Books You've Never Been Able to Get into or Finish

[kythe]

For the last few weeks (yes, weeks), I've been trying to get through "Dream Quest of Unknown Kadath" by H.P. Lovecraft.

I've really enjoyed many of Lovecraft's other stories. This one started off good, though it is quite different from some of his other works. It has more the feel of a light adventure story than horror. But the story is bogged down with too much description of fictional places and beings with no point of reference, so it makes reading more burdensome. It's only a novella, but longer than most of Lovecraft's other works. I keep putting it down and I can't get into the story. I find that I want to finish it only because it is Lovecraft, not because I actually find it a good story.

 

[Vince W]

I'm currently having trouble with The Ringworld Throne. I really want to like it, but I'm getting distracted far too easily.

 

[soulsinging]

The Stand, by Stephen King. A friend and I have both taken cracks at this and neither of us can beat it. I think I just don't like King... his characters seem like dated 70's pop psychology cardboard cut outs. Even at best they're cloyingly nostalgic US-conservative hero types... the plain, God fearing salt of the Earth folk that didn't have any fancy book learning but know how men should live. Makes it really hard to care if they make it or not.

 

[BAYLOR]

I'm currently having trouble with The Ringworld Throne. I really want to like it, but I'm getting distracted far too easily.

Ive read Ring World , no desire to read beyond that.

 

[MWagner]

The Stand, by Stephen King. A friend and I have both taken cracks at this and neither of us can beat it. I think I just don't like King... his characters seem like dated 70's pop psychology cardboard cut outs. Even at best they're cloyingly nostalgic US-conservative hero types... the plain, God fearing salt of the Earth folk that didn't have any fancy book learning but know how men should live. Makes it really hard to care if they make it or not.

King's characters are dated because he's always drawn on his own childhood and youth in the 50s, 60s and 70s for his characterizations. However, it's pretty unfair to call them conservative. King is brazenly and openly liberal in his sensibilities. Many of his protagonists are teachers and writers (unsurprising, as those are the jobs he has done in his life), and there's often a sympathetic female character who has been mistreated by an ex. His villains are often religious nuts or small-town bigots. Even some of his fans have gotten tired of King beating the drum about the same old stereotypical bogeyman of his counterculture college days (see the reviews for Under the Dome).

 

[Vince W]

Ive read Ring World , no desire to read beyond that.

I enjoyed Ringworld Engineers well enough.

 

[hardsciencefanagain]

I never finished R.F.Jones's Man of Two Worlds(AKA Renaissance Man)
Although I can't remember why
Was it something about the pace?

 

[hardsciencefanagain]

Does anyone else "proofread" some paragraphs ,just to minimize the chance of not liking the style of the author?

 

[SilentRoamer]

This all goes to show how completely varied taste can be. One person's favourite may not do it for someone else, and a title someone hated can be another person's comfort read. And none of it is wrong; it just means there's room for all types of fiction, especially in our chosen genre.

Hurrah for us! hehe

That is one thing I noticed about this site - a really nice seeming collective, a few of the other SFF sites I visit have a definite snobbish attitudes to newcomers and expect certain authors to be worshipped; subjective preferences be damned!

OK I'll do it:
Anything by Orson Scott Card
Tolkien, Lord of the Rings/Hobbit

I have always liked Card, Enders Game is one of my favourite novels.

Tolkien is the same for me, I love the scriptural tone which permeates his work - although I can easily see how others do not enjoy him.

it is incredibly subjective -- my Old Man and I love and loathe different books and agree on a VERY few yet agree on most films etc. Style can be a big thing that makes you read on or not. And we get antsy about different things. Basically, it's mostly personal -- they aren't bad books, they just don't float my boat.

And I'm picky about books so I'll only mention the first few that come to mind.

DNF: For varied reasons (pace/content/style mostly)

Assassin's Apprentice -- I much prefer Hobb as Lindholm.
Mistborn

YMMV

I found Assassin's Apprentice to be a bit of a letdown. It came highly recommended on another site I frequent and did not live up to its expectations.

I actually really enjoyed Mistborn, the magic system I remembered as being really stand out.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Also - Kate Elliots Crossroads series, read well into Book 2 and it just lost me.

Shame as it seems a non standard fantasy with some interesting ideas.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

Still think Tolkien and Card are both just ridiculously dull.

 

[thaddeus6th]

On Tolkien, I like The Silmarillion a lot more than Lord of the Rings [I know that's a minority view]. They're pretty different, so you may like The Silmarillion, if you check the sample to see.

Never read anything by Card.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Still think Tolkien and Card are both just ridiculously dull.

Hehe - I wasn't trying to persuade you otherwise. I have long since accepted that literary preferences is a fickle beast which chooses not to conform to expectation. I could be absolutely certain my friends would like a certain book - until they don't!

 

[MWagner]

On Tolkien, I like The Silmarillion a lot more than Lord of the Rings [I know that's a minority view].

Count me in that minority. To my mind, Tolkien was a much better world-builder and myth-maker than novelist.

 

[thaddeus6th]

I haven't gone back to check, but someone online [and, as we know, someone online is the most reliable source of information in the world] told me once that there are two pages dedicated to the plants in Helm's Deep.

 

[David Doherty-Jebb]

In regards to Card, I share Seanan McGuire's view: I refuse to read him as he is on record as saying he will fund right-wing, anti-gay campaigns, so as a gay man, I decline adding money to that pot. That's not to say I won't buy your book if I disagree with your politics (I generally don't research an author's beliefs, truth be told, just read their stuff if I like it). There must be room for all opinions, even those I find anathema, but Card just goes that step too far for me.

 

[SilentRoamer]

Hey David Doherty-Jebb,

I can appreciate your viewpoint. I personally find Cards personal opinions quite vile, and oddly I find them at odds with the prevailing message in Speaker for the Dead which is one of tolerance. However I have always believed in judging a work on its literary merit rather than the authors personal views - I wouldn't claim this to be the "right" way of appreciating literature though and would never expect this to be normative. At the time of reading Enders Game I had no idea of Cards political affiliations and truth be told they would not have deterred my reading (although they may have affected some of my interpretation.)

I find this is especially so when I am reading older literature, where the societal norms were more misogynistic/racist/generally less liberal and so the authors natural viewpoint is already at odds with mine.

Anyway I am not sure what my point is now! Except to say that I can appreciate your personal viewpoint even if your reasoning is not something which has ever been part of my own thought process.

 

[David Doherty-Jebb]

I totally agree, SilentRoamer, but it's just Card is a bit of an individual case, at least for me.

A work has to be judged on its own value, because, as you rightly say, many of the classics were written by people who espoused the prevailing ideas of misogyny and other bigotries of their time, and we have to try and see past this to appreciate the work.

Card actively works on an anti-gay agenda, using money he earns from his work to fund this. This is the distinction I draw. Otherwise, as you say, I try not to let external forces colour my opinion of the actual work as, once published, it has become indepedent of the author.

 

[David Doherty-Jebb]

PS- how many times did I write 'work' up there??

 

[SilentRoamer]

Card actively works on an anti-gay agenda, using money he earns from his work to fund this. This is the distinction I draw. Otherwise, as you say, I try not to let external forces colour my opinion of the actual work as, once published, it has become indepedent of the author.

I can see how this is a direct contradiction of your beliefs and or lifestyle and I can definitely appreciate your viewpoint. I can see the distinction in context as well.

PS- how many times did I write 'work' up there??

I didn't actually notice until you pointed it out. I also just realised in this reply and the one before how often I have said appreciate. Although I can think of worse words I have been guilty of over-using!

Anyway back on topic! Another set of books I just couldn't get the feels for were Kate Elliots Crossroads series. Just seemed to fall flat for me.