What's the worst book you've read (either recently or ever)? One that makes you wonder just what that publishing house was smoking when it gave money to the "writer" and wasted all that paper and ink on printing? I won't name the title, but the worst I've read in years was a Sci Fi book that committed almost every writing mistake I can think of, from technical points like screwing up the POV through gratuitous ego boosting of the author to being just plain boring. (Imagine a hard-science Sci Fi book without well-developed science and theories.) It starts off En Medias Res, then just as the reader starts to get interested in the character and wonders how he ended up in that predicament, the chapter ends. (Fair enough, build a little suspense.) The next chapter starts off with a 3 page "historical dissertation" on a random event that happened centuries ago just to show that the author had thought out the entire universe and its history, then the narrative flashes back to 10 years ago in the character's life, talking about a completely unrelated incident. (The incident never did directly tie in to the plot.) The entire book ends up being a series of "historical dissertations" from the last 800 centuries with random flashbacks of the main character's life, which I guess is supposed to give an idea of how the character ended up being such a boring jerk. Actually, everyone in that universe is a self-serving creep. (The 500-600 pages of background life story was completely unnecessary.) The only vaguely interesting character is a 60-70 year old pedaphile. (And the pedophilic aspect is not handled well at all! Grooming a 6 year old to be a decent concubine when she turns 13?!?) Throw in several passages where the author slams the 20th century Earth for being so backwards (the book takes place 800 centuries later - how many people would really remember what life was like back then?) and lots of snide remarks about Earth in general which seem to be designed to boost the author's ego because only he can see the greater truth and you've got an inkling of how dreadful the book is. Oh, and it's the length of an unedited Stephen King book, but with less color and description. BTW: Only about 50 pages in the entire book dealt with the actual plot of the book and how the character got into and out of the current predicament, not that the resolution was very clear, nor did it resolve very much.) I'm very tempted to put the book by my computer, so everytime I think I'm not good enough to get published, I can look at that piece of cardboard. If it can get published, anything can. So, what are your "pieces of inspiration?"

I think the worst is also a guilty pleasure from high school. Sax Roehmer's Fu Manchu series had everything wrong with it and precious little to recommend it. Sexist, racist, illogical, coincidental plots, stiff dialogue, overwrought narrative....and I loved them. I don't know why. I just did. And I am also a person who waded through Varney the Vampire; the Feast of Blood by Thomas Preskett Prest. Oh well.

wow..I'd like to find the editor that ok'd it..I could be published in no time..;) It's hard to say the worst book, if it gets bad, I tend to make another trip to the used book store and replace it..;). Surprisingly, a book by Saberhagen about the Berserkers was fairly annoying, because about 10 pages into it, the historical parallels to the Battle of Midway become overwhelming (you realized how it was going to end before you're even a third of the way through..;) He admits to it in the afterword..so I guess he gets points for that
Actually, the worst book(s) I've ever read are any 5th book in a Piers Anthony collection..the guy really doesn't know when to quit. The first is good, 2nd ok, 3rd..well, you see how it goes. But that's just a tiny collection. Trying to read Kipling's the Light that Failed, I've tried twice, and never made it..;)

Um, the worst book, I never read because I got annoyed with the author after a few pages and was reduced to days of sullen muttering about syllablitus. My book of doom? Nickolai Tolstoys The Coming of the King. It may even have been a good story, but I'm happy enough to struggle away with Chaucer, and I found the book more like hard work than entertainment. It is now used as a bookend, safely guarding all those other books which will get taken off the shelves again and again and again. Terry Pratchett nearly got my vote for his book Masquerade. Never before have I read a book and found myself wondering what exactly were the contractual obligations of the author. It reads like a book the man didn't want to write. Shame. Shanna :-)

Recently, my foray into the classics I never read took me to "The Hunchback of Notre Dame." Hugo spends 30 pages or so on an aerial view of Paris, which means nothing to you unless you've been there, and likewise another 30 or so describing the cathedral. There were a few other blocks of pages describing things I've wiped from my memory. And of course, every version in popular circulation is wrong. They all die. Pointlessly. I suppose that's why it's a classic. I'm actually glad I read it, to say I have and to find out that all the movies are wrong, but it will be the one time in my life I do.

wrong as in we get the edited, slimmed down version? A lot of novels get that. The 3 Musketeers is much longer than the version most folks get. I had to special-order it as a present once. Not to mention a goodly number of The Brothers Grimm tales are 'wrong', in that the folk tales they took them from are a lot gorier (Little Red Riding Hood actually gets eaten, etc) than the final version.

It is true that Victor Hugo takes some editing to be digestible. But I am referring to the common perception that Quasimodo rescues Esmeralda and they both live happily ever after, and only the wicked monk dies. Wrong. Yes, the monk dies. But Esmeralda is hanged for no reason even after it is clear that she did not commit the crime she has been accused of. Her mother dies just after realizing Esmeralda is her long-lost child. Quasimodo dies in despair. The story is most definitely a tragedy. (Well, OK, her goat lives.) I guess I was also disappointed because the person who recommended I read it said that Hugo does a masterful job of portraying Quasimodo first as some hideous criminal monster, and then as a gentle, beautiful being. I disagreed completely. I saw Quasimodo transformed from a pathetic, laughable lap dog to a valiant human, but never saw him as monstrous.

It's possible to read a book from more than one viewpoint and have more than one interpretation. Doesn't make either of you wrong. Just means the book is layered with possibilities and you each came away with a different impression. You shouldn't be disappointed with the person who recommended the book...but delighted that a book could be interpreted in such different ways (you can guess I have no patience with people who insist I see a book their way or no way). What I don't agree with is that books written decades ago are necessarily "bad" just because the writing style doesn't fit in with our modern sensibilities. Hunchback deserves some recognition as a classic even though it is a child of its time, with the stylistic encumbrances of its age. What we write today will seem equally "bad" to someone a hundred years from now (if there is anyone around a hundred years from now to read what is written today).

I guess I would have to say Intensity by Dean Koontz. The other novels that I have bread by him were pretty good, but this one was just shit. The imagery was o.k. but and the diction just sucked. And the diction took credit away from the tone for me. If the word choice would have been better, then the tone would have been excellent.

dialyn: I'm just griping. I can see why Hunchback is considered a classic. For me, it was just a disappointing read because of my expectations going into it. If I had known less to nothing about the story before I started it, I probably would have come away feeling more positive about the experience. Which, in light of this thread, applies. The worst book any of us have read might be on somebody else's best-of-all-time list. And our individual perceptions about any given book might be drastically different if we had read the book under different circumstances. =)

tiptoes in and shouts CONAN THE BARBARIAN

"... The sweet smell of sugar brought me back to those times when I sat on my grandfather knees on the sundays morning after the mass were finished when he brought his dear grandchildren to the bar at the corner of the old square and I can still see his rough hand smelling of tobacco playing on the marble top of the little round table near the window where tiny black lines follow each other and twist and blend drawing fantastic pictures which seem coming from a fairy world." Okay, it's a quick translation from the book I'm reading just now (I opened it at random, and choose a sentence)... I'm not sure it's the worst I ever read... but, hey! she has been published! Yes, no puntuation in the Italian version, and the flipping from the past tense to the present tense is on the original as well... The book is supposed to be a biography of the author's grandfather, but almost each sentence is similar to the one I tryed to translate... Just to give my contribution... Sometimes I really wonder by which criteria the editors choose the work they publish...

mysteri ... it didn't appear to me from your first post that you thought it was the worst book that you had read, but rather was different from what you expected and you were disappointed in the reference the other person gave you. Apologies for my misinterpretation. An aside. I'm in a quandry because a friend of mine gave me a book her late husband wrote (and published). It is dreadful. And she wants to know what I think. So far I've had enough personal problems that I've been able to beg off providing feedback, but I know eventually she's going to want comments but I also know she thinks that his accomplishment is wonderful (well, it is amazing it got published, I will admit that). I know how demoralizing it is to get feedback on something you are proud of and find out someone else's reaction is different than you hoped, and I don't want to hurt her feelings....but there is almost nothing good I can say about the book other than it has a pretty cover. :( What to do. What to do. What to do.

urgh, a painful situation... What about saying it isn't your genre of story?

don't worry. Have any of you written a piece in a Creative Writing class..turned it in, and had the teacher interpret it in a way that leaves your jaw hanging, because it's nothing like what you meant? kinda reminds me of that..also makes me wonder if literary criticism is just creative writing by other means..;)

My tip for not what I think when I have to say, is to repeat back elements of the story, so I say for instance, hmm interesting choice of Harold as the Hero. Means nothing, causes no offence. Shanna :-) Who doesn't do that here.

Lord Foul's Bane, by Stephen R. Donaldson. Yuck! Enough said. dialyn - sometimes honesty is not necessarily the best policy. :-) jon