worst book ever! Showing 701-750 of 1,030

[Rita]

I love this book, it is one of my all time favorites. I think you need to hear the words not just read them. It's somehow like a lyric novel. I'm not sure there is such a thing. I.ve taught several times in high school as a substitue when this book was being read andthe students didn't care for it or were afraid to admit than they liked it. I think they are mostly too immature forit. Try it again on audio or just read it out loud to yourself. I find it to be a beautiful book.

[John]

yes i totally agree!

[Sally]

Maybe not the worst, but definitely don't appreciate it. Full of a bunch of dimwit richies. Yeah don't feel bad for 'em.
But The Jungle was worse for me.

[Deanna]

ok, some chapters can be a little tedious but the description of Gatsby's smile is honestly the best character description I have ever read and I think if you give the book a chance the ending is rather shocking and I actually really enjoyed this book.

[C. J.]

Alex wrote: "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/..."

I disagree with that. I read it for high school and I loved it. I think that had to do also with having a great teacher who helped us understand the "language" throughout the book. One little thing that I liked about the book was coming up with little observances of my own during the experience of reading it.

One thing I noticed was how the whole "partying" setting was almost like a masque to the characters. Most of the time almost everyone gets along as if they have to until one character dies from a vehicle accident. Then people started arguing with each other and saying how they really feel it seems as if the death brought everyone's feelings to light.

I don't know if that all is completely accurate though it has been some years since I read it.

[Geoffrey]

I don`t recall the person dying. Yes, there was an automobile accident at the party.

[Rebecca]

In my opinion Life of Pi was worse, but Gatsby is definitely a close second.

[Mike]

Reading the comments that this is the worst book ever makes me very sad. Clearly, if you believe this book is the worst you're either a fan of hyperbole OR you didn't understand what you were reading.

[Mike]

Feliks wrote: "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."



This is perhaps the best comment I've ever read. Well played.

[Gavin]

The Great Gatsby is the worst book ever?...Surely you've never suffered through a reading of Love Machine by Jacqueline Susann or Hollywood Wives by Jackie Collins.

[Paridy]

Up there with worst book overated, anything by Hemmingway and most Shakespeare is right up there along side of it. High School Lit had the worst books ever that I was stuck reading.

[Rita]

Why do you think these books ( Hemmingway, Fitzgerald, Shakespear) have remained high on the lists of books to read? The classics, why are they the classics? Mike wrote that some of you should stick with Harry Potter, I think Harry Potter may someday be a classic; Twilight-not a chance.

[☯Emily]

Rita: Don't you think that Fifty Shades of Grey will be a classic?

[Lora]

Call me crazy....I loved Gatsby. It's a classic for a reason. Looking forward to the movie. Hope I'm not disappointed.

[Michael]

So far, it is in my list of Best American Novels next to the works of Steinbeck.

The outer facade of the book may be full of dragging plot lines and slow-paced sentence but it is those same things that give it meaning. I remember reading it just for leisure, and how much information I got out of it without the aid of pesky English teachers. It really reflects the lifestyle of the world today and makes the 1920s repeat itself.

[Marriam]

This book is not the worst book ever but it is not the best either. I love Nick, the narrator. I think Tom also grew on me at the end but the other characters were a wast of time.

[Irene]

"The worst book ever"?! Really? You're serious? This was one of my favorites out of all the books I had to read for English in four years of high school. It remains a favorite of mine to this day. It may seem "dull" to some but I think those are the folks who don't or can't appreciate really good writing, writing that doesn't revolve around vampires, werewolves or teen romance.

Worst book ever? Try "Twilight."

[Rosa]

I'm sick and tired of people saying that the reason we dislike the Great Gatsby so much is because we don't understand it. We don't "dig deep" into the true meaning of the book and we can't appreciate its "intricate symbolism".

Well, we do understand the book. We understand the themes and the characters, and that's precisely why most of us dislike the novel so much.

I have never in my life encountered such a shallow and vapid crew of characters. They undergo no significant development in the novel, and it is because of this lack of development that the plot does not march forward and instead muddles along.

In terms of characters, none of them change significantly at any point in the novel. Gatsby proves that he's always been shallow and pretentious, completely disregarding others in his constant quest to court Daisy. Daisy, on the other hand, is just as terrible as Gatsby. She has no consideration for others and goes out of her way to actively demonstrate this disregard every time she appears in the novel (please note that her daughter only makes one appearance in the novel and she makes it very clear to Tom that she has no interest in him once Gatsby comes around, not that Tom is any better).

As for the novel's symbolism that everyone is so eager to clammer about, it is the most overtly obvious symbolism in any novel I've come across. I mean, seriously? The billboard with Dr. T.J Eckleburg's eyes hovering over the characters? If that's not explicit symbolism, then I don't know what is.

These few reasons that I've touched upon do not even begin to cover my personal dislike for this book. It gave me so significant insight into any of the characters and it left me quite irritated upon finishing it. Mind you, I've read this book more than 5 times, each time hoping to gain a new, more mature understanding of the book, but being unable to do so every time.

[Rita]

Emily, I would just say no to that but I haven't read them so I really can't comment.

[Sarah]

Rosa wrote: "I'm sick and tired of people saying that the reason we dislike the Great Gatsby so much is because we don't understand it. We don't "dig deep" into the true meaning of the book and we can't appreci..."

I believe that you understand the surface of the novel, but there are SO many symbols within the Great Gatsby, not just the blatantly obvious ones, like the billboard, that people tend to miss. It is through the deep reading that you pick up on the many, many symbols carried throughout the entire novel. For example, Daisy's comparison to a siren, Fitzgerald's use of colors, identity; I could go on.

Moreover, you aren't supposed to like the characters. That's the point. It is a commentary on the downfall of society because of peoples disillusionment caused by wealth and materialism. Gatsby and Daisy are prime examples of this disillusionment. Living with abandon and superficiality will lead to destruction and decay. Myrtle being hit by a car and the ripple effects is Fitzgerald's warning about lifestyles in the 1920's. It wasn't just the climax of the story.

I find that people tend to miss the little gems that make The Great Gatsby so great. Granted, you may have genuinely not liked the book, and that's okay. But to say that it is the WORST book ever is going to far. I just don't understand how a book so steeped in symbolism and overlapping stories and meanings can be the worst book ever. Agree to Disagree.

[Parvathi]

I have always been surprised by the admiration of those who read it. When I read it the first time in high school, I found nothing great in this book. But after reading all those reviews that venerate this book, I decided to give it a second try. Then, I found the nothing great in this book. The characters seem so artificial that I didn't find any of them memorable. And the plot is some kind of a modern day adaptation of an old, melodramatic romance. The book is okay... but I don't think it deserves all this attention.

[Erika]

NO!!!!!!

[Feliks]

Trust me, folks. If you're NOT GETTING this book, the fault is not the book. Sweet Creeping Jesus. Hey, can you stand some constructive criticism without getting a lawyer? Then, let me tell you frankly..its you. Believe it. Absorb this one salient reality. The book is better than you, better than your whole life, certainly better than your pining and whining and peevishness. Better than everything you've brought to the experience of reading, when you started opening the pages of this icon.

Every reader doesn't bring the same faculties and capacities to a novel. We don't all share the same sensitivity. Fact. This is not a slam or a diss. Due to all our individual upbringing and our abilities we don't all register everything that everyone else does.

So please stop 'blaming the author' here. Its not Fitzgerald, for God's sake, its YOU. Come on! Drop the arrogance.

Its you who have spent your life reading vampire pop; playing video games; watching soap operas; Clive Cussler, supermarket checkout-aisle paperbacks..daytime TV..flipping through magazines. In short, doing everything else EXCEPT gaining a mind and a brain. Oh snap! S*** out of luck! Low-hanging fruit! Take some responsibility for being sub-par as an audience member, rather than telling us that Fitzgerald blew it.

Look...when "The Vampire Hunter's Daughter #2" comes out next month...and it doesn't grab you.. then yeah, call out the author for not being, 'up-to-snuff'. But you pathetic losers telling people that F Scott Fitzgerald didn't cut the mustard. Holy hannah, get OVER YOURSELF.

[Rosa]

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 ..."

Well....... That escalated quickly.

[Lindsay]

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

I would completely agree with you on this! I absolutely cannot stand this book!

[Susan]

Laura-lou wrote: "does anyone agree with me that this is the worst and most boring book of all time?"
No. Read
The Time Keeper by Mitch Albom. THAT is the worst and most boring book of all time.

[Kevin]

I've never understood the appeal myself - i don't think there's a single likable character in the story who the reader could have any sympathy for.

[Erika]

Kevin wrote: "I've never understood the appeal myself - i don't think there's a single likable character in the story who the reader could have any sympathy for."

But the characters don't necessarily have to be likeable for the book to be good. And I think that Gatsby is likeable. His hopes are just too far-fetched.

[Rick]

I'm reserving my "Worst Book Ever" vote for ERASERHEAD, should it ever be adapted to a novel.

[Andrea]

I've had to read this book twice and I can honestly say I never liked it. I found the book boring and the characters too fictional. I couldn't care less about any of them.
I'm a book lover, but this one I just don't get the hype!

[Gavin]

I'm noticing a trend in people reading this before their 20's and hating it.

[Geoffrey]

Hey wait a minute Feliks, I take strong exception to your claim about GG dislikers, (not haters in my case),not enjoying "better literature" than GG.

Here`s my list from one to ten. It changes from year to year.

THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV
AS I LAY DYING
CRIME AND PUNISHMENT
GRAPES OF WRATH
THE MEMOIRS OF A GEISHA
SMALL
SOT WEED FACTOR
OF MICE AND MEN
HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY
THE TRIAL

[Geoffrey]

Again, let`s accept my challenge book boosters, go ahead and give the book a thorough literary analysis. Go explain the billboard as metaphorical imagery pertinent to what F is saying about G`s social mobility.
It particularly bothers me that it`s the books detractors who have done the work of the boosters in analyzing the literary "tricks". So let`s here it from you boosters, dissect it away, or are you in so much awe that it leaves you speechless?

[Terry]

TGG is on of the best books written in the twentieth century. The story and the technical execution of writing are both top-notch - the major beef most folks have TGG is that it's a bit dated, and the same could be said of _The Fountainhead_ but both are outstanding even for all that. Let's face it, some people are not going to like TGG.

[Penny]

Feliks wrote: "Trust me, folks. If you're NOT GETTING this book, the fault is not the book. Sweet Creeping Jesus. Hey, can you stand some constructive criticism without getting a lawyer? Then, let me tell you fra..."

Certainly full of yourself there Feliks, as you so rightly point out we are all different, so if you don't like a book, surely that is the authors responsibility to have written something a bit more engaging. You can be all smug about "getting it" if you like, but you can't "diss" everyone else for not feeling the same.

[Jeffrey]

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

Uh..no, The Great Gatsby is the greatest American novel of the 20th century.

[Karl]

@Penny If some people didn't like it and the author has to do something to make it more engaging (If it really needs that) then would he not risk losing another selection of readers?

The best works are not written to cater for select audiences. The audience needs to find the work.

[Susan]

Erika wrote: "Kevin wrote: "I've never understood the appeal myself - i don't think there's a single likable character in the story who the reader could have any sympathy for."

But the characters don't necessar..."

I don't understand the need to for likable characters in order to find meaning in a book. Novels should reflect real life, and real life, unfortunately, has a lot of unlikable characters.

[Susan]

Gavin wrote: "I'm noticing a trend in people reading this before their 20's and hating it."

I agree, Gavin. Perhaps it takes a little life experience to appreciate it. Perhaps at an age when young readers are determined that their own dreams are going to come true, they don't want to read about the failure of someone else's dream.

[Sarah]

Gavin wrote: "I'm noticing a trend in people reading this before their 20's and hating it."

I disagree. I read the book when I was 17 and loved it, most of the people I am friends with also loved the book. Maybe it's just the kind of people I hang out with, but we were all younger than 18 when we first read it. I think we find ourselves relating to the book because of the society we live in today. We are becoming the "Why" generation; nothing seems to matter anymore because the 'grown-up's' are screwing us over and we are too young to do anything about it. So why should we try, why should we not just buy what we want, do what we want, and to hell with everyone else. Sad isn't it?

[Rita]

Feliks wrote: "Trust me, folks. If you're NOT GETTING this book, the fault is not the book. Sweet Creeping Jesus. Hey, can you stand some constructive criticism without getting a lawyer? Then, let me tell you fra..."

Everyone certainly has a right to their own onion. I also have the right to share mine. This one of the greatest books of all time. Because it is a great book doesn't mean you have to like it to know it is good. I hated The Grapes of Wrath but I'm sure it was a good book. Feliks, thanks for speaking your mind.

[Feliks]

Rosa wrote: "vapid, shallow characters..."

But that is deliberate; can't you see that? You can't take it at just that face value; you've got to have a little bit of ear for how Fitzgerald sees his own creations, y'know. These aren't 'patent' concoctions on his part; he surely knows all about character arc and character development. He's deliberately painting them a certain way to express something else.

This is part of what I mean when I try to explain that some folks just can't tune in to this type of work. I'm not saying that anyone is 'stupid' or 'deficient' in any way. Forget what I said above. People are being trapped by their own subjectivity here.

I'm merely suggesting that some folks just can't get into some time-periods and societies where certain novels are set. They're not sensitive to it; for whatever reason. It doesn't spark their imagination; they can't make the leap and transpose themselves to the setting and the descriptions offered by the author. Maybe they don't know that much about the Jazz Age; or its a period of American history which just strikes them as strange and unfamiliar.

Whatever the reason. We've all got blind spots that prevent our appreciating this-or-that, various work of art or literature. There's got to be some way to sidestep this whole, "you don't get it" vs "Oh I get it, but there's nothing to get" wrangling.

[Feliks]

p.s. yes, okay, okay--sorry for my vehemence above..every man's got his limit to how much--
err, umm, 'balderdash' he can listen to...

Open forum here, no one's opinion is being quashed but on the other hand, you have to expect the occasional outburst too. No hard feelings. Woodstock uber alles!

:^o

[Geoffrey]

Gee, Feliks, so now I can`t appreciate Shakespeare because, gee whiz I don`t understand those roaring 20`s as evidenced by my dislike of TGG, or that, shucks, and I thought I had HOW GREEN WAS MY VALLEY nailed down pat, nor will I ever read Chekov or Cather again, cuz I just don`t get it.

[Tim]

I read this in high school and hated it. I read it 6 years later and still hate it. Why are they making this into a 3D film?

[Bryan]

Read this book last summer for enjoyment, not because it was assigned to me(I'm 32). I thought it was great, no pun intended. Yes, the characters were shallow, but it seemed to me that they were supposed to represent the type of person that exists in real life who is just that:shallow. We all know or have met people like this. As for earlier commentators who claimed that these were whiny, vapid characters who should just stop complaining and get jobs...well, though I might agree that a classically upper-crust lack of work ethic is definitely a part of their character flaws, wasn't that a portion of what Fitzgerald was trying to get across with this story? Maybe I'm wrong(I'm just a carpenter without a post-secondary education, after all).

One of the things I love about art is it's ability to fill one person with awe and do absolutely nothing for the next. To me, art is one of the purest ways for people to celebrate the things which make us all unique. Having said that, I'm genuinely surprised by the amount of vitriol that I've read here directed toward what I thought was a very good book.

[Jessica]

I read this book at age 30 and found it "okay." I think at some point I will give it a second chance.

[☯Emily]

Agree with you, Brian!

[Jason]

So wait, the book is pretty good?

[Parvathi]

Actually, the book is good. But nothing beyond that.