Books you feel like you have to like but didn't

I read the book Luna by Julie Anne Peters. It is about the sister of an M-to-F transsexual (the titular Luna) who dealt with her coming out. After reading it, I thought it was okay. It seemed that it should have been called Regular Predictable YA Chick Lit Novel With a Transgender Person. But, I felt guilty for disliking it because it was about the transsexual girl.

Another one(I just thought of) is Kazuo Ichiguro's Never Let Me Go. I had heard about it, and thought it would be really good. It wasn't. It took forever for them to even get to why these kids were in boarding school and had no parents. Then, NO ONE DOES ANYTHING ABOUT IT  ^*

. No revolts, no defiance, not even an "I think this is wrong." Any other books you felt like you had to like?

edited 13th Nov '09 8:29:26 PM by wuggles

Schindler's List. I had to read it for a class once, and it certainly wasn't bad, it just wasn't that good either, and isn't anything I would have picked to read on my own. But I always feel kind of bad knocking it - I mean the guy did save a lot of Jews from the Holocaust, so applying the word 'boring' to the book doesn't seem right.

Dune. Yes, it's a classic of science fiction, but... it's so friggin' boring.

The Lord of the Rings books (and movies) bore me to tears, and I know I'm not alone, but still.

Any and every attempt to read up on classic mythology, especially Arthurian Legends. I feel like I need to know these stories since they're the foundation of a lot of fantasy today (the whole "if you wanna write it you gotta read it" thing—which I'm starting to think is a load of malarkey), but they're just so fecking dull.

And it just gets better from there!

I agree about the Lord of the Rings novels, though I like the Hobbit and hte worldbuilding of the Silmarillion.

A Game of Thrones. The rest of the series is damn good, but this one was just boring. Maybe it'll be better in future rereads?

"I can't imagine what Hell will have in store, but I know when I'm there, I won't wander anymore."

The Bible. When are they going to make a quality tv adaptation so I can skip the filler?

Anything by Jane Austen. Seriously, fuck that guy. Bronte for life.

A True Lady's Quest - A Jojo is You!

The Silmarillion was this for me. It was like reading a mythology textbook, except for a world that didn't exist, and it was all background for a story that was infinitely more entertaining in my opinion.

Chiming in again with Lord of the Rings (and to a lesser degree, The Hobbit). I find Tolkien's prose tedious and boring while his dialogue was stilted and excessively formal.

Welcome to the Sea of Chaos

Sadly Lord of the Rings still does this to me. I just can't get through them. I'd rather watch the movies or have my grandfather tell me about the story and all the other things he knows about Middle Earth.

The Jungle. I hate this book. I liked it in the beginning. I really did...and then it would not end. Just refused. When our hero ran off to become a hobo (I believe that's what he did anyway) I became rather fed up with the book. I just didn't care anymore. He could go die in a ditch and I would not care. Then came the ending. I will never read it again.

Look, Aon here was able to orgasm by meditating. That should be proof, you know. - Onee-sama

@Furiko Maru

Oh no you DIDN'T!

Jane Austen is hilarious. The Bronte's premote the dangerous and degrading byronic hero that has eventuated in the likes of Edward Cullen. Northanger Abbey if one of the most fantastic paraodies of the melodramatic gothic genre that was in vogue at the time. She made fun of the Bronte sisters BEFORE THEY WERE BORN.

Of course my hatred of the Bronte sisters does not extend to Anne.

@Furiko Maru

Oh no you DIDN'T!

Jane Austen is hilarious. The Bronte's premote the dangerous and degrading byronic hero that has eventuated in the likes of Edward Cullen. Northanger Abbey if one of the most fantastic paraodies of the melodramatic gothic genre that was in vogue at the time. She made fun of the Bronte sisters BEFORE THEY WERE BORN.

Of course my hatred of the Bronte sisters does not extend to Anne.

What.

Have you even read Wuthering Heights? The entire story is built around a Draco in Leather Pants ruining the lives of everyone even remotely connected to him and his childhood crush, just because he felt hard done by. Even Cathy, the chick to whom he reveals his dere side, tells his fiancée that he's fucked up and she shouldn't marry him.

Austen is trite and boring. She writes like a fucking girl. If I want to read girl-writing I'll go over my old essays, thanks.

edited 14th Nov '09 3:26:09 AM by FurikoMaru

A True Lady's Quest - A Jojo is You!

I haven't actually read any Jane Austen yet, but you do realise she was being satirical, right?

I've heard her books improve once you realise they're supposed to be funny, not serious.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

'Supposed to be funny' =/= actually funny. PG Wodehouse is doin it rite kinda sexy, acshully.

edited 14th Nov '09 3:37:21 AM by FurikoMaru

A True Lady's Quest - A Jojo is You!

Well, I'll judge that when I've read some Austen. I need to finish Dracula first, and there's a copy of Fight Club-the-novel that I need to read and return to the library after that.

The closest I can think of, with regards to the topic, is the way that I keep reading books that are supposed to be "classics" or great literature or the best book ever, and I still haven't found any that I enjoyed more than Harry Potter. I don't even know why Harry Potter is supposed to be objectively worse; I've heard some reasons, but they weren't valid since they weren't actually applicable.

Welcome To TV Tropes | How To Write An Example | Text-Formatting Rules | List Of Shows That Need Summary | TV Tropes Forum | Know The Staff

Pride and Prejudice; sorry, Austen fans. The characters who interested me kept not getting the spotlight, and the style hurt my eyes. I wanted to see someone care about Mary, for instance, or see Collins grow a spine, at least develop a little. I wanted to see other people the story doesn't like so much get some attention anyway; that's how stories happen. I wanted to see people like Elizabeth have something more to overcome.

Some writing.

@Furiko: Maybe you should try reading the Catholic Bible. It's even longer, but the extra stuff is freaking awesome.

As for me, The Hunt For Red October. Everyone talked about how it was such a great, well-researched, thrilling book, but when I tried to read it, I found that Tom Clancy isn't one for letting a good story get in the way of describing military hardware. Thank Morpheus the movie cut out most of it.

Also, a partial example would be Journey To The Centre Of The Earth. My mum tried to get me to read it when I was about 12, on the grounds that I liked scifi but classics are inherently better; she figured that JTTCOFTE might work as a bridge between what I liked and what I should like. I just found it interminably dull, but then again, I was a little brat with a very short attention span. If I reread it today, I'd probably like it better.

Ukrainian Red Cross

Pride And Prejudice: Boring. Sooooooo boring. Nothing ever seemed to happen— I mean, I'm sure there's a plot somewhere in there, but it was lost in all those oh-so-"proper" and "pleasant" conversations the dull characters kept having. Mr. Bennet was the only person in the book who I felt was anything close to interesting. The whole story should have just been about him snarking on everyone.

The Catcher In The Rye: Annoying viewpoint character, a plot that feels utterly pointless, and just generally boring. I'm sorry, but this book was terrible.

Heart Of Darkness  ^*

: Admittedly, this book picks up and actually becomes enjoyable during part three, but the first two parts were nothing more than an endless parade of SYMBOLISM with no real point to it. Not to mention the almost laughably over-the-top Purple Prose.

Honestly, though, the only one of those I was actually disappointed with was The Catcher In The Rye, since I had heard nothing but good things about it before I read it. I was expecting Pride And Prejudice to bore me— and it did— and I had no real expectations for Heart of Darkness; though the awesome third part was a pleasant surprise.

Pride and Prejudice may be the most "classic" of Jane Austen's books, but it is not the best one. I think that Persuasion is much better.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.

Making Money. It's a Discworld book, and I like all apart from the very first few, but apart from a half page of impressive description and a handful of random funny ideas it just does not click in my head.

As to classics, well.

I don't care if something is a classic, or symbolic, or deep, or realistic. I read for MY fun and escapism, and anyone who thinks that's a reason to look down their noses at me can go hang. :P

Jane Austen has let me down time and time again. I know, I know. She was being satirical, but that doesn't mean she was interesting. The only book of hers I actually enjoyed for the most part was Northanger Abbey.

A Separate Peace. Every time I think about this book, it pisses me off more and more. Most of the characters I hated with a passion. The narrator, especially, was an annoying, spineless, flip-flopping whimp, who continuously clung to another person to make themselves feel better. Yeeeah, I'm not a fan of the book.

edited 14th Nov '09 12:52:21 PM by Jumpingzombie

I also hate that book. Fuck A Seperate Peace.

"I can't imagine what Hell will have in store, but I know when I'm there, I won't wander anymore."

I didn't like A Separate Peace either. It didn't help that it was taught to a class of 13-year-olds who couldn't see past the homosexual subtext when I read it.

edited 14th Nov '09 12:34:52 PM by Penguin 4 Senate

Lady Chatterlys Lover The narration is tedious and doesn't mark sudden jumps forward. I thought being a literary classic there'd be a bit more to it.

It's not bad, just a bit dull.