Disappointing reads.

I think I could probably post on behalf of @The Big Peat by listing everything I've ever recommended to him.

On a similar note, I was really disappointed by Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita, which came heavily recommended by a friend whose taste I would normally trust.


The original is showing its age starting to look very stilted and archaic in its language.
It's the original I like, and it's the slightly foreign, non-current feel of the language I find so charming.
 
Last edited:
The Number of the Beast by Heinlein.

it was the first Heinlein I ever read (complete lack of Heinlein books in Edinburgh libraries in the late 70s/early 80s for me.).

To be fair, I don't think it has high standing amongst Heinlein fans either, but I don't really know as...

...I wouldn't say that book pissed in my well of enthusiasm for reading further Heinlein. No, it shat uncontrollably into it, then finished it off by throwing in a decaying month-old corpse of a donkey into it.
 
Last edited:
I'm dying to add my one (or less) star reviews, sadly the "No DNFs" prevents me from regaling you with passive aggressive prose full of backhanded compliments. The furthest I've gone with a famous book that I did not like is 25% or so. I can usually figure out I won't like a book in the first few chapters.
 
The Number of the Beast by Heinlein.

it was the first Heinlein I ever read (complete lack of Heinlein books in Edinburgh libraries in the late 70s/early 80s for me.).

To be fair, I don't think it has high standing amongst Heinlein fans either, but I don't really know as...

...I wouldn't say that book pissed in my well of enthusiasm for reading further Heinlein. No, it shat uncontrollably into it, then finished it off by throwing in a decaying month-old corpse of a donkey into it.

Gods yes that was an awful book. Like someone had written an overlong but hilariously funny parody/pastiche of Heinlein- then systematically worked their way through what they had written and removed every possible vestige of a joke.
 
Which... well-respected books ... with reputations for profundity and wisdom
I'm often struck by how often replies are posted that either ignore or misread the original posters question. There are a heap of books suggested in the thread that I'm pretty sure have no reputation for profundity and wisdom whatsoever!

For myself, I think I was pretty underwhelmed by Richard Ford's Independence Day, though it won the hearts of many literary critics and won the Pulitzer. It seemed stodgy and unengaging to me.
 
I love The Master and Margarita. It very much reminded me of Gogol's short stories (On the other hand, Gogol's novel Dead Souls didn't do much for me).
 
To be honest, @JunkMonkey , those reviews seem like the sort of thing that always attach themselves to that kind of book ("Shimmers with unspoken truth... both challenges and confounds... holds up a mirror to our..." etc). I remember when almost every fantasy novel with a sword in it was compared to Tolkien on the back cover.

The Road seemed like cod profundity to me: you could replace "carry the fire" with "be a nice guy" or "stay sane" and it would be no deeper. But you wouldn't win any awards for that.

Catch 22 didn't do much for me: the comedy and the deep stuff seemed forced when I read it (admittedly, a long time ago). The Little Prince was just... a nice story, really. I don't think there's anything clever in Starship Troopers, but then I think it's just plain bad, so I suppose it doesn't qualify.


The Road is an exercise in misery. I read through to the end but wouldn't again.
 
.I wouldn't say that book pissed in my well of enthusiasm for reading further Heinlein. No, it shat uncontrollably into it, then finished it off by throwing in a decaying month-old corpse of a donkey into it.
*Applauds this sublime piece of prose*
 
If nothing else this thread has taken The Road firmly off my "(I Suppose I) Must Read One Day" list.
My list has four* divisions: "I definitely want to read", "I'd think I'd like to read", "I feel I should read", and "I really ought to read"...


*Five, if you count " I wouldn't read this if you simultaneously offered me a large sum of money, and threatened me with a large stick". *coughtwilightcough*
 
If I'm being fair, The Road probably isn't a bad book so much as a mediocre one. I really dislike McCarthy's style in it, which feels pretentious, and I feel that once the pretention and reputation is stripped away, there's nothing exceptional there. However, it does feel inexplicably successful, the sort of "book club book" that makes me wonder "Why is this so popular?". I find it irritating that occasionally a "literary" writer has a go at science fiction and suddenly makes science fiction good.

This might be heresy, but I've never quite got what was especially deep about Philip K Dick. I've never worked out if he had something profound to say, or was just a cranky man being cranky. Perhaps a bit of both.
 
The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho
I'm not sure I really expected much from The Alchemist; it was loaned to me by a friend who seems to think my reading taste is rather dark (he's probably right), but it was easy reading so I finished, fully convinced the book went where the author's thumb on the scale dictated.

I may have indicated my dissatisfaction with The Belgariad elsewhere, so in short: a story drawn out a book or two longer than it could sustain displaying thread-bare imagination some of it drawn from old movies, vapid prose, standard issue characters, and a travelog of locations likely to be torn down and reassembled later for some other fantasy brick.

I hadn't read anything from Heinlein later than Starship Troopers, so I decided to jump back into his writing when Friday was trumpeted as a return to form. Really?! How bad had his previous form become? I never bothered to find out since his characterization of Friday was suspect, and the book as a whole shallow. I'm not fond of Starship Troopers, but it was better than Friday by a long stretch.

Three novellas have put me off their writers when I thought they'd be good entry points into their works: The Breast by Philip Roth took a potentially fascinating and amusing variation on Kafka's Metamorphosis and made it dull and boring. Seize the Day by Saul Bellow was a slog and William Styron's The Long March was that, exactly that. It's possible I'd like other works by these writers, but I've found a lot of the writers who came to prominence post-WWII do nothing for me, compared to those post-WWI. That said ...

To Have and to Have Not by Ernest Hemingway was, up to a point, an okay attempt to tap into the kind of pulp adventure story that he'd inspired other writers to write with his pared down, precise, poetic prose. Until late in the book. Apparently embarrassed with himself, he tried to leverage the book toward a literary profundity that hadn't been earned up to that point. The 1944 movie directed by Howard Hawks and starring Bogart & Bacall is a lot more fun as it rehashes Casablanca.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top