Challenge: 50 Books discussion
Friday Questions
>
Question #8: No way. No how. Not now. Not ever.
I find that I will most likely NOT be reading those risque romance novels with Fabio on the cover.Also, I refuse to read anything by Scott Westfield, or whatever his name is. The guy who wrote, "The Uglies," "The Pretties," all of that junk. I just can't stand his writing, its horrendous.
Even though I own the first four Twilight books, I was SEVERELY disappointed by Breaking Dawn (It was a cop out.) and the popularity has killed it for me. So, if she ever does publish another book in the series, I will NOT be reading it. Although, if she publishes something like "The Host" I'll give it ago because I enjoyed that book. The writing was HEAPS better than Twilight.
There were a couple of books I thought I would never read Twilight & the Sookie Stackhouse books. After seeing the T.V. show True Blood I started reading the Sookie Stackhouse books and thoroughly enjoy them. The other is Twilight. I swore I would not read it, just not interested, but I saw a preview for the new movie and spoke to some friends who like the same types of books as me and I broke down and am reading it now. Although, I think Stephanie Myers may take the story a little too seriously, I've actually enjoyed reading it. I should be done this evening.I also snubbed my nose at adults on this site who constantly read YA books. This year, two of the best books I've read so far are The Hunger Games & Catching Fire. Both YA books.
My advice to myself from now on is "never say never."
Connie wrote: "There were a couple of books I thought I would never read Twilight & the Sookie Stackhouse books. After seeing the T.V. show True Blood I started reading the Sookie Stackhouse books and thoroughly..."connie, that is so funny! i've done the same thing, especially regarding the "Twilight" series. i swore i would never read them. then i got on facebook and saw all these references to edward on the "flair" page. i have a very curious personality, so i ended up giving in and picking up twilight. i got hooked! i do plan on reading the rest of the series.
thank you for the other suggestion, i'll have to add those to my "to-read" list.
I will never read a book that is BASED ON a movie. Like today i saw "wolfman" the book and on the cover it said "based on the motion picture" not "now a major motion picture" but "based on a motion picture". Why? seriously.
Connie wrote: "There were a couple of books I thought I would never read Twilight & the Sookie Stackhouse books. After seeing the T.V. show True Blood I started reading the Sookie Stackhouse books and thoroughly..."Well said, Connie. I read a wide range of books, and young adult novels are one of my favorite genres. A lot of people do snub their noses at these books, but I'm always amazed at them. They can sometimes venture into things that adult books never do and they do it well--usually things more magical. I remember a while ago reading a quote from Philip Pullman of why His Dark Materials (considered children's books) were written with children characters, for children (and adults) to read. He just didn't think the story would fit written based on adult characters, and was able to take the story where he wanted to with children.
Also, we've all been young adults so we can all usually identify with the characters.
I don't think I could ever say no way no how to any author or genre under normal circumstances when I have easy access to the library and bookshops but I know if I was in a country where I didn't speak the language then I would read whatever book was available. Yep even if it was something like Mills & Boon which under normal circumstances I wouldn't touch.As for books that are suppose to be aimed at children and young adults I love the Skulduggery Pleasant series and I think that The Hunger Games and Catching Fire are two of the best books I have read.
I swore on my life that I would never read the twilight saga but after some time of hearing people talk about how much they liked them I started to read them too when I finsihed twilight I was so into New Moon that I couldnt stop reading it.Going to read another book by Stephanie Meyer!!! Yay cant wait to get it tomorrow so I can start reading.
The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett. I have 2 copies I refuse to read.
Evan wrote: "I will never read a book that is BASED ON a movie. Like today i saw "wolfman" the book and on the cover it said "based on the motion picture" not "now a major motion picture" but "based on a motion..."There's big money in the book-to-movie genre. It also takes a certain amount of skill, which I guess not all authors have, but the ones who do can be very good. You are talking about two different styles of presentation...books TELL and movies SHOW. In books the motivation can be described in emotional terms, talked about with lush descriptions so the reader can understand the precise nuances of scene and character. In movies, unless it is the rare voice-over meant to convey ones inner thoughts, the motivation must be physically acted out to convey the characters' meaning.
It seems to me that it would be harder, perhaps lots harder, to capture the essence of a performance with words (preferrably succincly) so that the vision of the playwright or screenplay author is carried through without bastardizing it.
Lynsea wrote: "The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett. I have 2 copies I refuse to read."Lynsea - I really liked The Pillars of the Earth. It's a very looong book but some good action. My friend recommended it to me because it was her favorite book of all time. My mother was a big Ken Follett fan, but apparently, this book is like no other book he has written.
Evan wrote: "I will never read a book that is BASED ON a movie. Like today i saw "wolfman" the book and on the cover it said "based on the motion picture" not "now a major motion picture" but "based on a motion..."I'm a big fan of the Jason Bourne movies and I know the author who originally wrote the triolgy is dead, but I've seen other books out now that carry on where the movies left off. I've kind of been interested in reading them. I don't think I've ever read a book based on a movie, although I have read books that the movies were based on after having seen the movie.
Evan wrote: "I will never read a book that is BASED ON a movie. Like today i saw "wolfman" the book and on the cover it said "based on the motion picture" not "now a major motion picture" but "based on a motion..."Its even worse when you consider the fact that the movie wasn't even good.
Lynsea wrote: "The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett. I have 2 copies I refuse to read."oh, you HAVE to read Pillars of the Earth! That book was excellent! Great characters, a riveting story, a beautiful romance...it's a great escapism-read.
Lynsea wrote: "The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett. I have 2 copies I refuse to read."I guess a lot of people are going to comment on this one. "The Pillars of the Earth" is excellent. Don't miss it. Maybe I should say try it and it will probably grab you in the first few pages. If it doesn't..bag it.
Evan wrote: "I will never read a book that is BASED ON a movie. Like today i saw "wolfman" the book and on the cover it said "based on the motion picture" not "now a major motion picture" but "based on a motion..."I remember (lo- these many years ago) when 2001 came out as a movie. We then read the book in order to understand the movie. Then we watched the movie again! (and no, I didn't watch it after using LSD or any other drug that was popular then)
The Lord of the rings series, I just don't get the appeal that so many people think it has.Also most autobiographys and memoirs, they really grate on me, I feel like reading about someone else's everyday life is a waste of my own.
Connie wrote: "Lynsea wrote: "The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett. I have 2 copies I refuse to read."Lynsea - I really liked The Pillars of the Earth. It's a very looong book but some good action. My fr..."
I have been trying to get through "Pillars of the Earth" for at least 6 months. My problem is I neither like nor hate any of the characters enough to care about them and what happens to them. The fire in the old church seemed too contrived. So I pack it away, read other books, run across it in a pile and read some more. Maybe I'll finish it before the year is out.
There aren't many things that I can say I actually hate, from new foods, experiences, etc. to new books...but I have vowed to never again read a book by Edna Buchanan. She pissed me off by killing off a very sympathetic character in the one book I read by her...a fourteen-year old, living in an abandoned building and on his own for a number of years, the only toy he had was a small replica of the Starship Enterprise with a broken nacelle (are the tears streaming yet?) and I kept hoping things would get better for him...and instead she killed him off. I didn't see it coming and felt really betrayed emotionally. I don't want to take the chance of that happening again, so Edna--you had your chance and you blew it with me.
M.J. wrote: "I won't bother reading Ann Coulter because I have a hunch that I'd get more out of Twilight. I tried to read Miley Cyrus' autobiography, but I didn't make it past the first chapter."i L-O-V-E ann coulter...she's definitely NOT a quick read....perhaps the reason they may not appeal to you is 1)she's an EXTREME conservative and 2)she probably talks over your head. i will admit that she does use a lot of big words, but she does do her fact checking and her research. she ROCKS!
Urgh, Dan Brown for me! That man writes as though he's a 15yr old in a High School English class. The success of writers like him, when there are plenty of wonderful authors out there who barely scratch the surface, represents all that is wrong with the world today.
Tsk, tsk Carla. How rude. Not liking Ann Coulter does not make us unintelligent. Some of us just think she's obnoxious and strident. That makes us discerning. She isn't any less likely to edit "the facts" to serve her own purposes than any other talking head out there who contributes nothing to society but their opinion. Look at that, several words with more than one syllable AND correctly spelled! Aren't you impressed?
no need to be haters out there...like you both (donna and harold) i was simply stating my opinion, which i believe is STILL allowed in this wonderful country of ours that our brave men and women (both past and present) have been willing to fight and sometimes lay down ones life for.
I'm a hater? Um, wasn't the one who opined disliking something you like made me stupid. My freely expressed, constitutionally protected opinion is that that is an insult, not an opinion, and rude. Stating that you find her intelligent, that she makes cogient points and you find her well researched and thought provoking is an opinion. Stating that we probably don't like her because we're not smart enough to understand her is rude. William F. Buckley was all those things, without being strident or obnoxious - well except for that accent. And I've waved off nine friends & family members, some for their third tour in this war; I do volunteer work for the VA making litter quilts; my guild makes Home of the Brave quilts & neck coolers & care packages for troops overseas serving this wonderful country. So, don't start throwing I must not be a good American crap at me because I called you on rudeness.
'perhaps the reason they may not appeal to you is 1)she's an EXTREME conservative and 2)she probably talks over your head. i will admit that she does use a lot of big words, but she does do her fact checking and her research. she ROCKS!' Carla, my first reaction to the phrase 'she probably talks over your head' kind of made me do a double take. First of all, you are posting on a public message board, more people than just you and the person you are addressing can read this (unless you yourself delete it). Are you assuming that everyone who reads this is a Neanderthal? (Sorry Caveman, I don't mean to be un-PC) I won't even go into what I don't like about Ann Coulter because I don't want to turn this into a free-for-all which might spiral out of control...this thread is not meant for that...but I have to say that although I had just an ever-so-slight feeling about being talked down to about the phrase above, I overlooked it pretty much, but the next post was blatantly offensive...
"no need to be haters out there...like you both (donna and harold) i was simply stating my opinion, which i believe is STILL allowed..." If your opinion is that we're a bunch of morons, then yes, your post is offensive. Most people who feel superior have the good grace to conceal it in their own minds, and don't let it leak out in ways that can harm others. Having an opinion is not harmful, but character assasination to someone's face most definitely is. You're not alone, everyone has done it at some time or another, but is that how you really want to be or be known as?
I don't read romance novels. OK, well, I did read Twilight (and the rest of the series). And loved it. I won't apologize for that, either. :P Anyway Twilight is not a "romance" romance. You know, with the cheesy covers and whatnot...
Again Donna and Carol have stated things much better than I could have. Donna - WFB was a true conservative and I don't think anyone doubted his sincerity. What we are dealing with now are the "neo-cons" - and that is another matter altogether.Intelligent political conversation stops when the name calling begins. At that point there is no exchange of ideas or information - just sloganeering and preconceived notions.
Thanks for the kind words Harold. I truly mourn the loss of civil discourse. Not that I don't have some uncivil moments myself, but try keep them trapped in my internal monologue.And thanks Lianne for bringing us back to the actual topic. I've stated previously that I would not be reading Twilight, but that I would be forever grateful to Stephanie Meyers for getting my goddaughter reading. And I know the covers are often cheesey, but there are some good reads in there. My addiction to romance started in college trying to keep my brain from burning out the semester I took bio-ethics, statistical analysis and child psych at the same time. My brain needed a break.
I'll usually try any book, but no way will you catch me even considering reading It by Stephen King. Why? One word - CLOWN!!!! I hate clowns. I've always been terrified of them - to the point where, even though I'm a huge fan of the series, I have never and will never watch the episode of Supernatural with a clown in. *shudder*
But....clowns! I would watch it with my Mum telling me when to shut my eyes, but she always ends up getting distracted and either scaring me half to death, or letting me miss huge chunks. :(
Nairabell wrote: "I'll usually try any book, but no way will you catch me even considering reading It by Stephen King. Why? One word - CLOWN!!!! I hate clowns. I've always been terrified o..."Ever since I read the first 20 pages of "It" (was too scared to read any further), I have been afraid of clowns and storm drains!
now you both have my curiosity piqued....i'm going to have to definitely pick that book up and read it....clowns don't disturb me - too terribly much; storm drains - now that may be a different story.
With "It" it wasn't the evil clown that got me, it was the scene with the group of 12 year old protagonists having an orgy (well, more like running a train on the one girl of the group) that made me sick. I love Stephen King... until he takes it way too far.
Gack! 12-year-old gang bang? Soooo glad I skipped that one. And now it's on the no way-no how list.... King's "Salem's Lot" was the only book I wouldn't read at night. I was tucked up in bed doing just that when I got to the part where the boys are attacked in the woods when I started hearing all these rustling noises outside my window.... Apparently there was a raccoon or stray cat digging in the trash by the garage, which was next to my bedroom. One sleepless night later....
Sydney wrote: "I'll probably get flogged for this...Harry Potter, Twilight, Lord of the Rings. Just not into them. I get that people love them. I'm just not in to fantasy.
Also not going to read James Frey..."
Yes!!! I refuse to read Twilight, Harry Potter, and the Lord of the Rings, too! Except that I add the Chronicles of Narnia into the series.
Symbol wrote: "Melynna,That was my general impression of romance. I felt a little guilty completely discounting the entire genre without ever taking a closer look at it though. I know that a lot of people have ..."
Mellynna and Symbol,
Yeah, there's a lot of cruddy romance out there, and even the cruddy stuff is intensely formulaic. But its worth giving it a shot. Just keep in mind that a person shouldn't go into looking for award-winning literature, just a lite, feel-good read. There actually is romance that isn't smut (I recommended christian romances for that. And is you don't like it, well, you haven't wasted too much of your time. I also recommend, the following book. It's clean and surprising intense, if not all that well written.
oh, and for Christian romance is you're interested:
I keep trying, and failing, to find get interested in any sort of political opinion writing. As much as I agree on certain points with the likes of Mark Levin and Sean Hannity, I just am not interested in reading 300 pages of the stuff. And that goes doubly for authors on the other side of the issues, I have NO interest in what they have to say, no disrespect intended to those who do agree with them. Personally, I just have my views and do not wish to be swayed by pompous blowhards on either side of the aisle.
Matthew wrote: "I keep trying, and failing, to find get interested in any sort of political opinion writing. As much as I agree on certain points with the likes of Mark Levin and Sean Hannity, I just am not intere..."And to Matthew I say "Amen". I don't enjoy reading any of the political writers either.
Jane wrote: "Sydney wrote: "I'll probably get flogged for this...Harry Potter, Twilight, Lord of the Rings. Just not into them. I get that people love them. I'm just not in to fantasy.
Also not going to rea..."
Wow. I usually try to evaluate by the level of writing, not the genre that they fall into. While fantasy is not my first choice, The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings are wonderfully written and don't skew toward a teenage audience in the least (although they can appeal to such).
Harry Potter is framed as fantasy but is really a contemporary view of a fantastic world, so after book 1, I was done. I could not read Twilight. Not well written. While it is a classic love story, and there are some nicely done plot twists, I find that the movie spoiled my appetite for the book. Would someone PLEASE eat Bella already (it wouldn't take long) and move on to the more interesting characters like Rosalie and the dads?
Narnia is a classic children's book. Truly well written but more engaging when you are young.
i have to say that i'm with jane as far as the harry potter series goes. it just doesn't appeal to me. i haven't tried reading the hobbit or the lord of the rings series yet...would like to. i'm enjoying the twilight series - even though it's not that difficult as far as the writing goes. i have, however, drawn the line at actually SEEING the movies. i'm not going there. i just picked up twilight to see what all the hub bub was about on facebook...and it sucked me in. i haven't quite picked up on why so many people are anti-bella fans.
I understand staying away from really popular series.Harry Potter - to me - is amazing in a way that no other series I've ever read was. I've never felt that way while reading a book.
Twilight - Terrible Terrible Terrible
Narnia - I agree with Laura - much more engaging when you're young or if you were super religious.
Lord of the Rings/Hobbit - I understand why Tolkien is so important to fantasy. I get why people worship his books but man that was some boring reading. Painfully boring. Shoot myself in the face boring.
The Great Gatsby. Sorry, F. Scott Fitzgerald is intensely envious and it shows. Sordid, unreal, and not very interesting. Had to quit several times and won't go back again.
Nelson wrote: "The Great Gatsby. Sorry, F. Scott Fitzgerald is intensely envious and it shows. Sordid, unreal, and not very interesting. Had to quit several times and won't go back again."I had to read this FOUR TIMES in the course of my education. How did you get out of it?
Go head ask me about the symbology of the lights on the dock, the optometrist's sign, the shirts - my god the shirts!!! And they took us on field trip to see the movie! Does that count as five?
I would say that it counts as eight because you had to re-live every separate and excrutiating time that you were forced to read it. (Assuming the movie was post-fourth-read) No . . . nine. We have to include the movie as well.
Look, I think deconstruction is as painful as it sounds and should be avoided in almost all cases. Applying context, nuance, symbology, metaphor, etc., etc. to the Great Gatsby is simply misguided unless one is trying to figure out what is wrong with F. Scott Fitzgerald himself.
Nairabell wrote: "I'll usually try any book, but no way will you catch me even considering reading It by Stephen King. Why? One word - CLOWN!!!! I hate clowns. I've always been terrified o..."I really dislike clowns because of a bad experience I had at a friend's birthday party when I was 5. The clown was making coins appear out of kids' noses and ears and when I asked him to take something out of my ear (we were eating birthday cake at the time) he told me to go away and told the birthday girl's father that he hated kids! He was an angry clown! I've been a little nervous about them ever since( and watching the movie "Killer Klowns from Outer Space" probably didn't help either...
Challenge: 50 Books
Books mentioned in this topic
Sugar and Spice (other topics)The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest (other topics)
The Host (other topics)
Midnight’s Children (other topics)
Breaking Dawn (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Salman Rushdie (other topics)Stephen King (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Stephen King (other topics)
Chuck Palahniuk (other topics)
More...
I couldn't agree more. Other than that, I refuse to read bodice-ripper romances (They are simply too silly for me.) and, although I am a hug fan of science fiction and intelligent fantasy, I won't touch anything by Robert Jordan or Piers Anthony. I have had several people try to sell me on them, and I feel these two authors' books are staggeringly over-hyped, painfully derivative, and completely lack-luster.