Books We Never Finished

[AuntiePam]

Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte.  This is supposed to be some great love story?  Look, my love stories don't always have to end happily, but at least give me characters I have at least a smidgen of sympathy for!

 

I couldn't get through that book either, but my problem was with Bronte's punctuation.  Semi-colons and commas and dashes scattered willy-nilly.  Reading it was like my first attempt at driving a car with a manual transmission -- jerk, stop, die, etc.

 

But I don't know that it's supposed to be a traditional love story.  Isn't it more about obsession, revenge, pain? 

 

I'd love to have the book in a Word file so I could fix the punctuation.  Maybe then I could read the damn thing.  I loved the movie.

[wallflower75]

I couldn't get through that book either, but my problem was with Bronte's punctuation.  Semi-colons and commas and dashes scattered willy-nilly.  Reading it was like my first attempt at driving a car with a manual transmission -- jerk, stop, die, etc.

 

But I don't know that it's supposed to be a traditional love story.  Isn't it more about obsession, revenge, pain? 

 

It's been so long I don't remember the punctuation issue.  As for whether or not it's a love story--perhaps it wasn't supposed to be one.  To be truthful, while Jane Austen's novels are considered by many to be romantic, a deeper reading into them reveals that although they end happily, they aren't exactly romantic in the sense we define it today.  But I couldn't stand any of the characters in Wuthering Heights.  I just couldn't, so I stopped reading.

[jewel21]

It's extremely rare for me to not finish a book, but the one exception was Wicked. I just couldn't do it. So boring. I never got the hype. I got up to where they were in college and gave up.

[NewDigs]

I made it approximately 240 pages into Garth Risk Hallberg's City on Fire, put it down, picked it up the next morning, removed the bookmark and returned that bloated, self-indulgent book to the library. 

Like many here I rarely do not finish a book but that one was an exercise of above-average-eye-rolling proportions. The metaphors and qualifiers on top of qualifiers tested my patience and I failed. 

And that's the kind of big fat read I usually love. I had set aside times to read it and was instead left feeling at loose ends. Ugh.

[cherrypj]

You know, there are thousands of books published every year. There are millions of books available now. Why would anyone stick with a book they weren't enjoying? Just drop it in the fire. Go on with your life. Pick up a book you do enjoy.

That said, I hated hated hated All the Birds in the Sky, but I finished it anyway. That's on me. :( I did dump The Devil Wears Prada (the movie, for once, is way better than the book).

Edited May 21, 2016 by cherrypj
Negatives matter!

[Joe]

5 hours ago, cherrypj said:

That said, I hated hated hated All the Birds in the Sky, but I finished it anyway. That's on me. :( I did dump The Devil Wears Prada (the movie, for once, is way better than the book).

I've been thinking about All the Birds in the Sky. What didn't you like about it?

[cherrypj]

4 hours ago, Joe said:

I've been thinking about All the Birds in the Sky. What didn't you like about it?

Awful writing. Jumped from place to place. The parents were such awful people--it wasn't even funny (if that was the intent). Tried too hard to be cool (not that I'm cool).

[Joe]

2 hours ago, cherrypj said:

Awful writing. Jumped from place to place. The parents were such awful people--it wasn't even funny (if that was the intent). Tried too hard to be cool (not that I'm cool).

Thanks, sounds like a miss. Though I like that the dedication was to Analee. The author, Charlie Jane Anders, used to work for IO9, along with Annalee Newitz.

[cherrypj]

7 hours ago, Joe said:

Thanks, sounds like a miss. Though I like that the dedication was to Analee. The author, Charlie Jane Anders, used to work for IO9, along with Annalee Newitz.

I know. One of the blurbs was Michael Chabon, comparing Birds to Cloud Atlas (one of my favorites). So I had outsized expectations, you could say.

[ShellSeeker]

On 10/2/2015 at 1:12 PM, bubbls said:

I finished it just barely, but Sex and the City was shockingly awful. How someone read that shallow, boring, confusing book then came up with the charming series is beyond me, but I'm glad they did.

Even worse than that was "Trading Up." OMG. It was also about the shenanigans of rich people on the Upper East Side. The one thing I remember about it was a part discussing how it had become a trend among the very rich to wear strappy sandals in the dead of winter, so as to give the impression of being so rich that the weather doesn't matter to you, since you can snap your fingers and have someone from your legion of minions deal with the pesky inconveniences of Mother Nature. Horrible. And I really loved SATC in its first run, but surprisingly when I watch reruns now, I don't think it's aged very well, and I find most of the characters to be annoying.

One book that I technically did finish (by skimming through the last couple hundred pages just to find out how it ended) was The Golem of Hollywood by Jonathan and Jesse Kellerman. I love Jonathan Kellerman; I've been reading his Alex Delaware series for years. I grabbed this when I saw it in an airport bookstore, and what a mistake. It's this weird mixture of whodunit, religious parables, supernatural beings, and Jewish mysticism, all tied up with a disappointing ending. The story jumps all over the place and is very disconnected. I'm not Jewish, so I know very little about the the Torah or Jewish folklore. I wouldn't have minded it had it not been written like the authors assumed that everyone else is as knowledgeable as they are about these topics. It was so disjointed, and then the ending came out of nowhere.

[Katy M]

Books I couldn't finish:

Blindness by Jose Saramago

A Fool's Progress by Edward abbey

Arthur rex by Thomas Berger

and The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway, which is really bad because I was supposed to read it for school and I just couldn't.  I got a D on my essay of it, which I think was really generous of my teacher.

[die Frau]

I never finished Alice in Wonderland and even deleted it from ny Kindle, because I found Alice so incredibly annoying that I just didn't care anymore.

I tried Cold Mountain but didn't get very far into it. The lack of punctuation drove me crazy. 

[Mindthinkr]

The Woman in White by Wilkie Collins. He was a protege of Dickens and I tried but have set it aside for another time when I don't mind slogging. 

I also put down Sons and Lovers by DH Lawrence but eventually did finish it. 

I'm usually pretty good about finishing what I start but The Casual Vacancy has been put away for now as well. 

[Katy M]

59 minutes ago, Mindthinkr said:

The Woman in White by Wilkie Collins.

I loved that book, but have to admit that yes, it definitely dragged at times, and they probably could have cut it by about 100 pages.

[Mindthinkr]

@Katy M  I'm glad to hear of someone who enjoyed it. I'll have some spare time in another month and will try to get back into it. 

[Lugal]

On 5/15/2016 at 1:54 PM, jewel21 said:

It's extremely rare for me to not finish a book, but the one exception was Wicked. I just couldn't do it. So boring. I never got the hype. I got up to where they were in college and gave up.

I tried After Alice and only made it about 30 pages in.

I think that's my problem with Gregory McGuire in general. He always seems to be trying to put together the perfect sentence, but he forgot to tell a descent story.

[Katy M]

5 minutes ago, Lugal said:

I tried After Alice and only made it about 30 pages in.

I liked that book, too.  I'm beginning to think I have no taste.

[Browncoat]

14 hours ago, Lugal said:

I tried After Alice and only made it about 30 pages in.

I don't think I made it that far. 

[OtterMommy]

I had to give up on Into the Water.  I was apprehensive going into it, as The Girl on the Train didn't work for me.  However, this one didn't work in completely different ways.  There were too many narrators and I couldn't get a good read on what the purpose was.  I've come to the conclusion that Paula Hawkins is not an author who works for me.

[SmithW6079]

On 5/15/2016 at 4:54 PM, jewel21 said:

It's extremely rare for me to not finish a book, but the one exception was Wicked. I just couldn't do it. So boring. I never got the hype. I got up to where they were in college and gave up.

That's as far as I got too. Terribly pretentious book. I read the synopsis on Wikipedia, and I was struck just how ridiculous the plot was (and of the sequels). Plus, I couldn't get past that the Wicked Witch never bathed.

[Katy M]

6 hours ago, SmithW6079 said:

Plus, I couldn't get past that the Wicked Witch never bathed.

She bathed.  She just used oil instead of water.

[SmithW6079]

7 hours ago, Katy M said:

She bathed.  She just used oil instead of water.

Yes, I'm aware she used oil. Still gross.

[SlovakPrincess]

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo -- got to the first few depictions of graphic sexual violence in the book, and I was like "NOPE.  Don't need this in my life!"   I can deal with violence in books and movies, but this was just too unpleasant for me and not a fictional universe I wanted to stay in for 300 more pages.  

Inherent Vice -- Technically, I did finish, but I was hardcore skimming it at the end, missing plot points and really not caring.  Too many quirky characters popping in and out of the story to keep straight, and it was a disjointed mess.  

The Time Traveler's Wife -- the concept just ... troubled me, somehow, to the point that I was too distracted to even want to keep reading.  Like,  jumping uncontrollably through time and constantly waking up naked somewhere would just suck.  

The Count of Monte Cristo -- I stupidly tried to read this in college just because, and I didn't have that much time for fun reading anyway.   I would abandon it during finals, then try to pick it up again only to find that I'd lost track of all the many character names and aliases.  

[kathyk24]

I read the Count of Monte Cristo in ninth grade and I loved it. I read The Three Musketeers and I didn't like it.

[jojojo]

Anything by John Green. Seriously, I couldn't. I've started I don't know how many times but failed. 

[Zola]

Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time"

I do like astronomy and cosmology, and during my time at university, Hawking was all the rage, especially with this best-selling book of his. Consequently, I bought it and managed to get a far as Chapter Three before bailing!

I don't know why I couldn't get into his book, after all I have read more technical books from other scientific authors without any problems; but this book had me beat; and despite a handful of retries, it still sits on my bookshelf gathering dust.

I guess I just don't have the time for it, ha!

[Qoass]

It took me several tries to get through The Count of Monte Cristo but once I did, it became one of my favorite books.

I hope one day I can say the same for Anna Karenina.

I'll also have to give American Gods a third try, maybe this winter. Every time I start reading it, one of the books I've put on hold at the library shows up and I have to put it aside.

[Katy M]

10 minutes ago, Qoass said:

I hope one day I can say the same for Anna Karenina

Anna Karenina was the most depressing book I've ever read.  I wanted to jump in front of a train while and after I read it.

[Qoass]

Yikes! After sighing through Madame Bovary and The House of Mirth, that scares me!

[Athena]

I really liked Anna Karenina because of Tolstoy's style of writing. Plot is similar to House of Mirth and most of the characters are unlikeable. The couple that are I quite liked.  YMMV of course.

A lot of classic novels are depressing though. I've read a lot Thomas Hardy and I feel that is more depressing if possible.

[Katy M]

I've read two Thomas Hardy books.  Neither of them made me want to kill myself, but I have no desire to read any more.   I will say that I think between the two of them, Tolstoy is the better writer, and definitely gives better attention to detail and characterization.  But, I'm not really a fan of either, because not my taste.

[OtterMommy]

On 7/3/2017 at 6:48 AM, jojojo said:

Anything by John Green. Seriously, I couldn't. I've started I don't know how many times but failed. 

I'm not saying you should finish any of his books--I think if books don't work for you, don't waste your time on them.  But, if you were to finish one, you have basically read everything.  All the JG books I've read have been infuriatingly similar.

[CletusMusashi]

On 5/10/2017 at 5:47 PM, Katy M said:

Books I couldn't finish:

Blindness by Jose Saramago

A Fool's Progress by Edward abbey

Arthur rex by Thomas Berger

and The Old Man and the Sea by Hemingway, which is really bad because I was supposed to read it for school and I just couldn't.  I got a D on my essay of it, which I think was really generous of my teacher.

"The Old Man and the Sea" is literally the worst book I've ever read. First of all, pronouns weren't really Hemingway's forte. So you end up with narrative like: "Santiago was fishing. Santiago liked to fish. Santiago was in a fishing boat, fishing. For fish. Santiago wore a hat. On Santiago's head. Because Santiago liked to wear fishing hats." As hilarious as that could be, for, like, two pages, listening to that go on and on for an entire book had better actually be describing something interesting. Nope. Santiago catches a fish and then Santiago spends 99 per cent of the book being dragged around by the fish that Santiago caught while Santiago was fishing. Every now and then Santiago deals with rain or eating or spends an entire chapter reminiscing about the time that Santiago arm-wrestled a Negro and Santiago defeated him with Santiago's arm-wrestling arm.  Yes, that is an actual chapter.

There are books I simply didn't finish that I shrug off as "Well, I guess it just wasn't for me," and that I don't have that level of "How the fuck are you considered a great writer?" about. But, TOMatS is special. All I can say is that, with a narrator like Hemingway, Santiago was lucky to have an awesome name like Santiago. Imagine how much worse it could have been if Santiago were named Jeff or Kyle. Instead of Santiago, who liked to fish.

I loved Tolkien's "Hobbit" and short stories, but just can't stick with "Lord of the Rings." It's full of tropes that I like, hell, it even invented some of them, but the writing style just bogs me down and puts me to sleep.  

Also, I love everything by Christopher Moore, but I gave up after a few chapters of "Sacre Bleu." Caring about anything that happened seemed way more dependent on knowing all about eighteenth century painters than about what seemed to be the increasingly unlikely odds of a scene just being interesting in its own right. "Lamb" didn't require the reader to be an expert on history or theology. "Fool" didn't require you to be familiar with "King Lear." But "Sacre Bleu" is obviously not meant to be enjoyable to just any slob that picks the book up and follows the chatacters as written. So I shrugged and said "screw it."

I guess maybe I could include "Ulysses," by James Joyce, as a book I gave up on that might be as bad as ToMatS. It did feel like the writer was pretty far up his own ass trying to impress English teachers instead of actual readers. But if I'd gritted my teeth and waded through a few more chapters, maybe it would have gotten good. I can't technically say it doesn't. But, yeah, that's one that I bailed out of pretty quickly!

Edited July 27, 2017 by CletusMusashi

[Katy M]

4 hours ago, CletusMusashi said:

I guess maybe I could include "Ulysses," by James Joyce, as a book I gave up on that might be as bad as ToMatS. It did feel like the writer was pretty far up his own ass trying to impress English teachers instead of actual readers. But if I'd gritted my teeth and waded through a few more chapters, maybe it would have gotten good. I can't technically say it doesn't. But, yeah, that's one that I bailed out of pretty quickly!

It did not.  There's a whole paragraph of just repeating words in different orders.  The end of the book was a bunch of philosophical questions.  It switched to play format in the middle for a bit.

[Mabinogia]

7 hours ago, CletusMusashi said:

"The Old Man and the Sea" is literally the worst book I've ever read. First of all, pronouns weren't really Hemingway's forte. So you end up with narrative like: "Santiago was fishing. Santiago liked to fish. Santiago was in a fishing boat, fishing. For fish. Santiago wore a hat. On Santiago's head. Because Santiago liked to wear fishing hats." As hilarious as that could be, for, like, two pages, listening to that go on and on for an entire book had better actually be describing something interesting. Nope. Santiago catches a fish and then Santiago spends 99 per cent of the book being dragged around by the fish that Santiago caught while Santiago was fishing. Every now and then Santiago deals with rain or eating or spends an entire chapter reminiscing about the time that Santiago arm-wrestled a Negro and Santiago defeated him with Santiago's arm-wrestling arm.  Yes, that is an actual chapter.

It sounds like a really boring Dr. Seuss book.

[BlackberryJam]

On 7/6/2017 at 11:13 AM, Katy M said:

Anna Karenina was the most depressing book I've ever read.  I wanted to jump in front of a train while and after I read it.

I wanted to shove Anna in front of the train.

[Katy M]

7 hours ago, BlackberryJam said:

I wanted to shove Anna in front of the train.

I read the book like 20 years ago (how did I get so old), and I honestly don't even really remember what happened in it.  But, I do remember I got more and more depressed each day I read and I was so relieved to be finished.

[OtterMommy]

I read Anna Karenina , oh probably 12 years ago, for my book club (I have a friend who just loves to suggest Russian novels....sigh!) and I actually enjoyed it more than I thought I would--but I still hated the character Anna Karenina.  In fact, I took to referring to her as "Anna Karenina-that bitch!," which my friend still brings up.

[Sandman87]

Some years ago a friend lent me her copy of Shibumi, a spy novel by Trevanian. Yes, that's the full author name on the cover. He's also the one who wrote The Eiger Sanction. It was a New York Times bestseller and an international bestseller. It was also awful. The characters were so cartoonish and the writing was so bad that I only managed 25 pages before I gave up on it.

I probably should have realized what I was in for when she gave me the book and her response to "what's it about" was a vague hand wave and "like it says on the back cover..." Not coincidentally, she refused to take it back when I tried to return it to her.

[AuntiePam]

On 7/28/2017 at 9:02 PM, Sandman87 said:

Some years ago a friend lent me her copy of Shibumi, a spy novel by Trevanian. Yes, that's the full author name on the cover. He's also the one who wrote The Eiger Sanction. It was a New York Times bestseller and an international bestseller. It was also awful. The characters were so cartoonish and the writing was so bad that I only managed 25 pages before I gave up on it.

I probably should have realized what I was in for when she gave me the book and her response to "what's it about" was a vague hand wave and "like it says on the back cover..." Not coincidentally, she refused to take it back when I tried to return it to her.

Those two novels were intended as spoofs of the genre -- that's what the author says anyway.  I like his books, including the ones he wrote as Nicholas Seare. 

The problem with spoofs and parodies is that sometimes it's hard to know we're being spoofed.  I have the same issue with some movies -- am I supposed to take this seriously?  Is it a spoof or is it just a bad movie? 

[Sandman87]

The author is lying to try to put a good face on a bad book. Reading between the lines of what he said in an interview excerpt on the web site devoted to Trevanian, it was the result of 1) fulfilling a contractual obligation, and 2) just not giving a crap. Nothing that makes it sound like a parody.

Barnes & Noble and Amazon classify it under thriller/suspense.

Wikipedia classifies it as a thriller.

[AuntiePam]

1 hour ago, Sandman87 said:

The author is lying to try to put a good face on a bad book. Reading between the lines of what he said in an interview excerpt on the web site devoted to Trevanian, it was the result of 1) fulfilling a contractual obligation, and 2) just not giving a crap. Nothing that makes it sound like a parody.

Barnes & Noble and Amazon classify it under thriller/suspense.

Wikipedia classifies it as a thriller.

It doesn't sound like he was ashamed of the book:

"Like The Main before it, and like the books that were to follow, this would be a real novel hidden within a popular genre."

[Zola]

Bret Easton Ellis' "American Psycho"

I found this on my bookshelf with a piece of paper bookmarked at page 88.

I recall reading this 2 years ago but stopped at page 88 because I didn't like the relentless graphic violence and disturbing imagery , even though I realise this is about a serial killer. The narrative was also quite plodding. But I did try to give it another go a few days back, but regrettably the piece of paper is now on page 102.  I suspect it won't see page 104 for quite some time!

[proserpina65]

On ‎07‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 9:43 AM, Mabinogia said:

It sounds like a really boring Dr. Seuss book.

There weren't even any pictures.  Just Santiago who like to fish, and a crap-ton of pointless religious symbolism.

[Katy M]

47 minutes ago, proserpina65 said:

There weren't even any pictures.  Just Santiago who like to fish, and a crap-ton of pointless religious symbolism.

I wish I would have at least had that much info.  I was supposed to read it for English class and when we had to take the essay test on it, the question was What did the tiger symbolize.  I was like, why would there be a tiger in a book about fishing.  I don't remember what I tried to make up about that.  I got a very generous D-.  But, had I know there was a lot of religious symbolism maybe I would have been closer to the mark.  LOL.

[proserpina65]

21 hours ago, Katy M said:

I wish I would have at least had that much info.  I was supposed to read it for English class and when we had to take the essay test on it, the question was What did the tiger symbolize.  I was like, why would there be a tiger in a book about fishing.  I don't remember what I tried to make up about that.  I got a very generous D-.  But, had I know there was a lot of religious symbolism maybe I would have been closer to the mark.  LOL.

I don't remember the tiger, but I do remember a bit at the end where Santiago is dragging the mast of Santiago's sailboat up the beach because Santiago had become a Jesus metaphor.

[JAYJAY1979]

Anna Karerina...ive been slowly rrading it for four months...and I'm over in the 400s..and not even halfway done with it lol

Babbitt by Sinclair lewis

[MargeGunderson]

The Executioner's Song. I tried and tried but I just could get more than 100 pages in. 

[Mindthinkr]

Woman in White by Wilkie Collins. Just so many words to say so little. He was mentored by Charles Dickens and I expected better. 

[Black Knight]

I loved Woman in White, personally - Marian! Count Fosco! - but I do understand.