worst book ever! Showing 651-700 of 1,030

[Pat]

I was really disappointed and amazed to find such flat descriptions, it was not what I expected after all the praise it has collected.

[Paul]

I think this is one of the great American books, and certainly one of the best portrayals of Long Island's gilded age. Those who did like 'Gatsby' might enjoy a more contemporary look at Long Island's 'gold coast', the book in fact titled 'Gold Coast', by Nelson DeMille.

[k]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

Wow. Just when you think humans can't possess more stupidity and less taste, you read a comment like this.

Laura, you pitiful creature, clearly the art of the classical masters is beyond you, and furthermore anyone in agreement with your tragic self.

No reply necessary because I am right; whatever you might try to conjure as a response will go ignored. I can't believe I've already taken this much time, but your ignorance is astonishing and equally so, disgusting.

[k]

♥ Sarah ♥ wrote: "I don't get you people. This is one of the greatest books ever. F. Scott Fitzgerald got so much money and fame from this novel. It was one of the greatest books I've ever read. And I've read it when I was younger than twelve..."

Now this is more like it... Laura, are you taking notes?

[Penny]

I don't think Laura deserves this diatribe K, OK she didn't like the book and you did, but it hardly warrents
Your comment, which is way over the top and extremely rude.

[Geoffrey]

And obnoxious as well. You need to take a lifetime course in good manners and good sense. There are problems with the novel and they need to be addressed. That is why so many have faulted its "masterpiece" status.

But perhaps your critical facilities are somewhat deficient. You know how to vilify, but not to analyze. Too bad. We would expect a greater display of intelligence from someone who claims to be so.

So apologize to the lady and borrow her notebook. Write down....

I will not denigrate

I will not denigrate

I will not denigrate

100 times will do.

[Shea]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"
I do most certainly. Soooo boring.

[k]

Penny wrote: "I don't think Laura deserves this diatribe K, OK she didn't like the book and you did, but it hardly warrents
Your comment, which is way over the top and extremely rude."

Penny, don't tempt me. I'll destroy your petty feelings as well.

[k]

Geoffrey wrote: "And obnoxious as well. You need to take a lifetime course in good manners and good sense. There are problems with the novel and they need to be addressed. That is why so many have faulted its "mast..."

Geoffrey, don't think your expanded vocabulary threatens me. The entire POINT of my comment you ignorant fool, WAS TO VILIFY, not to analyze.

IDIOTS!

Laura wrote "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

THIS COMMENT DOES NOT WARRANT AN ANALYTICAL EYE.

IT IS A WASTE OF CYBERSPACE, I WOULD EXPECT MORE FROM A 5TH GRADER.

And by the way, Geoffrey, I have more manners, taste and character at 26 then you will possess in your wretched lifetime. I just have no tolerance for stupidity and even less of a tolerance for those displaying their ignorance like those tacky "Baby on Board" bumper stickers!

HUMAN BEINGS ARE A DISEASE, a foul festering pestilence that have no regard for the planet or other species that inhabit it.

THERE IS NOOOOOO TIME for pathetic comments like Laura-LOO-WHO's.


Disgusting.

F. Scott isn't for everyone, I'll give you that, but DO NOT try, I repeat DO NOT try to say it is anything less than a fabulous work of literature because if you do I would be more than happy to come to your house, where you live, and give you an "education"

[k]

Geoffrey,

Show me something worth being analyzed and then we can have a conversation, otherwise keep your mouth shut.

Your opinions leave much to be desired!

[Kailey]

i didnt like this book:( it was really boring

[Penny]

k wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "And obnoxious as well. You need to take a lifetime course in good manners and good sense. There are problems with the novel and they need to be addressed. That is why so many have ..."

k wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "And obnoxious as well. You need to take a lifetime course in good manners and good sense. There are problems with the novel and they need to be addressed. That is why so many have ..."

k wrote: "Geoffrey wrote: "And obnoxious as well. You need to take a lifetime course in good manners and good sense. There are problems with the novel and they need to be addressed. That is why so many have ..."

You have real problems K.

[k]

lol.

I would say that people who neither like nor appreciate the works of F. Scott have problems, intellectual problems.

'Nuff said.

[Jason]

I didn't mind the book. It was ok.

[Susan]

The last several comments seem to have underscored a problem with this topic overall--it's something of a dead end. Perhaps the thread should be recast as The Works of F. Scott Fitzgerald, Strengths and Weaknesses. If approached in this way we would be forced to give specifics and then would have a chance to analyze, agree or disagree, and learn. (Yes, in a former life I was an English teacher. Alas.)

[Bessie]

Rachel wrote: "I don't know what I would have thought of this book had it to been taught well to me. I am a highschool student--a junior. I finished the book this morning.

This isn't Tom Clancy. The story, wh..."

You have a great teacher and you have a great mind.

[Bessie]

Rather interesting how many people who hate Gatsby don't bother to use capital letters. "Jus' sayin'" (or something equally unintelligible) -- blither, blather.

Come on people, read the book when you've had some life experience. Of course it divides people, that's the point. Nick is the key. Gatsby and Daisy are hideous cartoons -- deliberately so.

Look to the language and the heart-breaking emotion. It's there. Find it.

[Maud]

I have to say I'm really surprised by some comments in this discussion... For people who tags themselves as Book Lovers I found some pretty hateful people... How can someone can analyze Fitzgerald's characters by saying "Get a job' ?
Anyway, as a french person, when I read The Great Gatsby for the first time many years ago, I felt touched, Fitzgerald's words were talking to me. I had no idea who he was or even heard about that book ( to be really honest, i was about 15 and I found the cover attractive)... It has been one of my favorite books ever... I often work on it with my students and if not make them read it... long discussions around it happen regularly. Some like it, some don't like it but calling The Great Gatsby The Worst Book Ever when some consider the Twilight serie as literature might be a tad exaggerated.

[Bessie]

Lorelei:

I had to read Gatsby in first year English in college. I was, meh, so what's the big deal? When I saw the movie with Robert Redford, I had read a thousand more books, and like you, I saw a copy in a bookstore with that great cover. I now read it every two years or so. Each time, I get something new.

The Twilight/Shitty Shades folk need to push themselves to read great authors. Yes, it's a struggle. No, it's not always mindless Entertainment Tonight style. Don't stop reading your junk -- just salt it with the good stuff sometimes. Gradually, the good stuff takes over. If you like detective novels, read Elmore Leonard. If you like erotica, read Anais Nin or Erica Jong, if you like fantasy, read Bradbury or Vonnegut. You'll be "entertained" and then you'll seek out more of the same type of book.

Pure "literary" fiction is hard work sometimes, but you have to start with the assumption that there is a damn good reason why these things become classics. If you don't struggle you won't find out why. If you do struggle and you still don't enjoy it, put it down to a style that doesn't suit you. I struggled with Faulkner and decided it wasn't worth the effort but I'm sure he has something wonderful to say for certain types of readers, but to call something like Gatsby, the "worst book ever" is over-the-top hyperbole and is limiting your choices in expanding your reading horizons. Watch Entertainment Tonight or Fear Factor but don't consider yourself a "good reader" until you've struggled with the good stuff.

[Edward]

It's a good book. It's literature, not escapism. There's a point to it. But considering 45% of the country wants to adopt Ayn Rand's views as our basis of economics, I'm not surprised at the vehemence aimed at a book critical of extreme wealth and the upper class. (Even though it was written by someone in the upper class.)

[Robert]

Emu wrote: "It's not the WORST book ever; that would be Jane Eyre. But this is an easy number 2."

Ever tried Pamela by Richardson?

[Robert]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

That a book is overrated does not require such an exaggerated dismissal.

[Tony]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

Yes I do I found it awful and depressing!

[Geoffrey]

K
And you have problems if you don´t address the criticisms made about the book. It´s called, "lack of critical faculties".

[Geoffrey]

K
And you have the conceit to go with it. I may be a curmudgeon but you´re only 26 and still insist on remaining a whippersnapper. If you´re having problems with any of this vocabulary, there is a great book that will help you. It´s called a dictionary. Look up the words you don´t know and you will have passed the ignoramus level.

[[deleted user]]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

Yes, I agree with you. But I actually think Heart of Darkness is the most boring book of all time. This one is probably number 2 on my list of boring books.

[Geoffrey]

I found Heart of Darkness interesting, but not nearly as interesting as Conrad`s THE OUTCAST OF THE ISLANDS, his second book which launched his literary career. I don`t find GG the most boring but merely one of the least significant of all so-called "classics". THE POWER AND THE GLORY by Graham Greene, NADJA by Andre Breton, PARADISE LOST by Milton are far worst in my estimation.

In h.s. I was bored out to my tears with MY ANTONIA, but rediscovered it only 5 years ago. What a dummy I was! How could I have possibly bypassed liking MA? But when I was a teenager I was fascinated by THE TRIAL, AMERIKA, AND THE CASTLE, but I am afraid to read them again as I suspect I would not derive the fascination I did when sweet 16.

[Julien]

I really don't want to sound like "teenagers wouldn't know great litterature if it struck them in the face", but I believe that some books are best appreciated at a later period in one's life.

Teachers, please, there must be some better books than The Great Gatsby or Heart of Darkness (even if I love both) to introduce teens to classic litterature. Both books require a sense (or sensibility!) of their particular historical epoch, as well as a taste for the sort of prose that just isn't done today. And few high schoolers have that sort of maturity/experience or taste!

[Maud]

Being a literature teacher myself i would answer Julien, if I make my students read books such as The Great Gatsby, The Grapes of Wrath, Les Miserables... its for several reasons. To give them a chance to get to know those authors. If you talk to "non readers", how many of them have read a classic since high school, chances are..none. Fortunately, they had the occasion to get to know a few of them when they were younger, thats better than nothing. Plus i truly believe that with the appropriate support, explanation, discussion, anyone can understand those books... They werent made for a happy few.

[[deleted user]]

I liked the book very much, I din't like it at the beginning but as I went through, I started to enjoy it a lot. Try to read "A Cidade e as Serras" by Eça de Queirós (Portuguese writer) and see which one is better. And I like Eça.

[David]

k wrote: "HUMAN BEINGS ARE A DISEASE, a foul festering pestilence that have no regard for the planet or other species that inhabit it. "

Wow, I thought I was the only Black Metal guy who read literature......

[Sarah]

Honestly, it's not the worst book in the world nor the most boring. I actually finished this weeks ago in my honors english class. I mean, sure, sometimes I got frustrated b/c some parts were a little hard to understand, but all in all I liked it. You can really see what Fitzgerald was trying to convey about how the world is (as he perceived it to be) and it lets you peer into his life a little bit. So this book will be one of my favorite classics of all time. Probably in the top five-ish. The only classics that I can think of right now that are better than it are the Divine Comedy and The Aeneid.

[Rivan91]

I really enjoyed this book, it may have been a bit boring at times but that's okay. I mean every book has its flaws, but this just stood out as only boring at times. Overall I found it a great read.

[Shelley]

I'm laughing at Robert's "Ever try Pamela?"

Shelley, Rain: A Dust Bowl Story
http://dustbowlpoetry.wordpress.com

[[deleted user]]

I feel like if you were not properly taught the book, you would probably hate it.
For one, you are not supposed to like any of the characters, that is the point. It is pointing out the flaws in the American dream and life style and that really would not work if you liked the people living it.
Once you start diving into his symbolism though I simply cannot imagine not at least enjoying the book if not loving it. I adore his writing style and have gone on the read several more of his books, with plans to try and read all of them.
Do I think it is the best thing he has written? No. But it is rather short and easy to get through, while also show casing a decade perfectly.

[Geoffrey]

And still people who love the book refuse to discuss its shortcomings of character development, credibility, theme development, etc. and only deal with the very true issue that many of us who dislike the book do so because we don`t like the characters.

[Penny]

Savannah wrote: "I feel like if you were not properly taught the book, you would probably hate it.
For one, you are not supposed to like any of the characters, that is the point. It is pointing out the flaws in th..."

I don't usually dive into a book looking for the symbolism of it,and what the writer meant to say! It doesn't seem right to have to be "taught" a book! I thought reading was all about the pleasure of reading and enjoying it, or not as the case may be. It spoils it a bit for me having to think about what the author may or may not have meant by this sentence, or that character. I like a book or I don't, I don't think it means a person is lacking because they haven't "got" every nuance of every sentence. And if they do not like a so called great book, so what!

[[deleted user]]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

I found it overrated, and rather dull. I still want to watch the film and maybe read it again.

[woodshadows]

agreed. amateurish drivel

[Kailey]

Totally agree with you

[[deleted user]]

Penny wrote: "Savannah wrote: "I feel like if you were not properly taught the book, you would probably hate it.
For one, you are not supposed to like any of the characters, that is the point. It is pointing ou..."

I guess that is a difference in taste then. Personally I enjoy books that make me think much more than those that do not, though I will not belittle the merits of sometimes reading a book purely for fun.
Also the lack of character development was 100% on purpose not due to bad writing. I feel like he set out to write something a certain way and did just that. It was not bad writing at all that made the characters flat, nor what made the book unenjoyably by some. It just matters how much you personally like to have to think during a book that makes the difference of opinion.

[Anna]

I agree that this book is not everyone's cup of tea, but to say that it is the worse book out there is extreme. Personally, it's one of my favorite books. It's all about immersing yourself in the Daisy and Nick and Gatsby's lives and then exploring whether their lives were fair or not. Or if they were all too shallow and vapid or never had a chance in life because of their social position and how they were raised (without empathy).

[Penny]

Savannah wrote: "Penny wrote: "Savannah wrote: "I feel like if you were not properly taught the book, you would probably hate it.
For one, you are not supposed to like any of the characters, that is the point. It ..."

I am sorry Savannah, I really don't want to be rude, but it's not that I don't THINK about what I am reading, it would be boring not to have a book affect you in some way. I just don't like the idea of examining every sentence and semi-colon to see what the author may or may not have meant by it. So many young people taking exams are forced to do just that, reading and reading books over and over! By the time my son had finished doing that he hated the book and will not be lifting it agian as long as he lives!(his words!!) Maybe it was bad teaching I don't know, but taking the book apart and dissecting it, is not something that appeals to me personnally. And being "taught" it! No you are taught to knit or bake!!!

[Feliks]

Zoooooooooooooooom. Hear that? Sound of a great big whomping four-engine jet that just buzzed right over somebody's head.

Stick with Harry Potter, you folks out at Daytona.

[Jonathan]

I loved the book upon first reading, though I never had to analyze it in an academic scenario. I believe the characters are relatable because of how they relate to the idea of the American Dream. That is ultimately what the novel is about. I try to focus on the human nature Fitzgerald is dealing with. Daisy being the bitch that takes money over love, Tom being the rich frat boy from yesteryear. The only commendable character in the whole novel is Gatsby. I love the irony of his less than illustrious career compared to Tom and the rest of the characters.

There's my two cents, though I can't make anyone love what they hate I suppose.

[Skip]

Actually, I consider it one of the best books I have ever read. Why do you feel the way you do about this book? I am really curious to hear what you have to say.

[Alex]

I believe that lower ratings come from people who were assigned to read this book for some class in school. I never had to read it; just did. I think it was very well done. The film Robert Redford/Mia Farrow was terrible, primarily due to the leads; they just didn't work in their roles. The production design, art direction, and score, however were great.

[Skip]

I also read it for the pleasure. Quite a good book, and, quotable. Now, I have to admit, reading it years later it did not stand up as strognly as I thought it would. Still, though, a food read. Actually, I think Fitzgerald and Hemingway get far too much attention, especially Hemingway, when there are people like Willa Cather, a great, great writer, Sherwood Anderson, James Balwin, and writers of that stature, get nearly no attention at all. And what about Mark Twain? People are so skittish about his throwing racism in the face of people then and now, that he does not get the credit and reading assignment he deserves. He is, after all, the greatest literary writer ever to put pen to page in the US.

[Sarah]

Penny wrote: "I just don't like the idea of examining every sentence and semi-colon to see what the author may or may not have meant by it. So many young people taking exams are forced to do just that, reading and reading books over and over!"

As a High School Senior who read The Great Gatsby, I respectfully disagree. Without the dissection of it, I would not appreciate it and love it the way I do. Maybe it was my teacher and the discussions our class had, but I turn to this book like a I would turn to an old friend. I don't think you can gain this appreciation and love for The Great Gatsby without dissecting it and re-reading it, learning the intricacies and symbolism. I know that if I had just read it, I would have hated it. Without seeing all of the symbolism, the story would have been boring and flat. Bottom line, if picking apart a novel is not your idea of a good read, you will not like this book. What I find that so great about literature is that it invokes discussion. No matter how bad or great the book was, you can still gain something from it.

[Feliks]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"

Set the blame where it belongs. With the modern reader.

The reputation of this novel has already long been assured by generations of competent reading audiences.

Let me ask you. Do you think a book which receives acclaim such as this one possesses--wins it by random chance? How many other American books from that same year, can you name which climbed as high? Do you think it 'just sorta happened' that this one was singled out for top honors? Don't you think its public esteem would have been quickly knocked it off within just a few years as other books came along in its wake?

Why were so many other books of its era, forgotten while this specific one, continues to be held so high? Is that thoroughly without reason?

Its no shame to admit that you just 'aren't holding the bar that high' for the literature you happen to enjoy reading. But this book meets a very select standard for accomplishment. If to you it seems boring or dull, assume correctly that its probably going beyond what you are asking for.

There's plenty of sensational page-turners printed every era; if that's what you want.