The all time worst "The Sound and the Fury" William Faulkner. Had to read it for a high school book report. The book was darn near impossible to comprehend. Never cared much for Charles Dickens either.

War and Peace, too freaking long, I cant even remember the half I did read.

Anything by Herman Melville. Moby Dick: first book I had enough time to finish and yet just couldn't force myself to finish. I'm an English major; I have forced myself to read quite a lot of horrible writing in my time.

The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck.... and I would say Shakespeare but I don't want a bunch of members jumping down my throat.

I was thinking of posting Melville too Moby Dick was awful, but I enjoyed Typee...probably because it was autobiographical. Melville really was a sailor, and jumped ship to be stranded on an island which practiced cannibalism. The book was initially rejected as "too fantastic to be true", but a friend and fellow ship-jumper attested to his veracity.

Scarlett Letter. Moby Dick, War and Peace. Pretty much every peice of "Classic" literature I was ever forced to read.

Most overrated author?

Tim LaHaye and that left behind garbage of his.
Worst of the Worst Blackened Raspberry goes hands down to Mercedes Lackey

Jane Austen; I'm sure it's all deliciously witty, but I can live without ploughing through fifty pages of Georgian niceties and reported conversation to get to one joke.

God; the elusive author of the world's best-selling book is hardly a page-turner, is he? If he (or "He" if you prefer) were, His book club network wouldn't feel the need to force itself down your throat and knock on doors, would it? I haven't had anyone bother me on a Sunday to ask me if I've read Harry Potter. Why does God get such devoted salesmen? Are they on commission or something? (I know many Christians have no ssense of humour, but I'll only worry if my unproven Creator does.)

JK Rowling; all credit for the invention and the self promotion. And I haven't read any of the books, so maybe my beef is with the people who seem to think that not reading some sub-Tolkein fantasy fiction aimed at teens and pre-teens is an expression of my utter worthlessness as a human being. (Hmm, maybe she has more parallels with God than I thought. Indeed, I've never seen them in the same room.... Mind you, the same rationale could mean anyone is God, including me, so maybe I have to think this one through some more. ).

Stephen King; I'm aware that dissing this guy's authorial skills will be a good deal less popular than saying anything about our Big Imaginary Friend, but I just cannot see the appeal. He is technically very gifted at creating images, but his endings are without parallel in their daftness and/or predictability. It for example, had me gripped with its fabulously well-imagined stuff exploring how childhood relationships and experiences have echoes in adulthood, and the scary interludes were very effective, right up until the point where the scary clown turns into a big spider thing from outer space. And that recent one about the car (which did make me wonder if he's read any of his past books, or that bump on the head in his car crach means he's rewriting the - a psychokinetic high-school outsider with a controlling mother, anyone?) with killer fish and bat creatures from another dimension - please!

Oh, dear. Most of you are opposed to the sorts of books I love and actively seek out! They're classics for a reason! But, well, different strokes for different folks.

The only classic I really hated was Salinger's modern classic, Catcher in the Rye. Not that I didn't see the quality of the writing. Holden was just so damn annoying!

Personally I have an inherent dislike all of the very commercialised authors, like Stephen King, Dean Koontz, Anne Rince, Ayn Rand. People that churn out formulaic titles with one theme. 800 page stories where the author never really has anything to say. For that reason I despise most of the fantasy genre.



I told Rebecca, my friend who works in a bookstore, about Stephen King winning a book award for contribution to American letters. She said it spoiled her entire day. I was glad I wasn't the only one.

Hilarious. Classic books covered in under 60 seconds.

Salinger is overrated. He only gets so much cred because he is obscure. Catcher and Franny and Zooey was all he had. He sucks. He is a recluse and a hermit so everyone assuems he is some tortured brilliant mind. He is a phoney.

Obscure? I believe he was extremely popular in the 1950s, when Catcher in the Rye was published, and influenced a generation of disaffected youngters. He doesn't suck. I just hated the protagonist who was, perhaps, almost too ingeniously characterised.

Staying away from the classics for the moment...

I have an undying distaste for Bill Bryson. His writing has the tone of the cleverest boy in school expanding on someone else's perfectly correct answer. I've read a good deal of his stuff (it's available at EVERY airport bookstore in the US and Europe, sometimes as literature, other times as sleep aid) and the common theme across all his books is Bryson's appreciation for his own ability to appreciate. You see, only Bryson can visit the various small towns and large cities of a place and get the deeper meaning of the experience. Sometimes he takes the train and, being so terribly empathic, it allows him to appreciate the small hamlets (in Bryson's world, there are no towns, there are "charming towns", "working class towns" and, of course, villages and hamlets over every moor and in each picturesque dell) and a simpler time for living and travel. Imagine, being able to use a simple thing like a train ride through the country to reflect on the landscape or wax nostalgic for the past. Where does the insight come from?

I'm also sick of this whole "ex-pat gone native" thing. I get it; your uniquely subtle intellect and sensitivity allow you to overcome your cultural shortcomings and really acclimate to England while still providing a wan smile and gentle laugh to those funny folks and odd foibles of your birthplace...my, but you've kept that common touch. How impressive. The rest of us ex-pats are forever stuck, not REALLY getting Europe or the UK the way you do. Why, we really can't even get America the way you do. How wonderful that you have penned several plodding travelogues for us to suffer through as a penance for these failings.

His more informational work (Mother Tongue, Difficult Words, et. al.) have the advantage of utility, there is research and the books provide fact and analysis on the topic(s) at hand, but through it all, there's the voice of the author, demanding that we forget about this history stuff and focus on what's really important, his incredible erudition combined with his authentic British humour and point of view. To paraphrase PJ O'Rourke (speaking of a different author), he has the permanent tone of a self satisfied toddler on the pot.

For travel writing, I'll take AA Gill, for humour, give me Stephen Fry.

Wow. I guess I have to play the pseudointellectual here (a role at which I am adept) and defend a lot of these classics from the slings and arrows of outrageous critics.

War and Peace by Leo Tolstoy. Not my favorite piece of classic Russian literature by any means (give me Crime and Punishment or The Brothers Karamazov by Fyodor Dostoevsky any old day) but I admire its sheer sweep. It reminds me of Les Miserables by Victor Hugo as a portrait of an entire society.

Moby Dick by Herman Melville. Simply put, I love it. Every word flows, and I adore his endless philosophical digressions.

The Catcher in the Rye by J. D. Salinger is an astonishing performance. Holden Caufield is, perhaps, the most real character I have ever encountered in fiction. I also love the "Franny" section of Franny and Zooey and most of the Nine Stories, particularly "A Perfect Day for Bananafish."

To prove that I can be as much of a philistine as anyone else, I'll admit that I get nothing at all out of William Faulkner.

I hate Charles Dickens books. Somehow someone got through them and might've discovered a plot somewhere in there but getting past the semi-old transferring to modern english was bad enough. Then add in run on sentences and intentional wordiness.... I don't want to work so much to read this stuff. Hard Times is the exception. The movies transfers are good enough for me otherwise.

I don't like Catcher in the Rye at all either. I know people like this and it irritates me to no extent. The whiny, depressed teens who think everyone is plotting and scheming against them and they're all phony and whatnot. Catcher in the Rye kind of glorifies this behavior. Ugh.

Got to agree with Julian on Jane Autsen. Persuasion was a Mills and Boon bodice ripper given credence because it was written a long time ago.

On the other hand I loved the Grapes of Wrath and thought it to be wonderfully well written book.

Julian- give Harry potter a go! They're big for a reason and it's not self promotion. Reading them reminded me of the good old days of reading Roald Dhal with a torch under the bedsheets. They're not really fantasy books as much murder mysteries.

Other overrated books: Paradise Lost by Milton is the most singularly tedious, tortuous read I've ever been forced to endure.

And Lord of the Rings. A bit too long winded and pompous for my tastes. I've read other fantasy war stories that have been far more absorbing.

Tom Clancy. I liked Executive Orders, but the others I have never been able to get even halfway through. My husband and I agree on most things, especially reading material, but that one has us divided. Clancy books-on-tape for roadtrips, anyone?

mule - you and I have VERY similar tastes. In fact, I'm glad you were the first to complain about LOTR - I'll let you stand in front of me & take the brunt of the tomatoes that will be thrown by all the sci-fi fans here at AD. I was forced to read some of that trilogy as an 8th grade assignment. It was pure torture.

I read my first Dickens book in 3rd grade (David Copperfield) - I have disliked Dickens ever since. Plus, I was told by a high school teacher that he was paid by the word. This wouldn't surprise me with drivel like, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times."

I adore many of the classics some of you hate, but I do agree with Julian that Jane Austin could be forgotten and no one would be the worse off for it.

Let me throw all the Bronte sisters into this fire as well. Does anyone know if Bronte is an old-English translation for BORING?

As for modern writers, the first person that comes to mind as overrated is Anne Rice. Maybe it was because I was a little goth poser in high school and hung out with a bunch of the same types, but all the girls I knew raved about Rice. Her writing is horrible. In fact, I find it to be a lot like like Dickens and the Bronte sisters - heavy on prose and short on story line. I mean, does she even have an editor?

Im back to Salinger. Salinger is an obscure personality today. He is a hermit and a recluse. Naturally everyone sees him as this eccentric and brilliant mind just for the simple fact that he shuns the lime light. I am not impressed with such games. I mean ooh he doesnt write anymore and he shuns the lime light what a brilliant and tortured man??? No. He wasnt impressive in school. He isnt terribly bright either look at his education level and grades. Holden's appeal is that everyone who reads it relates to that wild adolescent confused spirit and think the book is speaking about them. What reader's of Catcher fail to grasp is that everyone is like Holden. Even the popular kids in the world. Everyone likes to classify themselves as odd and bizarre and unique. This is the great sham of catcher. Everyone who ever reads it thinks Holden is them in doesnt matter if your a rich popular kid or a poor abstract kid. Its a relateable character. You walk away thinking only you and Salinger know but the big joke is everyone knows. I think Salinger is sickly overrated. Nothing is more unimpressive then a recluse hermit. A silent vow for attention.

The only Bronte that I've read is Charlotte Bronte's Jane Eyre, but it was haunting, IMO, and it is on my list of favourites. Call me boring if you want to.

I think On the Road by Jack Kerouac is overrated. I read The Dharma Bums and I absolutely adore that book, so I assumed that On the Road, being the more widely read of the two, must be at least as good...I was wrong.

Jaime, not just Dickens, but all authors of that time period were paid by the word. You should see the full set of The Three Musketeers series! (Which I have read all the way through, all eight or so thick volumes, and enjoyed every garrulous word.)

My pick for most overrated author is Kurt Vonnegut, who writes most of his fiction in a kind of faux-sophisticated deliberately childish style. Well, to me it isn't sophisticated at all, only childish. There is one Vonnegut book I thoroughly enjoyed though: Wampeters, Foma and Granfalloons which isn't fiction, just essays by Vonnegut on various subjects. Those are genuinely funny and thought-provoking. So I guess I like the author, I just don't like his fiction.

All? I'm not sure about that. A lot of authors of the time were publishing what the French called Feuilletons, after the line that separated the news from stories. Dumas was one of the more popular fueilleton writers. Usually, when they became successful, they would try to extend the story for as long as they could. Eugene Sue is a fueilleton writer who isn't nearly as popular as he once was. He wrote The Wandering Jew, the full version of which weighs in at about 500,000 words. Both are/were overrated. But fun, nevertheless.

Interesting, Corvus. Fueilleton would seem to describe the Dumas books I read, a seemingly interminable extension of The Three Musketeers storyline. I don't remember how many of them were really, just a lot. But I loved them, although I'm sure the literary quality was subpar. I didn't care, I was just enjoying the adventure and vicariously living in 17th Century France.

Yes, due to the nature of the monthly installments, the stories happened to be very episodic and chapters usually ended in cliffhangers, especially Eugene Sue. They're always fun because they're crafted that way for the general public. They are the equivalent of a 19th century soap opera.

I think my favourite Dumas book is The Black Tulip. It's concise and perfectly structured.

Youve jogged my memory of other hated readings, mostly of a certain time period...

Most overrated author ever: Henry Miller.
Although Miller seemed to think he was SO utterly interesting and cool that his books were all about himself, to me he was a debauched, freeloading pig of a man without a single redeeming quality. He disgusted and bored me to tears.

Anais Nin: Another empty human being. The only interesting thing about Nin was that she was such a fabricator she used to keep 3x5 cards in her purse to remember what lies she had told to anyone she knew, if thats even interesting. She and Miller were lovers which is not suprising. What is, is that both of these deadbeats sold plenty of books. I suppose it was the seedy sex, kind of new in literature of the time.

I could not stand reading about other peoples acid trips or drunken, drug induced quests on life, I cant even remember the authors. Bukowski comes to mind.

Some of the stories from the Ginsberg, Cassidy, Kerouac, Boroughs (Beat boys) antics as a group fit into both of the above. Negative criteria for me: People who are doing nothing but going around screwing up, theirs and almost everyones life they come into contact with, but think they are so bloody fantastic (and so appalling) they write about it with pride. I kept wondering what happened to the pregnant indian girl on the res that got left when whoever just got bored, and so many others like them.

That said, some of the Beat Boys stuff is good. Kerouac was said to manically write out a book in a few days. On the Road was engaging in its time. Some of the poetry was good also.

Hands down, Herman Melville's Moby Dick was the most boring book I've ever had to slog through.

I liked a few of Stephen King's earlier books, but he ran out of ideas years ago and nobody's caught on yet. Tom Clancy is as dry as toast, but I'd rather have my eyes gouged out with a rusty spoon than EVER read another piece of hacked out crap by John Grisham.

Grisham's stuff absolutely reeks!

When I was younger, it was anything by John Stienbeck. Now it's just Stienbeck's The Pearl. I would say anything by Michael Moore, too, but I haven't been able to stomach anything I see his face on, let alone read.

I feel compelled to defend Jane Austen... I do enjoy her books. Mostly because Its fun to laugh at all the stupid rules of old society - and then feel a little better about dealing with all the stupid rules of today's society... but, of course, she does have to be taken very small, skimming bits

And if you asked me five years ago, I would have readily agreed on LOTR. My english teacher in 9th grade was convinced I should read all four Tolkien books - and everytime I sat down to read them I felt like I was being tortured. Then, five years ago I ran out of new books to read and money - so I picked them up again and found they improved.

As far as overrated writers/books - Finnegan's Wake. What really annoys me is that no one understands it,.... so a few people pretend to understand and tell everyone else they are just a genius for understanding. Another case of the Emperor's new clothes...

I know there are other books/authors that annoy, but I'll have to ponder...

I don't think the Lord of the Rings is overrated that much. Sure, it's slow in places, especially the first half of the Fellowship of the Ring. But think of all the work that Tolkien put into it..... he wrote full histories of each race, as well as made many new languages with alphabets and everything!! I really enjoyed it. And IMHO it's better than the three movies. Detail never hurt anyone. By the way, it's not a trilogy to whoever said it before. Tolkien wanted to make sure people knew that, he even wrote a forward about it in some versions.

I personally have a strong disinclination towards the work of Stephen King, Anne McCaffrey, David Eddings and Tom Clancy.
I've never read 'Moby Dick', and after the dismal showing its had here I doubt I ever will...

Genre wise, I'll read most any thing, especially science fiction, but I have a strong apathy towards most fantasy novels and especially anything which requires me to buy a sequel to continue the story. I do however like Tolkien's work.

This is my first time browsing this thread, and so I'm a little late responding to kalabus and Corvus, but I just have to; I loved Catcher in the Rye, probably more than I would of had it not been a required reading assignment. I was just so happy to find a book mandated by school that I actually enjoyed! I thought Holden was a seriously funny guy, some parts of the book actually had me laughing out loud. And he reminded me a lot of myself...