Books you regret reading

[Mr. E]

I would definitely concur with those regretting the Sorrow's of Young Werther. Also, I always found Jack London's books far too gloomy for my taste. Edgar Rice Burrows books are sometimes unintentionally amusing but always terribly, terribly sexist and racist.

[Olinser]

The one nice thing I'll say about KJA's Star Wars books were that at least they weren't Children of the Jedi, Planet of Twilight, or The Crystal Star.

I stopped reading before she entered but from what I understand he's also not nearly as bad as Karen Traviss, either.

[Olinser]

That's pretty rude to everyone who writes D&D adventures and such.

And basically pisses on comic books as a medium.

I do agree somewhat with the underlying point, though it needs to be broken out.

People that are commissioned to write specific stories or storylines in other worlds and with other characters ARE usually hacks, and they take the job precisely because it means they don't have to come up with their own ideas.

The good writers are the ones that come up with ideas and then ask permission to use the world/characters for their stories, or who pitch their original ideas to get a job writing the character/universe.

[Sapphire Guard]

I have read a lot of of things. Goodkind. Twilight. Brown. In all of it, the only book I have truly hated it Marked by PC and Kristin Cast.

A high school girl gets into an elite school for vampires and vampire celebrities. Racist. Sexist. Homophobic. Sectarian. No matter your gender, creed, color, orientation, there's something to hate in this book. And apart from the anti Christian stuff, it's all accidental, the writer is well intentioned but just can't do things right.

[veti]

That's pretty rude to everyone who writes D&D adventures and such.

And basically pisses on comic books as a medium.

First: there is such a thing as a talented hack. They're uncommon, but they do exist. Even the less talented ones can have flashes of inspiration, but those are even more uncommon.

Second: you seem to be assuming there is no such a thing as a comic book with an original setting. See the works of Alan Moore or Neil Gaiman for counter-examples. But yes, the great majority of comic books are trash.

[Rynjin]

The great majority of anything is trash.

Defining "trash" as "anything that takes place in a shared, pre-existing universe" stretches the difference as to make it meaningless.

[Peelee]

I stopped reading before she entered but from what I understand he's also not nearly as bad as Karen Traviss, either.

In the old canon, Karen Traviss was the only female Star Wars author I could read (interestingly, in New canon, one of the women wrote damn near the best book yet). Not great, but not terrible. Obsession with mandalorians though.

Correction: A. C. Crispin was also badass. She should have done more.

[oudeis]

Good writers are those who make up their own characters and settings. Those who are paid by soulless corporations to write in other people's worlds are hacks. And the great majority of hacks are talentless, which is why they're not out there making up new stuff (which is way more profitable, if you've got the talent).

I have to disagree with this. When writers like Joe Haldeman, Barbara Hambly, and J. Gregory Keyes produce a Star Trek, Star Wars, or Elder Scrolls book, it isn't because they don't have the ability to create their own worlds. There are a lot of good authors who write what I call 'franchise fiction' books because of market pressures, i.e., their own material is too strange for the mainstream, their last book didn't sell as well as the publisher wanted, they just couldn't say no to the money they'd get from writing branded material, or all of the above. In short, because too many prospective readers are buying processed sci-fi/fantasy-type product starring Drizz't/Jedi/Vulcans instead of new, original material.

[Rodin]

Apart from summer reading (which to be fair I mostly enjoyed with a few exceptions), the main standouts for me:

A collection of short stories by Piers Anthony, the name of which I now forget. This was the first sign to me that there is something seriously, seriously wrong with that man. The Xanth books in general became very poor as he abandoned storytelling in favor of squeezing in as many metric tons of puns as he could instead of actually putting a plot in them. The rest of his works also suffer greatly now that I'm not a teenager and can spot the massive sexism going on.

Any of the Dragonlance books other than the original six books (Autumn/Winter/Spring and The Twins trilogy). I read them exhaustively from the library, and I can recall the plot of virtually none of them.

This is also true of the Star Trek EU novels I was reading at the same time. I enjoyed the Star Trek Logs (novelizations of the animated series by Alan Dean Foster), Dark Mirror, Q-Squared, and Fallen Heroes. And...that's it. The rest were unmitigated crap in retrospect, also noted by how I can't remember the plots of any of the over-a-dozen that I read.

And finally, another book I can't remember the name of (again, library). The first novel I enjoyed, telling a tale of a crippled boy on a quest where he slowly gets a full party of friends and many swashes are buckled. Then comes the sequel, where one of said characters equips cursed armor which makes him ultra paranoid and proceeds to steadily murder all the likeable characters built up in the first book. By the time the book ended just about every decent character was dead. Makes me wonder why the author bothered.

[Dienekes]

First: there is such a thing as a talented hack. They're uncommon, but they do exist. Even the less talented ones can have flashes of inspiration, but those are even more uncommon.

Second: you seem to be assuming there is no such a thing as a comic book with an original setting. See the works of Alan Moore or Neil Gaiman for counter-examples. But yes, the great majority of comic books are trash.

The vast majority of books are trash.

Also Gaiman's magnum opus was written in the main DC continuity, at the time, and directly steals characters not just from comics but basically all stories told around the world.

And Moore's most famous work was going to be entirely based in someone else's work and characters, which he wrote on commission. But then DC decided they wanted the characters to actually survive so basically everyone got a rename and new costume while otherwise still being the original character with a few Moore flourishes.

[Peelee]

Barbara Hambly

So long as she doesn't try another Star Wars, I'm happy.

[DomaDoma]

XVI by Julia Karr. It is the apotheosis of a bad YA dystopia. Ludicrous premise? Yep: Once you turn sixteen, you get a tattoo which means you are legally mandated to have sex with anyone who asks. Sheeple starter best friend with no redeeming qualities? Broody love interest who makes Catwoman's alliances look stable for no apparent reason? High school stereotypes masquerading as characterization? All of these. And no doubt more: keep in mind I haven't read the thing since 2012, and that's only the stuff that still stands out like a bad sore. (I read it to the end because not finishing a YA novel is kind of like not finishing a bucket of popcorn.)

[Olinser]

XVI by Julia Karr. It is the apotheosis of a bad YA dystopia. Ludicrous premise? Yep: Once you turn sixteen, you get a tattoo which means you are legally mandated to have sex with anyone who asks. Sheeple starter best friend with no redeeming qualities? Broody love interest who makes Catwoman's alliances look stable for no apparent reason? High school stereotypes masquerading as characterization? All of these. And no doubt more: keep in mind I haven't read the thing since 2012, and that's only the stuff that still stands out like a bad sore. (I read it to the end because not finishing a YA novel is kind of like not finishing a bucket of popcorn.)

And this was a published book? It sounds like the premise of a bad sex fanfic or low-budget porno.

[Fri]

XVI by Julia Karr. It is the apotheosis of a bad YA dystopia. Ludicrous premise? Yep: Once you turn sixteen, you get a tattoo which means you are legally mandated to have sex with anyone who asks. Sheeple starter best friend with no redeeming qualities? Broody love interest who makes Catwoman's alliances look stable for no apparent reason? High school stereotypes masquerading as characterization? All of these. And no doubt more: keep in mind I haven't read the thing since 2012, and that's only the stuff that still stands out like a bad sore. (I read it to the end because not finishing a YA novel is kind of like not finishing a bucket of popcorn.)

Wow.

This takes the cake as the most ridiculous dystopian YA novel premise I've ever read, and I've read Maze Runner. Believe me, that's no easy feat, because Maze Runner is about an organization who decimated human population because earth turned barren from solar flare, except the virus accidentally turned most people into zombies. So to stop the zombie virus they gathered immune kids, give them amnesia inducing drugs, and put them into a... monstered moving plant maze that kills them (which I assume took at least all the remaining plant in the world to build.

[Gnoman]

This is also true of the Star Trek EU novels I was reading at the same time. I enjoyed the Star Trek Logs (novelizations of the animated series by Alan Dean Foster), Dark Mirror, Q-Squared, and Fallen Heroes. And...that's it. The rest were unmitigated crap in retrospect, also noted by how I can't remember the plots of any of the over-a-dozen that I read.

You must have tried several of the bland ones in a row. The Star Trek novels are very uneven in quality, but even the worst are usually at least a step above the TOS episode Spock's Brain or Voyager's Threshold, and the best far surpass anything in the show(not least because they had far more room to develop the storyline without having to deal with the demands of a blockbuster movie). I've long been considering a Let's Read of all of them (similar to the Let's Watch somebody did of TOS not that long ago), but that would be an immense investment in time.

[The Glyphstone]

I'm quite fond of How Much For Just The Planet myself, as far as Star Trek EU novels go.

[S@tanicoaldo]

I'm happy to see my Threads spawns taking over the forum >:)

For me it was the The King in Yellow. Boring, incomplete and not scary or weird as it was hyped to be.

[Gnoman]

I'm quite fond of How Much For Just The Planet myself, as far as Star Trek EU novels go.

That is one of the better ones. Shame it was too silly to be adapted into an actual episode.

[Rodin]

You must have tried several of the bland ones in a row. The Star Trek novels are very uneven in quality, but even the worst are usually at least a step above the TOS episode Spock's Brain or Voyager's Threshold, and the best far surpass anything in the show(not least because they had far more room to develop the storyline without having to deal with the demands of a blockbuster movie). I've long been considering a Let's Read of all of them (similar to the Let's Watch somebody did of TOS not that long ago), but that would be an immense investment in time.

I would note that I read them 20+ years ago, so quite a few of the better ones I've heard about (like the post-TNG novels) hadn't been written yet. The ones by Peter David and Diane Duane tended to be pretty good, the others typically not so much.

I went through the list on Wikipedia and the only one I actually remember based on the title (apart from those I already mentioned) was The Eyes of the Beholders, which was utterly fantastic and really nailed the feel of being an episode.

The most recent title I recognize from the list is Q-Squared at 1994, so that's...23 years ago. Damn I feel old now.

[Gnoman]

I would note that I read them 20+ years ago, so quite a few of the better ones I've heard about (like the post-TNG novels) hadn't been written yet. The ones by Peter David and Diane Duane tended to be pretty good, the others typically not so much.

I went through the list on Wikipedia and the only one I actually remember based on the title (apart from those I already mentioned) was The Eyes of the Beholders, which was utterly fantastic and really nailed the feel of being an episode.

The most recent title I recognize from the list is Q-Squared at 1994, so that's...23 years ago. Damn I feel old now.

That's a pretty fair description. David, Duane, and Crispin aren't the only really good authors, but Duane in particular is responsible for several of the absolute best books. Come to think of it, I can't remember any that were downright bad as opposed to bland and forgettable.

[tensai_oni]

For people who dislike Sorrows of Young Werther all I have to say is - wow. I feel disappointed.

I know it's hip for the current generation of readers to crap on classics as "boring" but they're often classics for a reason, and Young Werther is no exception. I found that book very enjoyable, though in no small part it's due to mocking the titular character's naivete and emo-ness (which was actually the point, despite someone in the thread stating earlier that "it was the point!" doesn't excuse an unlikeable protagonist. I disagree - the fault lies on the reader's side, not the author's).

Speaking of more modern works though, there's Raising Steam by Terry Pratchett.

I don't regret reading bad books in vacuum, at worst it's time wasted. But I regret reading bad books by good authors, because they remind me of how much better the author could've done than what we got. And that just makes me sad.

Speaking of which Snuff belongs here too, but at least it was (slightly) less boring.

[Rynjin]

That's a pretty fair description. David, Duane, and Crispin aren't the only really good authors, but Duane in particular is responsible for several of the absolute best books. Come to think of it, I can't remember any that were downright bad as opposed to bland and forgettable.

Diane Duane is just an all around great writer. Her Young Wizards series is excellent. It takes a lot of talent to write a YA story that stands up even after its audience "ages out".

[digiman619]

Apart from summer reading (which to be fair I mostly enjoyed with a few exceptions), the main standouts for me:

A collection of short stories by Piers Anthony, the name of which I now forget. This was the first sign to me that there is something seriously, seriously wrong with that man. The Xanth books in general became very poor as he abandoned storytelling in favor of squeezing in as many metric tons of puns as he could instead of actually putting a plot in them. The rest of his works also suffer greatly now that I'm not a teenager and can spot the massive sexism going on.

Any of the Dragonlance books other than the original six books (Autumn/Winter/Spring and The Twins trilogy). I read them exhaustively from the library, and I can recall the plot of virtually none of them.

This is also true of the Star Trek EU novels I was reading at the same time. I enjoyed the Star Trek Logs (novelizations of the animated series by Alan Dean Foster), Dark Mirror, Q-Squared, and Fallen Heroes. And...that's it. The rest were unmitigated crap in retrospect, also noted by how I can't remember the plots of any of the over-a-dozen that I read.

And finally, another book I can't remember the name of (again, library). The first novel I enjoyed, telling a tale of a crippled boy on a quest where he slowly gets a full party of friends and many swashes are buckled. Then comes the sequel, where one of said characters equips cursed armor which makes him ultra paranoid and proceeds to steadily murder all the likeable characters built up in the first book. By the time the book ended just about every decent character was dead. Makes me wonder why the author bothered.

For a second I thought you were saying you regretted reading Q-Squared. That remains my favorite piece of expanded universe material for any series. I honestly, truly believe that following Track A Enterprise would have made a far more interesting show that the actual TNG series.

[SaintRidley]

Even the books I don't like, I don't really regret reading. Even the first chapter of Twilight isn't a regret.

Probably the only book I truly regret is Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. It's garbage all throughout, and the only saving grace is that it appears to be going in a delightfully gay direction. But it doesn't. Should be five times gayer than it is, so there'd be something worth reading it for.

[factotum]

Watership Down, because I was expecting Redwall. Which it isn't. That book was intense.

Tip: if you found Watership Down too intense to be enjoyable, do not, under any circumstances, attempt to read "Plague Dogs" by the same author.

[Rodin]

I was going to add another book series, one I really enjoyed when I read it. Why do I regret reading them? Because the series got orphaned halfway through the plot. I've had that dangling plot hook bugging me for over 20 years now.

However, upon searching for the name of the series (The Tales of Gom in the Legends of Ulm), I found out that the author returned to the series to write a couple more over a decade later! And then wrote several more 10 years after that!

Has anyone read the later novels? Are they worthwhile?

Because as I headed off to try and buy them, I was suddenly reminded of another set of books I regret reading - the Paksenarrion re-launch novels that Elizabeth Moon did. The quality of writing was so far removed from the original trilogy that it was hard to believe I was reading the same story. I thought that 20 years would have improved the writing, but I'm just not sure what happened.

So I'm a touch leery - should I be leaving the Gom series as fond memories? Or are the follow-up novels worthy successors?

[2D8HP]

...that description of Catcher in the Rye as "Dang You Kids, Get Off My Lawn: The Novel" was good.

I didn't like the Catcher in the Rye when I read it in the 1980's, but maybe now it will seem good!

[lt_murgen]

Dream Games, by Karl Hansen.

Read it way too young.

[Peelee]

I didn't like the Catcher in the Rye when I read it in the 1980's, but maybe now it will seem good!

It's a trap.

[Eldan]

I know it's hip for the current generation of readers to crap on classics as "boring" but they're often classics for a reason, and Young Werther is no exception. I found that book very enjoyable, though in no small part it's due to mocking the titular character's naivete and emo-ness (which was actually the point, despite someone in the thread stating earlier that "it was the point!" doesn't excuse an unlikeable protagonist. I disagree - the fault lies on the reader's side, not the author's).

Was it, though? Was it? Goethe was at around that age when he wrote it, got out of an unlucky love himself and a good friend of his did commit suicide at the time. It's much more autobiographical than pointing out any flaws. Goethe did say it was his attempt to write away his own depression.
It's also famous for young people imitating it and committing suicide in Werther-costumes. Goethe hated the entire thing later in his life and even rewrote small parts of it (including a small poem at the end that ended with "Be a man and don't do as I did").