I had a funny conversation with a friend, a fellow book lover. We were talking about books we hated and he said he always finished a book "no matter what". I, on the other hand, will toss a book (I mean donate it :) ) if it fails to deliver.

Was wondering about other people's thoughts? Will you trudge through a book even if you don't like it? I suppose it matters how far you've gotten?

We are discussing that right now over here:
http://www.librarything.com/topic/56990

In fact, this topic comes up for discussion a lot.

I honestly don't feel good when I quit a book. I always get that nagging guilty feeling but I'm a slave to my whims and I absolutely cannot tolerate forcing myself to read something I hate. The last time I did that was in college and even back then I used to read Sparknotes' sums if the worked really sucked hehe :P

I usually force myself to keep reading, because it usually takes the majority of a book for me to form a real opinion anyways.

I've only quit a book once, ever, and it's still bothering me. Every time I'm at the library I feel like grabbing it and continuing with it. I just have to finish what I start...

I give books about 100 pages so. Maybe more if I think it's just slow starting or it's just a certain character I'm not liking. If I am just not enjoying it at all I flip to the back and read the last 10 pages to see how it ends.

If the ending makes me wonder how X happened or what led to Y, I'll page back a bit. If I find myself paging back more I'll go back to where I left off & read forward.

usually though I just consider it 'read' and move on to the next book

I call it quits as soon as I lose interest. I don't waste any of my precious free time not enjoying what I'm reading.

For me life is too short to waste on (in my opinion) a bad book when there is a whole world full of great books screaming "READ ME" :)

I call it fairly early on if I recognize it's a style of writing I don't like. If it's a book I'm obligated to read and review I hang in longer but I will quit on it if it's really bad. Otherwise, I'll give a book ~100 pages before I toss it. I don't do it often because I'm pretty selective about what I start, usually going by what others who share my reading styles recommend.

#4 - I'm curious, Ape. What's the one book you quit?

I rarely ever make a conscious decision to quit a book. More than likely, I'll just pick up something different and the first book is pushed to the wayside. I've done this quite a few times, and to a number of great books (The Bluest Eye, Lord of the Flies, The General in His Labyrinth...) because they just weren't what I wanted to read at that moment.

I'm like LA2Hernandez. I quit as soon as it stops interesting me.

But it gets a little iffy sometimes - I'm reading a book right now that is a bit dull at page 63, but I KNOW it will be a wonderful read very soon so I'm slogging through the boring part. (The Egyptian Coffin by Jane Jakeman).

9: It was The Dark Lord of Derkholm. If I wasn't kicking myself already for having returned a book to the library unfinished, you can imagine how I felt when I read the reviews I saw people saying not to quit it during the beginning, because it gets a LOT better.

Maybe this is why I never put down a book now. How do I know the book isn't going to get a lot better towards the middle?

I think I'm going to pick up The Dark Lord of Derkholm the next time I'm at the library. I'm going to force myself to read through the beginning sooner or later!

Message edited by its author, Feb 17, 2009, 1:14pm.

You can do it, Ape!

I like the 50-page rule in theory. In practice I never respect that rule, let's be honest. I gave up on Tom Jones after 300 pages. It seems really cowardly to give up after so many pages but the book had 1000 pages in my edition and I knew I'd rather commit suicide than read twice what I had already read.
I gave up on The Book Thief after 30 pages. I don't care how good that book is, I just can't read it and one page took me forever to finish. It took me an entire week to read the first 30 pages. I cleaned up my room, cooked for the entire family before I went back to that book, it was so dire that I did everything I could to avoid it.
I waited till I only had one book, A Wizard of Earthsea, to start it. With one unread book in the house I still managed not to finish it. I didn't get nightmares, but only just. I read one page on the bus per day and that's it, so I gave up. It only has 125 pages. I feel bad but life's short.

Life's too short. I used to always finish them. Now I have 3 tranches - one is put it down after 1 page (hopefully I do this before I get it home from the library), second is put it down after 25 pages or so, or finish it. There's so many good books out there. If you get a bad hamburger do you keep eating it? I think it depends on whether there's any way to get something better easily, i.e. what else is at hand. If something else is at hand, put down the book, chalk it up to a bad purchase and let go, cut your losses....just my opinion.

Ape, if it gets better then there must be at least something pleasant worth reading even if it's not much in the beginning but there are books that are extremely boring and aggravating especially when the author's idea is unoriginal or unconvincing. There's no way in hell I can go through it.

I'm glad to say that The Egyptian Coffin picked up and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

I'll stop reading if the prose is awful. The record in this category is held by Dan Brown, The Da Vinci Code; I opened it at random, read a paragraph or two of gut-wrenching drivel, and shoved it back on the shelf.

If none of the main characters are likable, I'll decide not to waste any more time on it (hello there, Rhett and Scarlett).

If the whole tone of the book is too depressing, I'll give it a miss. Unfortunately, many of the required works in secondary school English classes fall into this category, and cannot be avoided. The only Thomas Hardy I wish to deal with is Thomas Masterman Hardy.

If it's a historical novel, and the author didn't do his or her homework, that's probably the closing bell. Paul Doherty can't even be bothered to get his Egyptian characters' names right. No one has used Hatasu (which Doherty renders Hatusu) for Hatshepsut (not Hatchepsut, by the way) in about a century. And his detective Amerotke has a name that might sound Egyptian--I guess. But it doesn't appear in any catalogue of monuments or personal names that I know of. The author could have gone to the library and read through some exhibition catalogues or historical works and collected some characters' names. And don't even get me started on his bizarre depictions of the Egyptian court! I've never been able to read more than a page or two before my brain starts to hurt.
Less obvious errors, such as Lauren Haney's characters saying that no Egyptian army had been seen in Nubia for twenty years--this in the middle of the coregency of Hatshepsut and Thutmose III!--can also cause the book to be popped shut and left to gather dust.

Oh yes, let's not forget Empire of Ashes, in which Alexander's dimwitted brother turns out to be the big military genius. I think I actually did finish that one--wish I hadn't wasted the time.

I used to stop when I got bored and stopped enjoying what I was reading. Now, if that happens and the book has redeeming features, I'll try skimming pages until I get momentum again - or not. If not, I'm done.

It depends how invested I am in finishing the book. There are very few books I outright cannot stand, and among them are books I have read completely (Anthem by Ayn Rand) as well as books that I will likely be forced to read completely in school (Beloved by Toni Morrison).

If I respect a book, I'll finish it regardless of how much I enjoy it. If I don't respect a book (as respect is something to be earned), then I have no qualms about dropping it. I guess that means if I respect it, I'm invested in it enough to slog through it.

I used to be a never-quitter, no matter how tough the going got.

As I got a little older and could afford to actually purchase piles of books, though, ironically enough a habit formed of putting something I'm just not feeling hot about to the side, diving in to the next. Sometimes I come back to it, sometimes it gets relegated to the bathroom reading bin, sometimes I just forget it's not done.

One book, though, I've still not finished not because I didn't like it but because I liked too MUCH. I also know the author has a track record for wrapping a book up too shoddily. Haruki Murakami, nothing personal, but I don't want to get burned again.

And then there's the time when I abandoned Naked Lunch in the middle because it just got to be too much gross. Scat, death, blah blah blah, kill, blood, feces, urine, vomit, etc etc. Great and raw as it was I just had to put it down, take a breather, and conveniently forget to pick it back up.

Last book I orphaned was Tree of Smoke by Denis Johnson. I just wasn't in mood for Vietnam, figured I'll get back to it when conditions are better.

I rarely quit a book, as I am ever hopeful that the book will get better. The last one I closed and fled from was Joh Grisham The Associate. The one before that was Edgar Sawtelle. Those are probably two of maybe three in as many years, and they have both been in the last several months. Maybe I am learning to step away in my old age.

Being fully aware of the "Pearl Rule", still I, like mckait, rarely walk away from a book and when I do it is always with great misgivings. I will continue to read, attempting to find the redeeming value in the prose, plot, characters, anything to give me a reason to continue.
The last book I put down was Dostoyevesky's Crime and Punishment and that was because of the way the violence was portrayed. I know I will be able to pick it up at a point in the future and read it.

I don't necessarily have a "rule" as to when I quit a book. Most of the time if I'm not into it I'll put it down and get a new one the next time I pick one up. I may go back to the "bad" book several times, before I finally just never pick it up again. There have been very few books in my lifetime that I have picked up and read the first few pages and said "oh, no", but it has happened.

The Kindle is changing my habits. Most Kindle books have a "free sample" to download. You can read the first chapter or two before making the decision to buy. Now I'm reading lots of first chapters, but only purchasing a small percentage of those books. It's not quite the same as giving up midway into a book, but similar.

#22: Oh, I do hope you'll give Crime and Punishment another go at some point. I loved reading it for the first time. The degree to which Dostoevsky had me understanding Raskolnikov by the end was frightening.

The last book I wanted to put down -- couldn't, what with it being assigned reading for a class -- was Fingersmith. I wanted to like it because it seems to be such a popular read, but the constant presence of pornography in the story rubbed me the wrong way. Much of my fun reading consists of Victorian classics. I like my drawing rooms and estates sterile of such things. ;-)

A couple of thoughts ~ When I was younger, I usually finished all the books I started, but I think that was principally because I tended to read only books in certain safe genres (sf, mystery, romance) by authors I already liked. Over the past few years (since finding LT, in fact), I've branched out of my comfort zone, trying literary fiction as well as new genres and new authors, and some of it clicks and some of it doesn't. I will sometimes try to push through a boring beginning or mid-book slump, but sometimes I just put a book down and don't go back to it.

However (and here's my second thought), I've also been surprised a few times to find that a book I rejected the first time (or two) I try it has turned out to be a favorite when I try it for the second or third time. Case in point: The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao. Loathed it the first time I tried it; loved loved loved it the second time a few months later.

That is still not enough to convince me that I will EVER want to finish Dreiser's An American Tragedy). No. Never happen.

:)

Edited to fix touchstone

Message edited by its author, May 25, 2009, 1:59pm.

I've always had a 50-page rule. If a book doesn't seriously grab me or have some other reason to continue it, I drop it after 50 pages.

There are, of course, exceptions to this rule. The Shipping News was a prime example. I thought it was a well written book, but the characters were odd and I couldn't figure out where the book was going. Still I persisted until I finally "got" the book about page 70. Then I loved it.

Recently, I abandoned A Spot of Bother at page 80 because I didn't like one of the characters. A few days later I picked it up again, and now I have more sympathy for that character and I think I'll probably finish it. It's not the brilliance that I thought The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time was, but it's a worthy and amusing read.

The only rule that I have when it comes to discarding a book is that bad prose and really terrible characters may be 'officially' discarded, but anything that is just not my cup of tea at that the moment (be it humor, historical fiction, etc), it is not discarded, it is merely put aside for another day.

I used to always read a book to the very end no matter how awfully boring or poorly written it may have been. I guess I used to think that all books had to have some redeeming quality to it even though I might not personally be able to discover what it might be. I stuck with the book hoping that the book's message or entertainment value would maybe magically appear in the very last chapter of the book! But, no, it rarely happened. If a book was bad from the beginning, it usually was equally bad in the middle, and equally bad in the end.

I finally decided that there was a major truth in the saying "so many books, so little time", and only recently decided that I no longer wanted to be saddled with a bad book.

Nowadays, I give a book about 3 chapters or so, and if I have not been hooked by then, it's time to call it quits and move on to something more interesting.

I'll admit thought that it was super hard for me to do this in the beginning because it had been ingrained in me for so many years to force myself to read a book through to the end. But, I'm glad that I've made this change because now I'm always in the middle of reading several very good books at the same time!

I have no hard and fast rule. Most times it's when I say "I really don't care about this story or charactors." That is usually about 1/3 to 1/2 way into the book.
But I will put it aside and try again in a few months. Sometimes they end up better and they get finished.

Message edited by its author, Jun 4, 2009, 7:56pm.

For me, it's pretty easy. If the story offends me, I'm gone. If the story bores me, I'm gone (like Albert Camus' The Stranger -- well, actually that one offended and bored me).

I try to pick my books pretty carefully, though, because not finishing a book is a purposeful insult, and a decisive action by the reader which says, "You are unworthy of my time." I can usually tell if I'll like a book by skimming pages at random before checking it out or buying it.

Message edited by its author, Jul 6, 2009, 12:32am.

I mentioned in posts 4 and 11 that I've only quit one book. Well, I'm giving it another chance and I'm LOVING it. Also, I almost put down Saturn Rukh because the first 100 pages or so were WAY to heavy for my tastes. But I stuck with it and ending up loving the last 200 pages. So I'm still an advocate of sticking with a book with a rough beginning.

If I own the book I try it and if I can't get into it I put it away for awhile then pick it up again. If I don't own the book I return it and then I am free to get it out again if I please. I found Eagle Island by Allan Baillie hard to enjoy a while ago and just yesterday I picked it up again and read it - same with Wreck.

I usually try to read a few chapters before I decide to quit. Sometimes I even read a couple pages from the middle to see if it can spark my interest. If it doesn't I just quit.

Though, if it's one of those books like Twilight or the Time Traveler's Wife that everyone else reading that doesn't catch much of my interest....I just go to Wikipedia.

I'm the same way now, after years of feeling like i should finish everything I start. There are just too many really good books out there NOT to read them!

I used to force myself to finish things but last year I signed up for a 100 book challenge and that made it much easier to give up and move on. Or I would run out of time!

I usually quit when I decide I just don't care about both the plot and the characters. If I dread picking it up and look for a magazine to read instead, I know I'm done.

The hard part in not finishing is worrying about ego issues like 'everyone else found this brilliant and deep and I'm just not getting it.' That's a hard one to let go of.

I usually only stop reading a book when it really gets on my nerves and I feel like throwing them at the wall, so it can be at the beginning, or only when a character does a completely stupid thing, or when the author writes something that drives me crazy. So basically anywhere in the story.

Just bad writing don't stop me (I'm always up for a good laugh) and I rarely choose books that bore me (when I do, I usually finish them up nonetheless, unless I "forget" them somewhere)

I recently gave up on Mistress of the Art of Death by Ariana Franklin after about 170 pages because if I had to hear her full name "Dr. Vesuvia Adelia Rachel Ortese Aguilar" one more time I was going to go insane.

Plus the story was phenomenally boring.

That's weird. I've just opened this thread, read through from top to bottom, wondering whether I was going to mention I've just given up on Mistress of the Art of Death. Spooky. I didn't even get to 170 pages, though. I've read several by the same author under her other name of Diana Norman and enjoyed them all, but this felt very different. (Which it would be, I guess, as she has chosen a different identity for herself writing it - duh!)

Don't you hate it, though, when you drop a book half way through and don't ever find out what happened?? Maybe I am just a control freak! :)

If I can't get into a book for what ever reason I just read the end and call it quits. To quote Jake Witherspoon, "Never read a book through merely because you have begun it."

I stopped reading The Wasp Factory about a week ago, 50-60 pages in. The story is interesting and fairly disturbing, but the way it's written is just so tedious.

I hate giving up on books. This is the first in probably a couple years. I know my literary conscience will force me to give it at least one more shot before trading it in, though.

*Edited for typo. :)

Message edited by its author, Oct 30, 2009, 4:19am.

#40 : actually, if I care enough about the story to want to know what happens, then I keep reading.
But if it's just a matter of "who killed the butler in the library ?" (and it usually is - sheer curiosity 'll kill this cat someday :) ), I skim the last pages or google the book to find spoilers.

To me it's more like a percentage than an actual number of pages. About a fifth or a quarter of the way through seems to me a good indicator of whether things are likely to improve. Sometimes something just keeps you reading and sometimes it doesn't. The first time I read Captain Corelli's Mandolin I found the first 80-100 pages really hard going but I persevered, suddenly everything fell into place and it is now probably my favourite book of all time and I read it at least once a year, sometimes twice. Like KarenMarie, I slung Mistress of the Art of Death across the room pretty quickly and, on a certain amount of LT investigation, I now suspect this may be the most-abandoned book listed on the site. Then again, there are some you just keep going with and live to regret it. To the people who abandoned Edgar Sawtelle, for example, I can only say 'well done', it doesn't get any better towards the end, in fact it goes rapidly downhill. If you want to read Hamlet, I'm reliably informed that a guy called Shakespeare did a pretty good version - try that one instead.

I really liked Mistress of the Art of Death. Just finished it as an audiobook read by Rosalyn Landor. But, since you tossed it off, I will not tell you who did it! :) The book definitely messes with the emotions and morality. It is difficult as a person of this age to try to transport themselves into the thinking of medieval England. At yet at the same time it is apparent that people have not changed all that much - including the lunatics.

Currently listening to The Age of Innocence by Edith Wharton. Now there is a book that takes several chapters to understand what is going on. Descriptions of New York society c.1870 and the families. Eventually after about 10 chapters it starts getting interesting; the descriptions of the families and the way of life begins to make sense.

The last book I gave up on was David Mitchell's Cloud Atlas. It's a horrible one to quit because it's very high-minded and elaborate so people assume you just couldn't get it. And I did really like the structure. I just couldn't get into any of the specific stories or their protagonists.

I think of book reading as a guilty pleasure. I feel guilty for reading them, but not for not reading them. Honestly, there may be so many books to read but they aren't always ones availabe that I want to read. The other thing I will admit to is reading five books at once, One for the breakfast table, one for the bus, one tearjerker, etc.

#47 That's a weird thing to feel guilty about - especially on this site! Think of all the knowledge you are aquiring, not to mention how much you are expanding and exercising your brain. Surely a life spent doing nothing but read would still not be a life wasted? Sit back and feel good about it.

#39 JoannaON - great minds, eh?

#45 tames - I love historical fiction and am well able to transport myself to different periods and places. I think the thing that bothered me most about this book was that it was not subtle in any way. I felt bludgeoned with the constant repeat of her childhood and how, because she was a woman, she was repressed and had to do things in secret. Yes, this happened to women. Yes it still happens to women. And, of course, her !?$#!!?? name over and over and over and over. I really wanted her to get on with the story. I can meander and wallow in a book with the best of them, but this book just felt flat and dead and boring. It didn't feel cohesive, strong, well written.

Too many books, too little time.

I BookMooched it and hope that the person I sent to really likes it.

Message edited by its author, Oct 31, 2009, 6:05am.

It depends on the book when I quit it but if it's bad I just give up. I have to many books on my to-read pile to waste my time with boring stories or horrible writing.
This year I stopeed reading Sea Change by James Powlik because it had so much science details in it that it totally confused me. To read 5 pages about how some weather robot works isn't actually interesting for me....
I also gave up on A Girl's Guide to Vampires by Katie MacAlister. I forced myself to read about 1/3rd of it but the plot was just so un-logical and the main person so extremly stupid that I couldn't continue.

I usually don't give up on books. I have some on my shelf that I stopped some pages in simply because I don't have time to devote to them.

I'll finish a terrible book just on the off-chance that it could get better. The last one I forced myself through was Topping From Below. What a horrible book! I kept at it because once I made it half-way through I felt like I had to see what happened, but it never got any better! Just terrible - the "villain" was the best character, but he was still dry and boring too. I can't stand characters without brains or sense.

Now I'm just picky, and I always flip through the middle pages in the store before I buy it. If it seems like a million other things I've read or plain old drivel I'll just keep walking!