 2 books than hand over bloated filler every 5 becos of the pressure to produce something.

 

[j d worthington]

On J. M. Barrie... you might try some of his plays, especially that rather unsettling piece, Shall We Join the Ladies?... which I would not recommend being read to children, as it can be quite chilling.

On Mieville... I admire the man's talent, but something about him tends to leave me cold... in the novels, at least. Some fine stuff there, but as a whole, they just don't work for me. On the other hand, some of his shorter pieces are fine works, so you might give Looking for Jake a try, and see if you like him better in this form.

Dale: I would also add my vote to the Bester... it is certainly, in the final analysis, one of the most hopeful and uplifting books I've encountered in the field, and Bester manages to make the "redemption" of Gully Foyle surprisingly convincing...

Silverberg: I would also strongly recommend his work from the late 1960s to the mid-to-late 1970s. Some very powerful work there; though I don't think his later works should be dismissed, I also don't think they are on the same level as these....

 

[Connavar]

For me a disappointing authors are the ones who are acclaimed, hyped by critics or fans that i just cant any reason for. I dont have problem with Fried Egg type because if a great author writes a weak book it can be a temporary slump or just a weak book among many good ones. The ones i read and never see anything good in is my issue.


George RR Martin - gives epic modern fantasy a bad name imo. Bleak, political stuff that is about killing characters and terrible prose is not good imo. Most people that find it good, hail it to me are kind of readers who read Dan Brown for story type and not actually storytelling ability. His vampire fantasy masterwork book is whole another author it seems. What went wrong i wonder.....

Dan Simmons - Hyperion reputation in SFF was a shock to me afterwards, because it was so bland to me. Maybe the other books of that series is really good but the first book was huge letdown.


August Strindberg - he is sort of the swedish giant of classic literature. The swedish E. Allan Poe but he is so dated. Everyone who talks about his works talks more about his politics, his woman hating views than his actual writing. Play wise Ibsen is much better, novel wise Lagerlöf,Lagerkvist,Söderberg is much more timeless,brilliant.

He is the perfect example of literary canons were written back then by ignorant men who hailed people who lived like the poet myth lifestyle. Strindberg rep is built on in Sweden anyway on his personal lifestyle. His writing is pretty mundane, so overrated its hard to believe.

 

[biodroid]

Conn - I will give you shelter when the rotten tomatoes start flying about your GRRM comment (which I agree with)

 

[Connavar]

My brother is the biggest Game of Thrones book series fan so im used to GRRM fans and taking shelter from their comments.

Although im not saying GRRM is RA Salvatore bad but still. Some fantasy give the genre bad name and not because i dont like epic subgenre but because they are books for the masses that lack good literary ability unlike many other fantasy because they sell anyway.

 

[alchemist]

Those are both recent novels and likely not the best examples of his work (I haven't read them, so I don't know). Try something from 1970-1975 (1967-75 is the canonical span but the late 60s stuff is less impressive to me, overall, than the early 70s) like Beyond the Safe Zone or similar collections, or Dying Inside or nearby, well-regarded novels. Or at least the later (1980-3) first run of Majipoor books which are probably the specific thing he's most known for or The Conglomeroid Cocktail Party which is the complementary collection, and an excellent one.

Thanks for the advice (and to JD too). I'll pay attention to the dates the next time I come across one.

 

[Timba]

I would add: I'd be surprised if anyone could find me a great many writers who can both (1) work at George RR Martin's level, and (2) work much quicker.

It annoys me when people complain about the delays with ADwithD. Many books are written faster, but if they're not half the length they're nearly all less than half the quality.

Many writers would be happy if they spent a lifetime coming up with something as good as a single volume of ASofIAF.

Coragem.

Agreed, I will take quality over speed any day and this series has really got me hooked.

 

[biodroid]

I would add: I'd be surprised if anyone could find me a great many writers who can both (1) work at George RR Martin's level, and (2) work much quicker.

It annoys me when people complain about the delays with ADwithD. Many books are written faster, but if they're not half the length they're nearly all less than half the quality.

Many writers would be happy if they spent a lifetime coming up with something as good as a single volume of ASofIAF.

Coragem.

I disagree, there are better authors out there that don't bore you to death and then kill off your favourite characters because that's how they turn fantasy upside down on it's head. I don't see anything special about GRRM's books. I like my fantasy to have logic and magic and really cool fantastic scenes and amazing buildings and strange monsters and eerie forests. You need swords and scorcery, I do agree that the wizard shouldn't save the day by reviving the dead hero but which character are you going to care about when all of them are dead? I want my fantasy to be almost cinematic in my head, GRRM's book is written like a tv show, it was even mentioned that it's like a soap opera but it's not, it's a tv show.

*I will now go and hide*