What books are regularly accepted to be bad? I see a lot of

Define bad though. Relatively entertaining for a good section of the populous and sold very well

It's not written very well, even by romantic novels standards. Has no defining literary prowess

I personally loathe it along with every book you will see in a bookshop that has been published in the past 15 years

>>9761632
How incredibly subtle, my falseflagging friend.
I'll give you what you want, though:
>What books are regularly accepted to be bad?
Anything written by a women or a nonwhite, try a redpill and see the truth.

Women are simply inferior to the white man and their rightful place is subordinate to an authoritarian, disciplinary white male who decided how she should live - preferably a life devoted to domestic life.

A woman cannot create art; a woman cannot truly be ethical; a woman cannot truly love; a woman cannot truly be loyal.
These are all facts, but will be labelled 'sexist' by liberal brainwashing society because it doesn't fit the narrative of equality.

Women simply aren't as ontologically 'there' as men, they're shallow and lack depth, they're not as self-conscious as man. They aren't properly inscribed into the symbolic text which is why they can only think about Chad cock instead of true good matters and subjects.

Women are an embarrassment. They should stay at home where they belong; they don't deserve power or rights, because they are driven by emotion and will never be anything but inherently evil and destructive qua their inferior natures.
Without their festering mackerel-reeking cunts, they would have been killed off by man a long time ago.

Off the top of my head, among famous writers, Finnegans Wake is one of the more well-known bad books. It has its champions and most people know effort was put into---nonetheless, if the term existed back when it was released, it would definitely be called a meme book for memers.

File: readyplayerone.jpg (20KB, 220x334px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 220x334px

Serious question why does /pol/ invade every topic? No (you) for you.

>>9761639
>>>/r9k/

>>9761643
>>9761658
Are you dense? OP is baiting for a woman hate thread hence the:
>How incredibly subtle, my falseflagging friend. I'll give you what you want, though:

Castle of Otranto is widely seen as crap - esp by medievalists.

>>9761665
so, wait… are you saying that 50 Shades is worthwhile?
>Is that just misogyny, or what?
doesn't sound like a falseflag at all. OPs post seems sincere (but, yes, dumb.) Post we're reacting to is a huge, yet presumably ironic, r9k blogpost. yes, I missed the preamble. that poster read far too much into the OP, though, IMO

>>9761681
>OP's picture
>asking whether the dislike for FSoG is misogyny

It's bait.

>>9761632
fifty shades is badly written but that's not a really valid criticism imo you don't shit on a porn for bad directing or bad writing right

that being said it's soaked in rape culture so