least favorite books

Lullaby by Chuck Palahniuk. I received the book as a gift and I couldn't finish it. The main character was so pathetic and unintersting, I didn't care what happened to him. And after having seen Fight Club, I could tell that the structure was formulaic for Palahniuk and I didn't feel the need to read any more.

---

Back in 6th grade our class read a book called The Curse of the Blue Figurine by John Bellairs (I think that was his name). It is a children's book, but I remember it being the stupidest thing I'd ever read. I still know the whole plot, and it's still bad.

THE CATCHER IN THE RYE. BORING!

---

Well, some people that believe in the Bible (like me) don't use it towards hatred. So, hate those individual people . . . not the books.

---

Blame the interpreters who manipulate the Bible, not the Bible itself.


James Fenimore Cooper's 'The Last of the Mohicans.'

Dull.

After four or five tries, I've never made it through Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities. I feel slightly guilty about it, but... obviously not enough to force myself through it.

THE HISTORIAN by Elizabeth Kostova.

What a worthless piece of ****. It's too big and some of the characters are unneccesary. After I finished the book I couldn't remember any of the names, besides Helen and Rossi. The father/daughter part could be cut and left with the young professor and Helen looking for Dracula nad it wouldn've been great.

The only time I've seen a story, within a story, within a story work is with FRANKENSTEIN, and that's because it's not 600 pages long.

One of the books that really got to me was "The Lovely Bones" by Alice Sebold. It was alright until the second-half, where it got too wishy-washy and unbelievable. It broke the flow and made the book lose what momentum it had been building.

Definitely NOT my favorite book in the world!

"The Lovely Bones" by Alice Sebold

I LOVED this book. sorry to hear you didn't enjoy it

---

Sweetestsiren is right; A Tale of Two Cities is horrible. I definitely resorted to speed reading that book. I don't know if this is true or just an urban legend, but supposedly the novel started as a short story Dickens wrote for a magazine. He then realized that he could make a lot more money by fattening up the story, so the 400+ page book we have now is supposedly the result.

I disliked The Iliad as well. I know it's a classic work, but it did absolutely nothing for me.

As far as children's books go, I couldn't stand Sounder, Where the Red Fern Grows, or anything having to do with dogs. I apparently have a little trouble conjuring up sympathy for fictional dogs.

I'm kind of saddened to see The Catcher in the Rye and The Great Gatsby on this thread. The Catcher in the Rye was anything but boring for me; it really expressed perfectly a lot of what I was feeling at the time I read it (oh, the angst!). The Great Gatsby didn't strike me as pretentious at all but rather wonderfully written; the characters just drew me into the book. I suppose it just goes to go how subjective these matters are, though.

Updated On: 8/2/06 at 09:53 PM

Yeah I have yet to meet someone who was in the middle on Catcher

---

I remember reading a theory stating that those who don't like The Catcher in the Rye generally fall into two categories -- either they didn't understand where Holden was coming from or they're so much like Holden that they avoid him, so to speak. I don't know how accurate that is, as it seems to be a huge generalization, but just some food for thought.