The Most Overrated Books Showing 4,301-4,350 of 5,680

[Geoffrey]

Mark wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "Not even funny, Mark. Nice try."

No offense, Geoffrey. But the day I use you as a resource to gauge how I'm doing in the "make 'em laugh" department is the day I turn in my comedi..."

Now that was slightly funny Mark, a bit droll yes. So there's hope for you yet on stage.

[Esdaile]

deleted user wrote: "The one I've read most recently that I'd put at the top of a list of overrated books is Death in Venice. Although I know this book is considered a classic steeped in allegory, I can't get past the ..."

When wanting to include books on this list it is important to mention if they are translated from another language. The fact that you name this story in English suggests that you read it in English and in fact Der Tod in Venedig has been poorly translated. Even Helen Low Porter was not up the her usual level. That probably makes no difference to your opinion but it is only fair to say if you were not able to read the original.

[Mark]

Esdaile wrote: "deleted user wrote: "The one I've read most recently that I'd put at the top of a list of overrated books is Death in Venice. Although I know this book is considered a classic steeped in allegory, ..."

excellent point.

[Kerri]

deleted user wrote: "Which books do you think are overrated?

Here's a quick sampling from various internet sites that recommend skipping these:
The Catcher in the Rye
Moby Dick
The Great Gatsby
Waiting for Godot
The..."

I personally loved The Catcher in the Rye. I think you have to relate to Holden to have a true appreciation of it. When I read it at age 13; I hated it. I didn't "get" Holden. But when I read it at age 17, I loved it. It's really a hit or miss book. I used to vehemently believe it was over-rated, but now I don't think it is.

Also, I agree with some of the other posting about the classics; there is a reason that they have stood the test of time. I hate some of the classics I've read and love others. It's very subjective. I think the only books that deserve to be on an overrated list are those that are obviously badly written, clichéd, or that have a poor story line.

[Kallie]

Kerri wrote: "I hate some of the classics I've read and love others. It's very subjective. "

I don't see that as any more objective than hating or liking some kind of food. Even that taste can change.

[Esdaile]

Kevin wrote: "This list is the stupidest thing I've read in quite a long time, really. People didn't just agree on considering "Waiting for Godot" a great play. And by the way, stupidity starts right there, call..."

Well you say it is a precious read, which issurely in the same class as suggesting it is a novel. Surely it is suppoosed to be good theatre and if it is not that it has failed?

[Mark]

Esdaile wrote: "issurely" when Esdaile probably wanted to write "assuredly."

Sincerely,

The Stickler

[Karen]

Michael wrote: "I really disliked Virginia Woolf's Orlando, and now I'm struggling to get through The Waves. What am I missing?"

I felt like I was under water when I was reading The Waves,and I gave up. I didn't want to, but I hated it, which made me feel bad because there are not many women writers I have read. I will try Mrs. Dalloway- I don't want to dismiss an important writer like Woolf just yet.

[Michael]

Karen wrote: "Michael wrote: "I really disliked Virginia Woolf's Orlando, and now I'm struggling to get through The Waves. What am I missing?"

I felt like I was under water when I was reading The Waves,and I ga..."

Yes, exactly--underwater! It's lovely, poetic writing, but disorienting to read, and I feel no forward motion.

[Petergiaquinta]

Booksdigger wrote: "That is my book to read for 2015. So is it worth spending time on? "

Haters gonna hate...

The Goldfinch is a fine book, but based on what I see you've been reading, I don't know if you're going to like it.

I gave it five stars, but if I ever get around to writing my review, I'll probably knock it down a star to four. If you like Dickens and the Brontes, you might like this contemporary spin on the genre. If you hate that kind of thing, then don't touch it.

Mark would prolly sucker punch Charles D in a New York minute. But he's a mean one. I, on the other hand, soft-hearted lover of my fellow man that I am, appreciate all the words, the textures, the sentiment, the humanity. And that's what Tartt is doing here...she's going for something a bit mid-Victorian in a contemporary context.

Like it or don't like it, but when you look at the books that came out last year, I don't know why folks get so bent out of shape about it getting the Pulitzer. Who deserved it so much more badly than Ms. Tartt? Yeah, maybe Saunders, but that's just a make-up call. Anyone else???

[Karen]

Michael wrote: "Yes, exactly--underwater! It's lovely, poetic writing, but disorienting to read, and I feel no forward motion."

Oh good- sometimes I feel I can't get my point across when I'm not "talking" to someone in person. She is a beautiful writer, but it was very disorienting.

[Kallie]

Karen wrote: "Michael wrote: "I really disliked Virginia Woolf's Orlando, and now I'm struggling to get through The Waves. What am I missing?"

I felt like I was under water when I was reading The Waves,and I ga..."

My favorite of the Woolf I've read (which is not a lot). II read The Waves but remember almost nothing from that book, am left with an image of an early 20th century woman staring out to sea.

[Grace]

The Da Vinci Code
Twilight

I agree completely - both were very underwhelming when placed in any literary canon and there is another addition I would add to this, The Millennium Trilogy, a series of books in which every page is filled with eating sandwiches and drinking coffee, and the author living a fantasist life of his former life as an economic journalist turning him into a sex god.
I do sometimes, harsh as it sounds, wonder how popular the Millennium trilogy would have been if the author had not died.

[Kallie]

Karen wrote: "Michael wrote: "Yes, exactly--underwater! It's lovely, poetic writing, but disorienting to read, and I feel no forward motion."

Oh good- sometimes I feel I can't get my point across when I'm not "..."

Sheesh. My post truly lacked clarity. I meant to say, Karen, that Mrs. Dalloway was my favorite Woolf. It's a wonderful novel.

As an appreciator of both Mark and Petergiaquinta posts I don't know whether I will read The Goldfinch but do favor Saunders -- a disturbing and very funny American satirist. Do writers who go that far win Pulitzers?

[Karen]

Kallie wrote: "Karen wrote: "Michael wrote: "Yes, exactly--underwater! It's lovely, poetic writing, but disorienting to read, and I feel no forward motion."

Oh good- sometimes I feel I can't get my point across ..."

Kallie I'm glad you posted this, I will definitely read Mrs. Dalloway then. I am curious now about Goldfinch-someday, I've got too much Faulkner and Kundera to read, I know,both men. I don't care, I read what I love.

[Stephen]

I relished Woolf's 'The Waves'.
I'm sad someone says Tartt's 'Goldfinch' is over-hyped.
I'm finishing Leavitt's 'Florence---a delicate case' O'Reilly's 'killing Patton' & Martin Amis's' 'Time's Arrow'. All lovely reading.

[Petergiaquinta]

Kallie wrote: "I don't know whether I will read The Goldfinch but do favor Saunders -- a disturbing and very funny American satirist. Do writers who go that far win Pulitzers? "

Well, Mailer and Cheever both won it, and you could make the case that they go ever farther than Saunders. And Roth! But I get what you mean. Most of the winners of the Pulitzer in fiction are pretty traditional authors; and that's not something you could ever say for Saunders.

And if the authors aren't all that traditional, their books winning the Pulitzer in fiction are usually pretty safe choices in comparison. Faulkner's The Rievers sure isn't Absalom, Absalom or Sound and the Fury. Maybe the Pulitzer in fiction plays it safe, and maybe that explains The Goldfinch winning it last year.

However, I'm still wondering what other books last year deserve it more. I haven't read them, but the runners-up don't strike me as all that interesting from their descriptions.

[Geoffrey]

TO THE LIGHTHOUSE was such an excellent, poignant read that it put her in the major leagues. I've tried to read Mrs. Dalloway but found the character so insipidly conventional that I discontinued reading. I had the same reaction when I read Gore Vidal's Myra Beckinridge but gave that one another try and found myself impressed with the novel.

I think sometimes we have to give a novel some time and space and then go back to it. I was not initially impressed with TCITR when reading it at the tender age of 16, but now that I have a lifetime behind me I will give it another attempt considering how many people on this website have acclaimed its worth.

As for Orlando, I tried to watch the movie and was very confused by it.

[Geoffrey]

Karen wrote: "Michael wrote: "I really disliked Virginia Woolf's Orlando, and now I'm struggling to get through The Waves. What am I missing?"

I felt like I was under water when I was reading The Waves,and I ga..."

As for women writers, there's such a plethora of great ones I can't see how you could have missed them.

Pearl Buck
Willa Cather
Mary Caponegro
Doris Lessing
Edith Wharton
George Elliot

Anyway those are my favs.

I generally avoid
Colette
Anais Nin (she was a filmmaker, but wrote diaries as well)
Joyce Carol Oates
Cynthia Oznick (sp.?)

[Esdaile]

Mark wrote: "Esdaile wrote: "issurely" when Esdaile probably wanted to write "assuredly."

Sincerely,

The Stickler"

No. One should always go for the simplest explanation if there is no reason for chosing a more complicated one. There is a gap missing between "is" and "surely", that's all.

[Karen]

Geoffrey wrote: "Karen wrote: "Michael wrote: "I really disliked Virginia Woolf's Orlando, and now I'm struggling to get through The Waves. What am I missing?"

I felt like I was under water when I was reading The ..."

It's not that I missed them, I just haven't read many, I've read Charlotte Bronte, Kingsolver, of course Jane Austen who I love, and Alcott. It is one of my goals to read more.

[Petergiaquinta]

Karen wrote: "It's not that I missed them, I just haven't read many, I've read Charlotte Bronte, Kingsolver, of course Jane Austen who I love, and Alcott. It is one of my goals to read more. "

Try some Toni Morrison. She's our best, maybe our greatest. And since you're a big fan of Faulkner's, it's a natural fit for you. She covers some of the same ground, albeit from a very different perspective. Like Faulkner she can be difficult at times, so maybe start with Sula or The Bluest Eye or Beloved.

[Kallie]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Try some Toni Morrison. She's our best, maybe our greatest. ..."

I intend to re-try Morrison. Now I prefer Marilynne Robinson, Susan Choi, Dana Spiotta.

[Kallie]

Geoffrey wrote: "I've tried to read Mrs. Dalloway but found the character so insipidly conventional that I discontinued r..."

I disagree. But Karen, try for yourself.

[Karen]

Petergiaquinta wrote: "Karen wrote: "It's not that I missed them, I just haven't read many, I've read Charlotte Bronte, Kingsolver, of course Jane Austen who I love, and Alcott. It is one of my goals to read more. "

Try..."

I will do that for a late winter read, and I have heard that she is compared to Faulkner, she likes him also, thanks!

[Karen]

Kallie wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "I've tried to read Mrs. Dalloway but found the character so insipidly conventional that I discontinued r..."

I disagree. But Karen, try for yourself."

Oh I will!

[Michael]

Don't forget Ann Patchett, whose Bel Canto is fabulous.

Others I'd include:
Mary Shelly (Frankenstein)
Emily Bronte (Wuthering Heights)
Charlotte Bronte (Jane Eyre)
Harper Lee (To Kill a Mockingbird)
Ursula K. LeGuin (The Left Hand of Darkness)
Alice Walker (The Color Purple)
Isabelle Allende (The House of the Spirits)
Margaret Atwood (The Handmaid's Tale)
Arundhati Roy (The God of Small Things
Jumpha Lahiri (The Interpreter of Maladies)

[Petergiaquinta]

Try Lahiri's The Namesake as well.

I expected Arundhati Roy to become one of the world's great contemporary female writers based on God of Small Things. I don't know if that book was a one-time fluke, if she got sidetracked by politics, or if she just hasn't tapped a greatness to come. Nonetheless, I'm still waiting for more from her!

[Geoffrey]

I was disappointed in Bel Canto. But LeGuin, Roy and Lahiri are good reads.

[Richard]

The DaVinci Code I agree with. Sure it had its good moments although ephemerally. It's an okay thriller but that's it. I think I should mention Anne of Green Gables here as well but I'm pretty sure my opinions are strongly biased without keeping an open-mind. Haven't read Gatsby yet but Ulysses is literally one of the worst books I have ever read.

[Karen]

Michael wrote: "Don't forget Ann Patchett, whose Bel Canto is fabulous.

Others I'd include:
Mary Shelly (Frankenstein)
Emily Bronte (Wuthering Heights)
Charlotte Bronte (Jane Eyre)
Harper Lee (To Kill a Mockingb..."

Oh yes I read Mary Shelly and Harper Lee also- I didn't like The Handmaids Tale.

[[deleted user]]

OH Nanesake was great, so was God of SMall things. and a similar theme The Hero's Walk
Margaret Atwood - for me all apart from Handmaid's Tale
and Possession
and many British ones- Margaret Drabble, and Pat Barker- she is brilliant.
Sorry, I stopped following you because I got tired of Catcher in the Rye ( despite it being one of my favourite books), You are talking about other stuff now. Why did nobody tell me ? LOL

[Karen]

Lucie wrote: "OH Nanesake was great, so was God of SMall things. and a similar theme The Hero's Walk
Margaret Atwood - for me all apart from Handmaid's Tale
and Possession
and many Bri..."

Lucie, we were talking about other things when you posted last, but you had to go to bed so you missed it!!

[[deleted user]]

Well I am in a different time zone. But shouldn't you then maybe start a new thread? Like " women writers" or whatever?
Or " character arcs"- do we like them or not?

[Karen]

Lucie wrote: "Well I am in a different time zone. But shouldn't you then maybe start a new thread? Like " women writers" or whatever?
Or " character arcs"- do we like them or not?"

No, because this thread is like a meeting place- it's over a year old, so there is history here.

[[deleted user]]

Ok so it is no longer anything to do with overrated books? I am allowed to digress?

[Michael]

This is an exact quote from an email I received this past week from a literary agent I'd queried:

"I am finding that the market for exciting, innovative fiction to be a tough one..."

I find this astounding and dispiriting.

[[deleted user]]

and it is grammatically incorrect Even I- a foreigner can tell

[Kallie]

Michael wrote: "This is an exact quote from an email I received this past week from a literary agent I'd queried:

"I am finding that the market for exciting, innovative fiction to be a tough one..."

I find this..."

If he was referring to your fiction that at least is a plus.

[Karen]

Lucie wrote: "Ok so it is no longer anything to do with overrated books? I am allowed to digress?"

You can digress, or talk about overrated books.

[[deleted user]]

Karen wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Ok so it is no longer anything to do with overrated books? I am allowed to digress?"

You can digress, or talk about overrated books."
LOL Perfect.
But I just started a LIt Fic thread. I wonder if anybody will say something

[[deleted user]]

Edward wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Karen wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Ok so it is no longer anything to do with overrated books? I am allowed to digress?"

You can digress, or talk about overrated books."
LOL Perfect.
But I ..."
Sorry, you are of course being sarcastic about my geek speak-
But let's pretend you are not sarcastic:
LOL laughing out loud
Lit Fic Literary Fiction Dialogue
https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

[[deleted user]]

Good night- it is after midnight here

[[deleted user]]

Edward wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Edward wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Karen wrote: "Lucie wrote: "Ok so it is no longer anything to do with overrated books? I am allowed to digress?"

You can digress, or talk about overrated..."

That is fine, no offence taken. I have a transatlantic relationship, and most of our communication is on Google chat, one of us is always at work because of the time difference. the abbreviations are a bad habit.They make typing faster. BRB be right back , ATM at the moment ,LOL,OTP on the phone etc....

[Kallie]

More abusive word salad, tossed, especially rotten bits. Alas, no garbage disposal.

[[deleted user]]

Kallie wrote: "More abusive word salad, tossed, especially rotten bits. Alas, no garbage disposal."

????? don't understand what you are referring to. Maybe I am too dumb for this group.And why am I not asleep????I will read more tomorrow ( today rather)

[Geoffrey]

Edward wrote: "Petergiaquinta wrote: "Kallie wrote: "I don't know whether I will read The Goldfinch but do favor Saunders -- a disturbing and very funny American satirist. Do writers who go that far win Pulitzers..."

Edward being his regular miserable self again. Much such repressed anger spouted on the web. I hope you don´t sound like this in veritas.

[Renee E]

Repressed?

[Shannon]

Wow. What a bunch of pretension and personal jabs. It's like reading the comments on youtube videos. I'm off this thread because the nastiness is boring as hell. Grow up and learn to have an intellectual discussion.

[Indra]

I disagree with the inclusion of The Great Gatsby and The Catcher in the Rye.