Nullifidian:

I did enjoy reading your post. You express yourself so well!!

However, I enjoyed both of the Dan Brown books you mention. And yes, I know they have been lambasted by the literati and by the religious. But I just thought they were a good read. An exciting story. No more, no less.

I've also enjoyed quite a few of Stephen King's novels, but the foul language is attrocious and gets into my head, and I don't want it there.

I prefer James Herbert if I'm in the mood to scare myself to death. Mostly, I like a good laugh.

However, I do know that peoples' senses of humour differ greatly and so best not to recommend Terry Pratchett....it can loose one a lot of friends.

Penelope wrote:Nullifidian:

I did enjoy reading your post. You express yourself so well!!

Thanks!

However, I enjoyed both of the Dan Brown books you mention. And yes, I know they have been lambasted by the literati and by the religious. But I just thought they were a good read. An exciting story. No more, no less.

I understand, and I don't think you should ever feel the need to apologize for what you read. I do accept that Brown is often considered good "beach reading" or something similar. I have no problem with that sort of thing. I happily admit that one of my favorite book series is Stephanie Barron's Jane Austen mysteries. Likewise, I'm a major fan of John Mortimer's Rumpole books.

Where I differ from some people is that bad prose bothers me so much that I simply cannot stay relaxed while reading it, so it completely undercuts the concept of relaxation reading. Barron's and Mortimer's books, and of course many hundreds of others, work for me because they're great examples of style as well as "ripping good yarns".

I've also enjoyed quite a few of Stephen King's novels, but the foul language is attrocious and gets into my head, and I don't want it there.

I used to enjoy Stephen King's novels when I was younger, but now I have the same problem with much of his writing that I have with Dan Brown (although King is a much better writer than Brown). So much of King's work just reads like he's phoning it in, which is why I haven't read a book by him in over ten years. I think I read most of King's good books when I was young.

Again, though, I accept it if your tastes are different. De gustibus non disputandum est—there is no disputing in a matter of taste.

I prefer James Herbert if I'm in the mood to scare myself to death. Mostly, I like a good laugh.

However, I do know that peoples' senses of humour differ greatly and so best not to recommend Terry Pratchett....it can loose one a lot of friends.

I like Terry Pratchett (and Neil Gaiman). I thought I'd die laughing when I read their collaboration, Good Omens.

Where I differ from some people is that bad prose bothers me so much that I simply cannot stay relaxed while reading it,

I do appreciate beautiful prose. I think Patrick Leigh Fermour is the one who impresses me most (A Time of Gifts). But if someone is telling me an exciting story....I forget about the prose and just surrender myself to the story.

But, I do think humour needs to be well-worded to work. I suppose it is something like comic-timing. Terry Pratchett is very good a forming a sentence thus, as is Douglas Adams in the Hitchhiker's series, don't you think?

I'm glad you like Rumpole though.....so do I.

I'm just finishing 'Witches Abroad' and then I will read 'Good Omens' on your recommendation.

It just occurred to me that we enjoy books whereby we can identify with the characters, so that will be why I couldn't get on with 'Catcher in the Rye' - couldn't understand him. However, the bawdy old witches in the Pratchett books.....well.....they're very me!!!

"Twilight," "New Moon," etc etc. My hatred for those books and the author knows no bounds. You guys have no idea how much they infuriate me. The same goes for pretty much every teen vampire romance book.

...Actually, the entire teen fiction genre has been going downhill for the past couple of years, really. Still some good ones though.

I also hate "The Lovely Bones" by Alice Sebold. Had to read it for a class, and it annoyed me. I liked the parts about the character being in heaven, but the other characters were all very irritating. Many of the events were unbelievable to me.

Pamela, or Virtue Rewarded by Richardson.

I was forced to read this in college. I want the tuition for that course back!

The book was wildly successful as 18th century fathers bought copies for their daughters as moral guides. It basically teaches that withholding sex can be used to capture a wealthy husband.

The thing was exported to the US and ultimately to the rest of the English speaking world. I would bet it was the least read of all best sellers.

wilde wrote:"Twilight," "New Moon," etc etc. My hatred for those books and the author knows no bounds. You guys have no idea how much they infuriate me. The same goes for pretty much every teen vampire romance book.

I agree completely.

I hate Catcher in the Rye.
The Great Gatsby
Great Expectations
anything Steinbeck
John Updike's later novels where he is a lecherous old man and there is far too much gratuitous sex
Dracula (I found the concept and layout of the narrative interesting but also found it hard to read and hard to relate to any of the characters)
Jude the Obscure (probably anything Thomas Hardy, from what I can tell)
The Perks of Being a Wallflower

certainly others, but this is enough hate for now.

At least half the books I had to read through High School, including, but not limited to...

Of Mice and Men
Summer of the Seventeenth Doll
Treasure Island
Animal Farm
Lord of the Flies (To make it worse, teenage daughter now reading it for school. Can't they find something better by now?)
about half of Shakespeare,
- enjoyed Macbeth, Merchant of Venice, Othello
- but fell asleep during Caesar, Romeo & Juliet

Some of Stephen King's are just grusome and icky with no plot. Eyes of the Dragon was OK.
Emma (only one by Jane Austen I hate, love P & P, like the others)

Had difficulty reading Harry Potter series. I think it's a good storyline and plot written by a poor author. I'm sorry, but she waffles. First, and only, time I've enjoyed a movie adaptation better than original book.

Fanfiction! (Daughter loves it)

And finally.......any book written by someone else to cash in on a famous author's series/world after said author's death. Think up your own ideas people!!!

P.S. Really, really hate any book that sounds really good from the blurb on the back but turns into mush when you get past first chapter. So much promise, wasted.

Oh, I definitely agree about fanfiction. I can't stand it, although there is a parody of Harry Potter I like - "My Immortal." It's so stupid and unbelievable that it's hilarious.

You didn't like Great Expectations? That's one of my favorite fiction books. =(

What didn't you like about it? I didn't think Dracula was that bad either...

Now I'm reading a book by Hardy and you obviously don't like him.

I think I have found my arch nemesis!!! =D

Hello Camacho:

My theory is that female readers don't care for Hardy. His works make very good films because when you read them, it is as though you are watching the action. I mean that you never get under the skin of the characters. We ladies like books about 'feelings'. IMO

I like Great Expectations too, and Dombey and Son. But Dickens isn't very good at writing females. You just have to accept that and enjoy the story.

Now, Arnold Bennett is different. He writes excellent females. Has anyone tried 'Clayhanger' ?

Virginia Wolff and company wouldn't let Arnold Bennett into the Bloomsbury Group - because he was too common......so I like him.