"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich". I didn't even finish it (and there are many bad books that I have finished, that shows how much I disliked the way this book was written).

The Mayor of Casterbridge. Augh! It didn't help that I had to read it for school, but all the characters sucked and the end was such boring crap. I figured if I stuck it out until the end I'd get something meaningful, but there was just nothing there.

And I don't like fantasy or sci-fi much. There was a LotR rip off that I read half of, but I can't remember the name now. The only thing funny in it was a guy beating a gnome with a log until he passed out, then stuffing him in a firewood box. XD

AGgie - Give me Gatsby, or give me death!=:)

One of my jackass friends talked me into reading one of those ridiculous George R. R. Martin books. "I know it's fantasy," he said, "but it's sophisticated fantasy." Now I'm thinking maybe Tolkienesque or hopefully something along the lines of a sword and sorcery Pynchon. Apparently though, what he meant is a sword and sorcery Tom Clancy. With incest. I suppose sister fucking makes you sophisticated in some circles, but I'm guessing those are the same circles where cartoon tentacle rape is considered arousing.

I will not be taking any further suggestions from him, I assure you.

I had nearly the same reaction as you, Mundi, when some people I respected strongly insisted that I would love 'A Game of Thrones', and it was the best fantasy EVAR (I think they actually spelled 'ever' like that, too).

Anyway, that was several weeks of my life I'll never get back. It took weeks instead of hours, or even days, because I foud reading the book a complete chore and actually had to force myself to do it. I thought it did get a bit better near the end, but that wasn't nearly worth the other 95% of the book.

I thought it was basically like Stephen Kings 'The Eyes of the Dragon', only without any of the good, and the addition of boring Tolkienesque rip offs and some 'As the World Turns' melodrama thrown in to make it extra boring.

Although I may have stated otherwise elsewhere on the forum (when I had only started the book), I cannot stand 'The Odyssey.'

A great work of literature it may be, but the way in which it is told is so bloody tedious I can't read it for more than ten minutes at a time. Anyone who has read the book will know what I'm talking about - 'Dawn, fresh and rosy-fingered', 'the noble Odysseus', 'the brave Odysseus', 'the twatty boring Odysseus', etc. drove me mad.

Because it's written in this way, I lost interest in the plot pretty early on. It's one of the few books I have ever read that I have never finished.

As far as I can tell, the popularity of these books rests on a combination of better-than-genre-norm prose, plus a big dose of the self-loathing masochism so many fantasy fans seem to be possessed of. They found something that wasn't obviously written for adolescents, and suddenly, they realize that they've coated their pants with jizz.

As for the Odyssey, I do know what you're talking about. However, I kind of enjoyed that. Put me in the mythic mood, so to speak. It helps to remember how and when this was all written. I viewed it and the Illiad as big poems of heroic daring do told over days in the drinking halls. It got kind of fun then.

Plus, you have to find a good translation. Some are much much more dull and dry than others.

Captain Nevarre

Ernest Hemingway's Old Man and the Sea. one hundred pages of a guy fishing, and after reading it i had to analyze it to death in school. Why?

I have a friend with the theory that one either loathes Hemmingway and loves Faulkner or the opposite. I like Faulkner. Hemmingway, I find to be an incoherent, alcoholic git whose 'ingenious elipsis' is more the product of chronic alcoholism than genuine literary vision.

Further Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand has the distinction of having one of the best titles ever whilst being one of the worst books ever written. It could have been so good.

I think your friend is on to something then. I love Faulker, and despise Hemmingway with the fire of a thousand suns.

Hmm, I must be an abberation then. I kinda like both of them. Granted I've only read Hemingway's short stories, but I did enjoy most of them--especially the one about the dorky guy and his nagging wife getting run over by a wildebeast (or was it a water buffalo?). That had to be one of the best ends for dispicable characters I've ever read.

Hemmingway's short stories are palpable enough. But, ye GADS his longer fiction makes me want to immaculate him with a meat tenderizer, the damn drunken, self-loathing, woman hating, testosterone injected, cigar-chomper. (Living in south Florida is like some special Dante-esque hell for me. There are a ridiculous amount of fat, old chauvinists living in and around the Keys who all think they're Hemmingway reincarnated.)

And yes, I do happen to like Faulkner.

Rand is another one I can't abide. She always struck me as the kind of writer who hated reading as a kid, and wanted to horribly punish anyone foolish enough to pick up her books.

I cannot stand Billy Budd by Hemmingway. I read it for english class this year. I actually got pretty angry that the the main charater was such a violent idiot, but everyone liked him because he was "pretty" or some shit. The only thing I liked about it was that it was 70 pages (no joke) long.

Also, I've always HATED anything by C.S. Lewis.

Wasn't Billy Budd Melville, or am I thinking of something else? Not that it really matters. Moby Dick was boring as fuck, and I never had the slightest inclination to read any of Melville's other works after my English teacher forced me to slog through that crock for nearly three weeks.

Aye, Billy Budd was Herman Melville.

Have I mentioned in this thread that I really didn't like Lost Souls by Poppy Z. Brite? Hell, I don't think even she likes it anymore.