The Reading Challenge Group discussion
Book Chat
>
I don't like this book!
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Bronnie
(new)
Jan 03, 2014 06:07PM
I have started "The ocean at the end of the lane" and I am really not liking it. Fantasy is not a genre that I enjoy but I thought I would give this a go but I am struggling. My philosophy in recent years is that life is to short to keep reading books I don't enjoy, however I don't know what to do about the challenge, I supposed I can't count it?
reply
|
flag
If I can't get through a book, I give up on it and read something else. Sorry you are not enjoying the book. That one was pretty good.
I think life is way too short to spend reading a book you think is not good. So if you really don't like it, juts give it up. In that case I suppose you can't count it to your challenge.I started reading the same book last night and I got halfway through in no time. I really liked the book, but I do also like fantasy as a genre. It's one of my favorite genres actually. I'm sorry you didn't like it, but if you want to give it another chance, you could try listening to it.
I found an audio version of the book read by Neil Gaiman himself as a video on YouTube. I've been listening to it while reading and this makes the book almost come alive. Here's the link to the video if you're interested.
Mod
I have this problem with finishing books. I didn't finish 3 last year of which only one I can truly say I just don't want to read it. I completely didn't count them. I keep saying maybe I just wasn't in the mood and I will go back and try again but there are just too many books and not enough time. My to read list never seems to get any shorter.
I agree that there are so many books out there that it seems a shame to slog through something you don't like after you've given it a fair chance. I hate to lose time from my list, too, so I keep a separate running list of abandoned books each year (in 2012, I read 94 and abandoned 4 others). I usually make notes about each book in my personal log so I remember what my issues were with each particular book--that way, if I decide to pick it up again, I'm ready.
Similarly, I like to re-read books and I only count new books for my yearly reading lists, but I keep a side list of books I re-read, just for fun.
Last year I started keeping a list of abandoned books. It pains me to look at it. I like the idea of making notes so I remember why I stopped reading it. I think I am going to start doing that.
I hate it when I just can't get into a book as I like to finish them when I have started. There are only a handful that I truly haven't been able to finish but if you really aren't enjoying it I would move on to another book. As everyone has already said there are far too many books to read to be stuck reading a book you aren't enjoying.
I really have enjoyed Neil Gaimans books, I haven't read this one yet but I would suggest you try some of his earlier works as they might help to introduce you to his writing and satirical style.
Mod
Oh dear, that's not good, Iasa! You need some recommendations for non-wall-worthy books!
My problem is if it is branded a classic I feel obligated. I'm reading Catch-22 and not loving it, I quit The Fountainhead because it left a bad taste in my mouth and I once spent 3 months picking up and quitting The Portrait of a Lady. I have never felt such satisfaction once I finished it.
RE: abandoning classics.I definitely don't feel bad about doing this; I used to until one day I just thought, hey maybe it's everyone else in the world pretending to like it and I'm the only one being honest ;o)
Seriously though, I think reading a book is like meeting somebody at a dinner party - even if everyone expects you to get on, sometimes things just don't gel. I won't apologise for not liking Dickens or Henry James, I just get on better with Tolstoy and George Eliot. and life is too short to be having conversations with people who bore you!
Jude wrote: "RE: abandoning classics.I definitely don't feel bad about doing this; I used to until one day I just thought, hey maybe it's everyone else in the world pretending to like it and I'm the only one ..."
I don't think anything has ever made me feel better about setting down books I don't enjoy. You've freed me!!!
I hate giving up on a book but at the same time I don't want to waste time reading something I'm not that into. I have borrowed four Star Wars books off my brother and I slogged my way through the first one. I wanted to quit it after the first chapter but my brother assures me that it's necessary to read these books because they lead on to a better story. I shall give him the benefit of the doubt and give the second book a fair shot. If it does not improve on the first one shall not be amused. My sister gave me all her Patricia Cornwall novels, and her Wallander books. I read the first nine of Cornwall's books before I gave up but I only read the first half of one Wallander story before I gave up with them. And the other week I got a copy of The Bourne Supremacy and only read the first page before realising it was not my cup of tea. I don't know why I persevere with some and totally give up on others but I don't question it. If I hear that little voice saying give it up then I give it up.As for abandoning classics... I've read a few in the past couple of years and was not impressed so I now no longer read something just because it's on a list of the Top 100 Must Reads of All Time. Who decides what books qualify as Must Reads? What qualifies them to make that judgement?
Oh my goodness I so agree with you here. I have often read through these lists and though 'I have read that and it is rubbish, why would I recommend it'. Yes I know that we are all different and have different tastes but I only recommend books to friends whose reading preferences I know. This does not mean that if I read and enjoy a book outside my preferred genre I wouldn't recommend it. I was given 'The Hunger Games' and thought 'why?' but I loved it and read the series and recommended it to others. My reading choices have changed so much over the years and I hope will continue to do so.
Yvonne wrote: "As for abandoning classics... I've read a few in the past couple of years and was not impressed so I now no longer read something just because it's on a list of the Top 100 Must Reads of All Time. Who decides what books qualify as Must Reads? What qualifies them to make that judgement?"I mean, I dislike a bunch of the classics, so I'm certainly not going to tell anybody to enjoy them or else. But this comment feels a bit harsh? Scholars are qualified to include a book in the canon (aka the Must Reads) through years of schooling and work.
I don't think anyone would go and ask a doctor what qualifies them to say that polio is more serious than the common cold . . . Or, if you want an example not rooted in hard science, I don't think anyone would go and ask an art historian what qualifies them to say the Mona Lisa is better than what I paint in my basement.
It just sounds as if you're minimizing a lot of years of hard work because you did not personally find such and such author ought to be read. And once again, I dislike a bunch of the classics, and I even dislike what work of Harold Bloom I've read, and he's a leading literary critic. But I wouldn't dream to ask him what qualifies him to say this work is part of the Western Canon while this other work that I like better isn't.
I don't think that just because something is a classic that means everyone is going to like it. Aren't classic noteworthy and enduring? Just because something is enjoyable doesn't mean that 50 years from now it will even be remembered. I mean really everyone loves 50 Shades but it is never going to be a classic.
Aitziber wrote: "Yvonne wrote: "As for abandoning classics... I've read a few in the past couple of years and was not impressed so I now no longer read something just because it's on a list of the Top 100 Must Read..."I think there's a place for the everyman in the shaping of the must-read-top-100-lists.
As I understand it, a bestseller becomes so because people buy it and love it, and then urge other people to buy it - multiplied by the world over. Of course, criticisms and negative reviews are valid and important, but when they're not the consensus you can see how their voice is easy to lose in the crowd - which, incidentally, is part of the reason why I think abandoning books that you don't gel with is a completely acceptable thing to do.
When it comes to classics and the canon, the question of "who decides what makes a classic, and why should I read it?" is a debate that has been raging for decades. A debate that has as much to do with political and social consciences as it has to do with literature. As I see it, the classics are named so, because they try to illustrate stories across the spectrum of political and social ideas that can run parallel with the modern everyday points of views and societies (albeit, they do this with varying degrees of success).
Like many others, I've definitely not loved every classic novel I've ever read. But, I'm not convinced that you're supposed to, I feel like their purpose is to help to steer you into finding your own personal literary agenda, which is perhaps why we're always told to start with them in our younger years.
When it comes to who decides what we should read I feel I agree with Yvonne and Sandy, that is something that should challenged often, and perhaps even aggressively, because as long as someone is telling you what you can and can't read they are subversively telling you what you can and can't think about. And, I'm not sure that anyone should have that right. If we are to place people with that responsibility, I feel it is then our right to hold them accountable for their recommendations.
