History DethroningMoment / Literature

* WillBGood: ('''Note:''' I'm just moving this entry over from DarthWiki/SoBadItsHorrible-- I have not read this book, but the Horrible page recommends putting individual books from otherwise well-regarded series on this page; if the original author of this wants to come and replace my name with theirs I'm fine with it.) ''Literature/TheWheelOfTime'' series has ''Crossroads of Twilight,'' a {{Doorstopper}} without content which generally takes place at the same time as ''Winter's Heart'' (the previous book). Most of ''Crossroads'' consists of PurpleProse about food and clothing — the book has 822 pages, but you could condense it into 100 and not miss anything. The BigBad in this book is grain weevils. The series has LoadsAndLoadsOfCharacters, but very few of them appear in what passes for the main plot; the book needs a 50-page prologue to explain what everybody's doing, and it doesn't help. Rand, the driving force of the series as a whole, only appears in the last few pages; he has the long-awaited confrontation with Loghain, but nothing comes of it. Every female character is identical, and they're all unlikable stuck-up bitches. The series had been heading this way for a while, but this is the nadir. But the later books are better, and you don't have to read this to understand them.

* Tropers/MelancholyUtopia: As much as I love ''Literature/LordOfTheRings'' for its epic tale and classy story-telling, and am a big defender of Tolkien when somebody criticizes it, there's one moment even I don't like, and it's Gandalf's death and resurrection, for the same reasons I spited Pell's survival in ''Anime/OnePiece''. It was meant to be a HeroicSacrifice for the heroes, that he gave his life so they could survive the cave... only demeaning it by having him come back even stronger (specifically "Gandalf the White"). Just... what was the point? There was no reason for him to stay alive either, he's done his part in the quest of destroying the ring by providing guidance to Frodo. There's nothing more for him to do, he might as well stay dead. As much as I admire Tolkien for his years of planning the story and his old style of writing, this moment goes to show he is as prone to flaws as anyone else.

* Tropers/KilgoreTrout: I faithfully bought and read just about every StarWars Expanded Universe novel published that was set after ''Film/ReturnOfTheJedi''. Did I read ''ComicBook/DarkEmpire''? Yes. ''[[Literature/JediAcademyTrilogy The Jedi Academy Trilogy?]]'' Indeed, I bought that. ''[[Literature/TheCallistaTrilogy Darksaber]]''? I didn't like it, but I still bought and read it. The only one I think I didn't read was ''Literature/TheCrystalStar'' and the ''Literature/YoungJediKnights'' series. I bought all those books, from mediocre to good to awesome to terrible, because no matter how much I disliked any of them nothing was enough to make me give up on the EU entirely. (''Darksaber'' was enough to make me give up on Anderson, though.) So what finally made me swear off the EU for the foreseeable future? ''Literature/LegacyOfTheForce''. One of my favourite characters, Jacen Solo, turns pure evil for the flimsiest of reasons and begins acting [[CharacterDerailment wildly out of character]]--and this wasn't just a single author getting him wrong, this was everybody. Then, he kills off another of my favourite characters, Mara Jade, which I felt was a MoralEventHorizon. You can blow up a Death Star, you can destroy Carida, but if you kill one of the EU's greatest characters how the hell are you supposed to atone for that even if you want to? Kyp Durron at least came to regret his actions and tried to atone for them. Jacen didn't. I stopped reading the books after the seventh one and read what happened next on Wookieepedia. Turns out that Jacen converted Tahiri into a Sith, so that she proceeded to become his [[TheDragon Dragon]] and does all sorts of horrible, evil shit. They kill off two of the biggest heroes in the story and top it off with a {{Retcon}}. They took Vergere, who made great points about how fucked up the Jedi philosophy was, and {{Retcon}}ed her into being a Sith because I guess Creator/GeorgeLucas got his panties in a knot over the idea of some moral ambiguity in his universe.

* Tropers/793ws: I happen to be a fan of the Literature/MrMen books. But even though i am a fan, it doesn't mean that the series is immune to screw ups every now and again, like with Little Miss Naughty and Little Miss Bossy's behavior in "Little Miss Shy And The Fairy Godmother," where they both [[KickTheDog cruelly taunt]] [[TheWoobie Little Miss Shy]] for blushing and [[Tearjerker/MrMen make her cry.]] I normally find Little Miss Naughty and Little Miss Bossy's {{Jerkass}} behavior funny, but what they did was cruel even for them and what cemented it was the fact that went [[KarmaHoudini unpunished]] for what they did. It makes me wish i could climb into the pages and give Little Miss Shy a hug.

* Tropers/{{Sensemaker}}: [[Literature/TheScarletLetter Scarlet Letter]] by Nathaniel Hawthorne. It's a reasonably good piece of fiction in general if a bit contrived. I cannot help but to be annoyed that the author has written in such a way that he seems to have a raging hate-boner for ugly people. The antagonist Chillingworth does objectively good things: He gains great medical knowledge from the indians at considerable personal risk and uses it for the benefit of the community. When Chillingworth comes home to see his wife (and indirectly himself) publicly shamed, he comforts Hester, medicates her and her daughter and mostly blames himself for his wife's infidelity. He helps Dimmesdale medically and emotionally by correctly insisting that Dimmesdale will never fully recover until he relieves himself of whatever is weighing his heart. Despite these good acts, the Puritans of Boston seem ungrateful for having a man who has put so much effort into becoming a great doctor for them and seem to interpret everything he does in the worst possible light. Everyone, including the narrator and Chillingworth himself assumes that he is doing everything for the very worst of reasons -because Chillingworth is ugly. Just to hammer in his badness the narrator makes Chillingworth ugly and uglier as the story goes on. The reader finds him/herself asking "what can an ugly person do that counts as a good deed to you, Nathaniel Hawthorne?" The dethroning moment of suck occurs when that question is answered near the end of the book. Chillingworth dies and leaves his great fortune (that we never heard of before apparently Chillingworth choose to live an austere life despite being rich) to the cute child Pearl -though he knows it is not his daughter. The author claims this was his only good deed. The author has answered: "Die! and leave his money to a beautiful person. That's the only good thing an ugly person can do because the only good ugly person is a dead ugly person!" Cue Evil laugh. Scarlett Letter; hate speech against ugly people.

* Animeking1108: I'd like to point out that I found ''Literature/LittleBrother'' by Cory Doctorow an overrated book that [[TheyWastedAPerfectlyGoodPlot sadly had a lot of wasted potential]]. A lot of my issues with the book [[TheScrappy stem with]] [[DesignatedHero Marcus]]. He is [[HolierThanThou self-righteous]], [[EntitledBastard entitled]], and a huge GaryStu. However, I think the moment that really made me hate him was early in the book. After a terrorist attack occurs early in the book, this causes his home town to be under heavy surveillance. However, Marcus's father approves of the security measures, which sparks an argument between them. However, Marcus has his head so far up his own ass that he refuses to see things from his father's point of view. He fails to understand that [[spoiler: [[AdultFear he has been missing for several days in government custody, and his parents were worried sick about him]]]]. However, the book paints Marcus's father [[InformedWrongness as being in the wrong for supporting the government's extreme methods]]. Are we really supposed to root for such a self-righteous bastard who doesn't think about his parents were put through? And don't you dare point out how evil the DHS were in the book. 1. Marcus [[spoiler: didn't know that they captured his friend that got stabbed]]. 2. He was kept in custody for as long as he was because [[spoiler: he refused to comply with orders to give the Big Bad his phone, which had nothing incriminating on it]]. 3. His refusal to follow orders while under interrogation made him look suspicious, along with his history of hacking to play hooky, so of course they were going to keep a careful eye on him. 4. As far as most people knew, [[DesignatedVillain the DHS were just doing their jobs to protect the country after a fucking terrorist attack]]. Another thing I hated about this book was the Black and White morality. You're either against the DHS, or you're an idiot or a bad guy. There is no middle ground in the story.

* WillBGood: ('''Note:''' again, not my opinion but another entry moved from DarthWiki/SoBadItsHorrible) As ''Crossroads of Twilight'' is to ''Literature/TheWheelOfTime'', ''Naked Empire'' represents the bottom-of-the-barrel for Terry Goodkind's ''Literature/SwordOfTruth'' series. This book, even more than the others before it, is mostly [[AuthorTract one gigantic sermon against communism and pacifism]], containing the infamous "[[StrawCharacter evil-pacifist]]" plot of Bandakar. Even outside the conflict, Richard's dialogue is [[CharacterFilibuster constantly saturated with Goodkind's views]] when he's talking to his friends (including an idiotic side conversation where Richard and his half-sister discuss the "right" of hair to live on a person's head). The main plot of the series is advanced barely an inch by the end of this book, there are [[CharacterFilibuster speeches]] that go on for pages or even whole chapters, and the plot's resolved in one of the most blatant {{Deus Ex Machina}}s in literature. Go look at the reviews on [[http://www.amazon.com/Naked-Empire-Sword-Truth-Book/product-reviews/0765344300/ref=sr_1_1_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1 Amazon.com]] if you want more proof.

* Tropers/{{PCNNM}}: ''Literature/TheBerenstainBears'' books are one of my favorite book series of all-time. But there was one punishment from Papa Bear that was far too harsh and out of proportion in “Get the Gimmies.” After he explained to Brother and Sister that they can’t get everything they want in life all the time and Brother and Sister seemed to understood his lecture. Then, Gramps and Gran arrive to the house and Brother and Sister instead of saying hello jump up and down shouting “What did you bring me!?” Papa being furious was justified and he punishes them with no TV or treats for a week, month…and a year. Okay, no TV or treats for week and maybe a month is fair. But for a whole year!? That’s being far too extreme. Mama, Gramps not Gran call him out saying the year part was too harsh. And it gets even better that Gramps reminds Papa was the same way EVEN WORSE than Brother and Sister were earlier in the book. Wow, to think that Papa gave the cubs such an extreme punishment and Papa himself [[ParentalHypocrisy was guilty of the same thing even worse than they were.]] I know he was just a cub at the time. But he should have at least explained that to the cubs and how he learned his lesson from that.

* Tropers/{{PCNNM}}: ''Franchise/The Berenstain Bears'' books are one of my favorite book series of all-time. But there was one punishment from Papa Bear that was far too harsh and out of proportion in “Get the Gimmies.” After he explained to Brother and Sister that they can’t get everything they want in life all the time and Brother and Sister seemed to understood his lecture. Then, Gramps and Gran arrive to the house and Brother and Sister instead of saying hello jump up and down shouting “What did you bring me!?” Papa being furious was justified and he punishes them with no TV or treats for a week, month…and a year. Okay, no TV or treats for week and maybe a month is fair. But for a whole year!? That’s being far too extreme. Mama, Gramps not Gran call him out saying the year part was too harsh. And it gets even better that Gramps reminds Papa was the same way EVEN WORSE than Brother and Sister were earlier in the book. Wow, to think that Papa gave the cubs such an extreme punishment and Papa himself [[ParentalHypocrisy was guilty of the same thing even worse than they were.]] I know he was just a cub at the time. But he should have at least explained that to the cubs and how he learned his lesson from that.

* Tropers/{{PCNNM}}: ''The Berenstain Bears'' books are one of my favorite book series of all-time. But there was one punishment from Papa Bear that was far too harsh and out of proportion in “Get the Gimmies.” After he explained to Brother and Sister that they can’t get everything they want in life all the time and Brother and Sister seemed to understood his lecture. Then, Gramps and Gran arrive to the house and Brother and Sister instead of saying hello jump up and down shouting “What did you bring me!?” Papa being furious was justified and he punishes them with no TV or treats for a week, month…and a year. Okay, no TV or treats for week and maybe a month is fair. But for a whole year!? That’s being far too extreme. Mama, Gramps not Gran call him out saying the year part was too harsh. And it gets even better that Gramps reminds Papa was the same way EVEN WORSE than Brother and Sister were earlier in the book. Wow, to think that Papa gave the cubs such an extreme punishment and Papa himself [[ParentalHypocrisy was guilty of the same thing even worse than they were.]] I know he was just a cub at the time. But he should have at least explained that to the cubs and how he learned his lesson from that.

* Tropers/{{PCNNM}}: ''Literature/The Berenstain Bears'' books are one of my favorite book series of all-time. But there was one punishment from Papa Bear that was far too harsh and out of proportion in “Get the Gimmies.” After he explained to Brother and Sister that they can’t get everything they want in life all the time and Brother and Sister seemed to understood his lecture. Then, Gramps and Gran arrive to the house and Brother and Sister instead of saying hello jump up and down shouting “What did you bring me!?” Papa being furious was justified and he punishes them with no TV or treats for a week, month…and a year. Okay, no TV or treats for week and maybe a month is fair. But for a whole year!? That’s being far too extreme. Mama, Gramps not Gran call him out saying the year part was too harsh. And it gets even better that Gramps reminds Papa was the same way EVEN WORSE than Brother and Sister were earlier in the book. Wow, to think that Papa gave the cubs such an extreme punishment and Papa himself [[ParentalHypocrisy was guilty of the same thing even worse than they were.]] I know he was just a cub at the time. But he should have at least explained that to the cubs and how he learned his lesson from that.

* Tropers/InTheWorldAndSea: The ending of ''Literature/{{It}}'' is what made me stop reading Creator/StephenKing forever. There is a severe MoralDissonance going on with underaged kids. The reasoning for it sounds more AuthorAppeal AssPull than anything reasonable or logical.

** WhyNotNow: For me, there's a small, often overlooked moment that forever killed Marco's character. Oh sure, we all knew he had had suck moments before that which stank of total immaturity, such as floating Baby Rush bars in a pool and telling everyone it was shit or laughing at a horse taking a dump, all of which points to a juvenile and puerile outlook, but the worst moment for the character by far had to be his willingness to kill an innocent little girl to prevent the Yeerks from finding out their secret. The book tries to present this as a choice, that you have only two real options; let Karen, the innocent host being controlled by a Yeerk, go and then the Yeerks find out that the "Andalite bandits" are really human, or kill her to keep their cover. But upon closer reflection, there is actually an easier way out of this MoralDilemma; just overpower Aftran, take her someplace hidden, starve the Yeerk out, and leave the innocent little girl with the Chee. Simple solution, problem solved. But Marco doesn't see that, and for someone who's supposedly so intelligent, it moves this moment from merely being disgusting to totally unforgivable and brings up some very UnfortunateImplications that Marco, the ruthless, cold-blooded bastard he is, may have thought of this, but disregarded it out of hand in favor of simply murdering an innocent child. It's one of the rare moments I applaud Cassie's stupidity because it actually worked out well in the end, no thanks to Marco. The character died with me the moment he made that cruel, evil choice.

* Tropers/{{Pysiewicz}}: ''[[Franchise/TheWitcher The Witcher saga]]'' has its ups and downs over the course of five books and the preceded antologies of short stories. But then the ending is finally there. Every single character that somehow survived till that point, including Geralt and Yennefer, is unceremoniously killed off or at least badly maimed. If you had a name - you are dead by the end. If you were nameless, then you die by the dozen. This includes even incredibly minor characters. And not for dramatic effect, nor for the shock value, but simply for the sake of it. The entire setting shares this fate - there is inevitable ice age incoming and some sort of superplague, combining traits of the Black Death and ebola, is brought back with Ciri by accident from another world. Within final 50 pages, everyone is dead and the world is extra-doomed. All of it, because the author opelny claimed boredom with the series and its characters. In the same time, he was equally open about destroying and killing everything, so nobody will be able pick up the verse to continue. This just came out as petty and spiteful, robbing the saga from having any real ending or sense of closure, while in the same time being simply mean-spirited. At least newer generations of readers can always indulge in games' continuity, but back when the saga ended, there was nothing saving readers from the bleak GainaxEnding, earned after having read through almost 3000 pages in total. One of the ultimate cases of ShaggyDogStory in Polish literature, as all the events of the saga meant almost nothing and are fully undermined by the end.

* Tropers/{{Arxane}}: ‘’Literature/ThePillarsOfTheEarth’’ is a fantastic book with amazing detail, wonderful characters, and a brilliant story that’s engaging from beginning to end. However, there was one moment that stained an otherwise marvelous book for me. Deep into the book, Aliena is still married to her awful husband and is not allowed an annulment, preventing her from marrying her true love Jack. Unable to be together openly in a strict conservative Christian society, they agree to meet in secret every so often to maintain some form of intimacy. This seems to work for a few years, but then Aliena suddenly announces to him that she can’t live like this any longer and will seek to move away from him, taking their kids with her. This announcement came out of nowhere with no buildup, and Aliena sounds so sure of herself without any hesitation or conflict. If she had shown even just a little bit of genuine heartbreak at the idea of leaving Jack, it would’ve showed how difficult the decision was, but instead, she was firm and resolute with no room for argument. What makes this all even worse is that her awful husband eventually dies, freeing her to marry Jack, and she does...without any contrition for her firm decision to leave not too long ago. She received no rebuke, no emotional conflict, and it aggravated me to see such a potentially powerful moment in the story be wasted like this.

* Tropers/{{Nightfurywitch}}: I don’t even remember its name, having blocked it from my memory, but one Mark Twain story gets under my skin in the worst way. To sum it up: kid gets abused over small things, grows up, gets married, beats his wife, before murdering her and their kid with an axe. [[EsotericHappyEnding with no comeuppance. And this is portrayed as]] [[BlackComedy a comedy story.]] And the reason he gets away with all of this? [[FlatWhat Because he doesn’t have the same name as someone in a Sunday School story.]] I get that it was a different time, but this isn’t funny at all. When it starts you feel bad for the kid, but when he grows up, you just want karma to come and blow his head off, but nope. [[KarmaHoudini He gets off scot-free for axe murder.]] And he wasn’t even likeabke enough that you wouldn’t want him to go to jail! Basically, while Mark Twain may have made some iconic and well loved stories, this one should be forgotten for good.

** Tropers/MathsAngelicVersion: I think ''DOAWK'' has been suffering from {{Sequelitis}} for a while, but it was the ending of ''Wrecking Ball'' (book 14) that made me give up on the series. The Heffleys are about to move, which could have led to some fresh and interesting plots... and then, in one of the last pages, the idiot who was supposed to move the hot tub backs up and hits a couch, which causes the hot tub to fall and severely damage the house. As a result, the buyers back out and the Heffleys are stuck with their ruined house (and apparently no compensation, even though the destruction wasn't their fault). Basically, Jeff Kinney set up an interesting new direction for the series,[[note]]or at least a great SequelHook -- I would've been fine with the Heffleys moving back after a a book or two in the new location[[/note]] and then threw it out at the last minute with a stupid and frustrating DiabolusExMachina because StatusQuoIsGod and nothing can ever go right for the Heffleys.[[note]]Apparently the next book does [[ThrowTheDogABone throw them a bone]], but at this point it's too little, too late.[[/note]]

** cricri3007: The "No man can beat me" "I'm a woman" scene. A moment of awesome for Eowyn? Yes. But ever since I read it for the first time, I've always felt it was... weak, an AssPull or something. In my mind, it'd have make much more sense if the one to kill him was a drawf, an elf or even a Hobbit.

* Animeking1108: I'd like to point out that I found ''Literature/LittleBrother'' by Cory Doctorow and overrated book that [[TheyWastedAPerfectlyGoodPlot sadly had a lot of wasted potential]]. A lot of my issues with the book [[TheScrappy stem with]] [[DesignatedHero Marcus]]. He is [[HolierThanThou self-righteous]], [[EntitledBastard entitled]], and a huge GaryStu. However, I think the moment that really made me hate him was early in the book. After a terrorist attack occurs early in the book, this causes his home town to be under heavy surveillance. However, Marcus's father approves of the security measures, which sparks an argument between them. However, Marcus has his head so far up his own ass that he refuses to see things from his father's point of view. He fails to understand that [[spoiler: [[AdultFear he has been missing for several days in government custody, and his parents were worried sick about him]]]]. However, the book paints Marcus's father [[InformedWrongness as being in the wrong for supporting the government's extreme methods]]. Are we really supposed to root for such a self-righteous bastard who doesn't think about his parents were put through? And don't you dare point out how evil the DHS were in the book. 1. Marcus [[spoiler: didn't know that they captured his friend that got stabbed]]. 2. He was kept in custody for as long as he was because [[spoiler: he refused to comply with orders to give the Big Bad his phone, which had nothing incriminating on it]]. 3. His refusal to follow orders while under interrogation made him look suspicious, along with his history of hacking to play hooky, so of course they were going to keep a careful eye on him. 4. As far as most people knew, [[DesignatedVillain the DHS were just doing their jobs to protect the country after a fucking terrorist attack]]. Another thing I hated about this book was the Black and White morality. You're either against the DHS, or you're an idiot or a bad guy. There is no middle ground in the story.

* Tropers/Silverblade2: I read ''Literature/FiftyShadesOfGrey'' out of BileFascination but even then there was a moment that was so awful it wasn't even funny. Early on, Anna jokingly send an e-mail to Christian claiming she never want to see him again. How does he react? He breaks into her appartment and proceeds to rape her. Anna only tells him that it was a joke after [[NotIfTheyEnjoyedItRationalization enjoying being raped]]. Wow! This is so wrong and offensive.

* Tropers/{{Lale}}: Anne Elliot's "[[IRegretNothing I have nothing to reproach myself with]]" speech in ''Literature/{{Persuasion}}''. So, according to the narrator in Chapter 4, Anne considers her decision eight years ago a mistake, yet she tells Captain Wentworth she feels exactly the opposite? {{Hypocrite}}! Captain Wentworth has to apologize for taking her rejection seriously and not running back as soon as he had his first few thousand pounds to the woman who made it clear his proposal was unacceptable; yet, Anne doesn't have to make any sort of apology to him at all?! DoubleStandard! The plot doesn't lead to any CharacterDevelopment or disillusionment for Anne but to her (and everyone else) realizing she always was and always has been perfect, and how dare anyone (including herself) think otherwise? MarySue! And her response to Captain Wentworth telling her how much he loves her and how badly he still wants to marry her is telling him that she would have suffered more had she remained engaged to him eight years ago? WhyWouldAnyoneTakeHerBack after that?! I would cling to the frail hope that Austen was being ironic but A) the scene is played too seriously to be a SpoofAesop like Lizzie's and Darcy's conversation in ''Literature/PrideAndPrejudice'', and B) it's consistent with the {{anvilicious}} moral of the absurdly-executed scene at Lyme. This speech ruins the entire book -- what has been an equally beautiful and painful love story becomes a vehicle for preaching the importance of women yielding to persuasion and singing the praises of a supposedly perfect heroine! UGH! I want to rip my hair out and scream just thinking of it! And I want to throttle anyone who claims this is better than ''Literature/MansfieldPark''! How can such a preachy novel (of out-of-date morals, nonetheless) be so overrated?!

* Tropers/FarseerLolotea: In S.L. Viehl's ''[[Literature/StarDoc Blade Dancer]]'': [[spoiler:Jory agreeing to have Kol's babies at some point in the future, after she'd previously made it clear that she [[MandatoryMotherhood didn't want babies]]]]. As if [[StrangledByTheRedString strangling them with that damn red string]] (to say nothing of Viehl's penchant for {{Mary Sue}}s) wasn't enough...

* Tropers/TwilightPegasus: I'm probably going to commit blasphemy here in the eyes of fans of this book, and I don't want to begrudge anyone who likes it. If you like it, cool! More power to you! But I can't bring myself to sugarcoat this so I'm going to come out and say it: I absolutely ''loathe'' ''Literature/TheHateUGive''. I think it's a poorly written, overly melodramatic, {{Anvilicious}} AuthorTract that [[DontShootTheMessage completely botched its intended message of advocating against senseless violence towards people of color by people in positions of authority]], and many parts of it completely reek of racism. What do I mean? Well, since I can't put the entire book on here, I'll mention two specific moments that made me hate this book with the fury of a thousand suns. At one point in the story, the main character, Starr, introduces her white boyfriend Chris to a new kid on the block, [=DeVante=]. At first, the two don't quite hit it off, but after a while, they do become friends. Normally, this would be considered very sweet and heartwarming. But how does Angie Thomas write them officially becoming friends? With this passage: "According to [=DeVante=], Chris's massive video game collection makes up for this whiteness." What?! So, apparently, according to this book, in order for a black person and a white person to be friends, the white person needs to have something to "make up" for having white skin, as if being born a certain skin color is a crime! The hell?! How is someone's skin color something that needs to be made up for?! Didn't Martin Luther King say that people shouldn't be judged by the color of their skin but the content of their character? Saying someone needs to have something to make up for being born a certain skin color is like saying an autistic person needs to be an IdiotSavant in order to make up for being autistic, and we all know the UnfortunateImplications behind that line of thinking! As if that wasn't bad enough, in a later chapter, Chris and Starr have a talk in the midst of a riot, and Chris...apologizes to her on behalf of all whites for being white. [[SincerityMode No, I'm not making this up.]] I read the whole thing cover to cover, and as soon as I read that line, I never wanted to throw a book at a wall so hard. Being born a certain skin color is NOT something one should apologize for! You can't control how you were born, and those two scenes, along with many other moments that plague the entire book, make me feel like Angie Thomas is trying to say that [[DoubleStandard it's not okay to be racist towards people of color but it's totes okay to be racist towards whites]] [[UnfortunateImplications because they're all evulz!]] No. [[SomeAnvilsNeedToBeDropped Every kind of racism towards any person of any skin color is wrong, no matter what kind of person they are and no matter who started it first, and it's especially wrong to try and promote such a disgusting double standard.]] It's for this very reason that I can't bring myself to like this book, and I can't fathom how it became so popular. This is not the standard to which we should hold literature in any way whatsoever. Seriously, when two episodes of ''Series/GreysAnatomy'' and ''Series/{{Flashpoint}}''[[note]]The episode in question is called "Good Cop," which aired a year before the Trayvon Martin murder.[[/note]] manage to tackle the same issue in a more engaging, sensitive, nuanced way, without indulging in bad stereotypes and botching their intended messages, you've got serious problems.

* Tropers/CapriciousSalmon: A book that got adapted into a movie I highly respect is ''Literature/LifeOfPi'' but one thing I can't get over is how the book treats agnostics. Basically, Pi spends a good chunk of the book going on crazy rants about agnostics, and not in a comical way, hating them because they're "confused." First off, agnosticism isn't about being confused, and agnostics are not idiots. As South Park explains, to agnostics, there could be a god or there could be no god or there could be a giant reptilian bird or a flying spaghetti monster, but who cares? Just live your best life, you have better things to worry about. I don't mind Pi hating agnostics, but I hate how the narrative never calls him out for a lot of the on-the-nose preaching, and since Pi is our narrator, it gives off the UnfortunateImplication we're supposed to agree with him. They never say something like he was in a difficult place when he thought it or Pi learns to see it from the other side and understand why agnostics hold onto their beliefs in the first place. Maybe it sounds pearl clutching, but a lot of what Pi says is what's told to a lot of agnostics, including myself. Imagine if instead of hating agnostics, Pi hated bisexuals because "they're too confused to pick one or the other!" That's what it feels like. I like the whole lesson of "sometimes the story is better than the truth" but it's so annoying Pi, who is a great character otherwise, never gets called out for his bashing.

** Tropers/SpaceHunterDrakeRedcrest: I really love this series, but ''The Getaway'' was easily the worst in the series, even worse than the already miserable ''The Long Haul''. Easily the worst scene in the book is when Greg finds a spider in the hotel bathroom. He explains that due to a horrifying experience with a spider egg as a child, he's [[WhyDidItHaveToBeSnakes deadly afraid of spiders]]. Fair enough, I'm also arachnophobic. But what happens to the spider just seems like unnecessary animal cruelty. First, Greg drops a glass on it to trap it. Then when it gets free, Greg tries trapping it again with a food cover, [[AnArmAndALeg cutting off one of its legs]]. The spider then starts crazily running around on the ground, because, you know, ''it lost its leg.'' It then crawls over to the toilet seat, so Greg slams the lid shut and the room service guy ([[FridgeLogic who somehow got in the room, in spite of an earlier conversation]]) flushes the spider down the toilet. [[spoiler: Except it doesn't, because Greg's dad finds it and hits it with the bathrobe.]] This isn't BlackComedyAnimalCruelty; this is just animal cruelty. The fact it's a spider doesn't make it better; even if I'm afraid of them, they're still living creatures. It's sad when [[DarknessInducedAudienceApathy even arachnids don't survive this story unscathed]].

* Tropers/CapriciousSalmon: A book that got adapted into a movie I highly respect is ''Literature/LifeOfPi'' but one thing I can't get over is how the book treats agnostics as confused idiots. Pi also spends a good chunk of the book going on crazy rants about them. I don't mind Pi hating agnostics, but I hate how the narrative never calls him out for a lot of the on-the-nose stuff he says, and at times, agrees with him. They never say something like he was in a difficult place when he thought that or Pi learns to see it from the other side, etc. Maybe it sounds pearl clutching, but a lot of what Pi says is what's told to a lot of agnostics. It feels the same as a guy hating bisexuals because to him, "they're confused idiots!" and the narrative saying they're right. I like the whole lesson of "sometimes the story is better than the truth" but it's so annoying Pi, who is a great character otherwise, never gets called out for his bashing.

* Tropers/CapriciousSalmon: A book whose plot I do enjoy is ''Literature/WutheringHeights'', but something I can't get past is the framing of the novel. Look, I don't mind unreliable narrators, as they're one of my favorite literary devices, but I hate how the novel is framed as Nelly telling the story of Heathcliff and Catherine, and not Heathcliff or Catherine or both. There's a lot of wasted potential, I don't know what to root for, and I don't get why they love each other. You remember the show How I Met Your Mother? Imagine instead of Ted telling the story about his friends and we get their viewpoints and experiences even when Ted isn't with them, it's instead Carl the Bartender telling the story to a random patron, and only when Marshall is hanging out at the bar. You know the whole sad arc of Marshall losing his father and learning to accept it? What if instead of us seeing this, we instead only have Marshall go to the bar and tell Carl what happened? For three hundred pages. That's what Wuthering Heights is to me.