I will never again read anything by

? Has any author so turned you off that you will never read their book/s again ?

{inspired by the Tolkien thread}

JRR Tolkien

BLASPHEMY!!!!
;o)

Laurell K Hamilton (Merry Gentry series) and Martha Grimes (Richard Jury mysteries)

The first books in their series started out great, but then they just got silly and mostly forgot there was supposed to be a plot somewhere.

* hides from clam*

Patricia Cornwell oh ditto!!!!!!

...Brian Trent. Can I just say ICK?

"Martha Grimes" is she the one who inserts all those blasted quotes all the time????

... Mark Haddon.

Aryn Kyle

Robin Hobb. Just can't do it.

Dean Koontz

I'm such a bad sf/f fan:

Mercedes Lackey
Anne McCaffrey
JRR Tolkein
GRRM
Franesca Lia Block
Neil Gaimen (unless my sister manages to convince me to, but that is unlikely)

and

Nicholas Sparks (don't ask what possessed me to read him in the first place, I don't know)

I have a real problem with Franesca Lia Block, too. Maybe I should try again. Can't remember why I didn't like her, but I didn't.

Danielle Steel

Ick. Got one of her books from my mom who accidentally bought a duplicate. Never again.

M.C. Beaton, Theodore Dreiser, Sue Grafton, J.K. Rowling (this one might change in the future, but not now), Laura Childs and, oh, tons of cozy mystery authors.

Oh yeah, J K Rowling and Stephenie Meyer.

J. K. Rowling
Susannah Clarke
Louisa May Alcott
Neil Gaiman

Richard Layman
Mike Gayle
Dave Pelzer

Piers Anthony

David and/or Leigh Eddings
Posie Graeme-Evans

Russell Kirkpatrick
Brian Keene
Stuart Woods
Douglas Niles
Trudi Canavan

ETA:

Mickey Zucker Reichert
Cecilia Dart-Thornton
Sara Douglass (I tried, but after two books, I felt a little sick)
Robert Newcomb (I don't know how I finished an entire book)

Matthew Pearl

#7 - mckait - I don't remember an abundance of quotes,but I may have blocked them out of my mind. It's been a couple of years now since I tried reading Martha Grimes.

I have to agree and add Dean Koontz and Piers Anthony to my list, alongside Grimes and Laurell Hamilton. And these are all authors I've read several books from and used to enjoy :o(

Ian McEwan

Booker Prize or no, his books are AWFUL.

Jodi Picoult
Danielle Steel (embarrassed to admit I've read even one)
Thomas Harris (ick. ick. ick. ick.)
Khaled Housseini (yes, he's a good writer, but I don't need to be that depressed, thanks)

#1 Well, perhaps one of his sons or grandchildren will publish some back of a bar tab sentence by him to milk the Tolkien cash cow a wee bit more.

0:)

Tolkien?? Koontz?? has someone been reading my favorite author list? :-)

but i must totally agree on Cornwell. what happen to her.....totally unreadable these days.

Ditto MC Beaton and Patricia Cornwell. And I'll add Catherine Asaro. I only read one by her and it was not what I expected at all. Ick.

#10 readafew - Wow are you serious??? Robin Hobb's six duchies books are my fave ever. Soldier's son definately dragged, but I'm still surprised that someone could dislike her enough to never read anything more of hers, each to their own i know, just very surprised!!!

I'm not sure there are any authors I want to avoid...

Holly Black-- though I'm going to get the Spiderwick Chronicles a try, since it was co-authored and so might not be as bad as the books she wrote on her own? :D Well, I hope so, anyway.

I'll never read another book by Dan Brown again. The Da Vinci Code was enough to make me wretch.

And why all the hate of Neil Gaiman? Leave Neil alone, he gives so much of himself to his fans I'm surprised there's anything left for himself!

Umberto Eco I very much regret reading even one.

La Plante ditto, and then I bought a second not remembering! argh.

Robert newcomb rubbish. Really poor derivative fantasy

Rankin just too gritty. I like gritty detectives but this was over the top.

Clancy I liked his early stuff but it went downhill quite fast.

Eddings ditto. Although I might try his non-fantasy if he writes anymore because losers was pretty good.

Ian M Banks just not impressed.

#21 - What's up with Trudi Canavan. It isn't the worlds best fantasy, but I thought it was pretty good.

31 TA

I can dislike Gaiman's books if I want to. Nobody's said anything about the man himself, he doesn't need defending.

Just thought of another one... Virginia Andrews , read some in my teens,. Was checking them out on a friends bookshelf recently and realised how depressing and victimising the books were. ick...

edited to try and fix touchstone. Nope...

>#33: His hair's too long. And his name sounds like a crocodile.

Edited to clearly identify which author i was dissing. Not Virginia Andrews.

*goes to look up Virginia Andrews so i can diss her too*

Neil Gaiman. Coraline was OK pretty good but the only other of his works that I truly enjoyed was Good Omens... and that one pretty much bears a clear mark of Pratchett, IMHO.

John Steinbeck. Ever only tried Tortilla Flat, but... no thanks.

Ray Bradbury.

Charles Bukowski. Yuk.

A few of the ones mentioned earlier that I've not read comes to mind. I mean, why should I try David Eddings or Piers Anthony when they don't seem to write the kind of books I'd like?!

Khaled Housseini...I totally agree.
I read a Danielle Steele once, a long long long time ago. I never have and never will read another.

Roger Zelazny

I think it unlikely that I'll read any more Agatha Christie. One was enough.

Anne Rice - I excused the increasingly crappy writing in the Vampire Chronicles because I loved the characters. Well, I ain't got no love for Jeebus, lady!

Danielle Steele for sure
Jeffrey Archer
Martin Amis

(I just about kept my cool over Mark Haddon (#8) but Steinbeck? How could you Busifer? Tell you what - I'll read your share instead - would that be okay?)

Oh and definitely J K Rowling. She's probably nowhere near as bad as I think but it rankles that the rest of the world seems to think she's so good!

ETA Touchstones then decided against it. Why should I give publicity to these appalling oiks?

I was going to say Tolkien, but I'm not sure that's true. I'm really tempted to wade through the entire Lord of the Rings with a big black sharpie to make a "good parts" version (a la Princess Bride).

41 Caramellunacy

HAHAHAHA I love it!

#40 - I think Steinbeck is a distinctly american author, or maybe very male, in his choice of topics? I don't know.

My husband thinks he's one of the great authors of our time, but then he loves italian film as well... and I'm sorry, but I just don't think romanticised descriptions or novelizations of the discreet charms of the underprivileged are any more fun to read/watch than those describing the discreet charms of the überclass.

Of course, I haven't read The grapes of wrath etcetera. But Tortilla flat didn't made me want to try... There are so many books out there nothing's going to convince me to read books 'just because'. I read for pleasure and education, not to appear erudite.

>43 Busifer:
When you first mentioned Steinbeck my first thought was that his writing was very American.

You may well be right - though as an English female maybe it's me that's a bit weird. Believe me, if you didn't like Tortilla Flat you shouldn't even think about trying Grapes - TF is one of his cheerful ones! Thank heaven we all have different tastes. I'm with your husband on the books but definitely not on the italian films (at least, I don't think so - not sure I've ever seen one.)

#44 - Yes. Problem is there are other authors out there who could be described as very /insert choice of origin/, authors which I can read and enjoy. Or that was my thought, hence the elaboration (of which I'm still uncertain if it's valid).
Now that I'm thinking of it no one springs to my mind, though...

#45 - LOL. Classic italian films are very... poetic, romantic, and tragic. At least that's the stereotype.

#47 - You mean they aren't all about a bunch of silently sobbing mimes?

If people are up in arms about Tolkein, here's another "untouchable...

Terry Pratchett

I've tried four of his books. Just not happening for me.

Nah, I don't really get him either, though I'm sure he's not in quite the same class as Danielle Steele - oh, or another of someone else's suggestions I have to agree with - Virginia Andrews or any of the evil pixies now writing under her name.

#48 - Isn't that just about what I said? ;-)

I'm not going to read any more new JRRT either, but that's because I think LoTR is enough - I'm rereading it every now and then ;-)

I had decided not to read any more by Neal Asher, but then I decided to give him one more try. Mainly because I enjoyed all of his books except the last one I read the Voyage of the Sable Keech, which I loathed.

I have a lot. Sigh. I would rather dance an Irish Jig on sharp stones than read:

Terry Bloody Goodkind. *makes the sign against evil*
Cecilia Dart-Thornton. Someone take the thesaurus and the poor fairy tale
retelling pen away from this woman.

Eddings, any Eddings, Jordan (rip Mr Jordan, with all respect), Brooks, Danielle Steel (she comes up a lot - loved her when I was a romance-stricken teen), Wilbur Smith (no more elephants and violence for me thank you), Trudi Canavan, Sean Williams, Sarah Ash, Fiona McIntosh (gag to the last four)..

and on and on...

29 > I read the assassin trilogy, I own the ship trilogy and I just can't seem to ever start them, someday it might happen but there are so many other books that I WANT to read that it is unlikely, just don't like how she beats the crap out of all her characters and they lose even by winning. It's just tortuous reading for me.

#52 - more Trudi hate? What do you find so bad? Granted it's not the most original deeply sensitive character literature. But I've found her work to be more original than most, with some interesting magic themes, good developing characters, and an intruging balance between good and evil. Yes the animal names are intensely irritating, but not enough to never read anything else she's ever written.

David Sedaris
Orson Scott Card
Bill O'Reilly

@54. Honestly? It's not about the story or the characters. I just don't like her writing. A writer could have the best, or even a good, story and if I don't like the writing - it's lost on me.

Jude Devereaux
V.C. Andrews
Margaret Drabble
Dan Brown
Mary Higgins Clark
John Grisham

-some of these aren't terrible, I just got sick of them. I'd say Danielle Steel, but I've never read any of hers.

#55 - Hah! I'm with you on the Bill O'Reilly. I started one of his and couldn't finish it.

Severn, I am with you!

Hmmm Does Bill O'Reilly qualify as a writer?
He is such a lunatic... I know he has books out, but still...

#59 - "Does Bill O'Reilly qualify as a writer?"

I'm sure he thinks he does. ;o)

On the Danielle Steel front. Truly, I loved her when I was a teen. I wept buckets over The Ring, and Remembrance. Zoya broke my heart. The sheer, glorious, tragic romance of it all swept me away from many unpleasant real life things, and I am thankful to her for that.

For all that, though, erk. All the characters must be beautiful. All the characters must either be rich, come from a rich and/or powerful family, or marry into a powerful and/or family. The woman must all, without exception, be vulnerable and tremulous, yet utterly strong. The men must all, without exception, be hard yet with a soft centre - like a mallowpuff really.

By the time I'd reached book 15 or so I wanted to kill them all, and make them live in the real world.

Don't all of her characters have violet eyes and they are all very petite...?

My mom loved her books.. I always thought she had depression issues and should be treated.

#62 - The author or your mom?

#62 Well, if she didn't have them before it's my bet she probably had them after reading all those DSs.

#63 Ah - was assuming you meant your mum there but I get you now. DS should certainly be treated for something, even if it's only terrible writing.

LOL the author.....

Truly, if Steel's female characters lived 150 years ago they'd be Heathcliffing: running across fields, deliberately catching consumption, wailing and rending their clothes for their lost, tragic loves.

Only for lost, tragic love to storm in dramatically and wave a scented handkerchief under their noses and declaring their eternal love.

For most, it would be too late, and they'd die with a last, heartfelt sigh.

Their tombstones would all read:

Died in the Name of Love
Blessed Be

ROFL@Severn

Jane Austen
Charles Dickens
any Bronte

Now you're just being weird, surely?

>70 Booksloth:
Who?

Well . . you, fleela.

Note to self: It is not compulsory for other people to like everything I like. Nor does it make them 'weird' when they don't. At least, it may do, but there are lots of nice ways to be weird.

And I do truly hate Wuthering Heights too.

I love Wuthering Heights....

Me too ~fervent~

I love Austen, though. And Jane Eyre. But that's it.

Actually as a friend once said (more blasphemy) 'they didn't exactly have many authors around then did they?'

What would be weird is if I were to read more of what I know I don't like.

A Tree Grows In Brooklyn by Betty Smith.. have you read it? I read it over and over as a young teen... I don't remember it, or why I read it so much...

Christopher Paolini (I got through 1/2 of Eragon. It's boring, poorly written, and pretty much plagiarized. Oh, and the author's an arrogant wanker.)

Jim Butcher (I know I'm in the minority on this one, even among my female friends, but I absolutely loathed the misogyny of his Storm Front.)

John Grisham (I read The Pelican Brief at the urging of a former co-worker, who thought it was wonderful. His wet-dream Mary-Sue heroine made me want to retch, and the writing sucked eggs.)

Gabriel Garcia Marquez (I disliked One Hundred Years of Solitude so much that I haven't given any of his other books a chance.)

Now, I understand Robert Bloch and Ramsey Campbell are rather renowned for their horror fiction, but I was really turned off by the terrible writing in Bloch's Lori and the boring plot and obnoxious characters in Campbell's The Overnight. So I don't know whether I'd read either of them again.

After one Pern short story, I decided I wasn't interested in reading Anne McCaffrey.

Years ago, I read some V.C. Andrews books, but I doubt I'll ever return to her.

I have never read nor been tempted to read Mercedes Lackey, Piers Anthony, or Danielle Steel.

I've never read any Dan Brown and probably never will (unless I someday decide to read The DaVinci Code for the sake of the puzzle-geekery).

I love Austen, too. Have not read her in a while.. I need to fix that.

Well, isn't this the cat in the bag thread...

Laurell K Hamilton
Stephenie Meyer
Kevin J. Anderson
Richard K. Morgan
Charles Stross
Iain M. Banks
Neal Stephenson
William Gibson
Bruce Sterling
Terry Pratchett
Terry Goodkind
Mercedes Lackey
Anne McCaffrey
J.K. Rowling
Dan Brown
Justina Robson
Piers Anthony
R.A. Salvatore
Margaret Weis
Tracy Hickman
....

And so many more I've tried to just completely erase from my mind... I would probably recognise their names if I saw them, but right now, I'm just going to pretend I've never read their works... I do have to say I never have read a romance novel in my life -- UNLESS you count LKH / Meyer... which, I'm just trying to forget them....

EDIT: Oh jeez, you just HAD to bring up Eragon... add Christopher Paolini to my list as well... *shudder*

#76 That's very true.

#78 Should have remembered Paolini. Do you know the author or is the 'arrogant wanker' bit just speculation? (I really hope you know the author and have lots of libellous stories to tell us.)

I had to read mills and boon (harlequin) for my Popular Fiction paper at uni.

We all stood around and grabbed random ones from an old box the lecturer had lugged in. It was great: Dissecting romances. Those, and my dear departed Danielles, are my only romances. I always find it funny how fantasy is considered but a hairsbreadth away from romance by some...

@80 - you've reminded me to add Laurell K Hamilton, McCaffrey, and Lackey to the list...

So now what am I supposed to do about all those authors other people have mentioned and who I've never heard of? Should I take it as good recommendation and avoid them anyway? Or should I spend a fortune on buying them in order to make up my own mind, despite having had all these good warnings?

McCaffrey, and Lackey .. agreed

Sigh. On the subject of Paolini. My friends and I went to the movie solely to diss it. (Sad geeks that we are). There was so much to diss!

Not to mention the whole 'my parents are publishers so that's why I got published' thing.

My new mom-in-law sent the book to me for my birthday. Gah. So, I kinda have to read it because she's coming over in a few months - first time I'll have met her and things. And she loves it, and will want to discuss it.

Booksloth: At a small sci-fi/fantasy convention I attended earlier this year, one of the authors told a story about meeting him when he was first promoting Eragon at a book-signing event or con. Apparently, he approached a couple of veteran fantasy authors and asked them, "How would you like to buy a real book?"

ETA - I read half a Mills and Boon book once to see what all the fuss was about. Won't be doing THAT again.

#87 That's weird. That should have come out as an edit to 83. Ain't technology great!

#85 No offence to your new wife who I'm sure is lovely, but have you considered a quickie divorce?

erm...I'm the wife part of the duo ;0

And you can't blame the parent on the son.

He's turned out well, thank god.

~giggling~

#83 - you have to look at the what the users have posted and decide if you agree with the choices you do know. If for instance you try some Mccaffery and find you like her, then you may well like Lackey as well.

Whereas I know I can discount the opionions of Kassestra as Kassetra obviously has rubbish taste ;-) {different to me} and just doesn't appreciate all those superb authors in #80, so any on that list that I don't know are probably worth my while trying.

I love my romance novels, not that there aren't authors I would never touch again, but I do think it's funny that people insist they'll never read one again because the one or two harlequins/mills & boon they picked up were really bad.
To me it seems a bit like dismissing the entirety of fantasy because you don't like two books you read published by TOR...

ETA - obviously romance novel plots simply don't appeal to some people, and I'm not saying anyone has to/should/needs to read romance. I just take issue with people knocking the entire romance genre as poorly written based on a few bad experiences. As with most genres, there's a whole lot of crap out there obscuring the good ones.

Terry Goodkind. I think I read two of his books, and then just couldn't force myself on.

Anne Rice. 'Nuff said.

Elizabeth Peters. I enjoyed the first couple of her Amelia Peabody mysteries, but then they just got more and more over the top, and it became the "All Ramses, all the time" show. No more, please.

#90 Oops, sorry! Remarkable how some parents manage to raise perfectly normal kids!

Love the Paolini stories. The guy certainly sounds like a tosser. Is he actually old enough these days to stay up late for sci-fi conventions?

91 - "opionions of Kassestra"
Ohhhh... all the comments I could make about taste in authors and abilities to spell..... but I'm above that... mostly. ;)

I've known many people with completely opposite taste in books as mine and that's cool -- I just happen to use their fav list as usually a 'what to avoid' list. It's good knowing what you do and don't like as it can help narrow down the choices vying for your eyeball time on the glorious book shelves.

No problem! Severn isn't a girly name I know ;)

I hope that when he grows up he'll realise he doesn't want to be an author...

LOL!

I liked the Paolini books as well.. they were not very well written, but he is a kid.. and he did get published!

I will read the third one....

You really can't judge a book by a move..
It pains me to think what they did to the Mists of Avalon movie.. and that book was a jewel...

When I said I loved the Paolini stories, I did mean the stories about how awful he is - not the books (just didn't want anyone getting the wrong idea).

Yes, Terry Goodkind, I forgot him. I LOVED Wizard's First Rule and hated everything afterwards.

And while we're on fantasy books, how about Terry Brooks?

Did I mention Nicholas Evans?

I LOVE Nicholas Evans! (Shut up, Sloth, shut up.)

ahh sorry..

well, I did like the stories well enough to read the next one.. I don't buy them, but borrow from my niece.

I love a lot of the authors on this page... Nicholas Evans, Nicholas Sparks, early Stuart Woods (his later stuff stinks), Rowling, Dan Brown etc.
I recommend Chiefs by Stuart Woods to everybody. It was his first book and it was wonderful. Much different than his later writings.

Evans killed Singer... in The Guardian.. I am finished with him.. I read one of his other books.. maybe two..
but he is off my list!

ooops I meant Nicholas Sparks.. I don't like Evans either..

Stendhal - hated La Chartreuse de Parma when I had to read it for school. Won't ever touch another book of his.

Goethe - disliked Die Leiden des jungen Werthers so much and although I heard he wrote other really good books, I won't read any of them.

Laurell K. Hamilton - loved the first nine Anita Blake books and then hated every part even more than the one before. Won't buy any more. I gave her four more chances and she's run out of them.

Dan Brown - need I elaborate?

Tom Wolfe (sorry wrong touchstone) - Bonfire of the Vanities was okay, but A Man in Full was simply horrible.

Ayn Rand - I tried about five times over ten years to read The Fountainhead. Couldn't get into it at all and thought it was terrible. Will not try again.

Paulo Coelho - read The Alchemist and was astonished how wishy-washy it was. Won't read any more of that pseudo philosophy.

Eveline Hasler - I loved the story of Anna Göldin, but I just can't take her writing style. I wish she wrote differently because the books always promise to be great. But nah, just can't read it.

I'm sure there are more, especially authors we had to read in school, but I can't think of them right now.

>#107 I'm sure there are more, especially authors we had to read in school...

Yes: Hemingway. I was really turned off by A Farewell to Arms. When an author doesn't seem to care about his own characters, my reaction is, "Well, why should I?"

This thread makes me smile - I'm a never say never sort of person, there are plenty of authors above I love and a reasonable number I've not touched..but thats not to say that I won't.
I haven't to my recollection ever finished a Danielle Steele or Tom Clancy and don't have a burning desire to do so but come another sleepless night in a foreign hotel with nothing else I can read available who knows -OTOH I might use the long hours to learn {insert language of country here} via the hotel's novel collection and probably discover it is the local variant on Steele or Clancy.

To be fair I can think of a few authors I'm not very keen on..

>#108

Dude. Hemingway. Only read it if you really want to be depressed. He's so depressing I'm surprised they don't sell his shirts at Hot Topic.

Edited because I am a moron who forgets to close tags.

>69 DaynaRT: Fleela, I am with you on Jane Austen. In fact, the first A paper I got in my incredibly difficult humanities class was one that mocked Austen. (We had to write a preface for Emma.)

I think I only got an A because the professor had the same loathing. He was mysteriously ill the week we had to discuss Austen.

BUT, even though I cannot finish one of her books. In fact, I fall asleep to them like nothing else in my life, I still suspect that I will keep torturing myself by attempting to read them because I tend to like the movie adaptations of her books.

And no one ever shuts up about what a significant influence she was blah, blah, blah so I feel as if I'm missing something.

After all, I hated Dickens for a while and now actually enjoy him.

But since Ian "the emperor's new clothes" McEwan is contemporary I can rest quietly in knowing that his influence on literature, at least for the moment, is almost nil. And for the sake of books I hope it remains that way.

Danielle Steele, Nora Roberts, and William Shakespeare.

#91 - I was just about to write something like that in response to #80, and then I saw your answer, lol.

>112 momom248:

Shakespeare? Really?

I have to say that's the first answer that really surprised me. (Even if I disagree with others.)

Are you just opposed to reading his work? Or performed as well?

They can be dry and difficult, boring reads on paper, but I love his plays in the hands of deft performers.

I just moseyed over and bought a Jane Austen omnibus.....thanks to a lovely gift card... of course I picked up one or two other things as well.......

Just reading Shakespeare--it is so boring but I have nothing against in plays --like you said esp. if its good performers. I actually enjoyed Romeo & Juliet the movie that was made many years back.

Thanks to whomever reminded me to add Mary Higgins Clark to this list--she's another one whose heroines are all not only plucky, but also lovely, beautifully attired in clothes that sound like they come from Talbot's, and you can tell they are refined because they have long slender necks like swans . . . as someone who would have no trouble fitting in with Sister Woman's tribe of no-neck monsters, I found this very offensive or at least off-putting.

There's also plenty of that "don't go down that dark alley" type of activity on the part of the plucky heroines, when anyone with a grain of sense would know better.

#107 And thanks for reminding me of Paolo Coelho. At least, I could die quite happy if no-one ever reminded me of him again, but on this occasion . . .
And I'm convinced he only writes short books because he can't write long ones. Yeeeuuch!!!

You guys are a hoot! I haven't even heard of half these authors.

My only-touches-the-surface list includes Tolkien, Heinlein, the Brontes, Elizabeth Peters, A. M. Homes - read her memoir The Mistress's Daughter and can't even begin to imagine spending money on her fiction - Anne Rice - Interview and Lestat were good - gave up on Queen - Patricia Cornwell, Thomas Harris.

Second breath Sue Monk Kidd, Danielle Steele, Victoria Holt, Laurell K Hamilton's Merry Gentry series (agree with #3 sandragon).

I was supposed to read The Merry Wives of Windsor and Hamlet for bookclub last month but just couldn't get started, so I would possibly have to add Shakespeare's plays. I love his sonnets, though.

Sue Monk Kidd?? seriously? I loved Secret Life of Bees

120> I liked Bees too but I could barely get through The Mermaid Chair.

agreed... it didn't come close to measuring up to Bees

Pretty intensely disliked The Mermaid Chair. I have a real problem with dismemberment generally, plus I disliked the heroine--thought she was very self-indulgent.

Ack. Dismemberment? I'm glad I passed on that book then...

You don't like dismemberment? How very strange. After all - which of us can say we've never dismembered anyone? I know I have.

Laurell K. Hamilton (one was enough!)
Jim Butcher (I actually read the second one, but yuck)
Stephenie Meyer (jesus h. god, she sucks)
Gavriel Guy Kay (sorry, Busifer)
John Irving (talk about dismemberment!)
Tom Robbins (seemed deep when I was in my '20s. I'm in my '40s now.)

Hey, I adore John Irving... oh, dismembered touchstone.

yes, but you have to admit....dismemberments!

(I think he peaked out....didn't enjoy the last two books of his I read. Too puritanical.)

#128 - I didn't like the last one I read The Fourth Hand and so I waited until I could get the most recent Until I Find You for $1, so if I don't like it I won't fret over the lost money. It does make me sad, though. I thought A Widow for One Year was one of his best.

Yes, there are often parts a flying in his books...

I have read a few of Irvings.. and liked them. Clam I just mooched "Widow"
goddess help me and hold up my TBR mountain

Hee hee!

*sigh*

It's funny, but it's not funny... the TBR mounds, I mean.

I hope you enjoy it, mckait. I think that The Cider House Rules is still my favorite of his.

I really liked that too, clam

Owen Meany! (dismemberments included)

hehe liked that one too!

Yup, yup!
:o)

Ahh dismemberment...

*with apologies to Gigi*

He: I feel no strife.
She: You don't relax.
He: I used a knife.
She: You used an axe.
He: Ah yes! We dismembered them well.

He: We used our charms
She: We looked like dregs.
He: We took off arms.
She: We tore off legs.
He: Ah yes! We dismembered them well....

...etc...

#136 - o.o

Very clever, PeaBee.

Or should I say cleaver. ;o)

I love Maurice.

I truly can't think of any authors I loathe that much not to read any more of. I thoroughly didn't like Wuthering Heights, but I'm pretty sure that's because I had it over-analysed for a first-year university lit class taught by a boring old professor.

I can understand people's dislike for Piers Anthony, but I still read some of his books. They're very much hit-and-miss. I *should* never read Traci Harding ever again, but I just keep coming back to wallow in how much she needed an editor (and someone to tell her that Mary-Sues belong in fan-fic).

I find it difficult to completely exclude an author, possibly because I'm a kind hearted reviewer. I tend to think well of most books (and movies), even if others hate it.

#136

Oh, thanks--now I'm never going to be able to watch Gigi again (and I like to watch it about once a year) without substituting these words in that song!

But I'll never watch The Piano again . . . anyone who has seen it will know why.

Raymond E. Feist - I actually kind of enjoyed the first two Riftwar books, but the third one bored my socks off. I figured I'd read the rest eventually, but I've been consciously delaying for about a year now. I figure it's time to face facts.

Jim Butcher - I think. I read the first three Dresden Files and tried really, really hard to really, really like them. It ain't happening.

Barbara Cartland - I saw a television adaptation of one of her novels, and it was so hilariously bad that I figured I needed to read some of her stuff just for a laugh. It was definitely bad, but there wasn't even a hint of hilarity about it.

L.A. Banks - oh god. Why did I even finish Minion? It was absolutely the worst book I read in 2007. I might try another one if someone payed me. Otherwise: not a chance in hell.

Wow. *continues to make notes for books to add to her TBR pile*

There are so many authors here I love! Heh. Guess I'm low-brow.

#137 Cleaver I am not. That is the family name of Ward and June, who happily named their youngest son Beaver.

# 53: readafew - fair enuf, liveships is my fave trilogy of the three, but if you didnt like assasins then i guess you wouldnt like it either. I didnt find the torture of her characters too bad, but I found her characters so intensely real that I almost felt their pain as I was reading, so I guess I get where you're coming from. FYI - If you dont like torturing of characters, i strongly dont recommend Karen Miller's Godspeakers trilogy. I'm reading it at the moment & i am really enjoying it, but the first book was almost too dark & emotionally difficult for me to get through...

Cynthia Franca Gluckenstein

Wallace Franklyn Stovedore

Morinda Ellen Kostonova

Bella Jaimie Winston

M.K.W.C. Fingersfurth

Anne McCaffrey: I loved the Dragonrider & Harper Hall trilogies when I was young, but since have outgrown.

Marion Zimmer Bradley: Ditto--loved the Darkover novels back then. I could see maybe rereading Mists of Avalon some day.

Charles de Lint: I think I gave him a fair shake by reading Memory and Dream, but it was just too fraught.

Sheri S. Tepper: Enjoyed The Gate to Women's Country at the time, but I don't think it would hold up on rereading. Grass left me indifferent. Beauty I had an adverse reaction to and abandoned after 100 pages.

#145: VisibleGhost, how can you say that? Cynthia Franca Gluckenstein and M.K.W.C. Fingersfurth are my favorite authors ever!

Jodi Picoult ... not after the stupid ending in Nineteen Minutes.

#148 Now I'm going to have to go and check out the ending again. Another voice in favour of John Irving, btw. And another yeuchhhh for Barbara Cartland - though she was really more of a dictation machine than a writer.

Going through the above, I could start a new list: of authors I once loved and would reread old favorites of, but I doubt I'd read anything new (or new to me) by them.

Anne McCaffrey (still a favorite author though, for her Pern novels)
David Eddings
Robert Heinlein
Ray Bradbury
C.S. Lewis
Anne Rice (loved The Mummy but never liked any else by her)
RA Salvatore
Margaret Weiss/Tracey Hickman
Jude Devereaux (Knight in Shining Armour was a hoot)

Ray Bradbury is still a favorite..Dandelion Wine in particular.

I bought Knight in Shining Armour solely on the strength of its cover... I swear, and it was a hoot....

>#125 After all - which of us can say we've never dismembered anyone?

Geez, Booksloth, between you and messpots*, I'm not sure LibraryThing is safe anymore.

* See #103 on this thread:
http://www.librarything.com/talktopic.php?topic=34503

Don't compare me with messpots! Dismembering people may not be everyone's cup of tea but I would NEVER sink so low as to defend Max de Winter!

My added list:

Danielle Steel
Steven King
Dan Brown
Barbara Cartland
Lawrence Sanders
Martha Stewart
Mazo De La Roche
Lilian Jackson Braun
V C Andrews
J D Robb
Nora Roberts
Gregory Maguire

looking back, I've read several things that I now think were a total waste of time and brain space. Sad, huh? Now I just don't finish the book. Life is too short for stupid books.

Gregory Maguire, add him to my list.

There are a lot of authors people have mentioned that I'm not planning to ever read a first book by, heh.

#154: I am definitely going to take authors from your list.

Danielle Steel - stopped reading her in elementary school.

Steven King - It turned me off from him.

VC Andrews - OHHH, GAAAAWD!!!

J.R.R. Tolkien - I know, I know, BLASPHEMY!

Patricia Cornwell - In high school, I loved her, but then it became monotonous.

L.A. Banks - I purchased one of her books but I am taking it back. I seriously want my money back. It was horrid.

>#153 Don't compare me with messpots! Dismembering people may not be everyone's cup of tea but I would NEVER sink so low as to defend Max de Winter!

Hey, if the shoe surgical saw fits...

:P

#156 (That's a hard name to shorten! Geek just sounds rude; Black has to be racist, which probably means Girl is sexist. GBG okay?) Anyway - let us know how you get on with that return. It's something I've always wanted to do but I've never been brave enough - not for being a bad book anyway, though I did return one that had the last 30 pages missing. And they were very nice about it too.

Dan Brown (the Da Vinci code was rubbish)
Marina Lewycka (v unkeen on A Short History of Tractors in Ukrainian)
GRRM (A Game of Thrones was not my cup of tea. At all.)
Ian Sansom
Paulo Coelho: so meaningless.
Bret Easton Ellis. I was seriously put off by a particular scene in Glamorama. Eurgh eurgh eurgh.

Steve Berry--The Templar Legacy had some continuity and common sense issues that really drove me crazy!

Oh Oh have to add Stephen King...brrr...no thanks. Read like 8 in a row - stupid move. Never again.

K.J Parker - horrible incident in The Belly of the Bow, involving a small boy, a bow maker. Yuck.

Dan Brown - haven't read him, never will.

Delia Falconer - The Lost Thoughts of Soldiers was a pretentious waste of space. Selling it soon. Love Civil War stories - ones that make sense, and actually have characters I can care about.

Bessie Head - I also love stories about Africa, but this lady - no matter how politically incorrect it may be to dislike her work - turned me cold. Also selling my copy of Maru soon.

I have a 'waffle' tag. The last two made it into there.

(eta - stuff)

I just remembered another one I blocked out my memory:

Michael Moore

I like his movies okay (obviously when taken with a grain of salt) but the one book I read was stupid and insane and made me realize that he's basically the inverse of Anne Coulter.

"he's basically the inverse of Anne Coulter."

and that's wrong?

#163: It is to me. Anyone with a tendency toward extreme and/or intentionally inflammatory rhetoric is likely to turn me off. Liberal or conservative, religious or non-, doesn't really matter.

>163 mckait:, 164

Me too. Being a crazy, extreme liberal is no better really than being a crazy, extreme conservative.

I see your point, but if I had to be in a room with one of them, it would be Michael... Anne give me chills just thinking of her.

If I had to be in a room with either of them, I'd start inventing imaginary friends real quick!

#167: Ha! So true.

Or maybe the Imaginary Enemy, Ed, that my friends and I made up in middle school. Poor imaginary Ed--he got blamed for everything.

Put me in the camp of never wanting to read inflammatory rhetoric of any stripe, shape, color or orientation.

I also will read no more:

Thackery or Laurie Lee

I was surprised at how hard it was to come up with someone I was pretty sure I would never read again. The only one I feel confident about is Flannery O'Connor

I forgot to mention Christopher Moore.
I know lots of you think him funny, but to me it's just too much air. Maybe he's very american, too (see Steinbeck...).

I'd forgotten about Barbara Cartland. In high school, my friend Lorie and I started reading romances. In every BC we read there was some variation of the phrase "when he kissed her for the first time it's as if he drew her soul from between her lips." When we found it, we would hoot and carry on something fierce. It always struck us as soooo funny.

Being a yellow-dog Democrat I prefer Michael Moore to (I can barely make myself write her name) Ann Coulter. She gives me the heebie-jebbies. More important, she's dangerous.

ETA:
#120-124 I guess I should have read The Secret Life of Bees first. Now I can't bear the idea of opening anything by her. This is what I get for taking a recommendation from my MiL.

Bees is about strong loving women... and about rising above..
It filled me up. It also discusses the black Madonna... so has religious tones...
I am NOT religious.. it was not, in my opinion preachy ...just good.

I thought these links might be of some use to those of us that both love and love to hate some authors... (Of course this also spawned my remembrance of all the writing that is Crichton, Niven, and Lewis, ugh and I was so hoping to forget...)

I had to laugh at the versions of even some of my most beloved books...

Book-A-Minute, SF/F

Book-A-Minute, Classics

Omg those are so funny...

Ship of magic one is my personal favourite so far...

C. S. Lewis
L. Ron Hubbard

176 - OH MY BRAIN, MY BRAIN! I must now go attempt to bleach it out. You HAD to mention Hubbard. I had a friend that adored his writings... I got Battlefield Earth for christmas one year... OH GOD, THE PAIN....

>120 mckait:-122 & 172
RE: the secret life of bees... did anyone see this article?

http://www.wyff4.com/news/16613800/detail.html

Mmmmm, hunny . . .

@177 - friends and I love to mock Battlefield Earth the movie. We didn't know what it was about till we were seated and after the first few scenes my mate said 'this is going to be bad' and boy...was she right.

~shaking head~

I know! I'll go to the ruins of the New York public library, instantly find a book on flying B52's, and teach a bunch of cavemen who don't know what triangles are, how to fly one in just a few days!

Wooooh!

>180 Severn:
Not to mention that despite the fact that aircraft are notoriously finicky and in need of constant maintenance to become airborne, they will nonetheless be in perfect working order even after several hundred years...
What?

Then there's the issue of whether or not John Travolta as Dread-locked Alien actually had 5, or 6 fingers on one hand.

It changed periodically...

Oh god. My brain. I need to go wash it out again.

And were those platform shoes really menacing? Or just a scary scary pseudo-tribute to the 70s and Saturday night Fever...

#150, 151 - Yeah, Knight in Shining Armor was a lot of fun for a 15-year-old, but that's as far as I'd go. It did kick off my Anglomania though...

C. S. Lewis...yep! finished with him as well...
L. Ron Hubbard never have, never will.....

174: kassetra Links are hilarious!

ETA clarification on links

#186. mckait, no L. Ron Hubbard? I'm going to have to read Dianetics just so I can wholeheartedly disagree with it! Right now, I'm only in nigh-complete disagreement with L.Ron and Tom Cruise :)

I used to live in West L.A. near the main church of Scientology and I'd periodically get stopped on the street by the Scientolonuts asking me to take a quiz that would "prove" how much I needed them to help me . . . sign here and hand over your money.

No thanks, not reading that stuff. Life too short, on this or any other planet.

#188: Did you offer them a free psychological evaluation that would prove how much they need you to help them? :)

*snort*

A scientologist stopped me on the street once with 'you look like an intelligent young woman'. I stopped him as well and said 'it's the brown hair and glasses isn't it? I don't like assumptions' and walked off.

The gall.

Gall I say!

*double snort*

LOL!

I used to have an employer that was, for a time, a Scientologist..

He told me some pretty wild things.. he stepped away when they kept
asking him for money.

I would seem to be fairly uncritical in the field of literature as i can only conjure up one name to contribute to this thread-Ernest Hemingway-the man took macho too darn far. The only one of his books i like is The Old Man & The Sea. Of course you'll never catch me reading any of Danielle Steele's books & Ditto for Barbara Taylor Bradford or any other writer of 'Bodice Rippers'. 8^)

Without, I hope, being too pedantic, I wouldn't call Danielle Steele or Barbara Taylor Bradford writers of bodice rippers. No, in their books the plucky heroine undergoes some hardship but manages to rise above it, stronger and frequently richer than before, and in the process finding a strong, sensitive, understanding, handsome, sexy, loving, rich, etc. guy, and at some point quite far into the tale, they make magical earth-shattering and generally not very explicit love. Whereas in the bodice rippers, quite early in the tale the heroine has her womanhood awoken by a manly, rugged, domineering hero who sometimes quite literally rips her clothes off and handles her heaving white globes while making her reach heights of passion hitherto unsuspected . . .

I don't read either of these types much any longer, as they are both, as I hope I've demonstrated, pretty predictable!

Oh oh I get to be pedantic too! ;p

In Steele's at least they're not usually plucky exactly...many of them are all fragile and broken-like, whom the man must rescue either from circumstance, bad relationships, or from themselves. Well, at least in her earlier stuff which I was reading in the lat 80s, early 90s. I don't know what she does with her rich gals now. I'm sure the men are all still ruggedly handsome and wealthy though.

'heaving white globes' - are you sure you're not talking about lamps on a magic pirate ship?

#196

You are of course right about Steele's heroines--they are fragile and need rescuing (ugh). I have not, I hasten to say, read that many of her pieces of dreck. But I remember one in which a poor country girl with no education ends up running a huge company--strained credulity, to say the least. There may have been roses involved in the story somehow.

Magic pirate ship--I'd like to read that story! (Actually, I just momentarily forgot how to spell bosom--heaving or otherwise.)

Oh I liked the one where a nazi married an Austrian 'jewess'.

Yes...really...

I found the most down to earth one to be 'Remembrance' - about 3 sisters who were separated when young, put into foster care and given new families, losing all contact. It followed the eldest who was abused in said 'care' and became cold and distant, throwing her energies into work until a man (rescuer) reached through the ice so to speak.

Still the usual formula, yet with some heart, and emotion. It was certainly my favourite back then.

Now we're well and truly into the subject of DS, the only one I ever read was about a very poor girl who falls in love with a wealthy man. He (or probably his parents) don't want to know and they are separated. Then the girl is involved in a car crash and has to undergo plastic surgery which completely changes her looks so that when she goes after him for a second time he has no idea who she is. At some point here she's come into some money (just as well I guess or she wouldn't have been able to afford all that surgery.) No doubt all turns out well in the end - I can't remember if I actually finished it. Quite why she would retain even the slightest bit of interest in the kind of man who allows his parents to dictate who he marries, I have no idea (though it seems to have worked for Prince Charles). Fun? Maybe, if you're 12 years old. Realism it ain't.

Robin Hobb
Roger Zelazny
Piers Anthony Though I am going to give him another try.

Heh, Booksloth -that was 'The Promise'

I was trying to remember the title of that...that was, I recall, one of the ones I was particularly annoyed by. Of course she became beautiful, mysterious and enigmatic...

bah

it was nonsense

I can't believe I forgot V.C. Andrews. I'll usually give authors at least two or three books before I decide they're just not worth it, but one of hers was more than enough. I only finished it because I was dogsitting at a friend's placce and only had a couple of novels with me.

#201 You're darned right it was (I was trying to think of the title). I do have to point out that knowing that makes you look awfully like a DS expert which I'm sure you didn't mean! It's okay - I won't tell anyone.

ETA - and about V Andrews - what's that all about, eh? I mean - if you were a genuinely brilliant writer and it was possible for someone to clone books, in your name, after your death, it MIGHT be fair enough (at least it might be a help to people like me who grieve that they will never find a new Steinbeck, Patrick Hamilton or Robertson Davies book) but who on earth was it who decided the world needed more VCA? Doesn't anyone else think death might have been god's way of telling her to stop writing?

#203

Laughing at your last sentence, I wanted to mention that I just read an article on Yahoo about sarcasm being an evolutionary adaptation for survival--I sooo want to send the article anonymously to the two managers who told me in a brutal evaluation that I was perceived as sarcastic by coworkers. Well, they said "sarcastic and negative" and I was like, "I'll give you sarcastic, sure, but negative?" I went to a lot of trouble to psych myself up to be all cheery and smiley for that stupid job.

As for VC Andrews... that had always been a mystery to me. I thought she was dead.. then all these books kept showing up ( I read Flowers In The Attic and stopped ) so then I thought I might be wrong and she wasn't dead...

but so she is dead?

Who is writing the post demise novels? Is she a ghost writer?

as for your last sentence.. funny! harsh.. but funny..LOL

Stephen King. Ick.

Anne Rice, L. Ron Hubbard, Ayn Rand, Tom Clancy

and others. Life is too short.

Oh yes, Ayn Rand. I read We the Living about seven years ago, and it still ranks as the most depressing book I've ever read. Seriously, that sucker did a number on my mental health. All while I was reading it, I felt about ten times worse than normal. Yeah. Never again.

#205 Yeah, she is dead (though not nearly dead enough IMO). It is a ghost (ha ha! No pun intended) writer now (or even, I'm sure I've heard, a whole team of them). Why? Don't ask me.

#204 Sarcasm a sign of evolution? That's the first time anyone's suggested I have evolved! I'm flattered!

I never finished any Ayn Rand, but I read part of The Fountainhead during my junior year of high school. Dreck. She is definitely on my no-read list.

I can't think of any authors I've completely sworn off. I think some morbid curiousity keeps me thinking that maybe the next one might have some bit of brilliance or might be terrible in some interesting way. But whenever I think about reading or buying one of their books, this image of a huge pile of unread books pops into my head. So, if some kind of global catastrophe destroyed all other written works in the world (at least in the languages I might be able to read--I could see buffing up on my college German to avoid these authors.) then I would probably be willing to read their books.

Anyway, here's the list below:

Dean Koontz
Raymond E. Feist
Chuck Palahniuk
R.A. Salvatore

#169 Oh MrsLee!!! The wonderful tact you have. Here I was rhapsodising about Cider with Rosie and you didn't like (to put it mildly?) Laurie Lee and never said a word? The kindness of the woman. *chuckle* I'll be smiling about it all evening now. :-)

@203 - erk! I er, have a good memory that's all I swear! (Actually, I really was a passionate DS expert in my teens. Argh. The memories. The shame).

*Goes to the bar to have some of what Groo has been handing out*

#211 - You caught me! I hesitated even to write that here. *blush* The fact is, I don't think he's a poor writer, just not my style. :)

I am so relieved to see Ayn Rand on so many lists here. I was afraid the world would be dominated by people who behaved the way her heroes did, since I see her books on so many of the "most read" or "best literature" and in so many school assignments. I know so many college students who rhapsodize about her books and her philosophy. I think it's horrid. I am relieved that I've also met many who loved her at the young adult stage, but grew out of it.

How could I forget Nora Roberts? ye gods!

Oh, another vote for Ayn Rand.

And I think this thread has given me nightmares! I dreamed about Jack Nicholson running down the hallway chasing people with an ax. So it was either the GD, or something I ate.

Whichever.

#213, I totally understand where you're coming from MrsLee. Laurie Lee is a bit...over-the-top in his descriptions and I can certainly see where he wouldn't appeal. We share so many other books in common that we obviously enjoy, the differences add some spice to the mix don't you think? :-)

I remember enjoying Ayn Rand when I read her in high school but was surprised that people actually took her philosophy seriously (apologies to any here that do, no offense intended). I just read it as fiction without the agenda. I've kept her books, I'll try reading them again one of these days and see what I think of them now that I'm older.

213 -
As one that found much to enjoy in Ayn Rand's writing, I don't necessarily agree with the idea that it is because I haven't 'grown out of it'. One person's junk is another's treasures, no?

I know I've listed some authors that others adore, but I don't believe that someone is somehow less grown-up because they like authors I found repulsive.

It's fun to trash authors sometimes, *cough*Laurell K Hamilton*cough*, but I would hope we'd not trash the people that read them?

I don't think many people on here would do that and I've lurked around many threads and never seen MrsLee be anything other than lovely so I'm sure it wasn't meant that way. However, I do think that sometimes we can 'grow out' of a book or a genre without that necessarily implying that other people who read them are somehow immature. When I was younger I used to read a lot of fantasy - nowadays I can't stand it (with just a few good exeptions) I feel I've outgrown it now. I just read so much of the stuff that it felt like eating too many cheeseburgers - no matter how great they were you just can't face another. That's not to suggest in any way that people who enjoy fantasy are somehow on a lower plane than I am, or that some fantasy books aren't excellent - they are - I've just changed my tastes a bit, I may go back one day and then I suppose I'll have to say I've 'grown back into them'. I've never read any Ayn Rand so I can't comment on the specifics here.

Conversely, I love to rediscover books that I enjoyed as a child or in my teens that I probably should have outgrown. But I haven't.

Nevada Barr
Alice Sebold (EVER).
Sophie Kinsella
Gregory Maguire

And while I won't say NEVER, I'm extremely reluctant to read any more Anita Diamant.

That being said, I'm going to go hug my Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman books. They don't understand you like I do, dear books...

And am I the only person who LIKES depressing books? If a book can make me cry, it's really good.

I LOVE depressing books! Is there any other kind? If nobody dies, what's the point?

And just to go back to that 'outgrowing' thing. Sometimes you just hit on one that is soooo great (Gormenghast, in my case) that you know there's no point in trying to better it. You've reached the pinnacle - time to try something else.

221 -
That example, as far as I know, is not an example of 'outgrowing' something.

Outgrowing, with all due respect to MrsLee, is a term typically used, (according to my dictionary, perhaps it is not correct any longer), to convey something childish or temporary, such as obnoxious behaviour as a child, that is no longer present. I do not object to a work itself being called childish or horrible, etc. I disagree with using terms like 'outgrowing' toward the people that read and/or enjoyed the books at one time.

That is all I stated previously.

Perhaps this example will make what I said clearer; compare:
"I have outgrown the Green Dragon forum and am leaving now."

with:
"My tastes have changed now, and I won't be on the Green Dragon forum any longer."

(just an example to clarify what I mean! that's all!)

I stopped reading Robert Jordan about seven books ago. Also, no more Peter David for me. Sir Apropos of Nothing was mildly amusing, but the next one was mildly irritating, and I had to throw the third one across the room.

#222 My apologies. I must make more frequent references to my dictionary.

Mark Z Danielewski, James Frey, Stephen King and Dean Koontz. All awful in different ways in my opinion.

Mon dieu! L'anglais, c'est une expérience douloureuse.
I was trying to explain why I asked to keep it to authors and not readers. Argh.

Aujourd'hui, j'ai stoppé.

I don't think either of us needs take offence (en francais ou en anglais) - I just wondered why you are so bothered about the idea of outgrowing things. Older isn't necessarily better (I wish!) but surely you don't expect to have the same tastes when you're sixty as you have now? Of course we outgrow things.

Because it implies that someone is more mature and less childish than those who haven't "outgrown" a book, author or genre. It's insulting.

I suspect that's more a matter of interpretation than intent.

ETA - I've outgrown my jeans - you're not suggesting I think makes me somehow superior to those who haven't?

I know someone will probably attack me for this, but I don't like Stephanie Meyer. At all. Purple prose, much?

Also, I'm not too fond of Dan Brown.

Oh, John Steinbeck, too. After a secondary school course full of his stuff (The Pearl in middle school, The Grapes of Wrath in high school - the most books in the system by any author), I never want to read his works again. Ever.

227 -- well I have tried my best to explain what/why I asked only to receive an answer like 224.

As I stated now twice, outgrow has a negative connotation, at least in my translation/dictionary/immersed learning environment/locale/etc.; children outgrow poor behaviour. To outgrow -- to surpass in growing, exceed in growing; a comparison relative to others. (that is what I have for a definition, and that is what I have gone by; it is possibly not the same as other translations, but it is the only definition I have seen used.)

And as I said, I give up attempting to explain in english any further today. It's not worth the drama for something I considered a simple request.

The answer you seem to have taken exception to was an apology. Maybe it's a cultural thing.

231 With you on Dan Brown - though one was okay - I think it was trying another that was the problem.

LOL!!!

"To grow" is usually used in a positive meaning - as in "grown wise".

When people tell me it's immature to read speculative fiction and that they read that as kids but have now gone one to read more mature works I think that could be taken as an insult, even if it wasn't meant as one.

In fact I think all these relationship dramas focussing on the inner life of the protagonists that are so popular are mental fluff for people whose brains can't fathom concepts beyond that of family and immediate society.

Now, isn't that an insult on equal terms with the previous one?
Only some genres are deemed as of lesser value, and those reading those books can be judged without risk...

WTF, just let people enjoy whatever they are enjoying, and let it stay at that.

And definitely with you on those 'god-my-life-is-so-horrible' books. Have you seen the one called 'My Godawful Life: Abandoned, Betrayed, Stuck to the Window'? (I'd better explain before I get misinterpreted that it is to be found in the 'humour' section.) I haven't read it yet but I think I'm going to have to at some point.

Try walking up to someone and saying something to the effect of 'Once being educated, I outgrew my religious beliefs.'; it's tactless and insulting, no matter which culture you are in. Another example is when I'm teaching someone some bit of mathematics I don't say to them 'I outgrew that method when I learned such-and-such a subject.' Do I actually feel this way? Who knows? Who cares? But it certainly leaves an impression that I have somehow surpassed them in some cerebral context.

As I said, the specific verb form 'I outgrew...' (not 'to grow' or some other variant because changing this particular verb drastically changes the meaning) almost always leads to statements of comparison that are derogatory, no matter what culture you are in.

#237 As I said - I guess it's cultural. I did wonder whether I'd just been using the word wrongly all my life so I checked my OED and that certainly doesn't mention any perjorative use so it seems to be something that raises fewer hackles over here. I can't say it would bother me but that clearly isn't the case in countries that begin with an A. Although I wasn't the one who used it (and I'm sure they meant no harm either) I will apologise again for upsetting people's sensibilities. I've certainly used far 'worse' words to less dramatic effect!

Time out please!

kassetra - Please forgive me, I in no way meant for that to be insulting, though of course, I see how it was, and I agree with you. Please chalk it up to posting without a lot of thought to my phrasing. I loved the Ayn Rand books I read, and found even their philosophy very attractive at one point. I no longer love the philosophy, though it is possible I would still enjoy the writing. The fact that my tastes have changed is of course, no reflection on anyone who has, does or will enjoy her. Better?

Booksloth - Thank you, you were right, I intended no offense or judgment with my post, it was just sloppy phrasing.

Can we move along now? Let's be friends, O.K.?

I don't think anyone is upset? Only a clarification of terminology...
I certainly have been in a row of discussions were different ideas on what meaning or concept a specific word carries have led to heated debates, only to peter out when everyone realises it was all down to words.
And I think it interesting to get to see these differences. Enhances my grasp of a language not my own.

Can we move along now?
What are you implying? That we're sitting here static, while you're moving past us? You think you're better than we are just because you're more dynamic? ;)

(I did wonder how we got this far in this thread without some kind of controversy.)

I never realized how much slang, figures of speech, idioms, etc that I use until I went overseas (to Sweden, Busifer). I received so many blank stares. It was a wonderful learning experience for me. An eye-opener, you might say. :)

Busifer - I was upset, because I'm pretty sure I offended kassetra.

MrsLee - Yeah, and I think maybe a few more, but knowing you they all should had known you meant no offence.
At least that's what I think.

MrsLee, oh heavens.
Ok. I didn't think you set out to make comments about the readers -- but the order of your sentences and the verb choice struck me as remarking about the reader. I only wanted to point it out so that we could steer clear of associating readers with the authors/genres/books we were roasting. :)

The internet is a wonderful multi-cultural thing that gets lost in translation sometimes. I didn't think you were out to smite all of Ayn Rand's readers down with the hand of grown-up-ness. (Although... that would be FUNNY!) I only wanted to stay away from saying that readers have poor taste, etc.

Ok? Please? No worries now?

Because now I've just remembered yet another author I'm not reading more from... Michael Crichton... I call shenanigans on his science! I say foo to his endings!

>245 kassetra:
I also call shenanigans on Crichton's science (in most of his work), and foo to his endings (in the more recent books of his, anyway), yet somehow, I still end up reading just about anything he writes. I just like his style for some reason...well, right up until the ending, normally :(

I have never read anything by Crichton (and don't intend to either) but I have to say that I don't care overly much for how valid the actual science in the science fiction that I read.
I know there are people who can't read stories depending on FTL (that's short for faster than light) travel just because FTL isn't viable. I'm not one of those. If the story is well told and the topics are interesting and the characters capturing and the science or world or society internally coherent - that's enough for me.
Science fiction, for me, is about expanding the mind, stretching possibilities and, sometimes, discussing present day issues by use of allegory. Not about science per se.

247 -
Then call it *speculative* fiction... or even brain-expanding-impossible fiction.
Anything but *SCIENCE* fiction...

Well I have a lot of Crichton, and I generally enjoy reading him, but I have to say the Prey was pretty bad in the science. It almost looks good, he builds a bridge of information and logic from two banks to show how things went from 'here' to 'there' and if you are standing along the bank it looks like a complete bridge, however the 2 sides do not meet in the middle, he leaves a large gap but claims success and tells you to go stand on the bank and don't try to follow him across.

is that esoteric enough? Any way the point was most of the time I can ignore science problems but this one was impossible logically to get one thing from the other and ruined it for me really. I think it was because I had a fairly good understanding of the technology and theories he was trying to use poorly and could see it wouldn't work how he wanted. It's like basing a proof on the fact that 2+2 = 5.

#246

That just strikes me as masochistic--reading a book while expecting to be disappointed in the ending!

#236
I must check out that thread; those weepy chick lit navel-gazing woe fests are all my book club chooses. Ugh. And yet I keep hoping they'll pick better books (also masochistic).

#238 "countries that begin with an A"? Angola? Armenia? Afghanistan? You weren't, by chance, referring to my country, were you? (Hint: it really begins with a "U", followed by an "S of A") For what it's worth, I checked a couple of US dictionaries and found "outgrow" defined as "to grow too mature for," but without any derogatory label being specifically noted. The assumption behind taking offense at this phrasing is that maturity is better than whatever comes before it . . . I'm not so sure, myself!

>250 ejj1955:
I don't really read them "expecting" a disappointment, perhaps "hoping" for no disappointment, because, to me, many of his earlier works had pretty good endings. I've only been disappointed by a few recent ones. Still, I like his narrative style, and like readafew says, the science can seem to make sense. As long as you "stand on the bank and don't try to follow him across"

edited for spelling

#248 - No, I won't. It says 'fiction' afterwards, right? ;-)
As for what I deem science fiction you're welcome to look up my catalogue.

I do think people demanding that the science in science fiction be 100% viable in a present day perspective are making life hard for themselves. But hey, that's me - everyone got a right to read and label however they like, as long as they don't impose those standards on everyone else. Because then you're a zealot, and that's about the only people I have a hard time tolerating.

I read non-fiction till my 60th year when i began almost exclusively reading Fantasy. Don't know what that means to others-to me it means that i now mainly do things i wish to do not things i have to do. I loved finding this place (LT) where people of all ages read what they wish for whatever reasons. LT & the GD are the place we all come to talk about what we love-whatever it may be & why ever we love it! I still read some scientific non-fiction but not much political non-fiction or what i call heavy or serious fiction as i can get depressed enough by listening to the news. For me this is a survival technique & i just love talking w/other readers who read what they love about what they read whatever their reasons may be. 8^0

252 -
Fine then, I'm a zealot because I actually want the label/genre/category of the book to accurately reflect what kind of content is inside, usually considered as proper classification... or standards.

After reading The Corrections by Jonathan Franzen I'll never read another. Awful writing and characters.

#254 - ;-)
I don't think you are (other if you think me inferior for labelling my books in another way than you do), but do that mean you classify The Naked Sun and other "SF" classics as speculative fiction or as science fiction?

I have come across people thinking that because the science is invalid Star Trek is a lie and should be scourged. That is the kind of people I talk about.

This infighting is quite typical of the sf genre. I think it originates in some kind of inferiority complex were you /a generic 'you', not you/ feel like you have to make the books look valid and worthy in the eyes of people who talks deridingly of the genre.

I say live and let live.

Yeah!-What Busifer said!! 8^)

"I say live and let live."

With that kind of sentiment, how will we ever get back to the 'good old days' of burning some authors-along with their books-at the stake? There's nothing quite like the smell of burning author at high noon.

254 -
If I walk into a science fiction section, or crime section, I expect the books in there will be science fiction or crime, respectively, but there are many publishers now (and in the past) attempting to push other, non-related books off as particular categories in order to sell more/hide the true content/get wider readership/etc.. So what happens is that the *science* fiction label gets inundated with *speculative* fiction, *romance*, and *fantasy*... and finding any real science in that lot isn't going to happen -- which makes the label useless.

When the label is useless, then things like the Anita Blake series by Laurell K Hamilton get shelved in 'Science Fiction'.... and anyone looking for *science* fiction.... is going to have one bleep of a time finding any.

Every genre has infighting, so it's all typical (ever heard a bunch of crime/detective authors in a convention?! WOW!) -- but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm looking for labels to conform to the traditional genre publishing standards; for science fiction, if more than 50% of the 'science' is outside the scope of anything but fantasy -- then it's speculative fiction.

There are a lot of publishers that don't try to fool people with misleading genre labels though -- and those are usually the first logos I look for when browsing for new books.

Me personally, I'd honestly just like to walk into a book store and go to a section knowing that the books on those shelves are what the category says they are. If a category is supposed to help you find the books you're interested in -- it can be a tremendous waste of time to have to sort and sift through all the books that have nothing to do with the category. Every minute wasted trying to find a new interesting book to read is a minute I'm not reading! yikes!

(About Star Trek -- if I remember correctly, the entire debate started because apparently, Gene himself called Star Trek 'speculative fiction') There isn't much to be done about 'classics' because, well, if it's set in people/publishers minds already, then it would take a miracle of epic monetary proportions to change it. I don't trouble myself (or anyone) over the classics, they are what they are. New books, however....

258 -
I think the modern version of a good ol' book burning is the more personal approach called, "This book needs to meet the wall at high velocity, and then I'm going to stomp it to pulp." Of course, then you can recycle the pulp. Have to keep an eye out for global warming and all, you know.

I've made some decent hand-made papers from Crichton pulp...

#259 - Well, I thought the "classics" kind of defined the genre - to me that's what a "classic" piece of literature is.
I also think cross-pollination between genres is a good thing, but I don't think there are any reason to continue this argument as we are both set in our ways ;-)

(You know, I've heard from reliable sources /can't find right now, busy at work, it was in a discussion on another site/ that the genre infighting is way worse amongst SF authors than amongst those writing crime novels, but that is another discussion. Anyway, I don't go to conventions and don't belong to any fraternities as I view them as as close to incest you can come without getting sued over it.)

(The ST argument isn't in any way related to what Gene said or didn't say - this was a local SF community person who thought everyone watching ST as a person of lesser worth.)

#259 You get bookshops with more than a couple of genres?!

Most (not all but most) will have an area labelled Sci-Fi and Fantasy. This is often no more than a shelf or two of books. I know of one shop that stocks enough so that is could seperate fantasy from Science fiction, but doesn't. I've never been in (and don't expect to find) a bookshop that had enough stock to further break down Science Fiction into SF, SciFci, Spec Fic, Weird SF, Space Opera, Hard SF, Classic SF, movie tie-ins and whatever other minigenres people choose to call it.

If a "mainstream" author writes SF and it doesn't end up on the SF shelf, the odds are I won't be buying it because I won't have seen it. Niche marketing goes both ways.

261 -
Classics had their own infighting. Speculative Fiction and Science Fiction came out of that infighting and each genre label has its own 'classic' list attached to it.

I absolutely despise cross-pollination if it doesn't say so on the spine/category/label/genre. If I wanted to read something other than the section I'm in, I'd go elsewhere. My time is too important to me to waste on stuff I know I'm not going to like...

(I've been dragged to enough various author/genre conventions by friends/family to know that the infighting has ZERO difference in what genre you go to -- it's ALL bad.)

262 -
Yes. If I'm going to go to a bookstore instead of amazon, I might as well make it a day trip! :)

If an author (from any genre) writes say, a fantasy novel, as long as the publisher marks it as such, it will end up on the fantasy novels. When an author writes a romance novel and the publisher marks it as fantasy... it will also end up on your fantasy shelves. What you see on your shelves can have very little to do with what the story is about -- it can be all about what the publisher decides to market. There are many great genre books that get listed as generic 'fiction', for example.

Personally, I like authors that bridge "traditional" genre boundaries. Names and labels are always in a state of flux, they shouldn't be nailed down with a hammer just because it's what I happen to be used to.

Is GG Kay really writing fantasy? I think he's mostly an adventure/romance kind of author, with a smidgin of fantasy thrown in. But that's just me. Books like The Time Traveler's Wife, (just an example, actually I hated it) can generate interest in fantasy lit in those who would never ever have considered going into the fantasy section before.

Personally, I don't really care how perfect the "science" is, if it's fiction, then there's latitude. If I want to know what is happening in science in reality, I'm not gonna read a Greg Bear novel, I'm gonna read Scientific American or something.

JMHO.

What Littlegeek said.

Examples of cross pollination -

Asimov's Caves of Steel broke boundaries by crossing the crime novel format with was, back then, labelled science fiction. Good thing, IMHO.
Grimwood's Arabesque suite (starting with Pashazade), amongst others, takes it one step further and tosses alternate history in the mix.

With Mistborn Brandon Sanderson tried to use the heist format within the fantasy concept - worked well, methinks.

Littlegeek already mentioned GG Kay, and I agree with her - with the exception Fionavar and Ysabel he writes historical romances with a toss of fantasy, but he himself labels it fantasy so fantasy it is.

Now the son is calling, gotta run :-)

Not being a sci-fi person I know less than nothing about the different sub-genres but are you all saying there is a problem with classification in the bookshops you go to? Or is it something to do with that genre in particular? Like most people I deplore pigeonholing books but I guess there has to be some way of doing it if we aren't to spend our whole lives rummaging through the chaos (not that I'd really mind that, must admit!)

I'm thinking not. The main SF Bookshop where I live separates science fiction from fantasy from manga, and then translated or swedish language science fiction from translated or swedish language fantasy.
Enough for me.

I mean - why do we need tags, as opposed to, say, Dewey? Because each book can be a lot of things, be placed on a lot of shelves, so instead of making multiple and minuscule shelves we use broad categories, which makes it easier to find.

Of course, if you are very strict in your definitions and only want to read, say, whodunnits, then this is a problem to have to browse all crime novels to find them. But I don't have that problem, I like browsing :-)

I'm so with you there! The minute my local bookshop gets round to installing beds and sending out for sandwiches I'll be more than happy to move in full time!

#262, you know the Manchester Arndale branch of Waterstones actually does separate the Fantasy and SF, but I'm not bothered when they mix because I like both.

All I have been saying is that I find it obnoxious when books are *marketed* one way, but that ISN'T the category/genre of the story involved. (I said *marketed*, not shelved in a bookstore, not described by the author, not summarised, not anything else.)

Categories/Genres express a *marketing* 'bird's-eye-view' of what kind of story it is for the *reader's* benefit. I'm not saying, nor at any time have I said previously, that there needs to be a category for every. possible. theme. As I have now stated multiple times -- I'm for *correctly* marking/marketing books -- with the current broad-enough spectrum.

I don't care what buzzwords people use to describe books that dabble in everything -- if it's that much of a concoction, the marketers should call it 'fiction' and not attempt to put it in a genre where it doesn't 'fit' the standard 'criteria'. Which is... what they used to do, of course.

Then I'd say the purchasers at the bookshops I frequent must be pretty good as I've yet to experience a book put in the 'wrong' category. Bottom down that, and not the marketing - sf/f books are NEVER marketed in Sweden (with the exception of the last HP book) - decides on which shelf a book is placed/showcased in the shop.

#269. I hate the Arndale centre so I've never been in that one. Has it got a wider stock range than the Deansgate one, which doesn't seperate them? I thought the Deansgate one was the biggest in manchester - I've not seen more elsewhere and they have a few US imports too!

271 -
Ok, I'll give up explaining. What I'm saying isn't working and it isn't worth attempting to explain more.

I so envy you guys with enormous Waterstones's! We have two here and I must say that I think they're pretty darn good. The original one is my 'home from home' and we recently took on a second branch when we got a new shopping centre. I don't think it's nearly as good as the old one but at least it means I don't have far to go whichever end of town I'm at. Still, I don't imagine they are half the size - even put together - of ones in places like the Arndale. I have to say that, what with a generous supply of Waterstones's, supermarkets for the 'obvious' ones and all these lovely websites, I've never found it easier to track down whatever book I want. It's just book-heaven for me these days!

#272 no it's not bigger but it's not too small, maybe half the size, it's a nook about 6 bookcases wide with 2 on either side, and the island in the middle. Only the first 3 are SF, the next is TV tie in, then fantasy and the last one is anime/manga. All the fixtures are white so it seems far lighter and the ones on offer are more clearly displayed. It's just when I'm with people I can get them in there because we usually go past it, Deansgate is out of the way. There's no import section though.

They did put Mccaffrey in the Fantasy. I think they are putting all the crossovers and blurry cases under fantasy and leaving the SF fairly 'pure', they have got a lot of the SF masterworks.

It did suprise me, when it registered, I was looking for something, and couldn't find it and realised it was over in the SF, but I don't think they have separate signs, I suppose they don't make them separate.

Am I being too simplistic? Wouldn't you think they could just shove a copy in each?

#276 more than 1 copy?! Only the biggest of new releases manage that. Seriously.

#275 thanks I'll have a look sometime and see if they hold different stock. It is worth looking at the deansgate one when you get a chance. I've been told that the manager was (is?) a big SF/F fan and so is allowed to order in a greater range than Waterstones normally stock. I think it's about 12 SF/F bookcases plus a couple of islands and seperate sections each for horror, ani, RPG.

I'd look for Pern in the fantasy section anyway but some of her other works are distinctly more SF.

I do like the Deansgate one, whenever I'm on my own I go, I went there for a copy of Le Guins Lavinia when it came out in the US. That was where I got Lakeys Owl trilogy when I couldn't buy it on Amazon new. But they moved the horror recently, i couldn't find it for ages!

It does feel like they have different stock. I suppose Arndale has more newer stuff jumping out at you that is the kind of stuff that I don't notice in Deansgate.

That was the thing, her newest releases are continuations of the PTB series - Maelstrom, Deluge, which they put under fantasy! Space station, Aliens, Sentient planet, yeah totally fantasy!?, but shes recognised most under fantasy i suppose - even though she's only written 4 short stories that are.

edited to fix touch stones

#273 - I think you quite clear? You don't like it when a book is marketed and shelved as something it clearly isn't.

I wouldn't like that either, only I haven't experienced it and therefore it doesn't annoy me. Actually I' more annoyed with different bookshops shelving Ursula K Le Guin either under K, L or G, having had to run around searching in vain...

In the beginning of this particular argument it sounded like you despised cross-overs of any kind (which kind of would explain a fair portion of the list of authors whose books you don't want to read); and that you wanted 'speculative fiction' shelved separately from 'hard science fiction', which sounded as 'the one true definition of science fiction'.

But I think I've said it before - lots of debates are the result of communications misses, and as long as we learn something from them...

Robbert Jordan

Dennis L. McKiernan - his Once Upon... series was horrid.

nichlas Sparks

Who ever was responsible for the four books in the Twilight series. I just can't see the attraction in any way.

#283- Jillmwo-I think that not being 12 yrs old would help greatly to explain it. My G'daughter is 12 & loves the series. I have no interset in vampires & would not touch them w/a 12 ft. pole either. 8^)

Edited to correct transposed digits.

>283 jillmwo:

But--have you read any of them? I can see that one might think they weren't one's thing, but if you haven't given them a try, can you say you'd never again read anything by that author?

285 ejj

I've read several of them and I will never, ever again read anything by Stephenie Meyer.

Also, I agree with pollysmith re Nicholas Sparks *shudder*

Dean Koontz, Tom Clancy, or Anne Rice. Just outgrew them.

Patricia Cornwell wasn't impressed with the one I listened to. It was a full reading but felt like an abridgment of an abridgment. blah

Seconding Jodi Picoult. Also Kristin Hannah who wrote Firefly Lane (an ER book). Matter of fact, let's throw One in a Million author Kimberla Lawson Roby on the pile (another ER), as well.

Diana Gabaldon, Rosamund Pilsner

If reading snarked-up chapter summaries (and quotes!) count, I'm never reading Meyers again.

Also not touching Susanna Clarke or Robin McKinley, but I'm very much aware of the fact that it's a stylistics clash not a "They cannot write" feelings. Both can; I just don't like their style. (For some reason I have the darndest of problems getting people to understand that "I think McKinley is a good writer, but her style doesn't agree with me at all" does not translate into "I think McKinley is a bad author". Really, it's not just me imagining the two mean different things, is it?)

Anyway add me to the people who'll never touch Mercedes Lackey with a barge pole again. (Sues I could sort-of live with. Destroying the image of kelpies all over the Celtic world for no reason other than "Look! It's a Sue! Oh, thank you for taking care of my hoof, Sue! I shall love you forever and ever and it shall be Twoo Wub!"? Not so much. I kid you not about the summary.)

And McCaffrey, truth be told. Although at least I banished that mostly from memory now. And Jonathan Swift. Get that book out of my brain. Seriously, I want it gone. I hate Gulliver's Travels so, so much. Stephen King, too. Read one book for class and just... no. Not my thing.

Those are the ones I can think of on short notice/like this, so I guess that also makes them the most important ones. I'm not a fan of Neil Gaiman, but I do keep picking up books of his for some reason. That's actually a bit more than I was thinking it would be...

Lori Handeland after getting Any Given Doomsday as an ER a while back. Blech.

I finally got rid of The Secret Life of Bees since post #172. Somebody ust mooched it, in fact. I never cracked it.

In fact, I'm not at all interested in reading books about strong women these days. I'd rather read nonfiction or mysteries. Or books about men.

Oh. Virginia Woolf. I got rid of all the books I had by or about her except two.

William Faulkner (hated Sound and Fury) and Joyce Carol Oates (hated Them). Will never read Ron Hubbard. Love Austen and Dickens and Jane Eyre. Kudos to #136 for a lovely dismemberment song.

>293 jnwelch:

I have mercifully forgotten which Joyce Carol Oates made me decide that I would never again waste my time with her.

#293 - Blasphemy! I love Faulkner (not that I can't understand why one would not like him). After reading Last of the Mohicans I do not think I can handle any Cooper ever again. Nor would my husband let me read any at home, as I spent most of my reading time sighing and moaning out loud over the heavy overstuffed prose.

>295 janemarieprice:

I agree about Faulkner and about Cooper. But there's an antidote to reading Fenimore Cooper:

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/HNS/Indians/offense.html

I love Faulkner. (mentally puts As I Lay Dying on her reread list)

# 292 - Oh! Woolf! I forgot her... ^-^;; (Although actually I might pick up another book out of curiosity someday, but it had better be a library read if so. I miss library reading, but then I'd have to read in Dutch. *makes face*)

Adding Samuel Beckett to this list. I appreciate him intellectually and understand that he changed a lot about theatre, but reading or seeing one of his plays is like eyeball torture to me. So much so that when my husband suggested we go see one of his plays (hubby is not much of a reader and even less a play goer - he just wanted to see John Turturro) I made gagging noises at him until he stopped talking and asked me what my problem was.

Phillipa Gregory
Stephenie Meyer
Robert Jordan

Annie Dillard. Another vote for Steven King. Can't think of any others just now.

*Eating words about J.K. Rowling, since I read all the HP novels in about a month recently, and, enjoyed them.*

So, for some more pronouncements, no more James Fenimore Cooper, Carter Dickson or John Dickson Carr. No more Stephen King (except the one sort of fantasy/western? series which you all recommended), he's too scary-real for me.

No more Robert Jordan.

*sticks finger in her mouth and makes immature gagging noises*

Dan Brown definitely.

#301 Hey, to be fair, It's Stephen King with a "ph". You have to be careful or you might end up reading something you swore never to read :P.

She's been said, but I must reiterate Stephenie Meyer. Even her name spelling makes me hostile. *resists urge to RANT*