Books you wish you hadn't finished

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Speaking of Gabaldon, I read Outlander. I read the entire thing, AWFUL book. What a waste of time.

You are hardly the target market for it: it's a romance aimed at teenage girls. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean that it's not enjoyed by the people it's written for.

[theducks]

Looking at Wolfies list, I read some of those (LRH) when I was younger.

Upon opening to reread I think where were my tastes that I read all 10 volumes

[treadlightly]

Originally Posted by HarryT

You are hardly the target market for it: it's a romance aimed at teenage girls. The fact that you don't like it doesn't mean that it's not enjoyed by the people it's written for.

I would strongly disagree with the statement that it's a "romance aimed at teenage girls". It is a story that contains elements of romance, historical fiction and science fiction. The main characters are in their twenties at the start of the series, and in the eighth installment in the series, are now in their sixties. And that eighth novel hit #1 on the NYT bestseller list the week after it was released.

[speakingtohe]

Originally Posted by treadlightly

I would strongly disagree with the statement that it's a "romance aimed at teenage girls". It is a story that contains elements of romance, historical fiction and science fiction. The main characters are in their twenties at the start of the series, and in the eighth installment in the series, are now in their sixties. And that eighth novel hit #1 on the NYT bestseller list the week after it was released.

It seems pretty broadly aimed according to the authors own website description

In 1946, after WWII, a young Englishwoman named Claire Beauchamp Randall goes to the Scottish Highlands with her husband, Frank. She’s an ex-combat nurse, he’s been in the army as well, they’ve been separated for the last six years, and this is a second honeymoon; they’re getting re-acquainted with each other, thinking of starting a family. But one day Claire goes out walking by herself, and comes across a circle of standing stones—such circles are in fact common all over northern Britain. She walks through a cleft stone in the circle….and disappears. Back into 1743, where the first person she meets is a gentleman in an 18th-century army officer’s uniform. This gentleman, Jack Randall, looks just like her husband Frank—and proves to be Frank’s six-times-great-grandfather. Unfortunately, he also proves to be a sadistic bisexual pervert, and while trying to escape from him, Claire falls into the hands of a gang of Highland Scots, who are also trying to get away from Black Jack Randall—though for other reasons.

In order to avoid being handed over to Captain Randall, Claire is obliged to marry one of the young clansmen. So she finds herself trying to escape from Castle Leoch and her Scottish captors, trying to get back to her husband Frank, trying to avoid being recaptured by Captain Randall—and falling in love with Jamie Fraser, the young man she’s been forced to marry. The story rolls on from there…

I honestly don't know what to make of that. Not sensing it is aimed at anyone over the age of 20 but could be wrong Lot of factors, gang, pervert, bisexual, time travel? maybe it is a book of all trades and a master of none.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by dakini

Palo Alto by James Franco. . . .

James Franco found time to write a book in the midst of extemporizing, directing and starring in biopics that oversimplify their subjects in inept and embarrassing ways? He truly is a multi-untalented individual. His film about Hart Crane is one of the most awful things I've ever seen. And he has a gift for making unwatchable movies about unfilmable classics.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by theducks

Looking at Wolfies list, I read some of those (LRH) when I was younger.

Upon opening to reread I think where were my tastes that I read all 10 volumes

Now, you should be ashamed for having read all 10 volumes of that massive crapfest.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Battlefield Earth by L. Rob Hubbard

This might be a better world if everyone's ethics were indicated by their middle name.

[HarryT]

"Battlefield Earth" is a wonderful book, in my view. A really fun space opera.

"Mission Earth" (the 10 volume thing) is complete drek, but don't confuse it with "Battlefield Earth".

[gmw]

Originally Posted by HarryT

"Battlefield Earth" is a wonderful book, in my view. A really fun space opera.

"Mission Earth" (the 10 volume thing) is complete drek, but don't confuse it with "Battlefield Earth".

+1 I thought "Battlefield Earth" was good fun.

Along similar lines, I enjoy quite a lot of Robert Heinlein - but one I wish I hadn't finished was: "The Number of the Beast". It had a great opening and then fizzled and fizzled and eventually, finally, phht!

And to continue the theme of books that failed badly for me, from authors whose other work I have often enjoyed...

"The Mists of Avalon" by Marion Zimmer Bradley
"Tarot" by Piers Anthony
"Cradle" by Arthur C. Clarke and Gentry Lee
"The Final Programme" and "A Cure for Cancer" by Michael Moorcock

[Froide]

Nicely put by Peter Lennon in "Getting Away With Murder" (May 24, 1990) in The Guardian, and adaptable to many really good books in any genre, as well as to my anticipatory mourning of AMC-TV's soon-to-end series Mad Men:

The post-coital depression on finishing an Agatha Christie story is severe. With the denouement the book instantly sheds its seduction; life seeps colourlessly from it as from a bicycle tube after passing over a sharp tack. The characters corrugate, crimp and fall to the ground. No fold in the crinkum-crankum of the story (which the detective is first obliged to crankum-crinkum to fit the plot in retrospect) by then holds any interest. You are not shocked that one of the pieces of cardboard has committed a felony nor do you rejoice that a brown paper bag with a perm has not.