Actually bought a copy of Fifty Shades of Grey off a homeless person in the street for a fiver, mostly to stop him from reading it.
Read a couple of pages. Awful beyond belief. Even the harshest of reviews simply do not do justice to the level of retardation required to pull off that prose. Difficult to believe that there is such a large subset of masochists out there who literally get off on writing that is that painfully awful.
>>7679171 >Inherent Vice, Thomas Pynchon >Luna: New Moon, Ian McDonald >Zero Point, Neal Asher
Inherent Vice cause the movie seemed cool, but the book was just so boring and badly written
Luna: New Moon is: 'What if i take Game of Thrones and Dune, and make my own shit universe where i use my own words for shit so readers have to flick to the back of the book to know what the fuck im talking about'
TBF, Zero Point is the second in a trilogy i believe and i only bought it at an airport.
Catcher in the rye, crime and punishment (I was 16, need start again) pendulum of Foucault, literally gave up half way,1984 took me 2 attempts to start, catch 22 2/3in, could have stopped without missing anything
It was already badly written, but I made it a quarter of the way in because I thought the boss was based 100% on Anna Wintour. When I learned that she was just an amalgamation plus some fiction, I lost all interest in the book.
>>7679171 infinte jest gravity's rainbow kite runner i think that's it really
was not engaged by the meme duo. have read finnegans wake and over a thousand other books probably, im fairly certain those two are objectively bad and memeing about either is a telltale sign of pseudism
>>7679183 I do this too. No matter on the length - if it's long and I hate it, I'll push through (albeit at a slower pace) because I don't know whether the book will pick up in quality and I don't know what it has to offer in what not to do as a writer.
A bad book is like a bad movie, it's pretty easy to tell within the first few moments if it's bad or not.
Anyway, why continue reading something you despise? Because you think that somewhere down the road the book will surprise you with its perfectly profound message about the human condition that you 'just knew' it was gearing up and culminating towards? 9 times out of ten this is rubbish, no more than elaborate self-deluding in light of giving more clout to outside opinion and reputation than your own sense of taste. But let's say you do turn out to dislike a book that you know deep down, from countless academic and therefore trustworthy testimonials, is good like, say, Ulysses? Then its either legitimately a bad book, at least to you, giving way to subjective claims, or that the book is in fact good, but that you simply don't have the intelligence, cultural acumen, taste, or any other self-deigned important qualifier to properly enjoy it. So you finish it, pretend to understand, and say you loved it: cognitive dissonance at its finest.
The truth is: life is short, so don't spend time doing something you don't enjoy just to impress others, check it off the list, and go on, with improper restraint, to the next one. It's a waste.
I almost throw God's delusion by R.Dawkins to the trash. Read it all , tho. Books like Post-Mortem by Patricia Cornwell or The alchemist by Coelho are on-hold. I try to not drop the books, I always find in them some useful stuff regardless the level of shitiness it could be in them.
>>7679661 I always liked the movie as a shitty romcom filled with nice clothes and the dazzling aura of high fashion, but holy fuck the book was terrible.
Did you ever see the movie? What made it fun was Meryl Streep being a pain in the ass in frustrating but ultimately understandable ways, and she kind of redeems herself at the end. The boss in the book is just blindly being a total bitch, is distant and never gets fleshed out as a character, and stays horrible the whole time.
I was pretty bummed, but honestly not super surprised. And it makes the movie all the more impressive. I heard there's a sequel to the book, but holy shit I can't imagine it being good at all.
>>7679583 Wow. >>7680102 >A bad book is like a bad movie, it's pretty easy to tell within the first few moments if it's bad or not. This is simply not true with either medium. Unless the writing or acting is glaringly bad, nothing should be condemned at first glance. >>7680440 BURN THE ALCHEMIST
>>7682529 Must've gone over your head big time. I've read the whole in 2 weeks with IJ wiki and general knowledge of DFW's influences and context and I got to say that the entire book has maybe 10 pages devoid of a single interesing and intriguing thing
I'm on the fence of dropping Infinite Jest, about 200 pages in. I started it immediately after Gravity's Rainbow a week ago. Maybe you can understand... These criticisms aren't anything new, but DFW's writing is overwrought and pretentious. Maybe I have Pynchon freshly in my mind, but DFW is a poor mockery in style and substance. DFW's writing wanders in the same way Pynchon's does, yet DFW's take on the style is by filling in turgid prose and pseudo-technical language. Where Pynchon's technical references show his true (and realistically defendable) understanding of science, DFW's usage is blatantly masturbatory and only seeks to create a wall of distance between himself and the reader. This, I think, is a large contributor to his status not as an author who is convoluted and overwrought but simply misunderstood. This, and of course his suicide, create an aura of detachedness that is difficult to separate from his work, creating the illusion that the work is difficult to comprehend whereas the reality is that its just poorly written.
On a more tangible note, I'm just not a fan of his rambling sentences that I can only assume are meant to be witty. Characters with idiosyncrasies so absurd they go unquestioned because the characters are described by and represent the very fantastical prose they are written in? I'm not really buying it.
>>7682516 >should be I agree to not immediately judge, but in general cases: the smell matches the taste. If you're reading for prose, this holds true even stronger—it rarely suddenly starts to magically improve.
And now I must ask: pray, whatever else for is there to read than prose; for plot is ever prosaic?
To the lighthouse, though admittedly it was probably just over my head and I gave up trying to figure out if they were thinking about doing something, doing something, talking or thinking about talking and who the fuck's perspective or consciousness we're streaming from at any given time.
>>7679406 >inherent vice god yes. i was reading it in preparation of the movie (which i still haven't seen), but gave up on it a third of the way through. try-hard and desperate to be relaxed. made my eyes water with regret.
The only two books I ever dropped in my life were '1984' (Dad gave it to me to read when I was 8 or 9 but I found it too complicated) and Yahtzee Crowshaw's 'Mogworld' (which I wasn't enjoying at all at the time), might pick them up again though.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.