What Would You Not Read Again?

I posted recently on our “Books and Brownies” gathering where we all shared books we enjoyed reading that had profoundly shaped our lives. I read a post today in Book Riot that proposed the opposite sort of gathering where they talked about “What Not to Read“. The idea was to get together to talk about at least one book they hated that they would try to talk others out of reading. The basic rules were to be ruthless toward the book but civil toward each other (some others present might like what you hate!). Needless to say, animated but enjoyable discussion among booklovers followed.

I’d love to hear what my readers would nominate as their worst books. If I get a list, I will do a future post. Include your reasons.

Mine would be Gabriel Garcia Marquez One Hundred Years of Solitude. Lots of people with the same name, the bizarre world of magical realism, and decadent sex, all of which seemed to go on interminably. But I gather it is supposed to be brilliant social commentary on Latin American history. Here is a link to my recent review.

My wife nominates George Eliot’s Mill on the Floss. In her words, “never read something where the person is getting paid by the word.”

So what are your nominees for “What Not to Read”?

Unfinished Books

In my post yesterday, I wrote about how I hate not finishing things. That’s true of the books I read. Most of the time, I finish the books I start, and most of the time, I don’t mind. I have to admit, (and I know some will think I’m crazy) Gabriel Garcia Marquez’ One Hundred Years of Solitude was one of those I was tempted to give up on! And it probably shows in my review!

Someone asked me recently about “when should they give up on a book?” I’m probably not a good person to ask but I’ll hazard a few thoughts and ask you for more.

1. If you are conscious of how bad the writing is and suffering through it, give it up. You wouldn’t drink a whole glass of milk that has gone bad, would you?

2. Sometimes, a worthwhile work can be mentally demanding and if we are tired, or distracted, or simply not used to reading such dense fare, we might want to set it aside for a time we are more alert, focused, or have developed our capacity for wading through close argument.

3. Maybe we are experimenting with a new genre, have gotten good recommendations and discover we really don’t like the writing. I set aside the writing of one science fiction writer even though I found some of his ideas fascinating simply because of the graphic descriptions of violence in his books that I didn’t care to have lingering in my head.

4. Then there are the books that were meant to be articles or pamphlets where there is nothing new after the first twenty pages and the rest is filler. Hopefully you didn’t shell your own good cash out on this.

5. Finally, there are books that may evoke an unhealthy mental and emotional response from us. Others may read the book and be impervious. But if you find yourself having nightmares, unhealthy sexual fantasies, or other inordinate responses–lay the book down! (We even found this true with a few “read aloud” books when our son was young, and we left these unfinished.)

What are some of the reasons you set aside a book and decide it is not worth finishing–at least for now?

Pet Peeves

In our book group this morning, all of us found ourselves wrestling with the tension of reading a work with worthwhile ideas that were elaborated both so densely and extensively that the reading was tedious.  So in a brief post, I will share five of my pet peeves with books:

1.  Authors who make the grasping of their ideas more difficult than need be with dense prose and complicated sentences.  If I can summarize their ideas simply, why can’t they, as the originator do so?

2.  Authors who use unnecessary jargon that may impress those of their own academic guild but leave everyone else thinking “what is s/he saying?”  I secretly wonder whether the members of the guild understand either.

3.  Books that should have been an article, where every chapter after the first is simply the effort to spin out an article length article into book length.

4.  Sidebars or other insertions into the text other than illustrations or figures necessary to the flow of the argument. I find these distract me from the argument.  Maybe that is the point–to distract me from an argument that isn’t very good.  Either that or this is material that seems somehow related but the author couldn’t figure out any other way to incorporate it into his/her argument.

5.  Books that purport to be making a serious argument for a disputed contention that fail to deal with the thoughtful objections to that anyone with a brain in their head would raise.

So those are some of my pet peeves.  What are yours?  To better writing!