Books you wish you hadn't finished

[missimpossible]

Atonement. I still feel angry about that book three and a half years later.

[sharphamster]

The Circle - Dave Eggars. Not really a case of regret as I don't really regret finishing books, even bad ones. It did make me wish for my time back, and that Margaret Atwood had written it.

And it wasn't a complete waste, as it did make me pick up 1984 and We to re-read.

[pidgeon92]

Flashback by Dan Simmons. I just finished it yesterday, and I wish I had never started it. I've read several of his previous novels, and loved them all. This one was utter drivel. The only saving grace is that I borrowed it from the library. I've finished almost every book I've ever started, but life is short and I'm not slogging through another mess like this again.

[JDK1962]

Originally Posted by missimpossible

Atonement. I still feel angry about that book three and a half years later.

McEwan can do that do you. A few of his books I've enjoyed, but half the time he totally pisses me off. The ending of Amsterdam, Solar pretty much all the way through...

[caleb72]

Generally I can be disappointed with a book, or less impressed, but not generally wanting my time back. I'm trying to think of a couple of examples:

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (unabridged) - list after list after list. I don't know if regret is the right word, but I was disappointed with it, especially after my initial eagerness to read it.

Turn of the Screw - Felt no atmosphere at all in this. I don't regret reading it, but I didn't particularly like James' writing style which probably caused significant interference. I had no sense of dread, no chills, not even uneasiness.

The White People - I really wanted Arthur Machen to be a new discovery for me after I got some recommendations from this forum. I'm not giving up on him, but this was not the introduction I was looking for. It was tedious - and that's about all I have to say about it.

Animal Farm - I suppose I should have loved this and I really liked 1984 but I found it far to unsubtle for my liking. I think more effort could have been made to create a story with fleshed out characters and still make the point. I felt absolutely nothing for any of the animals and I thought that was a missed opportunity.

There's been some real misses in the indie/self-pubbed arena, but I tend to publish reviews for them - so I'll leave my negative feedback in the reviews themselves.

[orlok]

Originally Posted by missimpossible

Atonement. I still feel angry about that book three and a half years later.

Originally Posted by JDK1962

McEwan can do that do you. A few of his books I've enjoyed, but half the time he totally pisses me off. The ending of Amsterdam, Solar pretty much all the way through...

Amsterdam, most definitely. One of the stupidest endings I have ever read. McEwan went from one of my favourite authors to one of my most reviled in the space of one book. And to think it won the Man Booker! A political decision if I ever saw one.

[faithbw]

The Marriage Plot is the only book I can think of that left me feeling absolutely angry that I finished it. It was a pretentious book that kept you hanging on but then finished with the most unsatisfying ending that made me hate all the characters. It also made me not want to read anything else by Eugenides.

[missimpossible]

Originally Posted by faithbw

The Marriage Plot is the only book I can think of that left me feeling absolutely angry that I finished it. It was a pretentious book that kept you hanging on but then finished with the most unsatisfying ending that made me hate all the characters. It also made me not want to read anything else by Eugenides.

Oh actually, that reminded me of another one. The Virgin Suicides made me feel that way too.

[BenG]

Originally Posted by BadBilly

Fifty Shades of Grey (the first one). It's awful. Boring, badly written, and the sex is dull. I only finished it so I could say I had and talk about it with a friend who had read it. It has given me leverage in conversations, though. Lots of people who want to talk about it haven't read it, so I get to win all those arguments.

Dave Barry Learns Everything You Need to Know About Being a Husband From Reading 50 Shades of Grey
http://ideas.time.com/2014/03/04/dav...ors_picks=true

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Katsunami

I have nothing against gay men, but having to read about all the ... details ... is certainly not my cup of tea.

Or reading about them could make you more sensitive to the fact that gay people have to read/see/overhear the explicit details of heterosexual sex on a regular basis. Getting dosed with "the details" of gay sex should make you better able to understand the alienation that might be experienced by people whose sexual tastes are different from your own -- especially when their senses are flooded with your tastes every day.

One of my writing teachers was not only gay but wrote about it explicitly. In reading and savoring his novels and short stories, I was never disgusted, repelled or incensed. I merely had the feeling, while reading the sex scenes, of observing the habits of a person who was different. The descriptions seemed clinical, but only because I'm not the target audience (for a change). As I said, the writing was excellent and I've never regretted reading him -- or the stories of other gay writers who wrote about their sexuality -- for a moment.

And to the person who spoke about the teaching of gay literature violating "religious freedoms" -- what about the freedom of a parent who wishes to avoid exposing their preschooler to violence and takes exception to the rather grisly representations of the crucifixion on display nearly everywhere? Why exactly is that expression of outrage less worthy of legislation than objections to a high school teen being taught J.D. Salinger?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Or it could make you more sensitive to the fact that gay people have to read/see/converse about the explicit details of heterosexual sex lives on a regular basis. Getting a taste of that yourself should make you more understanding of the alienation and revulsion experienced by people whose tastes are different from yours when they're saturated with material about it.

One of my writing teachers was not only gay but wrote about it explicitly. In reading and savoring his novels and short stories, I was never disgusted, repelled or incensed. I merely had the feeling, while reading the sex scenes, of observing the mating habits of a creature who was different from myself. The descriptions seemed clinical, but only because I'm not the target audience (for a change). As I said, the writing was excellent and I've never regretted reading him -- or the stories of other gay writers who wrote about their sexuality -- for a moment.

I don't want to read explicit sex scenes in any book. I'm not a prude - I just find such things distasteful.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't want to read explicit sex scenes in any book. I'm not a prude - I just find such things distasteful.

Then the fact that the book happened to show gay characters in that way shouldn't be the deciding factor, should it?

Any list of writers who depicted gay sex in their work would have to include James Baldwin (Giovanni's Room), Jeanette Winterson, Edmund White, Rita Mae Brown, John Rechy, Juan Goytisolo, Jean Genet, Jean Cocteau, Dorothy Allison, W.H. Auden (posthumously), Patricia Highsmith (The Price of Salt), Gore Vidal, Dennis Cooper and innumerable others.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I don't want to read explicit sex scenes in any book. I'm not a prude - I just find such things distasteful.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Then you'd better not read James Joyce, Henry Miller or Anais Nin.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Then you'd better not read James Joyce, Henry Miller or Anais Nin.

I don't.