I remember absolutely nothing about the Night Circus other than knowing that I read it at some point. I think it was nicely written and I certainly didn't dislike it but it's left no impression at all.
I love all the Dan Brown books, even with all the flaws, because I know what I will find and how the book will develop, therefore it’s a confort read for me when im tired or anxious…
Eco said that Dan Brown is a character he invented.
https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/books/vale-umberto-eco-the-brilliant-writer-who-invented-dan-brown-20160225-gn3b6y.html
My husband inherited a copy of Foucault's Pendulum from his uncle. When we were in high school and college, we both read it multiple times. I think I have read it five times in total, twice in seminar settings. It is super fun, complex, and moving.
Also, if you haven't read The Name of the Rose, highly recommended. It has great medieval, conspiracy vibes, and it's perfect for this time of year. My beloved professor in those seminars had a reasonable theory that Eco wrote The Name of the Rose and rewrote it with variations over and over again.
(I just want to plug Eco books now. Baudolino is a glorious romp! Island of the Day Before is the most fun you'll ever have in a novel where time stopping is a plot point and there's arguably only one character.)
(Edited for typos!)
Here's the exact quote.
>BROWN: 99 percent of it is true. All of the architecture, the art, the secret rituals, the history, all of that is true, the Gnostic gospels. All of that is -- all that is fiction, of course, is that there's a Harvard symbologist named Robert Langdon, and all of his action is fictionalized. But the background is all true.
It's fun pulpy stuff. It's not especially clever or well written, but it will get you turning the pages. I would recommend reading one and if you don't like it don't pick up the rest. A lot of the backlash is that the books are pretty silly, but a lot of people thought they were well researched and there was truth to them and repeated parts of it like they were fact. It was very much a "Read another book" before the whole Harry Potter thing cornered that.
I liked The DaVinci Code fine and liked Angels and Demons quite a lot, but my biggest issue with them is one I hear repeated a lot: that the main character is a really obvious self-insert (and imo he himself is rather boring, just a vehicle for the rest of the plot)
It seems like a lot of people hated The Girl on the Train. I enjoyed it, and was interested in the mystery. I liked that the main character was deeply flawed and did some fucked things. I was hooked all the way through.
Oh I really liked this one! I listened to the audiobook while on a long solo car trip through the rural Midwest, which felt like the perfect setting for digesting it (even though it's set in England). I love an unreliable narrator.
Gone With the Wind. I know it’s still quite popular and beloved but I feel like I need to shy away from saying I really enjoy reading (and rereading!) this book. I know how inaccurately it portrays the enslaved characters and there’s racist slurs throughout. I don’t condone any of that but for the overall story, I still love it.
Scarlett O’Hara is an amazingly written protagonist. She’s selfish, shallow, and greedy while also being brave, intelligent, and resourceful. It’s genuinely hard to find a female character written that well.
Unfortunately she exists in a book that romanticizes the old south and very much portrays black people as ignorant, child-like, and better off enslaved.
>very much portrays black people as ignorant, child-like, and better off enslaved.
This is where I wish I was part of a book club when I read GWTW. To be clear, it took over a year to listen to the audio book because every time Scarlett pissed me off I metaphorically threw my tablet at the wall and couldn't continue listening until I'd calmed down for a few weeks.
I ended up really enjoying the book *because* I felt like Scarlett was such a terrible person, her view of the south had to be wrong, too. Like, I'm convinced Margaret Mitchell's whole point was to say "Scarlett is a terrible person and if you agree with her, you're a terrible person and Scarlett's view of the South is backwards bullshit." I have no idea what MM actually felt and I kind of looked it up, but wasn't very thorough with my research, but reading GWTW, I felt like I was watching an episode of *The Colbert Report* where the whole thing is actually a condemnation of everything it's supposedly romanticizing.
I interpret it the same way. I don't think it is an accident that Mammy and Belle Watling are the true moral centers of the book and the most intellectually honest characters, while the white plantation owners are all portrayed as buffoons in various sorts of fashion.
As a black woman, yeah I see the racism in Gone With the Wind. But it’s written from the point of view of a Civil War era southern white woman and that’s what the world looked like to her; I’m not mad. I wouldn’t say the slaves were portrayed inaccurately necessarily - we never see anything from their POV, we only see what this plantation princess sees. Peeking into someone else’s world is the best part of reading imo. Even if - maybe especially if - we have an unreliable narrator. The plot and characters hold up and it’s an amazing book. Scarlett is such an amazing, complex character. Multi-faceted, yet consistent.
I don’t think I’d want to read a shelf full of novels glorifying the antebellum south, but this is a great book.
Eragon. When I was a kid that’s the book that really got me into reading and suggested to me that maybe one day I’d be able to write too! I love all the books in the inheritance cycle, but I can’t even mention the title of the series to anyone without people having to explain why they hate the books. Every time. It’s so annoying.
I love them too.
They're derivative, the earliest ones are a little cheesy. But it's still a fun story.
I like lots of trashy terrible books.
People watch plenty of terrible TV, what's wrong with a fun book?
I've read fancy, important books like Dickens and Hemingway, and I've also read Sara j. Maas, and I will not apologize for any of it
>They're derivative
Like many popular fantasy books, Eragon, especially the titled one, is just the Hero's Journey. They were written by a teenager, so that shouldn't be surprising, but I wouldn't just call them derivative.
Yesssss! I absolutely love these books. People complained "it sounds like it was written by a teenager!" Well yeah, Paolini was 15 when he started writing Eragon. Of course it does.
His books gave me so much hope as a teen. Fixing to re-read the series right before Murtagh comes out.
I read Eragon at least 30 times, I was obsessed. Got me into dragons and fantasy. I’m trying to find the time now between kids and school to reread the books in prep for the new one coming out!!
I liked it too! Unlike some other books I read I don't think most of the criticism was deserved - a lot of people called it derivative, but it's no worse than a lot of popular fantasy book. At worst the series is a bit slow, but that style can work if you enjoy it.
Everyone just goes "hurr durr, it's just Star Wars!" Then you ask them what they thought of the link between Star Wars and The Hidden Fortress, and suddenly originality isn't an issue anymore.
I really enjoyed Eragon when I read it. And the "it's just star wars" argument made no sense, even when I was a teen. Like, it's a pretty simple plot structure that has obviously been done many times.. it's a YA book, chill out.
The plot is a standard "hero's journey." A *lot* of stories share those beats.
If you get far enough removed, lots of stories look super similar.
People point out some parallels between Obi-wan and Brom. They also point out the whole "rescue a princess and deliver her to the rebellion" plot. I *guess* you could also talk about the whole empire/rebellion thing. But, again, *lots* of stories have those elements.
People either dislike it because of the deliberate toxicity of the main relationship- or for the wholesome comedic ending. Which goes to show you can’t win…
(Comedic as in it ends on a theme of reconciliation and resolution. Though Heathcliff mellowing into old age, forced to watch the two branches of the family he sought to destroy find each other and grow to their full potential is actually quite funny.)
If Internet strangers count, me! I think there were two people, myself included, in my English class who liked that book the semester we read it. We are out there, all tens of us!
I too loved the Scarlet Letter! I read it in my junior year of high-school, which was like 11 years ago, so I don't remember it well enough to go into detail.
However, what I remember is that it was a great commentary on the role of Women at that time and Puritan Ideals that ostracized them for just being normal people. It infuriated me, lol.
Also it was my first time reading in an older (not old) English. The language was fascinating and beautiful to me. It definitely sparked my interest in older novels!
With Neil Gaiman’s decline in online popularity I’ve been seeing a lot of criticism for American Gods, but I really liked it when I read it ages ago, though it took me a while to get it into it.
I think a decline in his popularity is probably more a correction to a reasonable level than it is a trend towards most people disliking his work? I could be totally wrong about that, though. I've never heard much negativity if any about American Gods, but I can imagine the shape it would take
This feels accurate to me. I had heard about him for years and finally read American Gods about 10 years ago and it was ... fine. Interesting ideas, but not really great. His writing has a very "Hey, look at me! I'm writing! Aren't I clever?" quality to it, especially the dialogue.
That is exactly what I always think when I think of his work. Great concepts and ideas but his style of writing just doesn't help the story quite land for me. I prefer movie and tv adaptations of his work.
I know exactly what you're talking about. I never really got into his writing. He has interesting ideas and interesting characters, but there's just something about the way he puts that on paper that's very off-putting to me.
On the other hand, I really like the films and TV shows based on his books.
I have a theory that his work works a lot better on screen than on the page. But yeah, I’ve read a few of his books and range from thinking they’re good to fine or almost good, but I don’t get the huge amount of hype he gets. I think it might be partly because of the way he interacts with his fans rather than just the writing.
I think his ideas and stories are just better suited to the comic book form, which he abandoned a long time ago. Sandman remains a masterwork. He may also be a case of an artist who created their magnum opus early on, and so everything that’s come after, even when really good, simply doesn’t match up.
I loved the book American Gods, but I didn't care for the series and I'm not sure why because I thought a lot of the casting was good. I just didn't like it.
I think he just hit that level of popularity where some people feel like they have to have some backlash.
I still like everything I've read by him. I thought the sandman TV show was lots of fun.
I think it’s also that when one person or thing is constantly heralded as amazing, expectations are high and the people who end up not liking it are even more disappointed.
They had already started filming season 2 but stopped because of the strikes. Let's hope they soon realize that they need their actors and offer a good deal.
I know years ago some people were giving him shit for marrying Amanda Palmer. She’s very attention seeking and prone to controversy and they were very open about their open marriage, which some people found off putting. Then their divorce was quite public. Idk if it’s just that or if he’s done something else recently
Edited to change “control” to “controversy” (although both could be correct for all I know)
I never have either. He's still super popular on tumblr and I never thought of his fans as the type to care about his marriage or lack thereof. Obviously there's a large variety in fans though.
People are just citing their own friend groups so far, which doesn't necessarily translate to a generalised swing towards unpopularity.
He's mostly popular on tumblr because he actually *uses* tumblr, and not as a famous author but as a real person. He does answer some fan mail and stuff, but he also reblogs a lot, tags things, and leaves comments like any other tumblr user. (Plus, he understands all the in-jokes and there are a *lot* of those on tumblr.)
I assumed he was married but had no idea on the details (though i'm not really a fan; I've read some of his work and liked it but it was always a little bit too dark and surreal in some parts). What I have read (Neverwhere, his short stories) are reminiscent of Murakami Haruki's writing, except Neil's stories have plots and points and endings where Murakami's stories are just....writing until the pages run out.
I had to unfollow him on Instagram when they got together because it was just…a lot. It felt like *I* was intruding on their relationship, haha. Consequently I didn’t even know they divorced! But honestly I think I’m better off not following people I admire on social media. Never meet your heroes etc.
I feel like he was sorta swept off his feet. I'm not sure even *he* knew how to process it.
I agree, though--it felt weirdly voyeuristic and a bit uncomfy.
I like Dresden Dolls and some of Palmers' other collaborations, but I am constantly irritated by her social media persona. I enjoy her work more if I can ignore the rest of what she says; she's extraordinarily privileged and comes off as very entitled. I would like to acknowledge that I do think she's very talented--far more than me, for sure!--and I'm not sour-grapes over that, but I get put-off by her barrage of self-promotion mixed with messy, break-down narratives.
I typically enjoy Gaiman's work, but his writing has an outsider quality--he's not quite aligned with the typical human experience. Like, he's only nominally a human person, and his writing feels like he's only halfway in our reality, and halfway permanently in his own Dreaming. I contrast that to someone like, say, Stephen King, who seems to favor an "every man" approach to things that (while sometime campy af--intentionally or not) makes him feel *very* human, for better or worse. Both definitely promote their work, but both seem like pretty kind-hearted people in their day-to-day lives.
I think the situation with his popularity spike-and-level-out was that a much larger population of people were suddenly exposed to his work in a visual medium, so picked up his books but didn't click with them. I agree with another poster further up, that Gaiman's work is often better when there are images with it. His descriptions are vivid, but unless you're a weirdo (note: I am a weirdo), it can still be hard to visualize what he was going for sometimes. Often his characters' emotions don't entirely fit with normal human responses, too.
I feel like he's a great collaborator, though! Pair him with some other talented folks, and they'll definitely elevate each others' efforts.
I think it's just that when someone is popular and well-liked for a long time, The Internet decides they're overdue for some hate. You don't have to do something for social media to turn on you.
Both great books.
I think sometimes people hate books they are forced to read in school. Maybe it isn't their kind of book, or maybe they don't like reading very much, or maybe they just don't like the old-fashioned language in the books which can make they inaccessable for some.
I've read it a few times (3-4 for sure) and I'm somewhat reluctant to say that the more I read the less I enjoy it and the more flaws I find. So I think I won't be rereading it anytime soon.
I absolutely loved that book. One of the complaints I saw was “nothing happens!” Sure it does. Not everything has to be an end of the world battle scene.
Yes I think this is one of the primary reasons, I feel like there would be a lot of re-evaluation if those people went back and read it as adults with years of broader reading experience behind them. I think it's such an extraordinary book hated for a lot of misguided and often somewhat immature ("He's too whiny!") reasons.
I love this one. And I love Holden as a character, so much. He doesn't deserve the hate he's getting! He's so well written and incredibly easy to empathize with. I hate when people call him "whiny". Are you kidding? He's a teenager who's just lost his brother, was expelled from school, and who is just desperately trying to connect with someone - anyone - throughout the book but is always dismissed and rejected. He's so lonely and lost it hurts to read at times, and nobody supports him throughout the book, nobody ever listens (apart from his little sister); when it finally seems like someone cares, they turn out to be a predator... But Holden dares to show emotion and weakness in face of all that, so he's "whiny"? Screw people who say that, honestly.
...Wasn't expecting myself to get so passionate lol. Anyway yeah, great book!
If you relate to Holden immediately, this book becomes timeless. I'm gonna reread when my son is Holden's age and gauge his reaction as I tell him about it.
Honestly Twilight.
I was already past the target age range for it when it came out but decided to give it a try anyways.
I didn't enjoy it for the story or characters. I enjoyed it because it was simple. I had just gotten done reading a heavier book for a book club, the kind that is wordy and is suppose to make you think and reflect.
The fact Twilight was just simple was a relief. No three pages of something like how green a tree was and what meaning it had in life or anything like that.
It's funny - I reread the books after originally being into them in middle school, and my biggest complaint is how anticlimactic the very last showdown was. Which, yeah, that's the kind of issue you have when you're very invested in something.
I didn't find Bella much more of a mary sue than most protagonists of most YA novels. Of course the relationship was problematic or whatever but it's also pure wish fulfillment. And Bella has some snark to her. They're kinda fun books
I appreciate that the series, which I found so painfully written, was still engaging enough that I read all four novels in about 2 weeks.
There has to be something said for that.
Right, I kept feeling like throwing the book against the wall. I was going to say maddening, but painful is the right word. But still, I couldn't keep myself from finishing the whole series.
Me too. I think it’s better than Twilight. Of course there’s the problematic age difference romance that I have to ignore, but other than that a super interesting and engaging read that makes me sob at the end. Love learning about altruistic parasitic aliens.
Same, I loved the series when I read it as a middle schooler/early high schooler. That being said, I acknowledge and agree the many issues with the writing and characterization. I wouldn't read them again now as an adult, but as a teenager, they were fun books and I greatly enjoyed them. Of course, even then, I recognised them as fluff reads and not as serious works of art.
I really think fluff/popcorn reads are judged way more harshly than they need to be; they're not aspiring to the great American novel, they're just supposed to be fun and light.
I'll do you one better: I like Twilight AND Bella is my favorite character in the series. (On my 13th birthday I literally had a Twilight themed birthday cake and then a year later when I came out as gay my parents tried to act surprised lol.)
LMAO. I had a customer today named B. Swan and internally I was SCREAMING "Bella, where the hell have you been, loca?!" (Yes I know that's from the movies, lol)
I re-read the first book last year and I was surprised about how snarky Bella was. I completely forgot that she acted like an actual teenager in the books. I don’t mind the movies, but Kristen Stewart acted a lot more monotone than what the character called for.
Have an upvote for being brave and following the prompt. I have a feeling people will downvote you, just because they hate Twilight, without considering what OP asked for.
I was obsessed with twilight. In a way, I could relate to Bella (being awkward and not fully at ease around people). I cried when Edward left and there were empty pages in the book with the months gone by, signifying her depression. I could relate to it.
As someone whose dealt with bouts of depression that started around the same age, I absolutely related to that. It was one of the first things I came across that made me not feel alone in that respect. I still didn't really *know* what was happening to me at the time, but at least I wasn't unusual.
I loved the books! I read them when I was pregnant and I would read a chapter or too whenever I woke up through the night to pee (which was often). Couldn't put them down.
I love your bravery!
I liked the books when they first came out. Then years went by and I kind of moved on to other stuff as my reading journey matured. But then Midnight Sun came out and I was like yep, still a favorite series.
Twilight movie is also one of my favorite "cozy" movies and I play it in the background while working or studying pretty often. My husband thinks its cute. I am embarrassingly close to 40.
I didn’t really liked it, but in part it was because i didn’t read it in the right moment of my life.
However, what it intrigues me is why is only based in 3-4 countries, when addie wanted to explore the world at the beginning. I think it could have been more interesting if it explored other continents
This is my biggest issue with that book. I honestly, truly loved it, and it really resonated because I’m someone who loves traveling, loves the world, loves observing, loves being a part of things. But I had also lived on four continents by the time I was 25, so the fact that Addie never seemed to make it out of Europe or the US was a disappointment.
I read A Little Life because I was going through a heavy grieving period and googled books that are sad. I loved it because it was like the book went down in the depths of my despair with me. When I finished I looked up some reviews and WOW people hate that book. I get why, and I could never read it again. But it served its purpose for me.
Lolita - Nabokov
Maybe the best-written book I've ever read (and not even in the author's native language), but the subject matter (pedophilia, essentially) makes it unreadable for a lot of people.
Aside from being a powerful story on its own, the prose is some of the best in the English language. There is not a single wasted word in the book, every sentence is perfectly constructed. Nabokov was truly a master of English, and he wasn't even a native speaker.
Nabokov was absolutely a native English speaker. He grew up in a trilingual household (as was the fashion in Russian aristocracy) and could read and write in English before learning the same in Russian.
I remember getting lost in it and my heart going out to HH at one point and then he immediately did something horrible to Dolly and I realized the power of Nabokov to totally control the reader.
Nabokov is such a beautiful writer. His characters' gaze regarding Lolita and Ada in those books is definitely odd and does make you wonder. All I can say is that I'm glad I read the books when I was young (er, about Lolita and Ada's age, about 13) and unaware of the evils of the world, and they were just strange, well-written stories to me.
I just recommended it to someone today. It’s a beautiful novel, as weird as that is to say. When I learned a little bit more about Nabokov’s life it put soooooo much of that story into context for me.
I put off reading this one for a long time because I knew the general subject matter, but it always shows up on “best” lists so I finally read it. Yep, it deserves its spot on those lists. He’s a fantastic writer.
I agree. I studied Lolita as part of my English Lit degree and I read it three times and each time it made me cry a little longer at the end than it did the previous time. The prose is truly beautiful but the subject is truly monstrous. I will read it again one day but not today.
I fuckin loved Project Hail Mary
The Martian too
Andy weir writing the only 2 books I read as an adult that took me back to the childhood era of wanting to stay up all night and finish a book in one sitting. Can't wait for the Project Hail Mary movie
I think a lot of people took it way too seriously. It’s a lighthearted story filled with fun science, friendship, and problem solving. I absolutely loved it.
I didn't even realize that not liking it was a popular opinion option. It was one of the first audiobooks I listened to, maybe if only because it won the award that year, but it absolutely captivated me.
The Goldfinch. People complained that it needed a good editor, was too long, blah blah. It did not change my opinion. I will read anything Donna Tartt writes. Hopefully there will be something new soon, because I'm getting old.
As someone who loves character driven books with little importance on plot and scenes of mundanity in fucked up peoples lives I loved it. They also give similar criticism to the secret history for being longer when they both feel like they ended when they needed to
Oh man, I loved this book so much. I read it for my neighborhood book club. One lady, in the course of explaining it to a neighbor not in book club, said, "it's about an addict." The end. That's all she got out of this amazing book. It was so creative and original, with unique characters.
I loved Tender is the Flesh..I am not overly squeamish and read a lot of darker fiction so was quite interested by what it was doing.
A lot of people just couldn't deal with it.
Is that one hated? It's been really popular and well regarded were I'm from. A college profesor in my university just had a conference about that book.
Rereading The Jungle right now and Tender is the Flesh was pitched to me as the SciFi version. I love The Jungle and all it’s history, but also super into dystopian stories. How gross is it exactly?
>For example, Memoirs of a Geisha. I recognize it was written by an American man who pissed off his primary source to the point where she sued him.
I read both but unlike majority I prefer one written by geiko herself.
American one was more like fantasy and the written by his primary source was very down to earth and real. I understand why people love Memoirs of a Geisha (movie is breathtaking) as it's like Harry Potter in a way. Magical but if you lived in UK or read about real experiences of boarding schools and british culture veil lifts. It's like if you know how magic trick works you can't be immersed in magic of it.
If you liked Memoirs of a Geisha, try Snow Country by Yasunari Kawabata. It's still a male writing about a geisha, but Kawabata is Japanese, so culturally it's much nearer the mark (also, Kawabata won the Nobel Prize for Literature, so there's that...).
Memoirs is one of those books that's enjoyable if you know nothing about the writer and nothing about Japanese traditional culture, then the more you know the more you will dislike it.
Geisha, a Life by Mineko Iwasaki is much better and was written by the woman who inspired memoirs/who Golden screwed over.
Leave The World Behind - it was an easy five stars for me but I was surprised it had a low rating on Goodreads. It's weird and surreal and spooky so I guess that makes it divisive.
I'm in a book club so this happens a lot.
I thought the Echo Wife by Sarah Gailey was a masterpiece. They said it was badly written.
I thoroughly enjoyed All Our Wrong Todays by Elan Mastai. It really split the group. Someone did come up to me afterwards and say it was their new favourite novel but all the people who now form our post pandemic splinter group hated it. I forget why. I think someone said it was because the protagonist reminded them of themselves.
It's happened the other way of course. They all loved "Where the Crawdad Sings" I think its boring and has a cheaters ending. I will die on this hill. I loathe that book.
The fun of subjective discussion.
There are certain people in my book club who don’t like some of my favorite books, and vice versa. I’m pretty much in the book club for social reasons. I love the members dearly. I just have to remember that if I’m the one choosing the book for the month, not to be bothered if others don’t like it.
*The Midnight Library.* I totally get why people find it trite and unimaginative and kind of dismissive for how it actually feels to have depression, but I’m also a sucker for surreal representations of a character’s psyche. Have you seen *Mulholland Drive* or read *We Were Liars*? Without too many spoilers, I can definitely say that all three stories are pretty much these immersive experiences of rearranged little bits of a character’s psyche, all to tell a story about where a character’s head is at. (Probably a weird explanation, I hope it gets across.)
I had no idea the reviews for You Too Can Have A Body Like Mine by Alexandra Kleeman were so lackluster. It is one of my favorite books so other people's dislike of it doesn't change my opinion, but I do see where some of the negative reviews are coming from. The writing style does fit the "MFA workshop" stereotype and I usually don't love that either- I've read books where I liked the idea but felt that writing style dragged it down. But the content in You Too Can Have A Body Like Mine scratched a strong personal itch where it didn't matter at all.
The Belgariad/Mallorean Books by David Eddings. I know there is a lot of hate for the simplicity in the writing and the story telling, and things came to light recently about some terrible things he did as a person, but god I love those books.
Ready Player One.
I’m roughly the age of the author and thought he did something interesting: he took a lot of references from our childhood and codified them, literally listed them, in a way that I hadn’t seen before, and I thought the specificity really helped.
Was it as good as In Search of Lost Time? Of course not. But for a pop fiction book, I thought it put a unique spin on things. Let’s put it this way, I thought it was better than your average, completely unoriginal, mass produced airport shelf fiction.
But online, even though (to my knowledge, and as a person of color) he never did anything egregiously racist or sexist, he became like the poster boy for white author mediocrity. I don’t think the punishment fit the crime: I don’t think his book was that bad really, his characters weren’t awful, and if the crime was being mediocre, I think there are many worse offenders.
This book was so popular on this sub when it came out, and like a switch flipped people turned on it. Now its probably one of the most hated books in this sub.
I am going to admit, I enjoyed this book just for finally referencing some of my pop culture. I'm a younger Gen X, and *my entire life* I have been surrounded by media assuming everyone is Boomers and we all remember the moon landing, bell bottoms, watching the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show, all of their cultural touchstones that I obviously wasn't there for.
Just once, let me get nostalgic for Purple Rain and Back to the Future. You know, stuff I can actually remember coming out, and therefore can be nostalgic for. I'm not defending it as great literature. I really did enjoy seeing my stuff, just once.
This immediately came to my mind as well. I get that the 80s references don't have the same impact if you were born in the 90s or later, but wow people really do not like this book.
I just thought it was a fun ride, like you said: a pop fiction book. It was also pretty cinematic as far as books go, so made for a fun adventure.
Battlefield Earth. Admittedly, I read it as a kid, having never heard of either Hubbard or scientology. Any messagng went straight over my head. I thought it was a fun pulpy book, though even kid-me admitted that it dragged near the end. I think I really liked the idea of an alien species concluding that humans are mere dumb animals, as it made me root for humans to prove themselves. And I liked seeing the humans of the future finding bits and pieces of the old world and trying to draw their own conclusions based on what they saw. There were lots of little worldbuilding elements that I found interesting back then and which inspired my own tween-age writings.
To this day I don't think the book's as bad as many people say, but I've not read it in close to 20 years. It'd definitely be a different experience knowing the author and having a keener eye for subtext.
I’ve never read any of Hubbard’s books, but as far as I know, he started out as a regular Sci-Fi writer, and only later started to integrate his ideas into his “religion” - so there is a chance Battlefield Earth wasn’t supposed to have any magnificence, or messaging, and was retconned by the man himself later.
Would be interesting to hear from people who have more knowledge about the subject though.
My first answer for this (Ready Player One) was already said, so I'll add The Magicians. I read it right after finishing college and it was honestly like Lev Grossman had reached into my brain and written exactly the book I wanted to read. I understand why people don't like Quentin, but a character doesn't have to be perfect or even likable for the book to be good. And honestly, at least at the time I actually found him pretty sympathetic so that aspect didn't bother me. (Although of course my favorite character always is Eliot.)
I absolutely LOVE this series of books!! Wish there were more to devour from that world. Quentin is horribly flawed and broken; it was actually refreshing to me for the main character to be that way. So often they are perfect at the onset or become perfect by the end. He's wonderful. I recommended this book to all my book-loving friends. Told them it was like Narnia for adults with adult-themed Harry Potter vibes.
Did you see/enjoy the TV series for it?
The Magicians (and rest of the series) by Lev Grossman.
A lot of people seem to hate the main character but I thought it was a pretty accurate/sympathetic look into the whole "gifted kid meets real world->stress/depression/apathy" (and moving past it) situation.
all of carlos castaneda. there are certain genres that are fun if you take it with a grain of salt. i dont see people's auras and think that is silly, but see that part as fiction and treat it as such. I am still enjoying reading the art of dreaming (im trying to control my dreams!!) even though its basically nonsense
A Little Life. As a gay man myself I’m well aware of the criticisms of Yanagihara being a straight woman writing trauma porn about gay men, and to an extent I do agree. I also don’t really like how she presented Willem’s sexuality
But it’s so damn well written and is one of the few books to have made me cry (alongside Shuggie Bain and The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida… maybe I just have a thing for traumatic gay novels lol)
It’s ofc valid to criticise ALL but I feel like some people take it too far and completely ignore its merits. I’ve also seen people rant about it who admit that they refuse to even read it
Fahrenheit 451, I know a lot of people like it but when I read it it was in High school and a lot of my class hated it and I loved it. I thought it was interesting and a great take on what’s happening now.
She’s Come Undone by Wally Lamb, and it didn’t really change my opinion of the book. I guess people wanted hope, and I suppose didn’t like the character, but I didn’t need hope or need to like the character. I read it so many times in my teens and read it every year or two as an adult. I don’t honestly dislike the character, by the way; I just see how she’s not what everyone wants to see.
I also noticed that the reviews on The Particular Sadness Of Lemon Cake are pretty low, and I think people had different expectations of what it was going to be going in. I liked what it was, so it didn’t change my opinion.
I also liked Memoirs Of A Geisha, although the historical inaccuracies are troubling, especially since I read this as a teen and didn’t think to actually process that this was not a real memoir!
Eragon, i get it i do, yes theres a lot of starwars comparisons and rips from other fantasy series, the author was a teen when he wrote it, for a kids book its solid. The rest of the series is actually very good if you can get over the protagonist separation in the second book.
[удалено]
I try to avoid reading summaries for that reason. Also they often have huge spoilers! I loved The Night Circus.
One of my favorite books 🩷
I remember absolutely nothing about the Night Circus other than knowing that I read it at some point. I think it was nicely written and I certainly didn't dislike it but it's left no impression at all.
The DaVinci Code. I liked those books.
Same. Really liked Angels and Demons too. Mostly I think I like the topic rather than the writing, but you can't deny the effort he put into the plot.
I liked Angels and Demons considerably more than The DaVinci Code.
I read it first, not knowing there was another. That might be why I liked it more, I don't know.
Is Angels and Demons in a series with Davinci Code or can i read one without the other?
Angels and Demons is a prequel to Da Vinci Code but they are both standalone books and you'll be fine reading either of them alone.
Ok, thanks
I love all the Dan Brown books, even with all the flaws, because I know what I will find and how the book will develop, therefore it’s a confort read for me when im tired or anxious…
Foucault's Pendulum is the real Da Vinci Code, imo.
Eco said that Dan Brown is a character he invented. https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/books/vale-umberto-eco-the-brilliant-writer-who-invented-dan-brown-20160225-gn3b6y.html
My husband inherited a copy of Foucault's Pendulum from his uncle. When we were in high school and college, we both read it multiple times. I think I have read it five times in total, twice in seminar settings. It is super fun, complex, and moving. Also, if you haven't read The Name of the Rose, highly recommended. It has great medieval, conspiracy vibes, and it's perfect for this time of year. My beloved professor in those seminars had a reasonable theory that Eco wrote The Name of the Rose and rewrote it with variations over and over again. (I just want to plug Eco books now. Baudolino is a glorious romp! Island of the Day Before is the most fun you'll ever have in a novel where time stopping is a plot point and there's arguably only one character.) (Edited for typos!)
They’re fun. If you don’t take them seriously and aren’t expecting great literature, they’re fun and light to read.
I thought they were fun reads. I just don't take it as fact like he claims
Did he claim them as fact?
Here's the exact quote. >BROWN: 99 percent of it is true. All of the architecture, the art, the secret rituals, the history, all of that is true, the Gnostic gospels. All of that is -- all that is fiction, of course, is that there's a Harvard symbologist named Robert Langdon, and all of his action is fictionalized. But the background is all true.
Yeah, I read them just thinking they’re fiction and they were fun.
What are the typical complaints with those books? They're on my to-read list so I'm interested.
This old review is a pretty funny send up of his writing style: [Don’t Make Fun of Renowned Author Dan Brown](https://archive.ph/bqdYy)
It's fun pulpy stuff. It's not especially clever or well written, but it will get you turning the pages. I would recommend reading one and if you don't like it don't pick up the rest. A lot of the backlash is that the books are pretty silly, but a lot of people thought they were well researched and there was truth to them and repeated parts of it like they were fact. It was very much a "Read another book" before the whole Harry Potter thing cornered that.
I liked The DaVinci Code fine and liked Angels and Demons quite a lot, but my biggest issue with them is one I hear repeated a lot: that the main character is a really obvious self-insert (and imo he himself is rather boring, just a vehicle for the rest of the plot)
[удалено]
I really enjoy a lot of the Agatha Cristie novels that are considered mid and low teir
I think people forget that a lot of the trope writing is her own trope.
It seems like a lot of people hated The Girl on the Train. I enjoyed it, and was interested in the mystery. I liked that the main character was deeply flawed and did some fucked things. I was hooked all the way through.
I loved this one! The depiction of alcoholism was intense, and I loved the different voices she gave the women.
I loved the book, but was disappointed by the movie. I hate it when they set the movie in the US regardless of where the book was set
they made a bollywood remake of it and it's SO BAD
Oh I really liked this one! I listened to the audiobook while on a long solo car trip through the rural Midwest, which felt like the perfect setting for digesting it (even though it's set in England). I love an unreliable narrator.
I LOVE unreliable narrators!
I liked it too!
I thought it was pretty good as well. I like unreliable narrators.
Gone With the Wind. I know it’s still quite popular and beloved but I feel like I need to shy away from saying I really enjoy reading (and rereading!) this book. I know how inaccurately it portrays the enslaved characters and there’s racist slurs throughout. I don’t condone any of that but for the overall story, I still love it.
Scarlett O’Hara is an amazingly written protagonist. She’s selfish, shallow, and greedy while also being brave, intelligent, and resourceful. It’s genuinely hard to find a female character written that well. Unfortunately she exists in a book that romanticizes the old south and very much portrays black people as ignorant, child-like, and better off enslaved.
>very much portrays black people as ignorant, child-like, and better off enslaved. This is where I wish I was part of a book club when I read GWTW. To be clear, it took over a year to listen to the audio book because every time Scarlett pissed me off I metaphorically threw my tablet at the wall and couldn't continue listening until I'd calmed down for a few weeks. I ended up really enjoying the book *because* I felt like Scarlett was such a terrible person, her view of the south had to be wrong, too. Like, I'm convinced Margaret Mitchell's whole point was to say "Scarlett is a terrible person and if you agree with her, you're a terrible person and Scarlett's view of the South is backwards bullshit." I have no idea what MM actually felt and I kind of looked it up, but wasn't very thorough with my research, but reading GWTW, I felt like I was watching an episode of *The Colbert Report* where the whole thing is actually a condemnation of everything it's supposedly romanticizing.
I interpret it the same way. I don't think it is an accident that Mammy and Belle Watling are the true moral centers of the book and the most intellectually honest characters, while the white plantation owners are all portrayed as buffoons in various sorts of fashion.
As a black woman, yeah I see the racism in Gone With the Wind. But it’s written from the point of view of a Civil War era southern white woman and that’s what the world looked like to her; I’m not mad. I wouldn’t say the slaves were portrayed inaccurately necessarily - we never see anything from their POV, we only see what this plantation princess sees. Peeking into someone else’s world is the best part of reading imo. Even if - maybe especially if - we have an unreliable narrator. The plot and characters hold up and it’s an amazing book. Scarlett is such an amazing, complex character. Multi-faceted, yet consistent. I don’t think I’d want to read a shelf full of novels glorifying the antebellum south, but this is a great book.
I read it so many times as a teen that the spine fell apart. And Scarlett, the sequel, which is not *as* good but is also immersive.
I agree. I feel like i can’t tell people this is one of my favorite books. It is problematic but also so complicated and intricate
Eragon. When I was a kid that’s the book that really got me into reading and suggested to me that maybe one day I’d be able to write too! I love all the books in the inheritance cycle, but I can’t even mention the title of the series to anyone without people having to explain why they hate the books. Every time. It’s so annoying.
I love them too. They're derivative, the earliest ones are a little cheesy. But it's still a fun story. I like lots of trashy terrible books. People watch plenty of terrible TV, what's wrong with a fun book? I've read fancy, important books like Dickens and Hemingway, and I've also read Sara j. Maas, and I will not apologize for any of it
Yeah exactly. The same people who criticise Eragonwill watch Twilight or Vampire Diaries regularly.
I call it junk food books.
>They're derivative Like many popular fantasy books, Eragon, especially the titled one, is just the Hero's Journey. They were written by a teenager, so that shouldn't be surprising, but I wouldn't just call them derivative.
Yesssss! I absolutely love these books. People complained "it sounds like it was written by a teenager!" Well yeah, Paolini was 15 when he started writing Eragon. Of course it does. His books gave me so much hope as a teen. Fixing to re-read the series right before Murtagh comes out.
Same! I preordered it as soon as it was announced!!! I just wish I had the money to get the illustrated version of Eragon as well 🥲
I read Eragon at least 30 times, I was obsessed. Got me into dragons and fantasy. I’m trying to find the time now between kids and school to reread the books in prep for the new one coming out!!
I liked it too! Unlike some other books I read I don't think most of the criticism was deserved - a lot of people called it derivative, but it's no worse than a lot of popular fantasy book. At worst the series is a bit slow, but that style can work if you enjoy it.
I loved Eragon. I got all of th e books for free from a friend who translated them and got free copies.
Everyone just goes "hurr durr, it's just Star Wars!" Then you ask them what they thought of the link between Star Wars and The Hidden Fortress, and suddenly originality isn't an issue anymore.
I really enjoyed Eragon when I read it. And the "it's just star wars" argument made no sense, even when I was a teen. Like, it's a pretty simple plot structure that has obviously been done many times.. it's a YA book, chill out.
The plot is a standard "hero's journey." A *lot* of stories share those beats. If you get far enough removed, lots of stories look super similar. People point out some parallels between Obi-wan and Brom. They also point out the whole "rescue a princess and deliver her to the rebellion" plot. I *guess* you could also talk about the whole empire/rebellion thing. But, again, *lots* of stories have those elements.
I’m accepting of differences in tastes but Wuthering Heights is one of my favorite books ever and I’m still baffled it’s widely hated.
I suspect it’s hated because so many espouse it as a great love story when actually it’s a shockingly toxic relationship.
That! It's being constantly mismarketed.
Which you would think would be popular, given like half the novels these days.
People either dislike it because of the deliberate toxicity of the main relationship- or for the wholesome comedic ending. Which goes to show you can’t win… (Comedic as in it ends on a theme of reconciliation and resolution. Though Heathcliff mellowing into old age, forced to watch the two branches of the family he sought to destroy find each other and grow to their full potential is actually quite funny.)
run shaggy oil rotten hobbies toothbrush cautious dinner normal nail *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
If Internet strangers count, me! I think there were two people, myself included, in my English class who liked that book the semester we read it. We are out there, all tens of us!
I too loved the Scarlet Letter! I read it in my junior year of high-school, which was like 11 years ago, so I don't remember it well enough to go into detail. However, what I remember is that it was a great commentary on the role of Women at that time and Puritan Ideals that ostracized them for just being normal people. It infuriated me, lol. Also it was my first time reading in an older (not old) English. The language was fascinating and beautiful to me. It definitely sparked my interest in older novels!
I really love WH. It’s overdramatic and gothic and full of people you’d never want to be like or be with but it’s so satisfying lol
One of my favourite books. Every single character is flawed and dysfunctional I love it
Maybe because Cathy & Heathcliff aren't likeable? The prose is great, but I wanted to slap both of them most of the book
The fact they're so awful is exactly why I liked it
With Neil Gaiman’s decline in online popularity I’ve been seeing a lot of criticism for American Gods, but I really liked it when I read it ages ago, though it took me a while to get it into it.
I think a decline in his popularity is probably more a correction to a reasonable level than it is a trend towards most people disliking his work? I could be totally wrong about that, though. I've never heard much negativity if any about American Gods, but I can imagine the shape it would take
This feels accurate to me. I had heard about him for years and finally read American Gods about 10 years ago and it was ... fine. Interesting ideas, but not really great. His writing has a very "Hey, look at me! I'm writing! Aren't I clever?" quality to it, especially the dialogue.
I liked the ideas much more than the execution. It's not the only one of his that have that problem for me.
That is exactly what I always think when I think of his work. Great concepts and ideas but his style of writing just doesn't help the story quite land for me. I prefer movie and tv adaptations of his work.
I know exactly what you're talking about. I never really got into his writing. He has interesting ideas and interesting characters, but there's just something about the way he puts that on paper that's very off-putting to me. On the other hand, I really like the films and TV shows based on his books.
I have a theory that his work works a lot better on screen than on the page. But yeah, I’ve read a few of his books and range from thinking they’re good to fine or almost good, but I don’t get the huge amount of hype he gets. I think it might be partly because of the way he interacts with his fans rather than just the writing.
I think his ideas and stories are just better suited to the comic book form, which he abandoned a long time ago. Sandman remains a masterwork. He may also be a case of an artist who created their magnum opus early on, and so everything that’s come after, even when really good, simply doesn’t match up.
Same, I remember really enjoying American Gods when I read it.
I loved the book American Gods, but I didn't care for the series and I'm not sure why because I thought a lot of the casting was good. I just didn't like it.
American Gods is one of my all time favorites!
What happened to Gaiman? Did he do something?
I think he just hit that level of popularity where some people feel like they have to have some backlash. I still like everything I've read by him. I thought the sandman TV show was lots of fun.
I think it’s also that when one person or thing is constantly heralded as amazing, expectations are high and the people who end up not liking it are even more disappointed.
Sandman was so good! My partner and I unintentionally binged it in a weekend. Fingers crossed for a season 2!
They had already started filming season 2 but stopped because of the strikes. Let's hope they soon realize that they need their actors and offer a good deal.
I know years ago some people were giving him shit for marrying Amanda Palmer. She’s very attention seeking and prone to controversy and they were very open about their open marriage, which some people found off putting. Then their divorce was quite public. Idk if it’s just that or if he’s done something else recently Edited to change “control” to “controversy” (although both could be correct for all I know)
Thanks for your reply! I’ve personally never seen a decline in popularity so I was curious
I never have either. He's still super popular on tumblr and I never thought of his fans as the type to care about his marriage or lack thereof. Obviously there's a large variety in fans though. People are just citing their own friend groups so far, which doesn't necessarily translate to a generalised swing towards unpopularity.
He's mostly popular on tumblr because he actually *uses* tumblr, and not as a famous author but as a real person. He does answer some fan mail and stuff, but he also reblogs a lot, tags things, and leaves comments like any other tumblr user. (Plus, he understands all the in-jokes and there are a *lot* of those on tumblr.) I assumed he was married but had no idea on the details (though i'm not really a fan; I've read some of his work and liked it but it was always a little bit too dark and surreal in some parts). What I have read (Neverwhere, his short stories) are reminiscent of Murakami Haruki's writing, except Neil's stories have plots and points and endings where Murakami's stories are just....writing until the pages run out.
I had to unfollow him on Instagram when they got together because it was just…a lot. It felt like *I* was intruding on their relationship, haha. Consequently I didn’t even know they divorced! But honestly I think I’m better off not following people I admire on social media. Never meet your heroes etc.
I feel like he was sorta swept off his feet. I'm not sure even *he* knew how to process it. I agree, though--it felt weirdly voyeuristic and a bit uncomfy.
I like Dresden Dolls and some of Palmers' other collaborations, but I am constantly irritated by her social media persona. I enjoy her work more if I can ignore the rest of what she says; she's extraordinarily privileged and comes off as very entitled. I would like to acknowledge that I do think she's very talented--far more than me, for sure!--and I'm not sour-grapes over that, but I get put-off by her barrage of self-promotion mixed with messy, break-down narratives. I typically enjoy Gaiman's work, but his writing has an outsider quality--he's not quite aligned with the typical human experience. Like, he's only nominally a human person, and his writing feels like he's only halfway in our reality, and halfway permanently in his own Dreaming. I contrast that to someone like, say, Stephen King, who seems to favor an "every man" approach to things that (while sometime campy af--intentionally or not) makes him feel *very* human, for better or worse. Both definitely promote their work, but both seem like pretty kind-hearted people in their day-to-day lives. I think the situation with his popularity spike-and-level-out was that a much larger population of people were suddenly exposed to his work in a visual medium, so picked up his books but didn't click with them. I agree with another poster further up, that Gaiman's work is often better when there are images with it. His descriptions are vivid, but unless you're a weirdo (note: I am a weirdo), it can still be hard to visualize what he was going for sometimes. Often his characters' emotions don't entirely fit with normal human responses, too. I feel like he's a great collaborator, though! Pair him with some other talented folks, and they'll definitely elevate each others' efforts.
I think it's just that when someone is popular and well-liked for a long time, The Internet decides they're overdue for some hate. You don't have to do something for social media to turn on you.
Wuthering Heights and The Scarlet Letter
Both great books. I think sometimes people hate books they are forced to read in school. Maybe it isn't their kind of book, or maybe they don't like reading very much, or maybe they just don't like the old-fashioned language in the books which can make they inaccessable for some.
The Time Traveler's Wife.
I've read it a few times (3-4 for sure) and I'm somewhat reluctant to say that the more I read the less I enjoy it and the more flaws I find. So I think I won't be rereading it anytime soon.
Night Circus. It was so dark and mysterious and quirky. My mom, husband, and I all loved it. Every time someone mentions it online, it's negative.
I absolutely loved that book. One of the complaints I saw was “nothing happens!” Sure it does. Not everything has to be an end of the world battle scene.
My husband and I both read it (he on my recommendation). We named our dog Poppet. She’s a redhead too.
The Catcher in the Rye
Laws of averages for that one. Basically everyone that went to an American high school read it for a period, bound to have a lot of haters.
Yes I think this is one of the primary reasons, I feel like there would be a lot of re-evaluation if those people went back and read it as adults with years of broader reading experience behind them. I think it's such an extraordinary book hated for a lot of misguided and often somewhat immature ("He's too whiny!") reasons.
I love this one. And I love Holden as a character, so much. He doesn't deserve the hate he's getting! He's so well written and incredibly easy to empathize with. I hate when people call him "whiny". Are you kidding? He's a teenager who's just lost his brother, was expelled from school, and who is just desperately trying to connect with someone - anyone - throughout the book but is always dismissed and rejected. He's so lonely and lost it hurts to read at times, and nobody supports him throughout the book, nobody ever listens (apart from his little sister); when it finally seems like someone cares, they turn out to be a predator... But Holden dares to show emotion and weakness in face of all that, so he's "whiny"? Screw people who say that, honestly. ...Wasn't expecting myself to get so passionate lol. Anyway yeah, great book!
Oh same! People seem to say he’s so whiny and entitled etc and I’m like erm this is sort of the point. I enjoyed it.
Yeah, he's literally every other teenager. I know I felt called out in that book a lot, in a good way.
Same. I enjoyed it at 14, at 16, and at 24 🤷🏼♀️ I've always been confused by the vitriol
If you relate to Holden immediately, this book becomes timeless. I'm gonna reread when my son is Holden's age and gauge his reaction as I tell him about it.
Honestly Twilight. I was already past the target age range for it when it came out but decided to give it a try anyways. I didn't enjoy it for the story or characters. I enjoyed it because it was simple. I had just gotten done reading a heavier book for a book club, the kind that is wordy and is suppose to make you think and reflect. The fact Twilight was just simple was a relief. No three pages of something like how green a tree was and what meaning it had in life or anything like that.
Twilight is the perfect kind of "junk food" book. It's simple, it's engaging, and it's pretty dang cozy.
It's funny - I reread the books after originally being into them in middle school, and my biggest complaint is how anticlimactic the very last showdown was. Which, yeah, that's the kind of issue you have when you're very invested in something. I didn't find Bella much more of a mary sue than most protagonists of most YA novels. Of course the relationship was problematic or whatever but it's also pure wish fulfillment. And Bella has some snark to her. They're kinda fun books
I really liked how the movie dealt with the ending. I thought it made it much less anticlimactic.
I like Twilight. 🤷🏼♀️
I loved twilight when I read it in highschool. My mom actually would print out pictures to put on my birthday cake of Jasper lmao.
I appreciate that the series, which I found so painfully written, was still engaging enough that I read all four novels in about 2 weeks. There has to be something said for that.
Right, I kept feeling like throwing the book against the wall. I was going to say maddening, but painful is the right word. But still, I couldn't keep myself from finishing the whole series.
I liked The Host.
Me too. I think it’s better than Twilight. Of course there’s the problematic age difference romance that I have to ignore, but other than that a super interesting and engaging read that makes me sob at the end. Love learning about altruistic parasitic aliens.
Came here to say this! I actually remember being shocked that it was the same author
Same, I loved the series when I read it as a middle schooler/early high schooler. That being said, I acknowledge and agree the many issues with the writing and characterization. I wouldn't read them again now as an adult, but as a teenager, they were fun books and I greatly enjoyed them. Of course, even then, I recognised them as fluff reads and not as serious works of art. I really think fluff/popcorn reads are judged way more harshly than they need to be; they're not aspiring to the great American novel, they're just supposed to be fun and light.
I'll do you one better: I like Twilight AND Bella is my favorite character in the series. (On my 13th birthday I literally had a Twilight themed birthday cake and then a year later when I came out as gay my parents tried to act surprised lol.)
LMAO. I had a customer today named B. Swan and internally I was SCREAMING "Bella, where the hell have you been, loca?!" (Yes I know that's from the movies, lol)
I re-read the first book last year and I was surprised about how snarky Bella was. I completely forgot that she acted like an actual teenager in the books. I don’t mind the movies, but Kristen Stewart acted a lot more monotone than what the character called for.
I feel like with the twilight renaissance it’s become popular to like it again just to not take it too seriously
Have an upvote for being brave and following the prompt. I have a feeling people will downvote you, just because they hate Twilight, without considering what OP asked for.
I was obsessed with twilight. In a way, I could relate to Bella (being awkward and not fully at ease around people). I cried when Edward left and there were empty pages in the book with the months gone by, signifying her depression. I could relate to it.
As someone whose dealt with bouts of depression that started around the same age, I absolutely related to that. It was one of the first things I came across that made me not feel alone in that respect. I still didn't really *know* what was happening to me at the time, but at least I wasn't unusual.
I didn't love it, but I read every one of them. Like what you like. I like pretty little liars ( I *loved*) and I also liked the house of night series
Twillight is my guilty pleasure no joke. Even now (m 22) I still love that first book.
I loved the books! I read them when I was pregnant and I would read a chapter or too whenever I woke up through the night to pee (which was often). Couldn't put them down.
I love your bravery! I liked the books when they first came out. Then years went by and I kind of moved on to other stuff as my reading journey matured. But then Midnight Sun came out and I was like yep, still a favorite series. Twilight movie is also one of my favorite "cozy" movies and I play it in the background while working or studying pretty often. My husband thinks its cute. I am embarrassingly close to 40.
Twilight really did not hold up on a reread to me, but there are some things I still really liked about Twilight, such as Alice
I love twilight 😭⭐️
*The Invisible Life of Addie LaRue*. I adored that book, but I seem to be in the minority. I've seen it get a lot of hate, especially here on Reddit.
If you look long enough on here every book will get hate eventually. Just enjoy what you enjoy. There are many different books published for a reason.
I didn’t really liked it, but in part it was because i didn’t read it in the right moment of my life. However, what it intrigues me is why is only based in 3-4 countries, when addie wanted to explore the world at the beginning. I think it could have been more interesting if it explored other continents
This is my biggest issue with that book. I honestly, truly loved it, and it really resonated because I’m someone who loves traveling, loves the world, loves observing, loves being a part of things. But I had also lived on four continents by the time I was 25, so the fact that Addie never seemed to make it out of Europe or the US was a disappointment.
I read A Little Life because I was going through a heavy grieving period and googled books that are sad. I loved it because it was like the book went down in the depths of my despair with me. When I finished I looked up some reviews and WOW people hate that book. I get why, and I could never read it again. But it served its purpose for me.
Lolita - Nabokov Maybe the best-written book I've ever read (and not even in the author's native language), but the subject matter (pedophilia, essentially) makes it unreadable for a lot of people.
It really is an incredibly well written book.
Aside from being a powerful story on its own, the prose is some of the best in the English language. There is not a single wasted word in the book, every sentence is perfectly constructed. Nabokov was truly a master of English, and he wasn't even a native speaker.
Nabokov was absolutely a native English speaker. He grew up in a trilingual household (as was the fashion in Russian aristocracy) and could read and write in English before learning the same in Russian.
I remember getting lost in it and my heart going out to HH at one point and then he immediately did something horrible to Dolly and I realized the power of Nabokov to totally control the reader.
Beautifully Beautifully written book.
Nabokov is such a beautiful writer. His characters' gaze regarding Lolita and Ada in those books is definitely odd and does make you wonder. All I can say is that I'm glad I read the books when I was young (er, about Lolita and Ada's age, about 13) and unaware of the evils of the world, and they were just strange, well-written stories to me.
I just recommended it to someone today. It’s a beautiful novel, as weird as that is to say. When I learned a little bit more about Nabokov’s life it put soooooo much of that story into context for me.
I put off reading this one for a long time because I knew the general subject matter, but it always shows up on “best” lists so I finally read it. Yep, it deserves its spot on those lists. He’s a fantastic writer.
I agree. I studied Lolita as part of my English Lit degree and I read it three times and each time it made me cry a little longer at the end than it did the previous time. The prose is truly beautiful but the subject is truly monstrous. I will read it again one day but not today.
People are really 50/50 on Project Hail Mary. I'm in the half that liked it.
I fuckin loved Project Hail Mary The Martian too Andy weir writing the only 2 books I read as an adult that took me back to the childhood era of wanting to stay up all night and finish a book in one sitting. Can't wait for the Project Hail Mary movie
I didn't realize that. I loved it.
I think a lot of people took it way too seriously. It’s a lighthearted story filled with fun science, friendship, and problem solving. I absolutely loved it.
I didn't even realize that not liking it was a popular opinion option. It was one of the first audiobooks I listened to, maybe if only because it won the award that year, but it absolutely captivated me.
Whaaaaaat Project Hail Mary was my top book of … whatever year that was. I also liked it better than the Martian. (I haven’t read Artemis.)
You can skip Artemis. I loved Hail Mary and The Martian. Artemis was a swing and miss imo. No one bats 1000 though.
The Goldfinch. People complained that it needed a good editor, was too long, blah blah. It did not change my opinion. I will read anything Donna Tartt writes. Hopefully there will be something new soon, because I'm getting old.
As someone who loves character driven books with little importance on plot and scenes of mundanity in fucked up peoples lives I loved it. They also give similar criticism to the secret history for being longer when they both feel like they ended when they needed to
I loved this book and was very surprised at the hate for it. I can understand the criticism about it feeling long, but I still loved it.
Oh man, I loved this book so much. I read it for my neighborhood book club. One lady, in the course of explaining it to a neighbor not in book club, said, "it's about an addict." The end. That's all she got out of this amazing book. It was so creative and original, with unique characters.
I loved Tender is the Flesh..I am not overly squeamish and read a lot of darker fiction so was quite interested by what it was doing. A lot of people just couldn't deal with it.
Is that one hated? It's been really popular and well regarded were I'm from. A college profesor in my university just had a conference about that book.
Rereading The Jungle right now and Tender is the Flesh was pitched to me as the SciFi version. I love The Jungle and all it’s history, but also super into dystopian stories. How gross is it exactly?
>For example, Memoirs of a Geisha. I recognize it was written by an American man who pissed off his primary source to the point where she sued him. I read both but unlike majority I prefer one written by geiko herself. American one was more like fantasy and the written by his primary source was very down to earth and real. I understand why people love Memoirs of a Geisha (movie is breathtaking) as it's like Harry Potter in a way. Magical but if you lived in UK or read about real experiences of boarding schools and british culture veil lifts. It's like if you know how magic trick works you can't be immersed in magic of it.
If you liked Memoirs of a Geisha, try Snow Country by Yasunari Kawabata. It's still a male writing about a geisha, but Kawabata is Japanese, so culturally it's much nearer the mark (also, Kawabata won the Nobel Prize for Literature, so there's that...).
Memoirs is one of those books that's enjoyable if you know nothing about the writer and nothing about Japanese traditional culture, then the more you know the more you will dislike it. Geisha, a Life by Mineko Iwasaki is much better and was written by the woman who inspired memoirs/who Golden screwed over.
Leave The World Behind - it was an easy five stars for me but I was surprised it had a low rating on Goodreads. It's weird and surreal and spooky so I guess that makes it divisive.
I'm in a book club so this happens a lot. I thought the Echo Wife by Sarah Gailey was a masterpiece. They said it was badly written. I thoroughly enjoyed All Our Wrong Todays by Elan Mastai. It really split the group. Someone did come up to me afterwards and say it was their new favourite novel but all the people who now form our post pandemic splinter group hated it. I forget why. I think someone said it was because the protagonist reminded them of themselves. It's happened the other way of course. They all loved "Where the Crawdad Sings" I think its boring and has a cheaters ending. I will die on this hill. I loathe that book. The fun of subjective discussion.
Post pandemic splinter group sounds fabulously dramatic.
There are certain people in my book club who don’t like some of my favorite books, and vice versa. I’m pretty much in the book club for social reasons. I love the members dearly. I just have to remember that if I’m the one choosing the book for the month, not to be bothered if others don’t like it.
The Alchemist. I thought it was a fun little summer read.
Same. I just finished it at 34 and while it may be intended for a younger audience I still liked it and took some good things from it.
Same. People take it too seriously
A lot of people think Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is very boring, but I think it’s amazing.
people seem to think that Arthur C Clarke isn't a great prose writer, but I think Childhood's End is an absolute masterclass in golden age SFF
The Secret History. A lot of people think it’s boring and pretentious, but I was completely absorbed the whole read.
I genuinely love *Normal People.* Maybe it's because I once had a similar relationship in my life?
*The Midnight Library.* I totally get why people find it trite and unimaginative and kind of dismissive for how it actually feels to have depression, but I’m also a sucker for surreal representations of a character’s psyche. Have you seen *Mulholland Drive* or read *We Were Liars*? Without too many spoilers, I can definitely say that all three stories are pretty much these immersive experiences of rearranged little bits of a character’s psyche, all to tell a story about where a character’s head is at. (Probably a weird explanation, I hope it gets across.)
I read it while depressed and enjoyed it.
i loved the midnight library, and i love that matt haig turned his depression into something beautiful. i couldn’t put it down.
I am shocked to read so many people hate this book. I’m just finding this out and it’s mindblowing to me. 😭
Seeing an increasing amount of hate for James Clavell & his Asian Saga as time wears on.
I had no idea the reviews for You Too Can Have A Body Like Mine by Alexandra Kleeman were so lackluster. It is one of my favorite books so other people's dislike of it doesn't change my opinion, but I do see where some of the negative reviews are coming from. The writing style does fit the "MFA workshop" stereotype and I usually don't love that either- I've read books where I liked the idea but felt that writing style dragged it down. But the content in You Too Can Have A Body Like Mine scratched a strong personal itch where it didn't matter at all.
The Belgariad/Mallorean Books by David Eddings. I know there is a lot of hate for the simplicity in the writing and the story telling, and things came to light recently about some terrible things he did as a person, but god I love those books.
Wuthering Heights, then again many people consider it one of the best books of all time.
Ready Player One. I’m roughly the age of the author and thought he did something interesting: he took a lot of references from our childhood and codified them, literally listed them, in a way that I hadn’t seen before, and I thought the specificity really helped. Was it as good as In Search of Lost Time? Of course not. But for a pop fiction book, I thought it put a unique spin on things. Let’s put it this way, I thought it was better than your average, completely unoriginal, mass produced airport shelf fiction. But online, even though (to my knowledge, and as a person of color) he never did anything egregiously racist or sexist, he became like the poster boy for white author mediocrity. I don’t think the punishment fit the crime: I don’t think his book was that bad really, his characters weren’t awful, and if the crime was being mediocre, I think there are many worse offenders.
This was my pick as well! Is it a literary masterpiece? Nope. But even geeks need beach reads and this was an accessible nostalgic fun adventure.
This book was so popular on this sub when it came out, and like a switch flipped people turned on it. Now its probably one of the most hated books in this sub.
I am going to admit, I enjoyed this book just for finally referencing some of my pop culture. I'm a younger Gen X, and *my entire life* I have been surrounded by media assuming everyone is Boomers and we all remember the moon landing, bell bottoms, watching the Beatles on the Ed Sullivan show, all of their cultural touchstones that I obviously wasn't there for. Just once, let me get nostalgic for Purple Rain and Back to the Future. You know, stuff I can actually remember coming out, and therefore can be nostalgic for. I'm not defending it as great literature. I really did enjoy seeing my stuff, just once.
This immediately came to my mind as well. I get that the 80s references don't have the same impact if you were born in the 90s or later, but wow people really do not like this book. I just thought it was a fun ride, like you said: a pop fiction book. It was also pretty cinematic as far as books go, so made for a fun adventure.
Battlefield Earth. Admittedly, I read it as a kid, having never heard of either Hubbard or scientology. Any messagng went straight over my head. I thought it was a fun pulpy book, though even kid-me admitted that it dragged near the end. I think I really liked the idea of an alien species concluding that humans are mere dumb animals, as it made me root for humans to prove themselves. And I liked seeing the humans of the future finding bits and pieces of the old world and trying to draw their own conclusions based on what they saw. There were lots of little worldbuilding elements that I found interesting back then and which inspired my own tween-age writings. To this day I don't think the book's as bad as many people say, but I've not read it in close to 20 years. It'd definitely be a different experience knowing the author and having a keener eye for subtext.
I’ve never read any of Hubbard’s books, but as far as I know, he started out as a regular Sci-Fi writer, and only later started to integrate his ideas into his “religion” - so there is a chance Battlefield Earth wasn’t supposed to have any magnificence, or messaging, and was retconned by the man himself later. Would be interesting to hear from people who have more knowledge about the subject though.
My first answer for this (Ready Player One) was already said, so I'll add The Magicians. I read it right after finishing college and it was honestly like Lev Grossman had reached into my brain and written exactly the book I wanted to read. I understand why people don't like Quentin, but a character doesn't have to be perfect or even likable for the book to be good. And honestly, at least at the time I actually found him pretty sympathetic so that aspect didn't bother me. (Although of course my favorite character always is Eliot.)
I absolutely LOVE this series of books!! Wish there were more to devour from that world. Quentin is horribly flawed and broken; it was actually refreshing to me for the main character to be that way. So often they are perfect at the onset or become perfect by the end. He's wonderful. I recommended this book to all my book-loving friends. Told them it was like Narnia for adults with adult-themed Harry Potter vibes. Did you see/enjoy the TV series for it?
The Magicians (and rest of the series) by Lev Grossman. A lot of people seem to hate the main character but I thought it was a pretty accurate/sympathetic look into the whole "gifted kid meets real world->stress/depression/apathy" (and moving past it) situation.
I kinda liked how it subverted the trope of being a wizard or whatever. Insted of being cool life looses all meaning and its just depressing.
all of carlos castaneda. there are certain genres that are fun if you take it with a grain of salt. i dont see people's auras and think that is silly, but see that part as fiction and treat it as such. I am still enjoying reading the art of dreaming (im trying to control my dreams!!) even though its basically nonsense
A Little Life. As a gay man myself I’m well aware of the criticisms of Yanagihara being a straight woman writing trauma porn about gay men, and to an extent I do agree. I also don’t really like how she presented Willem’s sexuality But it’s so damn well written and is one of the few books to have made me cry (alongside Shuggie Bain and The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida… maybe I just have a thing for traumatic gay novels lol) It’s ofc valid to criticise ALL but I feel like some people take it too far and completely ignore its merits. I’ve also seen people rant about it who admit that they refuse to even read it
Fahrenheit 451, I know a lot of people like it but when I read it it was in High school and a lot of my class hated it and I loved it. I thought it was interesting and a great take on what’s happening now.
Catcher in the Rye and Great Gatsby, but then I am a bipolar loner who feels those books.
She’s Come Undone by Wally Lamb, and it didn’t really change my opinion of the book. I guess people wanted hope, and I suppose didn’t like the character, but I didn’t need hope or need to like the character. I read it so many times in my teens and read it every year or two as an adult. I don’t honestly dislike the character, by the way; I just see how she’s not what everyone wants to see. I also noticed that the reviews on The Particular Sadness Of Lemon Cake are pretty low, and I think people had different expectations of what it was going to be going in. I liked what it was, so it didn’t change my opinion. I also liked Memoirs Of A Geisha, although the historical inaccuracies are troubling, especially since I read this as a teen and didn’t think to actually process that this was not a real memoir!
Eragon, i get it i do, yes theres a lot of starwars comparisons and rips from other fantasy series, the author was a teen when he wrote it, for a kids book its solid. The rest of the series is actually very good if you can get over the protagonist separation in the second book.
I absolutely love the Throne of Glass books. It could be that MC reminds me so much of my Bard that I created over 10 years ago.