Originally Posted by bfisher
I have never been able to get more than 20 pages into any Thomas Hardy novel. The only time I watched a film adaptation ("Far From The madding Crowd") was no better, I would have left after the first ten minutes except that I was a fifteen year old boy on on what I hoped would be a hot date :-)
Oh yes, how could I forget Tess of the d'Urbervilles
. One attempt at reading that was one too many. I could not even manage to sit through the entire film
starring an incredibly hot Nastassia Kinski. I was there because the woman I was dating at the time insisted that we go see it. Even she lost patience with the Tess character perpetually doing everything she could to make herself miserable and we both left long before the closing credits.
Originally Posted by elemenoP
I'm thinking of starting a separate "abandoned" list in Goodreads. Does anybody do this? I abandoned several books last year and now I don't even remember what they were (perhaps it's better that way?).
One that I WISH I abandoned: The Passage. I know some here loved that book. I hated hated hated it and wished I never slogged through it.
Oh I remember one that I did abandon: Three Men in a Boat. Every page I felt like, that was cute, that was mildly funny, when does the story start? Just not for me, I guess.
I have had an abandoned shelf for my Goodreads account almost from the time I opened it. Sadly a monthly book club selection is about to wind up there. I thought Three Men in a Boat
was very funny. The follow up Three Men on a Brummel
not so much.
Originally Posted by WT Sharpe
I liked The Scarlet Letter, but it took so l-o-n-g to get into the story proper. There was no need for all the preleminary to the actual tale.
I love The Scarlet Letter
. You are correct about that long introduction though. Especially when at the end one finds that the only purpose was to describe how the old set of documents from which the author spins the tale was found.
I don't get how anyone could have trouble with A Confederacy of Dunces
. I found it hilarious from the first page on.
Looking at this thread I am glad to see that I am not the only one that thinks The Lord of the Rings
is vastly overrated. Don't get me wrong when I read it, probably at about the age of 13-14, I thought it was an enthralling fantasy tale. To me that is the optimum time of life for the read. To attempt it at a much younger age the reader would find it too difficult and incomprehensible. Very much older and much of it would begin to seem silly. What I just don't get is adults wanting to reread it over and over.