Wriging

Some R. L Stine book that I finished for school. It just wasn't a genre I was interested in and the not-so-great writing just made it worse.

I rarely stick with books for very long if I'm not enjoying them (whether it's for school or not). But I do have this passage saved from a book that I don't remember the title to:

I therefore henceforth distinguish between the "I" of the human being (the total person as he or she concretely existed at a given time and place) and the self as the reference point of all "I"-statements, as a reality that is in a sense transcendent over against the empirical "I"

I'm ashamed to admit: Star Wars Shadows of the Empire.
Terrible piece of crap book.

In my defense I read a large number of books each year, and in years past when I had less responsibility would read even more... so I would just read whatever I could get my hands on.

DON'T JUDGE ME!! ;)

omg chris... if you could remember the title, I would so read it if just for the awfulness.

and i feel you on the R.L. Stine books. I remember when a classmate got the entire Goosebumps series, and I remember thinking "why on earth would you want to read all of those."

Haha, I will let you know if I ever figure it out. The entire book was written like that: huge sentences with odd word choices that are very hard to digest. Luckily, I didn't have to read such a monstrosity - someone was reading it for school.

"La Route de Chlifa". I had to read it in French class. The story sucked and things were hardly explaned.

As far as English books go, I end up liking pretty much every book I read. :P

I know many will hate me for this but "The Silmarillion".
I was addicted to the trilogy in middle and high school and was so disappointed in this book I could never get through it.

"Sahara" by Clive Cussler.
I picked the book up because Matt McConaghey was looking fine on the cover and...
I know, I know. I shouldn't have gone in expecting greatness but good gawd that book was painfully bad. The film was actually MORE enjoyable, that's how bad the book was.

The Amulet of Samarkand by Jonathan Stroud. I do try to keep in touch with what my kids read, and I made it through the Harry Potter years with them even. Harry Potter was even pretty good, but I'm a bit tired of it all at this point.

Back to this other trash by Stroud: I couldn't make it past the 10th page, if I even got that far. The man writes with footnotes, and every other sentence in the text is followed by little numbers that link to footnotes in the bottom of the page. Footnotes in a fantasy novel?? WTH?? It's absolutely jarring to try to read through, since you have to interrupt the flow of the story (if there is any flow at all to begin with) to go read the footnotes, and then go back to the story. And really, if it's in a footnote, is it pertinent to the story? Does it really need to be there? If it needs to be there, put it in the story where it belongs, otherwise skip it.

I'm pretty sure "Ethan Frome" tops it off. I mean, I can respect the work but it was a BOOORING read.

Sahara was pretty terrible.

According to LibraryThing, my lowest rated book is Candy by Terry Southern.

Robert Jordan's Crossroads of Twilight.

It's a book in a long series, The Wheel of Time. I've enjoyed the series for the most part, but this installment was the single worst book I have ever read. Nothing was accomplished, it was some 800 pages of what seems like stalling his publishers. It reminded me of a daytime soap, where about 300 things are happening at once, but only 5 seconds actually passes during the hour long show.

Absolute crap.

I was pretty invested in the series so I did read the following book, and it was decent!d

left behind

I never finish those bad books. Life's too short. Some books, though, I've just found too hard. But I try not to mistake "hard" for "bad."

"For Whom the Bell Tolls" by Ernest Hemingway

Certainly I've read quite a few trashy novels and my fair share of mediocre chick lit, but, in my mind, this "classic" is the worst because it was so disappointing. I expected to be reading a transformative literary work, and, instead, I finished the book and thought, "Huh?"

Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard.

There's a chunk of my life I'll never get back. What a waste of trees.

In terms of fiction, hands down, "The Time Machine" by HG Wells, and I was shocked by that since he was one of the initiators of the sci-fi genre, which alongside fantasy is my favorite genre. The plot line is better than other books I've read, but I think there was just too much fluff, so I got bored reading it. Fortunately it wasn't a colossal waste of time since I was able to do my world literature report on it.

In terms of non-fiction, pretty much any textbook is really really bad. Not because of grammar or word choice or structure, but because much too often they take too many words to say simple things. Words are great and all, but if it can be said in a paragraph, why take two to three pages? It's as if "academic" is equated with "drawn out." Or maybe the author's are like us students, trying to stretch out the writing as much as possible to meet some length requirement ;)

The worst book I ever read was Senor Vivo and the Coca Lords. It is really the nastiest, but also qualifies because it was the worst reading experience I've ever had. There've been nastier ones that I've touched on, but I could put them down. This book I couldn't - mainly because the author spends the first half of the book drawing you in, and making you care about the characters. Then, the second half of the book is dedicated to making them suffer (graphic torture, etc.) and destroying their lives (seeping leprosy, etc.) in the most unpleasant ways he could think of.

"The Babysitters Club" books. Who ever names their kid Claudia?

Growing Up Tough was Taylor Cadwell's autobiography and she just could not write about herself in the first person. It is the only book in my entire life I threw away. All of her books are out-of-print and I have searched for and read every book she ever wrote (about 40 in the 1930's). Every few years, I read them all again.

Probably one of the countless R. L. Stine books I read when I was younger. I plowed through dozens of those things, only to finally realize that they were A) all pretty much the same and B) they all sucked.

The Odin Brotherhood by Mark Mirabello was also fairly painful, not because the writing was bad, but because the content / topic was a bit over the top for me. Unfortunately, I had to read it for a class, so I couldn't opt out.

Dude! You people are insane! RL Stine was leading a pop culture revolution which made other series like Harry Potter possible. Are they as enjoyable now that you are an adult? No. But they weren't meant to be.

As for me, I'd have to say All's Quiet on the Western Front. It just never got me hooked.

Somebody's probably going to want to kill me for this, but I hated The Grapes of Wrath. Hated it so much that I'm recoiling just at the thought.

I am currently attempting to read Possession, by A.S. Byatt. I thought it would be good since it won the 1990 Booker Prize (which, fine, might have been a tip-off, as it's described as "the best original full-length novel, written in the English language, by a citizen of either the Commonwealth of Nations or the Republic of Ireland"), but it's not. I can't get through the first 100 pages, though I'm trying valiantly. We'll see.

Creepers by David Morrell.

This book HAD promise from the CONCEPT of the story but it was horribly executed.

Predictable from the beginning and boring. I finished the book but I had to force myself to do so and I sold it after I was finished. Not even shelf worthy.

I'm going to get a lot of flack here, but I'll just come right out and say it, I hate Catcher in the Rye, and I think it's the worst, most pretentious piece of crap I've ever read. It's a shame because I have enjoyed Salinger's other work.

I also thought Everything is Illuminated was a big pile of look-at-me look-at-me garbage.

War and Peace (L.Tolstoy)

War and Peace?! Holy ....

Hrmm. I'd go with RL Stine. The Goosebump series were the absolute pits.

PS: The Amulet of Samarkand was pretty darned good. Read it through to its climax (the footnotes are what makes it charming!)

@Lisa- My son had to read The Poisonwood Bible for school. He is in 10th grade and does not like to read much, so having to read this book was not easy. He did read it , but did not enjoy it at all.

She's Come Undone by Wally Lamb. It made me so furious that I actually set fire to it when I was finished so that one less copy existed.

Posionwood Bible is awesome!

I'd have to say American Psycho has got to be one of the worst for me. It was written fairly well, and there were some parts that were hilarious, but I just couldn't stomach it, and gave up when I reached a chapter called "Killing Child at Zoo" or something like that. Yuck.

On the topic of footnotes in fiction: I agree it is a slippery slope, but Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell is an example of a fantasy book that employs a lot of footnotes. Though it does disrupt the flow a bit, I didn't find it offensive for one reason only: 99% of the footnotes were interesting little stories that were almost as entertaining as the main plotline itself.

ErinR: Possession is a difficult book to get into, but I found that once I stayed with it past the first 125, or so, pages, I did end up liking it, maybe not as much as some books, but I still liked it.

But, that is me, you might not like it.

Mine is 'The Woman In White' by Wilkie Collins.

Though I like classics, this one had really tried my patience. I heaved a sigh of relief after reading it. I was too happy to have completed the treacherous book.
Yes, it is full of suspense but the descriptions are too long-winded and turgid. Except for Marian and Count Fosco, the other characters are helplessly 'flat'. The climax comes only a few pages towards the end.

I enjoy the musical one better.And I simply love the works of the Bronte sisters!

Oh, I have also found 'Sahara' and 'R.L Stine' books uninspiring.

Believe it or not, one cousin of mine hates Harry Potter!

Crime and Punishment is tied with Moby Dick as the worst books I've ever read. Thank you, Mr Botins, for helping me to discover a sure-fire sleeping aid.

@animejulie,
Crime and Punishment is tied with Moby Dick as the worst books I've ever read. Thank you, Mr Botins, for helping me to discover a sure-fire sleeping aid.

I feel the same way too. They are sleep-inducing, even better than milk.

However, I find them books of quality. The only thing is they are too complicating. Reading them really calls for much perseverence.

Maybe all the books of Heidegger and those of Fichte: damn German Idealim!

"Beautiful Losers" by Leonard Cohen.

Wildly incoherent. Boring. Experimental at best. Couldn't wait to get through this one, although I had considered many times just putting it down and walking away.

Oddly enough, it did affect my writing style when I was reading it.