What are 3 Terrible Fantasy or Sci-fi Books You've Read?

[[deleted user]]

Oh, and everything on this shelf of mine, I find terrible.

[Kim]

Ala wrote: "Oh, and everything on this shelf of mine, I find terrible."

I have not read any of them and thanks to you I never shall.

I tend to be quite picky in what I read nowadays and most of the time can push my way through so I only have 1 sci-fi/fantasy book that I found absolutely terrible and that was Doctor Who: The Coming of the Terraphiles. I'm sure many in this group remember it and wish they couldn't.

[[deleted user]]

Kim wrote: "I tend to be quite picky in what I read nowadays and most of the time can push my way through so I only have 1 sci-fi/fantasy book that I found absolutely terrible and that was Doctor Who: The Coming of the Terraphiles. I'm sure many in this group remember it and wish they couldn't. "

Man, I must have been feeling nice that day. I gave it two stars.

I need to change that.

[Yangsze]

LOL, this is such a hilarious thread! I can't remember the titles of some of the books I've read, but I usually give up partway if it's really bad. On the other hand, I have to confess to the guilty enjoyment of some pretty campy sci-fic/fantasy books too...

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Olga wrote: "I'm surprised that people jumped so readily to comment on this thread. Are we all so spiteful, so happy to condemn the writers who wrote those books? Yes, there are lots of mediocre novels out ther..."


Olga, I know you mean well...but this is not the point. There is a difference between hating a persona and hating a book.

I hated those books. Hated. There is no other words to describe my feelings.

If I need to start censoring my opinions to make some author happy...I would stop reading books by people currently alive. My opinion would not change. Spitefulness - in my opinion - needs to have a requirement for hurt. It is not my intention to hurt someone. But my opinion is not going to change. I feel like you are asking for readers to start lying. I'm not going to lie about how I feel about something. If I am not entertained by the book I read...then I'm going to say so. I'm not going to be a liar and claim I enjoyed something I did not.

[[deleted user]]

I find it interesting that a few of the books on here are some that I really like! Still...I can understand why people haaate them too. As a writer myself, I agree--you just can't expect everyone to like everything, and customers and readers have a right to be honest about their opinions.

My least favorite three:

My partner loves these. I could. Not. Get into them. The characters were paper thin!

GRRRRR! I liked these in grade eight. Then I read every other fantasy series ever and discovered that it was basically fan fiction of good series.

This applies to the whole Pern series. I know they're loved...but I haaate them. They're sooooo dry and dull!

[Ken]

Hmm
Foreigner
Cant remember anymore why I didn't like it, I think i was the the Aliens were not all that Alien. I tried to read it twice because some friends loved it. Figured I was missing something.

Ringworld
This was simple. While I normally take into account the time period it was written in I could take Niven's treatment of the woman character.

While not SF, or Fantasy but
The Lost Symbol
While I read the DaVinci Code, I didnt like the writing style I liked his idea. The Lost Symbol writing was so terrible I gave up 50 pages in.

With the exception of Browns book, it wasn't that the writers were bad, it was just how they executed it.

[Greg]

I think it's great to have different opinions on these books. Several of the titles listed I consider to be good books that I've enjoyed. Others I haven't heard of I can learn about, although it sounds like I don't want to.

Still, I've clicked on many of those links and checked out the books. Instead of hurting these authors, we might actually be helping them get some much needed exposure. Inadvertently we doom another generation to repeat our mistakes. Oh my, what have I wrought!

[Wastrel]

MrsJoseph wrote: "Olga wrote: "I'm surprised that people jumped so readily to comment on this thread. Are we all so spiteful, so happy to condemn the writers who wrote those books? Yes, there are lots of mediocre no..."

I think perhaps it's important to distinguish between hurting-in-order-to-tell-the-truth and hurting-to-hurt/hurting-to-be-funny/hurting-for-attention/etc.

Sometimes I do see negative reviews of books and feel quite queasy about them; and yet I agree with you about not wanting to have to lie (or even to be silent and lie through omission). I think the difference is that the reviews I find distasteful are ones where the reviewer hasn't just set out to give an honest opinion, but has instead attempted a comedy routine that uses the book as the butt of all the jokes. I know that humour in a review is legitimate, of course, and there's no clear conceptual line either between humour-to-make-the-review-a-better-read and humour-as-the-purpose-of-the-review - but in practice I think there is a difference. Some reviewers are trying to make themselves look better by rhetorically beating up some else (usually someone less popular with the sort of people who will be reading the review) - in other words, they're bullying the authors. Most of them probably don't think of it that way, of course, but there seems to be a real failure to understand, or care, that it's a real, feeling, psychologically damageable person on the other end of their schtick. [Oftentimes it's fair to assume the author can take it - if I write an excoriating review of a book by, say, Rowling, I imagine she won't care too much - but that doesn't in my mind make the bullying itself any more admirable].


This is different from, however, and must be distinguished from, a reviewer saying that something is bad because it's bad - that's not just a right, that's a duty.

[Marilyn]

Lou wrote: "Across the Face of the World, by Russell Kirkpatrick. Like maps? Like travelogues? Not as much as Russell Kirkpatrick, who fills this story with so much minutia about the hazards of travel in a med..."

Haaaaaa! This made me laugh out loud! You are absolutely right! I'm so glad someone else felt this way I couldn't stand this book and never finished it .

Also I feel as a consumer I feel it's ok to say how I feel about it. Especially if I have paid good money for it.

[Pickle]

The Lost Symbol
While I read the DaVinci Code, I didnt like the writing style I liked his idea. The Lost Symbol writing was so terrible I gave up 50 pages in.

With the exception of Browns book, it wasn't that the writers were bad, it was just how they executed it.

180+ chapters in a 300+ book is ridiculous. Some chapters were less than a page and there was no reason to have them so small at times. God awful book

[JG]

Three popular books I really did not like --

1. American Gods by Neil Gaiman: I detested this book in all its plotless, meandering, wooden glory.

2. Assassin's Apprentice by Robin Hobb: I finished it, but found it boring. While the atmospherics were interesting, I am skeptical of their connection to realism.

3. A Feast for Crows by George R.R. Martin: Among the most disappointing genre books I have read. Rated number three instead of one because it continues to turn the heroes-wander-pastoral-countryside trope on its head.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Lou wrote: "Across the Face of the World, by Russell Kirkpatrick. Like maps? Like travelogues? Not as much as Russell Kirkpatrick, who fills this story with so much minutia about the hazards of travel in a med..."

Marilyn wrote: "Haaaaaa! This made me laugh out loud! You are absolutely right! I'm so glad someone else felt this way I couldn't stand this book and never finished it .

Also I feel as a consumer I feel it's ok to say how I feel about it. Especially if I have paid good money for it. "


OMG! My husband bought this series for me as a gift and I felt so bad. The covers are breathtakingly gorgeous but the story is sooooooo boring. The maps were fantastic but I wanted to wrap the maps around the characters heads and then squeeze.

[Chad]

Olga wrote: "I'm surprised that people jumped so readily to comment on this thread. Are we all so spiteful, so happy to condemn the writers who wrote those books? Yes, there are lots of mediocre novels out ther..."

I disagree, I think this is the entire point of Goodreads, people get together and say what they liked about a book and what they didn't.

There are plenty of websites that only give positive blurbs for books (we call this advertising)

I use Goodreads and Kindleboards a lot and there is a tendency on both for authors to think the site exists only to give positive marketing for their books

[P.]

MrsJoseph wrote: "I hated, hated, hated Lord Foul's Bane. God, the MC was painful to read.

Yeah, Lord Foul's Bane is the first book that comes to mind, whenever "awful" and "book" are used in the same sentence.

Catherine Asaro's The Charmed Sphere was stunningly bad, especially given the author's credentials. Read like a novel that Asaro had written in junior high and was dusting off and publishing now, capitalizing on her name recognition.

Recently bailed on Michael Flynn's The January Dancer because...wow, garish purple prose, incoherent timelines, and more tangents than a trigonometry class. ZZZZzzzz

As some others have said upthread, the majority of books I read don't provoke a reaction one way or the other, so it's an accomplishment when one generates such lasting animosity.

[Mark]

This is a great thread ... it goes to show what varied opinions people can have over books (many of which I thought were great!).

I'm like the original poster: if I start it, I finish it. Some books i really didn't like:

The Real Story by Stephan Donaldson - everyone said the first book was bad but the second would be sooo much better ... it wasn't

Channeling Cleopatra by Elizabeth Ann Scarborough - where to start? Too much New Age mumbo jumbo ...

Wheel of Dreams by Salinda Tyson - I like to try out new authors (often ones I've never heard of before) and the Del Rey Discovery imprint was great for that ... but this one was a huge miss for me ...


My biggest recent disappointment:

Way of Kings by Brandon Sanderson ... if that is a typical Sanderson book I will be avoiding him like the plague. Way too long, repetitive, poorly paced, largely predictable.

[Riona]

A recent one: XVI. Worst. Ever.

[Tony]

Dark Lord: Star Wars: The Rise of Darth Vader
There was actually very little of Darth Vader in this book, it just seemed to be setting up for a new post-ROTS series.

And Eternity
The worst of the incarnations of immortality series.

Star Trek: The Return
Don't get me wrong, Captain Kirk is a god. But if this actually was penned by Shatner, then it's just complete narcissism.

[Lou]

@Mark, You are exactly right. We shouldn't be ashamed of disliking books. OTOH, I LOVED The Way of Kings, so what do I know ;)

[Marilyn]

Wow I had forgotten how bad "And Eternity" was. There are several other really good books in that series buy this one...wow ! It just makes a person feel not so fresh after reading it.

[Mary]

I couldn't get through this book. I tried really, REALLY hard to appreciate it, but it's basically a pretentious clusterf*ck of purple prose and ill-conceived attempts to be "literary." That it actually won an award makes me laugh at how far people will go to appear deep or artistic.

That's the only book on my hate list at the moment, although I definitely had issues with . It's got an interesting concept, but the wooden characters and video game-y premise made it hard for me to give a damn about anything that was happening.

And of course, there's Divergent, which is basically every YA cliche made popular by The Hunger Games rolled into an immature and implausible gimmick-fest.

[MrsJoseph *grouchy*]

Tony wrote: "Dark Lord: Star Wars: The Rise of Darth Vader
There was actually very little of Darth Vader in this book, it just seemed to be setting up for a new post-ROTS series.

And Eternity
The worst of the ..."

You're right. And Eternity was kinda squicky. What's worse is that I heard the (recent) last book was even squickier.

[Emelie]

The first book I come to think of is American Gods. Mind, I haven't read the whole book and I do like the concept of it but the beginning is so boring and non-catching I have given it up (for the moment being at least).

I couldn't bear to finish Santuario (non-catching, boring, confusing) nor The Ripple in Space-Time (also non-catching and with info dumps and a dry language).

Though I always say I will come back and test books I couldn't finish on the first read because my mood might have inflicted my thoughts or whatever. But, I don't think I will with this last two at least.

[Stevie]

I personally thought The Real Story (and the rest of the Gap series) was one of the best SF series I've ever read. Of course, I also thought Lord Foul's Bane and the rest of the Thomas Covenant Books are the closest thing to Fantasy perfection in existence. And I think The Way of Kings is the best book Brandon Sanderson has written yet. Kind of makes me want to check out some of the other books you folks have hated. :-)

[Jim]

Steve wrote: "I personally thought The Real Story (and the rest of the Gap series) was one of the best SF series I've ever read. Of course, I also thought Lord Foul's Bane and the rest of the Thomas Covenant Boo..."

Life's like that Steve. Seriously it might well be worth checking them out. It is all so subjective, and we do ourselves no favours unless we remember that :-)

[Paul]

I only have 1 that I wish that I never even started:

[Julia]

Paul, when you're going to throw something like that out there about The Martian Chronicles, for me at least, you need to why.

There is the shocking short story of the blacks leaving Earth, which was hard to read, but I can't get behind you "wish you'd never started it." Not that I need to.

But then I'm somebody who's been known to give a book one star on one reading and five stars on rereading...

[Shomeret]

I love The Martian Chroniclesfor the poetry of its style. I did an oral interpretation performance of "There will come soft rains..." in college. It's just beautiful prose.

[Paul]

Julia wrote: "Paul, when you're going to throw something like that out there about The Martian Chronicles, for me at least, you need to why.

There is the shocking short story of the blacks leaving Earth, which..."

I apologize for not explaining why. (I’m new) Honestly, it’s difficult for me to put my finger on exactly what I hated about the book… but I’ll give it a stab.

Fahrenheit 451 is one of my favorite books, so it’s not like I have something against the author. I re-read Fahrenheit 451 last month and decided that I wanted more which led to Planet of the Apes and loved it. The Martian Chronicles immediately followed and seemed to fall flat after these 2 reads.

Character development: I was waiting for something good to happen to any of the characters that I ending up liking. Nope.

I felt frustrated after every story. I re-read the story trying to understand what the story was trying to preach to.

I couldn’t understand the stories (tragedies) on almost any level. I honestly felt like Ray Bradbury was making fun of the Science Fiction genre. It felt heavy-handed social issue rhetoric wrapped in poetry. I get it, humanity ruins everything it touches… let’s move on please. I could care less about the racial aspect of the book. These political short stories could have taken place anywhere. It seemed half-baked to me. I really don’t understand how this is such a popular Science Fiction book.

[Julia]

Ah. Well, Fahrenheit 451 is a novel. The Martian Chronicles came before, when he wrote for pulp magazines, right? Just like I, Robot was short stories submitted to magazines before he put them together.

Thanks Paul, now I'm going to reread it. I had forgotten "There Will Come Soft Rains" was first in here.

[Mawgojzeta]

Maybe I would have liked it if I had read it during the time period it came out, but I am not sure. Being a huge sci-fi fan and a fan of most "feminist" sci-fi, I was surprised that it failed so epically for me.


This is another classic that I hated. Hated.




I got bored and simply quit reading one day, forgetting to pick it up again.

[Allan]

I'll jump in.., and I only have two. "Janniseries" by jerry Pournelle, talk about letting your political views overpower your text, got only about 1/4 through before I got tired, bored and revulsed by pushing the superiority of militaristic authoritarian governance to all other forms. I might have more tolerance for this load of crap now, but when I reading it in my mid-20s it was not my cup of tea. "Oath of Fealty" by L. Niven and J. Pournelle, OK again with getting their politics sledgehammered into your head; however, the text suffers less; for your information, Pournelle and Niven have specific political agendas they're pushing with their texts. Specific to OoF is the benevolence and required presence of the Natrional Security state; yes I know, in the text it's a non-governmental security system that safeguards the floating city. But to me it's a distinction without a difference, and for a present day parallel consider KBR or Blackwater. Anyway...

[Allan]

And now I remember the third, "ORyx and Crake" by Atwood. It's mysongist, and the text is a real mess, and it's internally anachronistic (the internal timeline makes little sense). The last point is in spite of the textual attempts in the story to try to pull the plot's timeline into something that is sort of stupid.

[[deleted user]]

Mawgojzeta wrote: "
Maybe I would have liked it if I had read it during the time period it came out, but I am not sure. Being a huge sci-fi fan and a fan of most "feminist" sci-fi, I ..."

I'd like to think I'm pretty eclectic and educated when it comes to genres and exploring them...but I tried to pick up 'Watermelon Sugar' and I felt like I was on a drug trip. I might give it another shot though.

[C.E.]

I had to join this group after reading this topic and seeing The Martian Chronicals and Watermelon Sugar mentioned. Both authors have a style you either seem to love or hate. This is especially true with Brautigan. I was introduced to him in H.S. by my lit teacher with Revenge of The Lawn and it was insta-love. Trout Fishing in America was soon after.

This is what's so great about a topic like this, since it really is, in most cases, a case of personal tastes for one author's style over another, or the storyline of the book. It's also interesting, as Michelle pointed out with Eragon, how tastes can change over time.

For example, in HS I read and loved the Sword of Truth series (Terry Goodkind). After university I began re-reading the books and started catching stylistic things that started to get on my nerves. Although I still really like elements of the story, it has actually become one of my "worst read" list residents. I'm not ready to toss out my Goodkind hard-cover collection yet, but I think that's more from nostalgia.

I was never able to get into the Ringworld series either, and again I think it was the styles. I like chapters. Chapters make me happy.

[Riona]

Allan wrote: "And now I remember the third, "ORyx and Crake" by Atwood. It's mysongist, and the text is a real mess, and it's internally anachronistic (the internal timeline makes little sense). The last point..."

Oryx and Crake is misogynistic? Seriously? Margaret Atwood's writing is some of the most feminist I've ever read.

[Doug]

C.E. wrote: "This is especially true with Brautigan ..."

The Hawkline Monster: A Gothic Westernwas great!

Oh, wait, these are supposed to be books we hate :)

[Galadriel]

I found Eragon to read like it had been written by a 15-year old boy, which in fact, it had. Perhaps Mr. Paolini has honed his craft since, but I was so put off, it'll be awhile before I try anything else he's written, if ever.

And, I agree with you, Ala. A professional writer expects not everyone will like everything he/she has written. It is part of the job to handle bad reviews. All of the authors mentioned in this thread have legions of fans who make up for the detractors, including Chris Paolini.

[Mawgojzeta]

C.E. wrote: "I had to join this group after reading this topic and seeing The Martian Chronicals and Watermelon Sugar mentioned. Both authors have a style you either seem to love or hate. This is especially tru..."

I had picked up "Watermelon Sugar" certain that I would love it. I was so excited. He had never been on my radar and I felt like I was really missing out. I think I was more upset about disliking the book than any other I have read. A shame. And I agree, it is all about personal taste.

[Roger]

The Martian Chronicles make more sense when you realize it is a collection of not-necessarily-connected, short stories.

[A book away from an episode of hoarders]

I think its interesting to see everyone else's opinions about books, that is one of the things I love about Goodreads.

While I absolutely LOVED American Gods (my paperback copy is falling apart from multiple reads and I also have it on audible).
I enjoyed both The Hunger Games Trilogy and Divergent.

I severely disliked The Giver (so much that I abandoned it half read and never looked back). Mort bored me to tears but the only book I can honestly remember HATING was The Metamorphosis. It was mind numbing and eye rolling. Apparently, I'm just not deep enough to enjoy it.

[Bryn]

Mawgojzeta wrote: "
Maybe I would have liked it if I had read it during the time period it came out, but I am not sure. Being a huge sci-fi fan and a fan of most "feminist" sci-fi, I ..."

Or not. I was around, more or less, to read this and other very self-consciously feminist sf. I remember the title Despatches from the Frontiers of the Female Mind: An Anthology of Original Stories. I mean... James Tiptree Jr's work survives and other work doesn't survive. I failed to love The Female Man.

[Kevin]

I think everyone knows my worst fantasy or science fiction.

1. The Name of the Wind-I hate this book for the exact reasons that Pickle hates the book.

2. Furies of Calderon- I felt the book is felt too much with tropes that the book should have been written in the 80s, plus the heading on the book cover summarized the whole series for me.

3. The Alloy of Law- This book had to much tropes for me to enjoy it.

4. Old Man's War - Actually I really don't enjoy any thing written by the author because he in part is a rewrite of other works.

5. 11/22/63 - This book would have been a lot better if it was a short story or at least cut the book's length in half. Lee Harvey Oswald did not even show up until 60% into the book. Also I though the few years in between while the main character was adjusting to the 60s is unnecessary.

6. Road of the Patriarch - Even though R.A. Salvatore is my favorite author of all time, even he can write crap. This book to me had no plot. All the characters felt like they were celebrating the accomplishments of the last book.

[Pickle]

Kevin wrote: "5. 11/22/63 - This book would have been a lot better if it was a short story or at least cut the book's length in half. Lee Harvey Oswald did not even show up until 60% into the book. Also I though the few years in between while the main character was adjusting to the 60s is unnecessary."

i read this and thought it was dreadful. It was a love story with a sub plot about JFK and Oswald.. yet there was little mention anywhere that this was a love story.

If i knew that i would never had read the bloody thing.

[Mark]

Quest for the Faradawn I didn't like this book or the second in the series,I never bothered reading the third.

He has a new book out I am going to read this book to see if I can finish it.

[Jonathan]

Kevin wrote: "I think everyone knows my worst fantasy or science fiction.

1. The Name of the Wind-I hate this book for the exact reasons that Pickle hates the book.

2. Furies of Calderon- I felt the book is f..."

I like the first three you mention because I thought they play the tropes alright and the others I haven't read.

Kim wrote: "Ala wrote: "Oh, and everything on this shelf of mine, I find terrible."

I have not read any of them and thanks to you I never shall.

I tend to be quite picky in what I read nowadays and most of t..."

I hated that book...

[Kevin]

Pickle wrote: "Kevin wrote: "5. 11/22/63 - This book would have been a lot better if it was a short story or at least cut the book's length in half. Lee Harvey Oswald did not even show up until 60% into the book...."

The same with me.

[[deleted user]]

The worst science fiction book I finished (for a Goodreads group) was The Hunger Games: trite, predictable, and jejune. The idea of media enforced killing games is intriguing (albeit unoriginal) but the focus of the story (teenage girl) wasn't captivating and became more and more ludicrous and bland. The politics and measures that would allow the games would have made a good book, but the kids killing kids adventure would have been a side story about pawns on a chessboard. Of course, you could argue the young adult aspect tops the science fiction elements.

[Trike]

It by Stephen King was the book that cured me of reading his stuff ever again. It's seriously 800 pages too long and it turns out the evil is giant spider from outer space that pretends to be a clown.

Oh, spoilers.

I would've thrown this horrible book across the room, but I knew it'd give me a hernia to try. Seriously, 1,100 pages for that?

[[deleted user]]

Trike, was It a comedy? It sounds like one the way you describe it. 'Giant spiders from outer space' - I'd cast someone like Will Ferrell in the movie, I think.

This thread is throwing up some real differences of opinion. Personally I think Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell is a wonderful book – it held me spellbound. I also think very highly of The Martian Chronicles.

My recent pet hates are:

The Book of Lost Things - intolerably dreary.

The Magicians - like Harry Potter without Voldemort: pointless.

At the Back of the North Wind - sentimental, with a central character who’s so wet that you want to kick the little sod’s backside.