Worst thing you've ever read

[Goosefeather]

And...what makes it so "foul"?

I can understand not liking it, but I'm confused as to why someone would hate it with such magnitude.

Agreed. I mean, it's hardly badly written from a technical point of view, so I assume Hbgplayer's objection is to the themes portrayed - but given that the book is satire, arguing against those themes, couldn't you argue that if it's able to provoke such a strong emotional response, surely it's well-written, and achieves its purpose, hence making it a good book? Compare Lolita.

Someone like Ayn Rand, on the other hand, doesn't fall into this category, because although she provokes a similar emotional response, it's unintentional, and she's writing in earnest.

[Das Platyvark]

Not at all. I hated reading that foul book.

May we have some reasoning here?

[Gnoman]

I also hated 1984, primarily because the social structure presented therin was sociologically impossible, the psychological theories that it was founded on had been largely debunked at the time it was written, and thus the verisimilitude crucial to a good satire was impossible for me to find. It is notable that I found Animal Farm to involve much less suspension of disbelief, and greatly enjoyed it. (Incidentally, the film version of the latter with Patrick Stewart is a masterpiece, and I suggest you go see it immediately.)

From this perspective, however, the classic I find the worst is The Cold Equations.

[Rallicus]

I don't know, I've read a lot of horrible books. The latest was The Haunted Mesa, though.

Basically a story about a guy who mulls over the same trivial questions before going on a tangent about the complexities of the universe for some reason. This happens for like, 200 pages or so, while he's off doing stuff that has no real impact on the story.

Then he goes into a parallel universe to save his friend. There's a contrived love plot in there where he falls in love with some girl from the parallel universe for no particular reason other than her pretty face or something. He saves his friend, some old cowboy that was there, some random girl his friend fell in love with and, VIOLA, 350 pages of nothing.

It's also horribly written.

I give the author a pass, though, because he died a year later. He was probably delirious.

[Misery Esquire]

all of it drenched in gallons of the most over-simplified, sexist view of the world

Hmm. I thought it's problem rested more on the fact that R.Jordan could only write one-and-a-half female characters and supplanted that on every woman* you meet in the series. And, maybe, three males. (Duty, Cheeky, and Angsty. And Perrin. Which is Angst+.)

*It's Nynavyene, but stubborner`

`It's like those other stubborn people, but even stubbornerer'

' It's like those people, but eve-...

Right, that's headed into another skit.

[Grey Watcher]

Hmm. I thought it's problem rested more on the fact that R.Jordan could only write one-and-a-half female characters and supplanted that on every woman* you meet in the series. And, maybe, three males. (Duty, Cheeky, and Angsty. And Perrin. Which is Angst+.)

*It's Nynavyene, but stubborner`

`It's like those other stubborn people, but even stubbornerer'

' It's like those people, but eve-...

Right, that's headed into another skit.

Right, in WoT, all women are calculating... rhymes-with-withces and all men are either dense or naive (which amount to the same thing most of the time). Probably didn't help that I was reading at the same time I was coming to terms with being gay and seeing the sexes presented as such monolithic entities with such an inexplicably vast gulf between them just quickly started to seem downright silly. And then I started on Book Two.

[factotum]

From this perspective, however, the classic I find the worst is The Cold Equations.

Why? What's wrong with that story?

[Saph]

Right, in WoT, all women are calculating... rhymes-with-withces and all men are either dense or naive (which amount to the same thing most of the time).

Heh, you're not the only one to feel that way. The really interesting thing about WoT is that Robert Jordan didn't think the female characters in the series were obnoxious at all. He just thought they were "strong", apparently quite sincerely.

There's a theory floating around the WoT fandom which says that all the WoT female characters are based on Jordan's wife (who Jordan was very much in love with). One collaborator actually met said wife, and said afterwards that now he understood why the WoT female characters were the way they were . . . Might just be an urban legend, though.

[Gnoman]

Why? What's wrong with that story?

Leaving aside the fact that the setup seems designed to murder people, considering the complete lack of any security (knowing that stowaways are a problem, they solve it with a handgun and a closed -but not locked- door), and the fact that there are enough unneccesary objects mentioned that they could have jettisoned those instead of the girl; the ships described in the story would have a 100% failure rate. If an engine was running even half a percent high in fuel consumption (an extremely tight tolerance even for a factory-new engine of any kind), the ship would crash. Frankly, there isn't a single line in the story that stands up to even cursory scrutiny. The author was attempting to subvert utopian sci-fi, but wound up simply making all the characters look like imbeciles or psychopaths.

[Giggling Ghast]

When someone cites a book like 1984 as the worst book they've ever read, I don't take them seriously.

If 1984, the Thomas Covenant series or even Harry Potter are truly the worst things you've ever read, then you've never really dipped your toes into the vast ocean of bad literature that exists in the world. There is an astounding amount of truly godawful books out there. Quite a few of them are tie-ins to other media or feature scantily-dressed men and women posing on the cover.

People read those books without any expectation of them being actually good. And they're promptly forgotten once finished or abandoned quickly part of the way through, because why would you waste your time on trash?

That's not to say that they actually liked "This Popular Book That Everyone Loves But I Don't." They probably really did dislike said book. But even though it was objectively better than, say, the book adapation of the movie Speed, they get riled up over "The Scarlet Letter" because it didn't meet their expectations.

[Lateral]

When someone cites a book like 1984 as the worst book they've ever read, I don't take them seriously.

If 1984, the Thomas Covenant series or even Harry Potter are truly the worst things you've ever read, then you've never really dipped your toes into the vast ocean of bad literature that exists in the world. There is an astounding amount of truly godawful books out there. Quite a few of them are tie-ins to other media or feature scantily-dressed men and women posing on the cover.

People read those books without any expectation of them being actually good. And they're promptly forgotten once finished or abandoned quickly.

That's not to say that they actually liked "This Popular Book That Everyone Loves But I Don't." They probably really did dislike said book. But even if though it was better than, say, the book adapation of the movie Speed, they get riled up over "The Scarlet Letter" because it didn't meet their expectations.

This is a very good point. That said, there are cases of things so bad that you can't help but remember them with horror. For example, to me that's Eye of Argon. (To be fair, though, I knew exactly what I was getting into when I started it, but still.)

[Giggling Ghast]

"Well, the Eye of Argon is truly awful," Candle Jack ejaculated somberly, his azure orbs glazing mistily at his vivid recollection of the infamous tale spoken of in hushed whispers at taverns and brothels where patrons indulge whimsically in dalliances with half-naked harlots with heaving bosoms.

[Axolotl]

When someone cites a book like 1984 as the worst book they've ever read, I don't take them seriously.

Personally I just imagine someone raised on Dostoyevsky and Proust cursing Orwell as a poor imitator of Kafka.

[TheLaughingMan]

"Well, the Eye of Argon is truly awful," Candle Jack ejaculated somberly, his azure orbs glazing mistily at his vivid recollection of the infamous tale spoken of in hushed whispers at taverns and brothels where patrons indulge whimsically in dalliances with half-naked harlots with heaving bosoms.

The Bellowing Carbon-based Life-form focussed his glinting mud-stained orbs upon the incandescent marvel of the humour-enwrapped syllable congregation encrypted 'pon a virtual tapestry into which he had woven innumerable heartstrings. The Guffawing Hominid then enclosed and then receded his orb valves not once, not twice, but thricescore times as his mind-meat melded its legions of thought into a comprehensible word-squadron, whereupon he reclined his posterior podium and let out an enthusiastic man-cry. "Aha!" he posited as his pinned up his language-communicator, "that was a good one!"

[Raistlin1040]

I couldn't get through The Chocolate War. The pacing was really slow and I just couldn't get into it at all. Not the worst thing I've ever read, but certainly not an enjoyable venture.

Atlas Shrugged. No thanks.

Robinson Crusoe is pretty damn terrible. It's the kind of book that most people know the story of (through Swiss Family Robinson, Castaway, film versions), but rarely sit down to actually READ. The philosophy is awful, the writing is incredibly dry, the characters are boring and one-dimensional. I understand that it's the first English novel, so there wasn't much precedent for good character development or plot, but still.

Edward Abbey's Desert Solitaire isn't great either. Memoir of his time in the desert with no other people around. Isolated passages are very powerful, but the whole book together is self-indulgent and heavy-handed.

The last two I read for class, which may have contributed to my dislike of them. I don't know if I've every read anything TRULY terrible (I tend to put most things down that I don't enjoy after an hour or so), so I'll say either Atlas Shrugged or Robinson Crusoe, both which fall into the "Bad, but not mind-numbingly awful" category.

[Whiffet]

The Bellowing Carbon-based Life-form focussed his glinting mud-stained orbs upon the incandescent marvel of the humour-enwrapped syllable congregation encrypted 'pon a virtual tapestry into which he had woven innumerable heartstrings. The Guffawing Hominid then enclosed and then receded his orb valves not once, not twice, but thricescore times as his mind-meat melded its legions of thought into a comprehensible word-squadron, whereupon he reclined his posterior podium and let out an enthusiastic man-cry. "Aha!" he posited as his pinned up his language-communicator, "that was a good one!"

Actually, that's probably better than the real thing.

[ThirdEmperor]

Narnia. I loved these books but I've read the ending and it messes with my enjoyment of the others. All of that and they die. And go to heaven, but not the people who couldn't give blind worship to a being that only comes in the span of decades if not centuries. And then only to a favored few. Anytime they come from earth they take over the lives of everyone else. No one else ever can take a priamary role without an earthling coming over and rescuing them. Or Aslan rescues them.

Yeah. I loved the other Narnia books, in fact I'm pretty sure it was the first series I ever read in entirety, but although I could happily list off my favorite points of every other book, I could never think of a single good thing to say about the last one.

For me, the worst would be The Eye in the Pyramid, first book of the Illuminatus! trilogy. I'm usually able to read even badly written stuff, but this had me putting it down after only 30 pages of drivel and terrible writing.

Fnord.

I find it hard to refute with any of your points, but I must say I utterly disagree with the final conclusion. The Illuminatus! trilogy's entire point is to be incomprehensible, filled with paradoxes, logic loops and riddles, and the writing is done in the perfect style to accentuate that.

In short, I would argue it's an ironically bad book and purposefully a mindscrew, which in my opinion changes it from 'bad' to hilarious.

As for the book I personally find to be the worst, I'd have to say Swiss Family Robinson. I read it as an nine year old and even then found it to be ridiculous, as the characters instantly and perfectly learned any skill they were required to by the plot, the island itself was utterly impossible in terms of ecosystem and the sheer degree to which the author failed to in any way research the subject matter astounds me.

[Misery Esquire]

Robinson Crusoe is pretty damn terrible.

Ah, but we got the Wishbone's Robinson Crusoe out of it.

So it's 'kay.

[factotum]

Frankly, there isn't a single line in the story that stands up to even cursory scrutiny. The author was attempting to subvert utopian sci-fi, but wound up simply making all the characters look like imbeciles or psychopaths.

I suspect the problem there may be down to editorial interference. I heard that the editor who published the story kept sending it back to the author until he came up with a version where the girl dies; maybe all the stuff you're talking about is holdover from an earlier version of the story where they found a way to survive?

(Oh, and I'll point out that there clearly *was* some leeway in the fuel, or the guy wouldn't have been able to keep the girl alive by simply reducing thrust--there just wasn't enough leeway to allow a safe landing with her additional mass once they got deep into the planet's gravity well).

[Feytalist]

Ah, but we got the Wishbone's Robinson Crusoe out of it.

So it's 'kay.

Robinson Crusoe is one of the few books I never could finish. Another would be Moby ****. Not because the writing was bad, but because it is so stupendously dense. I admitted defeat in the end.


I'll still admit to liking Atlas Shrugged. If not for the themes, then for the way they were presented. Rand could bring across her point very well.

[Avilan the Grey]

When someone cites a book like 1984 as the worst book they've ever read, I don't take them seriously.

If 1984, the Thomas Covenant series or even Harry Potter are truly the worst things you've ever read, then you've never really dipped your toes into the vast ocean of bad literature that exists in the world.

But explain to me why I should read books i KNOW are bad? It's like arguing that I shouldn't call "Daredevil" the worst movie I have seen, because I haven't seen "The Room". That argument is really not valid.

There is also a matter of interpenetration: What do you mean with "Bad"? The book that is technically the worst written, or the book I get the least enjoyment from?

[factotum]

But explain to me why I should read books i KNOW are bad?

I don't think he said you *should*, but it is quite hard to believe you've never read anything worse than 1984 unless you've only read about 4 books in your life. (I'm not the biggest fan of 1984 myself, I hasten to add, but I've read much worse without having to go hunting for bad stuff deliberately!).

[Aotrs Commander]

Tastes differ, the Belgariad series would actually be in my top 20 best fantasy series

I'd rate it higher than that, probably in my top five.

Eddings slowly slipped of the pedastal, though. Sparhawk was nearly as good, Althalus was above average, and the Elder Gods were dull, so dull they're the only ones I never finished reading.

That series had two problems. The biggest was the going over and over of the same events from three or four perspectives, sometimes word-for-word, so it was boring. The second, which I would have not minded in isolation, was the fact the bad guys really didn't generate any kind of feasible threat. It was clear from the outset they were utterly outclassed and out-thought by the good guys and were never going to win. They achieved what I would term Credible Threat. Now, I wouldn't have minded that so much if the repetition hadn't gotten so tedious.

[Giggling Ghast]

I don't think he said you *should*, but it is quite hard to believe you've never read anything worse than 1984 unless you've only read about 4 books in your life.

Exactly!

Bad literature is inevitable, like death or taxes. Sooner or later, someone will buy one for you as a Christmas gift and you force your way through it to avoid disappointing the giver. Or you'll pick up some dodgy paperback to burn through while on a plane or a bus. Maybe one day you'll like a Good Entertainment Product so much that you'll seek out the related media and end up reading some godawful tie-in novel or fan fiction. (Mass Effect Deception, for example.)

[PrometheusMFD]

To be honest, 1984 pales in comparison to The Great Gatsby. Analogy stories and bad satire tend to suck when you haven't personally experienced what they are talking about, and The Great Gatsby just exacerbates things with poor characterization and bad pacing.

[Sith_Happens]

But explain to me why I should read books i KNOW are bad? It's like arguing that I shouldn't call "Daredevil" the worst movie I have seen, because I haven't seen "The Room". That argument is really not valid.

What are you talking about? "The Room" is hilarious.

Also, on a similar note, if Daredevil is the worst movie you've ever seen, then you haven't seen very many bad movies.

"Well, the Eye of Argon is truly awful," Candle Jack ejaculated somberly, his azure orbs glazing mistily at his vivid recollection of the infamous tale spoken of in hushed whispers at taverns and brothels where patrons indulge whimsically in dalliances with half-naked harlots with heaving bosoms.

The Bellowing Carbon-based Life-form focussed his glinting mud-stained orbs upon the incandescent marvel of the humour-enwrapped syllable congregation encrypted 'pon a virtual tapestry into which he had woven innumerable heartstrings. The Guffawing Hominid then enclosed and then receded his orb valves not once, not twice, but thricescore times as his mind-meat melded its legions of thought into a comprehensible word-squadron, whereupon he reclined his posterior podium and let out an enthusiastic man-cry. "Aha!" he posited as his pinned up his language-communicator, "that was a good one!"

What... words are not supposed to... how many thesarauses did it take to... AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[NNescio]

It doesn't have to be in English, right?

Dream of the Red Chamber. Boring novel, boring plot, boring characters, and epitomises the boring parts of boring Chinese soap operas. Freaking boring opening repeats itself for a couple boring iterations before it even gets into the boring story. Plus it was required reading in my (Chinese) high school. And to top it all off it is written in what passes for the ancient vernacular, making it less comprehensible.

[Das Platyvark]

I think it's important to distinguish between bad things and and things you don't like. While the 'classics' that are getting bashed here do have a tendency to be rather dry, there's often a reason the become classics.
This isn't to say the people hating on Moby **** or The Great Gatsby don't have a point (though I rather enjoyed the former, in all its nautical dullness) but rather that they need to look at what made it bad—is it the book, the author, or how they read it?

[-Sentinel-]

Eddings slowly slipped of the pedastal, though. Sparhawk was nearly as good, Althalus was above average, and the Elder Gods were dull, so dull they're the only ones I never finished reading.

While I loved The Belgariad and The Malloreon, I found that the first Sparhawk series (The Elenium) was quite a step down. (Haven't read any of Eddings' other series.) The characters were rather unsympathetic; the hero, in particular, came across as self-righteous, violent-minded, petty and vindictive. Plus, the author was painting the words bad guy all over his villains instead of letting his readers judge them by themselves. Eddings' books do have good qualities (the snarky banter is always entertaining), but their main problem is the Protagonist-Centered Morality.

Although, when it comes to that particular problem, it's hard to beat Terry Goodkind and his war-crime-committing "heroes". And then there's Goodkind's objectivist preaching and sick obsession with rape... Be sure to stay the hell away from The Sword of Truth. Not the worst thing I've ever read, but probably the worst that actually had any success.

The Eye Of Argon at least has the merit of being so bad it's good. It has way more entertainment value than a merely mediocre book.


Has anyone here ever heard of the Maradonia Saga? It's a series of young adult fantasy novels written and self-published by a talentless, delusional teenage girl called Gloria Tesch. She advertises herself as the world's youngest novelist (which she isn't), uses sockpuppets to bump his Amazon ratings up and has been claiming for several years that a film based on her series is in the making (yeah, right). I haven't actually read the Maradonia series, but a thorough chapter-by-chapter skewering (complete with lines from the books) can be found here.

[Gnoman]

I suspect the problem there may be down to editorial interference. I heard that the editor who published the story kept sending it back to the author until he came up with a version where the girl dies; maybe all the stuff you're talking about is holdover from an earlier version of the story where they found a way to survive?

(Oh, and I'll point out that there clearly *was* some leeway in the fuel, or the guy wouldn't have been able to keep the girl alive by simply reducing thrust--there just wasn't enough leeway to allow a safe landing with her additional mass once they got deep into the planet's gravity well).

If you don't have the fuel margin to handle an extra 75-80 kilos of mass, then the mission is doomed. There have been many cases where seemingly identical aircraft have taken off, with one running out of fuel and crashing/being forced to make an emergency landing, while the other reaches the desitnation with enough fuel for another half-hour of flight. Being a spaceship doesn't make a difference to that. (Actually, being a constant-boost ship is worse, as he could simply cut the engines out for a little while, then restart.

Fundamentally, that's why The Cold Equations is a terrible story. The moral was forced by incredibly stupid plot points at all levels.