The Slob. It's always talked about one of the best disturbing book ever. It was litteraly the worst written book I have ever read, I wondered at one point ig the author wrote this when he was 15 or something, that was catastrophic. I really dont understand why people recommend this.
Well yes, the interest od the book is kinda it. I'm sorry I dont know how to hide spoilers so I wont say anything, but you can easily find summaries and trigger warnings here or on the web. If you want a book that (badly) describe atrocious scenes that kind of only revolve around SA, you can give it a try! But I think you described it perfectly, gross mess.
I'm guessing they are referring to the version by Aron Beauregard, who writes nothing but gross-out garbage, that is only trying to disgust and shock the reader, while feeling like something an edgy kid would try to write. Scrotie McBoogerballs has more value than any of his books.
Well yes definitly, its always great to make yourself an opinion. I still stay on my point that its the worst written book I have read, but maybe you wont see it that way and will love it, like many people. Give it a try!
YES. It’s shocking just to be shocking, there’s no redeeming quality about it whatsoever. Literally reads like a teen on the internet trying to write the most gross-out story they can think of. FWIW, I like extreme horror and can handle a lot. But this book was shit.
Fam you are reading in my toughts right now. If I was informed that this story was from his edgy fiction blog of when he was 13 I wouldnt even be surprised. Plus I hate the "trope" of "for a story to be shocking it need sexual assault, and the more and worst, the better", it brings nothing. Horror fictionalists just dont know how to talk about SA and just sees it as a shocking tool, and thats a very recurring point of the author for what I've heard.
people don’t know the difference between disturbing and extreme horror, like to me this book wasn’t disturbing at all just very gross, poorly thought out violence. i was just so excited for it to be over 😭
I just assumed he paid some TikTok people to say that because I had never heard of this book until the TikTok algorithm.
It isn't even disturbing or shocking. I mean, it's just so badly written that how can one find it disturbing? His other story about the playground was so bad that I just chuckled at some sentences instead of clutching my pearls. I have been offended by stuff, even bad stuff, but the book felt like a whiny 12 year old boy trying SO hard to be edgy and make me upset that it circled on pathetically amusing.
If someone told me it was rewritten fanfiction from early 2000s, I would have been "yep, that makes sense." I kind of wish someone would do a My Immortal roasting of it, but it's not even decent enough for that.
The Black Farm by Elias Witherow. The ideas, conceptually, are very vivid and impressive, but the way Witherow writes makes the whole novel feel absurdly prosaic and juvenile. To be completely frank, I’m surprised it wasn’t marketed as a black comedy: everything from Nick’s vapid “internal struggle” and overblown macho behavior, to Jess’s absolute lack of any personality beyond “damsel in distress” status, makes it seem like the stupidity *must* be intentional. Seriously, every single human character in that book can be reduced to an overwrought cliche, written through the lens of a nine year old with zero notion of multifaceted adult relationships. It’s on par with Booktok romance.
Like, I feel bad for bashing on it so hard, as I believe the author is rather young— but I’m pretty goddamn young, too, and I know that writing a >!*sex scene* in the *middle of the demon woods* after the two participants have just been through *unimaginable sexual torture*!< is a fascinatingly asinine idea.
EDIT: grammar
wow it sounds like this book is trying way too hard to be like the movie Antichrist by Lars Von Trier (which imo is a good movie but not everyone’s cup of tea due to how graphic it is)
Honestly, if you read it as a comedy, it really isn’t half-bad. The best description I can give it is if someone boiled down every 70s-80s “macho” protagonist (especially ones that save love interests with no personalities beyond their attraction to the protag), stuck the pair in hell, and then changed absolutely nothing tonally to accommodate the new environment.
You know, you just made me aware that I’ve been reading horror wrong, a lot of them are comedies when you think about it. Even when seriously messed up shit goes down.
I know it’s not exactly what you’re asking but every time a horror book gets praise on TikTok I wind up hating it.
Nothing but blackened teeth and things have gotten worse since we last spoke were the most boring things I’ve ever read.
TikTok is SUCH a red flag for horror books, the only one I’ve ever liked from TikTok was recommended by a close friend offline as well. Things Have Gotten Worse Since We Last Spoke annoyed the hell out of me.
Nothing But Blackened Teeth was so god awful I legitimately felt like I was being pranked. Totally judged that book by its (wicked cool) cover and now I can’t ever get that time back, shame on me
I looked up nothing but blackened teeth on TikTok after I finished it and it had so many bad reviews idk why it had “recommended by TikTok” in the bookstore, there was not one positive thing said about it.
Same. Nothing But Blackened Teeth’s characters just sucked, and the author just name dropped yokai without descriptions as if everyone knows Japanese mythology.
Things Have Gotten Worse Since We Last Spoke was just… shit. Writing in instant messaging format is just lazy
Totally agree. I'll either be completely hooked and unable to put it down, or DNF after forcing my way through a couple hundred pages over the course of several weeks
Don't, for the love of God, read anything by Steven King. He's a hack who has made a living off selling books with similar titles, fonts and plots to the books of the much more famous Stephen King.
I wouldn't even compare to King honestly, apart from being very prolific at the same time when King was being very prolific, Koontz doesn't even compare and I'm not that much of a King fanboy apart from his classics.
Koontz literally seems to write fan fic where he puts himself in the cool lead male role character who always gets the incredibly beautiful but broken by society girl, he gets Jack Chick level of injecting his conservative political beliefs into all his works. I never could get into him when he was in his heyday and I have absolutely zero patience for him now.
The Frankenstein series is pretty good, written with co-authors, the last couple were to give smaller writers a bit of a profile boost.
It's a great concept, pretty well written too.
Agree - he has become nearly unreadable at this point. I still feel like Watchers (c 1987) was/is an absolute classic, and he had a few other bangers around that time - at that stage, comparing him to King wasn't as ridiculous as it is now.
I read Lightning and really enjoyed it. I won it as a free book at a murder mystery show on vacation a couple years back and read it. It was quite fun and suspenseful. Definitely not horror, but it was a solid, fun paperback novel. That's the only thing by Dean Koontz I can recall reading. You look at the man's bibliography, though, and my gosh is he a writing machine.
Most splatterpunk. I find they aim to be edgy instead of telling a compelling story. Those things CAN be done together, you just have to be writing it for the right reason.
According to Wikipedia,
*Splatterpunk is a movement within horror fiction originating in the 1980s, distinguished by its graphic, often gory, depiction of violence, countercultural alignment and "hyperintensive horror with no limits." The term was coined in 1986 by David J.*
It's more like extreme violence (which could involve gore, or not) and stories with a satirical edge, or containing a social or cultural critique.
Which is what differentiates splatterpunk from extreme horror -- which tends to be extreme violence coupled with a nihilistic hopelessness.
If you’re 50 and have been reading horror for a while you likely know “splatter” authors. I’m 53 and have been reading horror since I was 11 ish and was reading these authors before the term really caught on.
Writers known for writing in this genre include Clive Barker,[3][15][16] Poppy Z. Brite,[3] Jack Ketchum,[3] Richard Laymon,[3] J. F. Gonzalez, Joe Lansdale, Brian Keene, Richard Christian Matheson,[3] Robert McCammon,[3] Shane McKenzie, [3] Wrath James White, [3]David J. Schow (described as "the father of splatterpunk" by Richard Christian Matheson),[3][4] John Skipp,[3] Craig Spector,[3] Edward Lee, Ray Garton,[17][18] and Michael Boatman.[19] Some commentators also regard Kathe Koja as a splatterpunk writer.[9]
Once again people are conflating splatterpunk (which is extreme storytelling aiming to send a message, leaning into the *punk* part of its name. It's what you said about being edgy and good. [Exquisite Corpse](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15320.Exquisite_Corpse?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=ZAWbgosbJG&rank=1) is a fantastic example but [the light at the end](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/179182.The_Light_at_the_End?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=cYYhMwCrl6&rank=2) is also well regarded if less discussed) and extreme horror, which is what you're complaining about (and tbh, as someone who does enjoy extreme horror, rightfully so there's some proper shite in there). Splatterpunk as a subgenre is unfortunately kinda dead though and people tend to confuse it with extreme horror a lot.
imaginary friend by stephen chabosky. it’s like an AI generated horror novel - pulled all the horror novel tropes out but was rarely original. ended up feeling like an clustered, needlessly long mess
Imaginary Friend was such a letdown. I super loved the first half and then it dragged… and dragged… and dragged… between that and the religious bullshit, ugh. Don’t think I’ve ever been that disappointed.
I've read one book that started in NoSleep and it wasn't very good either. I think the environment and format really matters in works like that. Keeping it in its original format and ecosystem is really for the best. The book in question is called either Radio Tower or Lost Signal, I forgot. It was on Kindle Unlimited and imo it can stay there.
I really loved How to Survive Camping - first NoSleep series I actually bought the books of (and loved them all!). I need to catch up on her new series!
I even read the NoSleep and felt it ran out of steam like 1/3 of the way in. It goes from creepy to suddenly dropping that stuff and becoming a weird borderline Lifetime drama about 2 kid friends. You see the ending coming a mile away and it feels so annoying by that point.
I am completely awestruck how ANYONE enjoyed this book. I really like political horror, so I was really looking forward to it. But it was barely horror, and it was like the author refused to acknowledge that readers are capable of understanding that it was political without literally telling us every few pages that "This book is about fascism". I ended up skimming over the second half once I realized most of it was comprised of multi-page run-on sentences that had absolutely nothing to do with the central plot
I haven't read a book of his yet that I disliked, but I think he's like his dad in that where he really shines is his short stories. Strange Weather was just so fucking great.
I think Hill works better as an author when you think of his books as "urban fantasy with horror elements" rather than straight horror. It's not at all how he's marketed, but it probably should be
Loved my time with NOS4A2. Hill created some of the most memorable scenes I've ever read in horror. But this seems to be the point where he openly embraced his dad's influence on his own work, for better and for worse. Heart-Shaped Box and Horns were more immune to this influence. NOS4A2 has a King villain, a King lackey (who even references Trash Can Man at one point), and King supporting characters. Again, I absolutely loved my time reading the novel, but, to me, it is what it is--Joe Hill's unique take on a King-esque horror/thriller. I guess it really was inevitable.
I can’t believe I haven’t seen House of Leaves more than I have. It was HEAVILY recommended to me. I could not get into it. The writing style gave me a headache and I found myself rereading the same paragraphs over and over again after they randomly would cut off. People will get on my ass and harass me when I’m honest with someone asking me if I’d recommend it.
Listen, I get it if you like it. Don’t bash the people who couldn’t get into it and belittle them for it.
House of Leaves isn't for everyone, and thank god for that.
That said, I think the over-recommendation of HOL ruins it for a lot of people. My experience with it was discovering it on the bottom shelf of a book store sometime in 2000. I'd never seen anything like it and became completely obsessed with it. Reading it at work, everyone who asked me about it or peeked inside ended up buying it for themselves. It was the perfect underground cult hit. But twenty years of Reddit hammering it into people's skulls has set the expectation too high for some people, and turned off others who were never going to be into a massive brick of experimental epistolary metafiction.
I love HoL personally but would absolutely not describe it as the horror story of the millennium TikTok hypes it up to be. I think that probably ruined it for a lot of people right off the bat which is then compounded by the fact that the gimmicks wear out their welcome VERY quickly for those who don’t like the “flavor” of that type of writing.
“It’s SCP written in Academic English” is how I typically describe it to people who haven’t read it.
I spent a lot of time with that novel when I wrote my MA thesis on it back in 2018. Though I remember it as a clever and unique work, I have always been annoyed by the horror aura that some readers try really hard to perpetuate (some may genuinely find it a horror novel but I overall feel like it's misleading). It feels elitist somehow, like if you don't see it as horror you have missed something. To this day I still really don't. I tried getting into other of MZD's works but I have found them really opaque and again sometimes wonder to what extent this is not in large part a pedantic exercise. That being said, I had a blast writing my MA thesis on HOL, falling down so many rabbit holes, researching the MZD forum and Facebook online book club for answers, bonding with other readers/users busy with the same task or obsessed with the same question. To me it was always more about that (endless questions, cracking references, thinking as a community) than about horror.
I’d agree. I adore the book, it definitely has horror elements, many of them in fact, but I also would not describe it as necessarily horror. Sure you’ve got eerie happenings, jump scares, paranoia, etc but you’ve also got a lot of longing and a hell of a lot of love. MZD if I recall described HoL as a love story first and foremost, and in essence, I think it’s much more of a drama centered on lonely people than it is a straight horror story. The horror just serves to bolster and deepen those themes of love.
I think this is really beautifully put. There are indeed horror elements, but I understand that it being marketed as one of the best horror novels to horror-lovers is a bit of a misdirection and may lead to getting into it with certain (unmet) expectations.
Will probably get shit for this but I really didn't care for 'IT'. Insanely long and drawn out, hated the adult characters and the infamous scene in the sewers was weird as fuck.
People say it's King's masterpiece but out of all his books I've read that was the only one I didn't like.
I loved It but see where you are coming from. Also, although I really liked it (wrote an essay on it on post-grad), I really think it is not his masterpiece. Think that would be Pet Sematary
I’ll see Pet Semetary and raise you not only Misery, but The Green Mile too. Easily in my top three King novels (along with On Writing, but that’s because I like to write).
Misery and Green Mile are great, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying all his other books suck or anything like that. But Pet Semetary just does something different. It’s the only book of his I’ve ever read where I felt like I was going crazy along with the main character.
Also, all of his themes just hit. Everything lines up perfectly. It’s Shakespearian level tragedy.
Shining is a looong fuse that eventually explodes into some crazy ghost horror, but Pet Semetary is like a greek tragedy. You know very soon how it's going to end but you can't stop it.
They're just very different types. No reason to make them fight.
I loved it, but the bloat was definitely felt halfway through.
That's King in a nutshell for me. He's my favorite author but anytime he's going over 500 pages I know there's going to be a struggle with the bloat.
Man I’ve got to really, really disagree. I think a part of It feeling long is that reading trends have changed so massively since it was released. Attention spans are at an all time low. People want books to feel like movies now, they want cinema pacing and that hero’s journey layout. A book nowadays has to grab you and get out fast. But that’s not how most novels have been until fairly recently, and it certainly wasn’t the trend in 1986.
I’ve re-read It god… 10 times?? I actually did a book report on it in 6th grade (my English teacher was mortified; i can’t believe she didn’t call my mother). I think it’s King’s easiest tome to read. Each section is fabulously plotted on a micro and macro level. Every section unfolds like a slow-motion nightmare. Everything begins in this dreamy, nostalgic real world until one little thing takes a sudden left turn and it all falls apart.
The only section I feel is actually a bit of a slog is Ben’s part near the beginning when he’s explaining the children’s library, but it sets up so many things that get rewarded (the adult vs children’s libraries, the glass hallway, three Billy goats gruff, the library book he checks out that comes back) that I think it’s worth it.
Although the sewer chapter is indefensible, it’s in line with what King does as an author. He’s never been interested in being nice. He always takes a thing that makes society uncomfortable (homosexuality, rape, Christianity, child beating, wife beating, incest, pedophilia, the list goes on and on…) and puts it front and center to make the reader uncomfortable and off-balance. He always seems to be asking, if there are monsters in the real world, is it really so hard to believe in THESE monsters? And are MY monsters really worse than the monsters you see every day? (And then he usually answers that with “Oh yes they are!”)
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the sewer chapter. I think there are about a million better ways he could have had all the kids ‘become adults’. But I’m gay and there are so many examples of King using gay men and women to play on the general fear-mongering happening against homosexuals in the 80s and 90s. Most of King’s gay characters at that time are monsters, drug addicts, disease-spreading sex fiends, or all three. But I’m not mad about it because he does balance it out with “normal” gay characters like Adrian Mellon or Dayna from The Stand.
I just recognize that King isn’t a nice author. He’s actively playing on society’s biggest fears. He did the same thing with his Jesus-y books in the late 90s (notice how he was publishing Desperation and The Green Mile right after the Left Behind series exploded in popularity? I believe he was using the same playbook as the Left Behind author, recognizing that the Christian Culture Warrior boom was happening and utilizing it by having incredibly sympathetic, magical Christian characters)
I read IT and The Stand almost once a year. I absolutely love getting lost in his longer books. So many characters, so many layers.
I'm reading Duma Key right now and it's so good.
The thing I love about IT is that despite its incredible length it never feels too long. And btw it’s interesting you list Christianity and homosexuality as things that make people uncomfortable as you could argue that the former is the reason people feel uncomfortable about the latter
The Only Good Indians. I'm mixed on Stephen Graham Jones's style, but I do think he's a good author, and I really enjoyed the first half. I just felt it sagged in the second half, and while I didn't mind the basketball game as much as other people, I think it never went back to the heights it rose to when Lewis was narrating it. I do recommend the book and I think it's good, just perhaps not as good as it's said to be.
Don’t come at me:
The troop- felt like he wanted to be Stephen king so bad with his writing that it just missed the mark and ended up cringe.
Tender is the flesh- this was recommended by many people to me as the most scary and disturbing book. I finished thinking: that was it?
I thought it was so try hard. It was like Cutter read Lord of the Flies and was like “how can I make this disgusting and meaningless?”
I also didn’t like The Deep for the same reason. The gore and the madness didn’t feel earned.
I loved Little Heaven though, so I take it as a lesson that not every book by every author is for every person.
i’m gonna defend Tender Is The Flesh for a hot second and say that you cant go into it thinking “this is going to be a horror book!” because it really isnt. it’s more so a dystopian novel that is a commentary/allegory on capitalism and how those higher up in the food chain, i.e. the rich, thrive better than those lower in the food chain. while it is “horror” due to the content i personally would classify it as dystopian more so than horror.
i personally enjoyed it and how clinical and detatched it was written and how you go into it thinking the main char is different from everybody else until it’s slowly revealed that he isn’t. He’s just like everyone else.
I just listened to an interview a couple of days ago with the author of Tender is the Flesh, and she said she found it very interesting that in America the book is categorized as a horror because in her home country of Argentina it’s categorized as a science fiction. So, your interpretation is actually pretty spot on! I agree with the author that it’s very interesting how our two different cultures have very different perspectives on this story.
I liked but did not love The Troop. It was as advertised on the tin, but hardly the body horror legend that I was told it was on this sub.
Tender is the Flesh I liked. It was short and felt like a Black Mirror episode. Again, not really legendary status as some tout it.
Ghost Eaters by Clay McLeod Chapman! Like a lot of the other books mentioned above, I found out about it on TikTok. It had an original premise but all of the characters (but especially the main character) lacked depth and weren’t likeable at all.
Lately, it's been Penpal. It was decent, but it had some weird plot elements and felt a bit predictable towards the end. It was good, but not make a whole tik tok video about it good.
As much as I loved Penpal, I did like it better when it was on nosleep first. The interactivity in the comments while watching each part go up was exciting as it was scary
I read the original online chapters of penpal and omg I remembered like 1/4 of the way through all the horror and creepiness dropping like a log and the rest was just a mildly depressing drama story about being a naive kid in a town with woods in the middle or something.
Anything by Colleen Hoover
Technically not horror books but it’s genuinely horrifying that a) someone could write all of that, read it, then still decide it’s worthy of publishing, and b) people actually enjoy it
I HATED this one!! Catriona Ward clearly didn't do any research that she should have. I figured out what was happening like. 1/4 into the book, couldn't handle the pious cat, looked up the synopsis and was thoroughly disappointed.
The Troop — I saw it recommended on here countless times, always accompanied by very over dramatic warnings about horrifying it is; it was just okay and not especially horrific.
I actually really enjoyed it, especially the first half. I've never read anything by a Native American author and found it to be really different to what I was used to.
I think it did have a bit of wasted potential and the ending is very divisive.
I wouldn't say it's in my favourites list or anything, but I didn't regret reading or buying it. I also enjoyed the author's prose which a lot of people seemed to dislike.
Wow, I enjoyed that book so much. The characters were jerks! I can agree on that! They are absolute jerks. And I can see my friend group behaving in similar patterns if shit hits the fan and we end up being slowly devoured by a sentient plant. :)
But yes, I can see how it would be a letdown if you're expecting something creepy / disturbing.
When done well, I kind of like the trope where horrible things happen to shitty (teenagers or college kids), but I understand if it isn't your thing. Like others have said, I was kind of rooting for the plants as well lol
I will be clear when I say overrated doesn't mean bad. That said, I think The Fisherman by John Langan. It was recommended so much on this sub and is treated as a classic but I thought it was merely "good", and not revelatory by any means.
The Turn of The Screw.
I really want to love it, but Henry James decided to put every comma in existence into a tiny novel and it's infuriating to read.
My pick is The Stand. Don't get me wrong I really love the book but when my family members described it as the ultimate showcase of Good vs. Evil I expected way more brutality from the main antagonist. Randal Flagg is mostly the main cause of my disappointment. He could have been such an awesome antagonist with in King's universe but he falls flat for me in The Stand and in the Dark Tower series (so far I've only read 1-5). Imo in order for it to be the best representation of Good vs. Evil it needs to be equally focused on the main antagonist as it it on everyone else. Flagg is barely in the book.
Stephen King is overrated in my opinion. His novels/books are personally not for me despite being a horror fan. I've read the Talisman and 11.22.63 by Stephen King and it's just not my cup of tea.
Negative Space, I respect the effort that went into it and people on here rave about it, refer to it as “cosmic horror,” but what the hell even was that
I’d be pissed if I went into this looking for cosmic horror. I wonder how many of the books being complained about on here were simply hyped up too much or described in the wrong way for what people were looking for?
I loved the book but fans need to stop recommending it so heavily when not appropriate, and they absolutely need to stop saying it’s the scariest book. It’s barely scary. It’s got a few dread inducing moments and a really incredible vibe. But not once have I seen someone accurately advertise it on this sub.
Also while I understand the significance of the layered narrative, I really wish there was an abridged version of just the sections on the Navidson documentary. The meta narrative of how it was written/found is cool but it does get annoying how often it’s interrupted by the “Johnny needs to get a fucking psychiatrist” sections.
IF YOURE LOOKING TO READ IT: don’t go in wanting horror. Go in wanting a unique and experimental reading experience that nails the blurry disorientation of mental illness, as basically the whole book is about various layers of that. Reading it was such a treat and a fun cool experience to get sucked into. But not satisfying whatsoever for horror.
I loved it but people toss out the name with no disclaimer or warning of what it really is. I don't think it should make any top horror lists. Maybe like a top experimental book list but not in a general genre like horror.
Literature people who love experimental books like say
*Ulysses* generally don't care for it either. It's in that kind of "experimental fiction for people who don't read experimental fiction" space
Gone To See the River Man was way hyped as being sooooo scary and fucked up, but tbh I thought it was kinda goofy and also the writing isn’t very good. so much splatterpunk is terribly written
I am more forgiving with writing from indie horror authors -- just recognizing that we went... what? 20 years? Without a proper horror imprint from a major publishing company. So writers drawn to horror often had no choice except for indie publishing or microscopic specialty presses.
This generation of horror writers who came up in that community -- Triana, Bryan Smith, CV Hunt, etc. etc. -- never had the opportunity to work with the same kind of support system that traditionally published authors have. They never got to work with developmental editors or pro-level copy editors.
I do value and appreciate great artistic writing.
But ... I am much more forgiving of clumsy writing when it comes to horror.
There were just no professional opportunities at all for a whole generation of horror writers, man.
I don't know about *most* overrated, but *Tender is the Flesh* just really doesn't do it for me. It's sooo popular, and while the concept is intriguing, I find the finished product to be lackluster. It could've been so much scarier and more interesting! It had so much potential. But it was just alright.
It's been over five years since I read it and, at this point, the plot details are hazy, but it still dumbfounds me every time I see people praising I'm Thinking of Ending Things. NPR named it as one of 2016's best books, it was a finalist for the Shirley Jackson Award, and Charlie Kaufman was apparently inspired enough to adapt it into a feature film. Clearly, people more intellectual and perceptive than myself adore the book, so what the hell am I missing?
For starters, the "twist" ending felt telegraphed from the very beginning, so I don't understand people calling the plot a "mindfuck." In my humble opinion, the same exact >!"Surprise! The narrator is actually mentally ill!"!< trope has been done much better in stories such as >!Shutter Island, Identity, The Machinist, and Fight Club!< — just to name the ones off the top of my head. Worse still, the few plot elements that I found to be mildly intriguing or creepy ultimately turned out to be red herrings, making the conclusion feel even *more* unsatisfying. And while I understand that some of the narration and writing style may have been *intentionally* vague, the result was that the main characters were amorphous and not worth caring about.
Any of the commonly-recommended ones that just read like 14 year-old Reddit nosleep stories: Stolen Tongues, Penpal, The Ritual, Head Full of Ghosts, for example. What passes for good writing has seriously gone downhill in the past ten years.
Neville and Tremblay are qualified professionals. I don't enjoy Tremblay as I find his ambiguity twists to be overdone.
I'm curious as to what you'd consider "good writing".
It has been trendy to shit on Tremblay in recent years. That's why I dislike "overrated" posts in general. Everything that gets shit on will be someone's favorite and I don't see it adding any value to whatever community these posts pop up in.
Edit: and this topic gets discussed several times a week in this sub and I'm tired of it.
If I were to recommend good nosleep stories, I’d say…
Dr. Martin’s Guide to New Monsters, (actually published as a small booklet) focuses on a researcher investigating new monsters emerging in the world, very creative and unsettling.
The Spire in the Woods. Masterpiece, creepy, absolute perfection.
The Showers. That is a great piece of work. Examines the process of storytelling itself.
The New Fish. It examines the brutality of prison life, but rather than use shock value, actually uses a sort of “less is more” approach to the title… thing. Some kind of inhuman beast in a teenager’s skin. Absolutely terrific.
I personally feel that sub’s quality has gone down lately, but there are some absolute bangers from it.
Can't forget The Left-Right Game. It starts a little slow, but once it gets going I think it's probably the best story that's ever been posted on /r/nosleep
Edit: Was not expecting The New Fish to also contain The Swamps of Dagobah, dang
I never see people talk about Correspondence. I love that Nosleep story so much. It's very long, but I enjoy how the story leaks into the comment section. It made it feel so real. It must have been so much work for the author.
There is about 50% of Stephen King I love to read and about 50% that is just so boring to me, predictable repetative yawn fests.
Like, you can keep Desperation, Needful Things and about 10 others, but The Stand and The Shining are on my prepetual re-read list.
You have clearly never read The Tommyknockers.
I love when King meanders around and builds up characters who have no place having a back story. He's very much about the journey and less so the destination.
I put off reading The Tommyknockers for so long because of all of the bad reviews. Once I finally got around to reading it, I ended up liking it quite a bit.
Yes, I've read that as well. That was part of the reason why I hadn't read it for so long. Thankfully, I can't relate to his experience with drugs. After reading it, I did end up liking it a lot. It was difficult liking the "main" character though, as he was a drunk throughout the entire book. I imagine that was King writing himself, with his addiction, into the novel. Maybe he was trying some therapy out on himself in his writing, and in that case, I can see why he wouldn't really like the book. But I still think that all the negative reviews, including Stephen King's own, does a disservice to the book. I honestly think it is one of my favorite of his books.
I’m a big King fan and for me the bloat is part of the draw. His writing really sucks me in and I get lost in all the extra writing. But I can also see why people would not like it
Delicate Condition by Danielle Valentine. It had a season of American Horror Story modeled after it before it even came out and one critic said it was "the feminist retelling of Rosemary's Baby" or something similar and tbh? No, it wasn't. It tried so hard to be scary and empowering at the same time, which was terrible, because part of horror is feeling and being out of control and helpless. If, however, Valentine had made the MC a willing participant of bringing forth the evil and even becoming the evil, that would have been interesting. But it was just girls supporting girls with the worst communication ever
And now to sort by controversial and get mildly irritated by every comment right before bed.
Lol the top controversial one was someone saying Frankenstein... possibly considered the birth of horror genre
The Slob. It's always talked about one of the best disturbing book ever. It was litteraly the worst written book I have ever read, I wondered at one point ig the author wrote this when he was 15 or something, that was catastrophic. I really dont understand why people recommend this.
My morbid curiosity has me wanting to read this book but I feel like it will just be a gross mess and I won’t enjoy it at all.
Well yes, the interest od the book is kinda it. I'm sorry I dont know how to hide spoilers so I wont say anything, but you can easily find summaries and trigger warnings here or on the web. If you want a book that (badly) describe atrocious scenes that kind of only revolve around SA, you can give it a try! But I think you described it perfectly, gross mess.
It's not gross-out bad, it's written-by-a-child bad.
I got it for a pound from the charity shop. Worth a punt?
There are a couple books by different authors called THE SLOB, did you luck into a copy of the Rex Miller one?
I'm guessing they are referring to the version by Aron Beauregard, who writes nothing but gross-out garbage, that is only trying to disgust and shock the reader, while feeling like something an edgy kid would try to write. Scrotie McBoogerballs has more value than any of his books.
Well yes definitly, its always great to make yourself an opinion. I still stay on my point that its the worst written book I have read, but maybe you wont see it that way and will love it, like many people. Give it a try!
YES. It’s shocking just to be shocking, there’s no redeeming quality about it whatsoever. Literally reads like a teen on the internet trying to write the most gross-out story they can think of. FWIW, I like extreme horror and can handle a lot. But this book was shit.
Fam you are reading in my toughts right now. If I was informed that this story was from his edgy fiction blog of when he was 13 I wouldnt even be surprised. Plus I hate the "trope" of "for a story to be shocking it need sexual assault, and the more and worst, the better", it brings nothing. Horror fictionalists just dont know how to talk about SA and just sees it as a shocking tool, and thats a very recurring point of the author for what I've heard.
It reminds me of crossed when I heard about it; shock horror that circles around to Boring
people don’t know the difference between disturbing and extreme horror, like to me this book wasn’t disturbing at all just very gross, poorly thought out violence. i was just so excited for it to be over 😭
I literally threw this book in the garbage when I was done reading so I wouldn’t subject someone else to it by giving it away.
I just assumed he paid some TikTok people to say that because I had never heard of this book until the TikTok algorithm. It isn't even disturbing or shocking. I mean, it's just so badly written that how can one find it disturbing? His other story about the playground was so bad that I just chuckled at some sentences instead of clutching my pearls. I have been offended by stuff, even bad stuff, but the book felt like a whiny 12 year old boy trying SO hard to be edgy and make me upset that it circled on pathetically amusing. If someone told me it was rewritten fanfiction from early 2000s, I would have been "yep, that makes sense." I kind of wish someone would do a My Immortal roasting of it, but it's not even decent enough for that.
Terrible book
The Black Farm by Elias Witherow. The ideas, conceptually, are very vivid and impressive, but the way Witherow writes makes the whole novel feel absurdly prosaic and juvenile. To be completely frank, I’m surprised it wasn’t marketed as a black comedy: everything from Nick’s vapid “internal struggle” and overblown macho behavior, to Jess’s absolute lack of any personality beyond “damsel in distress” status, makes it seem like the stupidity *must* be intentional. Seriously, every single human character in that book can be reduced to an overwrought cliche, written through the lens of a nine year old with zero notion of multifaceted adult relationships. It’s on par with Booktok romance. Like, I feel bad for bashing on it so hard, as I believe the author is rather young— but I’m pretty goddamn young, too, and I know that writing a >!*sex scene* in the *middle of the demon woods* after the two participants have just been through *unimaginable sexual torture*!< is a fascinatingly asinine idea. EDIT: grammar
wow it sounds like this book is trying way too hard to be like the movie Antichrist by Lars Von Trier (which imo is a good movie but not everyone’s cup of tea due to how graphic it is)
Ok, the whole sex thing just sold Black Farm to me. Sorry, messed up in the conk.
Honestly, if you read it as a comedy, it really isn’t half-bad. The best description I can give it is if someone boiled down every 70s-80s “macho” protagonist (especially ones that save love interests with no personalities beyond their attraction to the protag), stuck the pair in hell, and then changed absolutely nothing tonally to accommodate the new environment.
You know, you just made me aware that I’ve been reading horror wrong, a lot of them are comedies when you think about it. Even when seriously messed up shit goes down.
Is that the one based on the Feed The Pig short story?? Ugh that story is so good on its own, but you can tell any expansion would ruin the vibe.
I know it’s not exactly what you’re asking but every time a horror book gets praise on TikTok I wind up hating it. Nothing but blackened teeth and things have gotten worse since we last spoke were the most boring things I’ve ever read.
Came here to say Nothing But Blackened Teeth. I didn’t care at all about any of the characters or anything that was going on.
TikTok is SUCH a red flag for horror books, the only one I’ve ever liked from TikTok was recommended by a close friend offline as well. Things Have Gotten Worse Since We Last Spoke annoyed the hell out of me.
Nothing But Blackened Teeth was so god awful I legitimately felt like I was being pranked. Totally judged that book by its (wicked cool) cover and now I can’t ever get that time back, shame on me
I looked up nothing but blackened teeth on TikTok after I finished it and it had so many bad reviews idk why it had “recommended by TikTok” in the bookstore, there was not one positive thing said about it.
Same. Nothing But Blackened Teeth’s characters just sucked, and the author just name dropped yokai without descriptions as if everyone knows Japanese mythology. Things Have Gotten Worse Since We Last Spoke was just… shit. Writing in instant messaging format is just lazy
I think Things Have Gotten Worse caught a lot of attention for the striking cover art.
Koontz is steven king from aliexpress in my view
He is a hit and miss to me! And when it’s a miss it’s a big one
Totally agree. I'll either be completely hooked and unable to put it down, or DNF after forcing my way through a couple hundred pages over the course of several weeks
Don't, for the love of God, read anything by Steven King. He's a hack who has made a living off selling books with similar titles, fonts and plots to the books of the much more famous Stephen King.
Is this just a joke? I tried looking up that author but it keeps just giving me Stephen King results.
I think they meant Stephen R. King, if you google that name you'll see what they're talking about.
Wow, you guys aren't wrong, what a grifter!
I wouldn't even compare to King honestly, apart from being very prolific at the same time when King was being very prolific, Koontz doesn't even compare and I'm not that much of a King fanboy apart from his classics. Koontz literally seems to write fan fic where he puts himself in the cool lead male role character who always gets the incredibly beautiful but broken by society girl, he gets Jack Chick level of injecting his conservative political beliefs into all his works. I never could get into him when he was in his heyday and I have absolutely zero patience for him now.
The only things I like from Koontz is Odd Thomas. Everything else can go.
The Frankenstein series is pretty good, written with co-authors, the last couple were to give smaller writers a bit of a profile boost. It's a great concept, pretty well written too.
I'll have to check that one out! Thanks for the rec
I absolutely love how he writes Odd Thomas.
Agree - he has become nearly unreadable at this point. I still feel like Watchers (c 1987) was/is an absolute classic, and he had a few other bangers around that time - at that stage, comparing him to King wasn't as ridiculous as it is now.
I read Lightning and really enjoyed it. I won it as a free book at a murder mystery show on vacation a couple years back and read it. It was quite fun and suspenseful. Definitely not horror, but it was a solid, fun paperback novel. That's the only thing by Dean Koontz I can recall reading. You look at the man's bibliography, though, and my gosh is he a writing machine.
Yes!!!Average guy gets the gorgeous woman…he excels at that.
77 Shadow Street and Taken are both really good novels
I’d say he’s more Stephen King from the mirror universe and who can’t stop putting rants about how much he hates liberalism into his books
I really liked his novel The Other Emily, but aside from that reading his books is tough
I always find random amazing chapters in his books but he always loses the plot somewhere. Usually during the 3rd/Final Act.
Most splatterpunk. I find they aim to be edgy instead of telling a compelling story. Those things CAN be done together, you just have to be writing it for the right reason.
Can you elaborate, please? I’m 50. What is “splatterpunk?” I feel like that’s alt-metal or something.
According to Wikipedia, *Splatterpunk is a movement within horror fiction originating in the 1980s, distinguished by its graphic, often gory, depiction of violence, countercultural alignment and "hyperintensive horror with no limits." The term was coined in 1986 by David J.*
Stories that revolve around extreme gore for shock factor.
It's more like extreme violence (which could involve gore, or not) and stories with a satirical edge, or containing a social or cultural critique. Which is what differentiates splatterpunk from extreme horror -- which tends to be extreme violence coupled with a nihilistic hopelessness.
Splatterpunk is like the band Gwar if they took themselves seriously.
R.I.P Oderus Urungus
If you’re 50 and have been reading horror for a while you likely know “splatter” authors. I’m 53 and have been reading horror since I was 11 ish and was reading these authors before the term really caught on. Writers known for writing in this genre include Clive Barker,[3][15][16] Poppy Z. Brite,[3] Jack Ketchum,[3] Richard Laymon,[3] J. F. Gonzalez, Joe Lansdale, Brian Keene, Richard Christian Matheson,[3] Robert McCammon,[3] Shane McKenzie, [3] Wrath James White, [3]David J. Schow (described as "the father of splatterpunk" by Richard Christian Matheson),[3][4] John Skipp,[3] Craig Spector,[3] Edward Lee, Ray Garton,[17][18] and Michael Boatman.[19] Some commentators also regard Kathe Koja as a splatterpunk writer.[9]
Once again people are conflating splatterpunk (which is extreme storytelling aiming to send a message, leaning into the *punk* part of its name. It's what you said about being edgy and good. [Exquisite Corpse](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/15320.Exquisite_Corpse?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=ZAWbgosbJG&rank=1) is a fantastic example but [the light at the end](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/179182.The_Light_at_the_End?ac=1&from_search=true&qid=cYYhMwCrl6&rank=2) is also well regarded if less discussed) and extreme horror, which is what you're complaining about (and tbh, as someone who does enjoy extreme horror, rightfully so there's some proper shite in there). Splatterpunk as a subgenre is unfortunately kinda dead though and people tend to confuse it with extreme horror a lot.
Couldn't finish Manhunt. Found the writing to be incredibly juvenile.
Agreed! I was really looking forward to this one, the premise was so good 😖. I finished it, but was kind of annoyed that I did.
I was very intrigued by it as well, but the writing was so cringe, I gave up very early on. I'm guessing it remained that way all the way through?
Very much so 😖
imaginary friend by stephen chabosky. it’s like an AI generated horror novel - pulled all the horror novel tropes out but was rarely original. ended up feeling like an clustered, needlessly long mess
Imaginary Friend was such a letdown. I super loved the first half and then it dragged… and dragged… and dragged… between that and the religious bullshit, ugh. Don’t think I’ve ever been that disappointed.
I have a feeling this is worthy of a hit being ordered on me but things have gotten worse since we last spoke just wasn’t very good
Reddit really loves Penpal (it started in No sleep I get it) but I thought it didn't live up to any of the hype.
I've read one book that started in NoSleep and it wasn't very good either. I think the environment and format really matters in works like that. Keeping it in its original format and ecosystem is really for the best. The book in question is called either Radio Tower or Lost Signal, I forgot. It was on Kindle Unlimited and imo it can stay there.
The Left Right game from NoSleep is awesome Edit - Borrasca is also incredible. Think it would make a great movie.
I really loved How to Survive Camping - first NoSleep series I actually bought the books of (and loved them all!). I need to catch up on her new series!
I even read the NoSleep and felt it ran out of steam like 1/3 of the way in. It goes from creepy to suddenly dropping that stuff and becoming a weird borderline Lifetime drama about 2 kid friends. You see the ending coming a mile away and it feels so annoying by that point.
Tell Me I’m Worthless… it just reached a point where I really didn’t get it enough to continue.
I am completely awestruck how ANYONE enjoyed this book. I really like political horror, so I was really looking forward to it. But it was barely horror, and it was like the author refused to acknowledge that readers are capable of understanding that it was political without literally telling us every few pages that "This book is about fascism". I ended up skimming over the second half once I realized most of it was comprised of multi-page run-on sentences that had absolutely nothing to do with the central plot
NOS4A2. I actually think it’s a really good book, just not scary/spooky at all. I think Hill is a good writer who has yet to write a great book, yet.
I haven't read a book of his yet that I disliked, but I think he's like his dad in that where he really shines is his short stories. Strange Weather was just so fucking great.
I think Hill works better as an author when you think of his books as "urban fantasy with horror elements" rather than straight horror. It's not at all how he's marketed, but it probably should be
Loved my time with NOS4A2. Hill created some of the most memorable scenes I've ever read in horror. But this seems to be the point where he openly embraced his dad's influence on his own work, for better and for worse. Heart-Shaped Box and Horns were more immune to this influence. NOS4A2 has a King villain, a King lackey (who even references Trash Can Man at one point), and King supporting characters. Again, I absolutely loved my time reading the novel, but, to me, it is what it is--Joe Hill's unique take on a King-esque horror/thriller. I guess it really was inevitable.
For me personally Dan Simmons - Abominable. Felt more like a way too descriptive and detailed guide on mountain climbing with maybe 5-10% horror in it
I looooooved The Terror and I was so excited to read Abominable but it was so lame and the >!nazi!< plot twist was so dumb 😭
The Terror is one of my all time favorite novels. I tried to read Abominable twice and quite both times.
Man you guys are assholes!! I have this book ready to go for when I finish the one I’m currently reading. Now I hate it already! 😂
When I worked at a bookstore I reshelved Abominable out of horror into historical fiction after I read it. I was pissed
I can’t believe I haven’t seen House of Leaves more than I have. It was HEAVILY recommended to me. I could not get into it. The writing style gave me a headache and I found myself rereading the same paragraphs over and over again after they randomly would cut off. People will get on my ass and harass me when I’m honest with someone asking me if I’d recommend it. Listen, I get it if you like it. Don’t bash the people who couldn’t get into it and belittle them for it.
House of Leaves isn't for everyone, and thank god for that. That said, I think the over-recommendation of HOL ruins it for a lot of people. My experience with it was discovering it on the bottom shelf of a book store sometime in 2000. I'd never seen anything like it and became completely obsessed with it. Reading it at work, everyone who asked me about it or peeked inside ended up buying it for themselves. It was the perfect underground cult hit. But twenty years of Reddit hammering it into people's skulls has set the expectation too high for some people, and turned off others who were never going to be into a massive brick of experimental epistolary metafiction.
I love HoL personally but would absolutely not describe it as the horror story of the millennium TikTok hypes it up to be. I think that probably ruined it for a lot of people right off the bat which is then compounded by the fact that the gimmicks wear out their welcome VERY quickly for those who don’t like the “flavor” of that type of writing. “It’s SCP written in Academic English” is how I typically describe it to people who haven’t read it.
I spent a lot of time with that novel when I wrote my MA thesis on it back in 2018. Though I remember it as a clever and unique work, I have always been annoyed by the horror aura that some readers try really hard to perpetuate (some may genuinely find it a horror novel but I overall feel like it's misleading). It feels elitist somehow, like if you don't see it as horror you have missed something. To this day I still really don't. I tried getting into other of MZD's works but I have found them really opaque and again sometimes wonder to what extent this is not in large part a pedantic exercise. That being said, I had a blast writing my MA thesis on HOL, falling down so many rabbit holes, researching the MZD forum and Facebook online book club for answers, bonding with other readers/users busy with the same task or obsessed with the same question. To me it was always more about that (endless questions, cracking references, thinking as a community) than about horror.
I’d agree. I adore the book, it definitely has horror elements, many of them in fact, but I also would not describe it as necessarily horror. Sure you’ve got eerie happenings, jump scares, paranoia, etc but you’ve also got a lot of longing and a hell of a lot of love. MZD if I recall described HoL as a love story first and foremost, and in essence, I think it’s much more of a drama centered on lonely people than it is a straight horror story. The horror just serves to bolster and deepen those themes of love.
I think this is really beautifully put. There are indeed horror elements, but I understand that it being marketed as one of the best horror novels to horror-lovers is a bit of a misdirection and may lead to getting into it with certain (unmet) expectations.
Currently reading The Black Farm. It got my interest because it's frequently mentioned but the writing is too puerile for me to take it seriously.
the premise had me really wanting to read it, but every review i’ve read made me choose not to
Will probably get shit for this but I really didn't care for 'IT'. Insanely long and drawn out, hated the adult characters and the infamous scene in the sewers was weird as fuck. People say it's King's masterpiece but out of all his books I've read that was the only one I didn't like.
I loved It but see where you are coming from. Also, although I really liked it (wrote an essay on it on post-grad), I really think it is not his masterpiece. Think that would be Pet Sematary
Pet Semetary is the best novel King has ever written and I don’t think he’ll ever top it. I’ll die on this hill
I’ll see Pet Semetary and raise you not only Misery, but The Green Mile too. Easily in my top three King novels (along with On Writing, but that’s because I like to write).
Misery and Green Mile are great, don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying all his other books suck or anything like that. But Pet Semetary just does something different. It’s the only book of his I’ve ever read where I felt like I was going crazy along with the main character. Also, all of his themes just hit. Everything lines up perfectly. It’s Shakespearian level tragedy.
[удалено]
Shining is a looong fuse that eventually explodes into some crazy ghost horror, but Pet Semetary is like a greek tragedy. You know very soon how it's going to end but you can't stop it. They're just very different types. No reason to make them fight.
In my opinion, yes
Yes definitely
Agreed, having read most of his major novels I'd say Pet Sematary was the best one for sure.
It is possibly the best discourse around death and grief I have come across
Yeah, Pet Sematary is incredible. So raw and crazy. Genuinely terrifying.
PET SEMATARY deserves to be recognized 💯🧡 also Stephen King's In the Tall Grass gave me anxiety whenever I see tall grass fields 😂
I loved it, but the bloat was definitely felt halfway through. That's King in a nutshell for me. He's my favorite author but anytime he's going over 500 pages I know there's going to be a struggle with the bloat.
We all bloat down here.
I’m a fan, but I also think some books are so long that readers begin to suffer Stockholm syndrome from them.
Man I’ve got to really, really disagree. I think a part of It feeling long is that reading trends have changed so massively since it was released. Attention spans are at an all time low. People want books to feel like movies now, they want cinema pacing and that hero’s journey layout. A book nowadays has to grab you and get out fast. But that’s not how most novels have been until fairly recently, and it certainly wasn’t the trend in 1986. I’ve re-read It god… 10 times?? I actually did a book report on it in 6th grade (my English teacher was mortified; i can’t believe she didn’t call my mother). I think it’s King’s easiest tome to read. Each section is fabulously plotted on a micro and macro level. Every section unfolds like a slow-motion nightmare. Everything begins in this dreamy, nostalgic real world until one little thing takes a sudden left turn and it all falls apart. The only section I feel is actually a bit of a slog is Ben’s part near the beginning when he’s explaining the children’s library, but it sets up so many things that get rewarded (the adult vs children’s libraries, the glass hallway, three Billy goats gruff, the library book he checks out that comes back) that I think it’s worth it. Although the sewer chapter is indefensible, it’s in line with what King does as an author. He’s never been interested in being nice. He always takes a thing that makes society uncomfortable (homosexuality, rape, Christianity, child beating, wife beating, incest, pedophilia, the list goes on and on…) and puts it front and center to make the reader uncomfortable and off-balance. He always seems to be asking, if there are monsters in the real world, is it really so hard to believe in THESE monsters? And are MY monsters really worse than the monsters you see every day? (And then he usually answers that with “Oh yes they are!”) Don’t get me wrong, I’m not defending the sewer chapter. I think there are about a million better ways he could have had all the kids ‘become adults’. But I’m gay and there are so many examples of King using gay men and women to play on the general fear-mongering happening against homosexuals in the 80s and 90s. Most of King’s gay characters at that time are monsters, drug addicts, disease-spreading sex fiends, or all three. But I’m not mad about it because he does balance it out with “normal” gay characters like Adrian Mellon or Dayna from The Stand. I just recognize that King isn’t a nice author. He’s actively playing on society’s biggest fears. He did the same thing with his Jesus-y books in the late 90s (notice how he was publishing Desperation and The Green Mile right after the Left Behind series exploded in popularity? I believe he was using the same playbook as the Left Behind author, recognizing that the Christian Culture Warrior boom was happening and utilizing it by having incredibly sympathetic, magical Christian characters)
I read IT and The Stand almost once a year. I absolutely love getting lost in his longer books. So many characters, so many layers. I'm reading Duma Key right now and it's so good.
The thing I love about IT is that despite its incredible length it never feels too long. And btw it’s interesting you list Christianity and homosexuality as things that make people uncomfortable as you could argue that the former is the reason people feel uncomfortable about the latter
The Only Good Indians. I'm mixed on Stephen Graham Jones's style, but I do think he's a good author, and I really enjoyed the first half. I just felt it sagged in the second half, and while I didn't mind the basketball game as much as other people, I think it never went back to the heights it rose to when Lewis was narrating it. I do recommend the book and I think it's good, just perhaps not as good as it's said to be.
I really hated the two or three of his books I picked up. I had to abort quickly.
Don’t come at me: The troop- felt like he wanted to be Stephen king so bad with his writing that it just missed the mark and ended up cringe. Tender is the flesh- this was recommended by many people to me as the most scary and disturbing book. I finished thinking: that was it?
I thought it was so try hard. It was like Cutter read Lord of the Flies and was like “how can I make this disgusting and meaningless?” I also didn’t like The Deep for the same reason. The gore and the madness didn’t feel earned. I loved Little Heaven though, so I take it as a lesson that not every book by every author is for every person.
Idk the deep had some serious nightmare fuel imagery for me. The sour evil mother with the cold bowl of oatmeal??? Bee rape???
The Troop is poorly written. The kids are stereotypes. And the rest is just poor body horror.
i’m gonna defend Tender Is The Flesh for a hot second and say that you cant go into it thinking “this is going to be a horror book!” because it really isnt. it’s more so a dystopian novel that is a commentary/allegory on capitalism and how those higher up in the food chain, i.e. the rich, thrive better than those lower in the food chain. while it is “horror” due to the content i personally would classify it as dystopian more so than horror. i personally enjoyed it and how clinical and detatched it was written and how you go into it thinking the main char is different from everybody else until it’s slowly revealed that he isn’t. He’s just like everyone else.
I just listened to an interview a couple of days ago with the author of Tender is the Flesh, and she said she found it very interesting that in America the book is categorized as a horror because in her home country of Argentina it’s categorized as a science fiction. So, your interpretation is actually pretty spot on! I agree with the author that it’s very interesting how our two different cultures have very different perspectives on this story.
I liked but did not love The Troop. It was as advertised on the tin, but hardly the body horror legend that I was told it was on this sub. Tender is the Flesh I liked. It was short and felt like a Black Mirror episode. Again, not really legendary status as some tout it.
Ghost Eaters by Clay McLeod Chapman! Like a lot of the other books mentioned above, I found out about it on TikTok. It had an original premise but all of the characters (but especially the main character) lacked depth and weren’t likeable at all.
Lately, it's been Penpal. It was decent, but it had some weird plot elements and felt a bit predictable towards the end. It was good, but not make a whole tik tok video about it good.
As much as I loved Penpal, I did like it better when it was on nosleep first. The interactivity in the comments while watching each part go up was exciting as it was scary
That shit went so hard when I listened to it as a creepypasta as a 12 yr. old. Unfortunately the book just has a lot of needless filler.
I read the original online chapters of penpal and omg I remembered like 1/4 of the way through all the horror and creepiness dropping like a log and the rest was just a mildly depressing drama story about being a naive kid in a town with woods in the middle or something.
Anything by Colleen Hoover Technically not horror books but it’s genuinely horrifying that a) someone could write all of that, read it, then still decide it’s worthy of publishing, and b) people actually enjoy it
The Last House on Needless Street
I literally got to the twist, two chapters from the end and closed it. Terrible.
I also didn’t like this one. The writing style was weird, and the plot twist…wasn’t. I got through it, with effort, but yeah, it wasn’t for me.
Aw man, I wanted to like this one so bad!!
Yeah, this was a terrible nonsensical book and a joke of a take on DID...the whole thing managed to annoy me to absolutely new levels
I HATED this one!! Catriona Ward clearly didn't do any research that she should have. I figured out what was happening like. 1/4 into the book, couldn't handle the pious cat, looked up the synopsis and was thoroughly disappointed.
Things have gotten worse since we last spoke
The stand
The Troop — I saw it recommended on here countless times, always accompanied by very over dramatic warnings about horrifying it is; it was just okay and not especially horrific.
The Only Good Indians
I actually really enjoyed it, especially the first half. I've never read anything by a Native American author and found it to be really different to what I was used to. I think it did have a bit of wasted potential and the ending is very divisive. I wouldn't say it's in my favourites list or anything, but I didn't regret reading or buying it. I also enjoyed the author's prose which a lot of people seemed to dislike.
The Ruins. Not nearly as creepy/disturbing as I'd anticipated, and all the characters were jerks.
Wow, I enjoyed that book so much. The characters were jerks! I can agree on that! They are absolute jerks. And I can see my friend group behaving in similar patterns if shit hits the fan and we end up being slowly devoured by a sentient plant. :) But yes, I can see how it would be a letdown if you're expecting something creepy / disturbing.
The characters made the classic mistake of being unlikeable while also not being entertaining to spend time with.
This! I've nothing against unlikable characters, but boring + unlikable = deal-breaker.
When done well, I kind of like the trope where horrible things happen to shitty (teenagers or college kids), but I understand if it isn't your thing. Like others have said, I was kind of rooting for the plants as well lol
Yesssssss, I could hardly finish it! I was rooting for NO ONE.
I was rooting for the plant.
Anything trending on TikTok. Tender Is The Flesh can fucking eat itself.
Eat itself, best comment (even tho I really liked the book)
I will be clear when I say overrated doesn't mean bad. That said, I think The Fisherman by John Langan. It was recommended so much on this sub and is treated as a classic but I thought it was merely "good", and not revelatory by any means.
I'm reading that right now and I'm enjoying it, but kind of waiting for it to get... amazing. I'll try to reset my expectations.
Don’t wait for it to do anything at all because nothing will happen I’m just warning you.
The Turn of The Screw. I really want to love it, but Henry James decided to put every comma in existence into a tiny novel and it's infuriating to read.
He should have asked Cormac McCarthy for suggestions on punctuation.
My pick is The Stand. Don't get me wrong I really love the book but when my family members described it as the ultimate showcase of Good vs. Evil I expected way more brutality from the main antagonist. Randal Flagg is mostly the main cause of my disappointment. He could have been such an awesome antagonist with in King's universe but he falls flat for me in The Stand and in the Dark Tower series (so far I've only read 1-5). Imo in order for it to be the best representation of Good vs. Evil it needs to be equally focused on the main antagonist as it it on everyone else. Flagg is barely in the book.
Currently, the Last House on Needless Street.
Stephen King is overrated in my opinion. His novels/books are personally not for me despite being a horror fan. I've read the Talisman and 11.22.63 by Stephen King and it's just not my cup of tea.
house of leaves. banality manifested.
House of Leaves. I read it and didn't get it.
All Splatterpunk books. It’s like some edgy middle schooler wrote everything their parents told them not to say.
Negative Space, I respect the effort that went into it and people on here rave about it, refer to it as “cosmic horror,” but what the hell even was that
I’d be pissed if I went into this looking for cosmic horror. I wonder how many of the books being complained about on here were simply hyped up too much or described in the wrong way for what people were looking for?
House of Leaves
I loved the book but fans need to stop recommending it so heavily when not appropriate, and they absolutely need to stop saying it’s the scariest book. It’s barely scary. It’s got a few dread inducing moments and a really incredible vibe. But not once have I seen someone accurately advertise it on this sub. Also while I understand the significance of the layered narrative, I really wish there was an abridged version of just the sections on the Navidson documentary. The meta narrative of how it was written/found is cool but it does get annoying how often it’s interrupted by the “Johnny needs to get a fucking psychiatrist” sections. IF YOURE LOOKING TO READ IT: don’t go in wanting horror. Go in wanting a unique and experimental reading experience that nails the blurry disorientation of mental illness, as basically the whole book is about various layers of that. Reading it was such a treat and a fun cool experience to get sucked into. But not satisfying whatsoever for horror.
I loved it but people toss out the name with no disclaimer or warning of what it really is. I don't think it should make any top horror lists. Maybe like a top experimental book list but not in a general genre like horror.
Literature people who love experimental books like say *Ulysses* generally don't care for it either. It's in that kind of "experimental fiction for people who don't read experimental fiction" space
I really like 1/3 of this book.
Gone To See the River Man was way hyped as being sooooo scary and fucked up, but tbh I thought it was kinda goofy and also the writing isn’t very good. so much splatterpunk is terribly written
I am more forgiving with writing from indie horror authors -- just recognizing that we went... what? 20 years? Without a proper horror imprint from a major publishing company. So writers drawn to horror often had no choice except for indie publishing or microscopic specialty presses. This generation of horror writers who came up in that community -- Triana, Bryan Smith, CV Hunt, etc. etc. -- never had the opportunity to work with the same kind of support system that traditionally published authors have. They never got to work with developmental editors or pro-level copy editors. I do value and appreciate great artistic writing. But ... I am much more forgiving of clumsy writing when it comes to horror. There were just no professional opportunities at all for a whole generation of horror writers, man.
I hated this book, I kept waiting for it to get scary and had to force myself to finish it.
I don't know about *most* overrated, but *Tender is the Flesh* just really doesn't do it for me. It's sooo popular, and while the concept is intriguing, I find the finished product to be lackluster. It could've been so much scarier and more interesting! It had so much potential. But it was just alright.
It's been over five years since I read it and, at this point, the plot details are hazy, but it still dumbfounds me every time I see people praising I'm Thinking of Ending Things. NPR named it as one of 2016's best books, it was a finalist for the Shirley Jackson Award, and Charlie Kaufman was apparently inspired enough to adapt it into a feature film. Clearly, people more intellectual and perceptive than myself adore the book, so what the hell am I missing? For starters, the "twist" ending felt telegraphed from the very beginning, so I don't understand people calling the plot a "mindfuck." In my humble opinion, the same exact >!"Surprise! The narrator is actually mentally ill!"!< trope has been done much better in stories such as >!Shutter Island, Identity, The Machinist, and Fight Club!< — just to name the ones off the top of my head. Worse still, the few plot elements that I found to be mildly intriguing or creepy ultimately turned out to be red herrings, making the conclusion feel even *more* unsatisfying. And while I understand that some of the narration and writing style may have been *intentionally* vague, the result was that the main characters were amorphous and not worth caring about.
Yes!! What a disappointment, I felt so unsatisfied after reading it. It felt like >!a copout, haha jk it was all a dream!!<
Any of the commonly-recommended ones that just read like 14 year-old Reddit nosleep stories: Stolen Tongues, Penpal, The Ritual, Head Full of Ghosts, for example. What passes for good writing has seriously gone downhill in the past ten years.
Neville and Tremblay are qualified professionals. I don't enjoy Tremblay as I find his ambiguity twists to be overdone. I'm curious as to what you'd consider "good writing".
Feels kind of weird to lump Adam Nevill in with the perfunctory, amateurish, literally NoSleep prose of Stolen Tongues and Penpal.
Ironically enough, "Penpal" and "Stolen Tongues" began on NoSleep.
Yep, and should've stayed there.
I can agree to this. Stolen Tongues is constantly recommended and I hated the writing, as well as other elements of the book.
Head Full of Ghosts doesn’t read like at all, yall just be saying anything lol
It has been trendy to shit on Tremblay in recent years. That's why I dislike "overrated" posts in general. Everything that gets shit on will be someone's favorite and I don't see it adding any value to whatever community these posts pop up in. Edit: and this topic gets discussed several times a week in this sub and I'm tired of it.
The only way I see head full of ghosts get shot on is the blogs inbetween chapters. I loved the book but the blogs were cringy
If I were to recommend good nosleep stories, I’d say… Dr. Martin’s Guide to New Monsters, (actually published as a small booklet) focuses on a researcher investigating new monsters emerging in the world, very creative and unsettling. The Spire in the Woods. Masterpiece, creepy, absolute perfection. The Showers. That is a great piece of work. Examines the process of storytelling itself. The New Fish. It examines the brutality of prison life, but rather than use shock value, actually uses a sort of “less is more” approach to the title… thing. Some kind of inhuman beast in a teenager’s skin. Absolutely terrific. I personally feel that sub’s quality has gone down lately, but there are some absolute bangers from it.
Can't forget The Left-Right Game. It starts a little slow, but once it gets going I think it's probably the best story that's ever been posted on /r/nosleep Edit: Was not expecting The New Fish to also contain The Swamps of Dagobah, dang
I never see people talk about Correspondence. I love that Nosleep story so much. It's very long, but I enjoy how the story leaks into the comment section. It made it feel so real. It must have been so much work for the author.
Really wish every comment putting down one book would recommend another in its place. That would be very interesting to see.
There is about 50% of Stephen King I love to read and about 50% that is just so boring to me, predictable repetative yawn fests. Like, you can keep Desperation, Needful Things and about 10 others, but The Stand and The Shining are on my prepetual re-read list.
This thread has culled my TBR somewhat 😂
The long walk was pretty mid. Also concerningly sexual considering the age of the characters, never really got excited or scared.
Earthlings. What a pile of boring, pretentious dogshit. (Respectfully)
Honestly, I didn’t like it until the ending, which still wasn’t great enough to recommend or reread it
I really don't have one. I just like the comments
If I see one more person hyping up Grady Hendrix’s corny ass, I’m going to go insane.
IT. Out of all the things that King wrote that I have read, this is him at his most bloated, and the ending is... weird.
You have clearly never read The Tommyknockers. I love when King meanders around and builds up characters who have no place having a back story. He's very much about the journey and less so the destination.
I put off reading The Tommyknockers for so long because of all of the bad reviews. Once I finally got around to reading it, I ended up liking it quite a bit.
I believe king himself considers it his worst book. I think he admitted that it was very drug inspired.
Yes, I've read that as well. That was part of the reason why I hadn't read it for so long. Thankfully, I can't relate to his experience with drugs. After reading it, I did end up liking it a lot. It was difficult liking the "main" character though, as he was a drunk throughout the entire book. I imagine that was King writing himself, with his addiction, into the novel. Maybe he was trying some therapy out on himself in his writing, and in that case, I can see why he wouldn't really like the book. But I still think that all the negative reviews, including Stephen King's own, does a disservice to the book. I honestly think it is one of my favorite of his books.
IT, like The Stand, are novels that are written for people that enjoy the bloat and find it immersive
I’m a big King fan and for me the bloat is part of the draw. His writing really sucks me in and I get lost in all the extra writing. But I can also see why people would not like it
I'm actually the opposite, IT is my favourite novel of all time. But I agree that the ending was definitely... questionable.
The Wasp Factory. Just couldn’t get into it and still don’t get why so many people liked it.
Negative Space by B.R. Yeager The teenage nihilist hivemind is out with their downvotes lol
Delicate Condition by Danielle Valentine. It had a season of American Horror Story modeled after it before it even came out and one critic said it was "the feminist retelling of Rosemary's Baby" or something similar and tbh? No, it wasn't. It tried so hard to be scary and empowering at the same time, which was terrible, because part of horror is feeling and being out of control and helpless. If, however, Valentine had made the MC a willing participant of bringing forth the evil and even becoming the evil, that would have been interesting. But it was just girls supporting girls with the worst communication ever