# Authors You Dislike? Would you put Stephanie Meyer at #1?



## harrybarry (Jan 3, 2014)

Hi WF Authors/Readers,

I've been seeing a lot of great opinions on these boards and wanted to get the general take of the WF community regarding the authors you consider the worst when it comes to writing.

Can you believe Stephanie Meyer isn't #1 on the list:
http://www.ranker.com/crowdranked-list/the-lamest-authors-of-all-time

I would assume that her twilight series would place her at the very top. 

Do you all agree with that list?


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 3, 2014)

I dislike reading some books, but rarely feel judgemental about authors (although I don't think that's what you meant anyhow.)

Genres I don't like, I tend not to read, so I don't have a view on books that are that peculiar combination of popular and maligned, such as the Twilight series.

As I've said elsewhere, it strikes me that there are an awful lot more authors that have won awards than there are best selling authors, so it could be construed that the public are more discerning than the critics!

As regards authors, such as Stephanie Meyers, who have sold so many books, common sense would suggest they can write, and either we don't get it or we lack their talent. - Such books may not be literary masterpieces, but I dare say that they have entertained more readers than the sum total of every member of writingforum's books have done!


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 3, 2014)

Authors, in general, aren't "bad." (Or lame.) It's their work that's bad. That work can vary in quality. For instance, Anne Rice had a really nice bit of innovative work with her first couple of vampire books. But, the latest werewolf thing she cranked out? Terrible. That's just the way it goes.


----------



## Deleted member 49710 (Jan 3, 2014)

Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Just the worst.

Haven't read most of the people on that list.


----------



## popsprocket (Jan 3, 2014)

That list is pretty bad. It's popular-bashing. Plenty of the authors on it write a thousand times better than some of the worst stuff I've seen published, they're just big names that will stir up commenters by their inclusion.


----------



## luore (Jan 3, 2014)

I agree with Poppy. The people who made that garbage list are just jealous tools that are writing for a site that's so meaningless that none of those authors would even stoop so low to be interviewed by.


----------



## squidtender (Jan 3, 2014)

Wow. Some of them I really enjoy. Ken Follett? Really?


----------



## bookmasta (Jan 4, 2014)

There are books I don't like. I'm not too fond of Stephanie Meyer, but I respect her for what she's accomplished. I feel she has earned it. Beyond that, there aren't a lot of authors I dislike. I simply don't read their book if I don't like it and move on. Also, I fee like this list is blasphemous. Some of these authors I really enjoy. particularly Rick Riordan as he was one of my major y/a influences that led me to writing.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jan 4, 2014)

Can we talk about the fact that Hitler is #28. I dislike the Twilight books but I don't know if I would rate Stephanie Meyer above flogging Hitler. I would however consider putting Ann Coulter above him...


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 4, 2014)

Just took a look at the list, and laughed. - Amongst my favourite books are:

Battlefield Earth (L Ron Hubbard)

Angels & Demons (Dan Brown)

The Wheel of Time (Robert Jordan)

I wonder if those that have voted have done so from a position of knowledge, or prejudice.


----------



## J Anfinson (Jan 4, 2014)

Pidgeon84 said:


> Can we talk about the fact that Hitler is #28...



I thought that was funny, too. I mean really--people hate Hitler's book less than Dean Koontz? I know Koontz doesn't always knock them out of the park, (some of his books I love, others are real stinkers) but he's made more money and fans than 99% of us will.

I don't think there's any particular authors who's work I totally hate. But some of their books have been bad, imo. Stephen King comes to mind.

Edit: Let's add John Saul. Sometimes great, sometimes terrible.


----------



## Jeko (Jan 4, 2014)

Thank goodness Meyer isn't at the top; she isn't worth talking about. Anyone who bashes her is wasting their time.

But if people hate all the other authors, (inc. John the Evangelist - what?), then they must be some of the best, because a lot of people like them as well.

But this:



> Authors, in general, aren't "bad." (Or lame.) It's their work that's bad.



is spot-on. We shouldn't judge authors. Judge not, lest ye be judged.


----------



## ConnorCarolina (Jan 5, 2014)

James Patterson. I still don't see what the average reader sees in his work.


----------



## dale (Jan 5, 2014)

J Anfinson said:


> I thought that was funny, too. I mean really--people hate Hitler's book less than Dean Koontz? I know Koontz doesn't always knock them out of the park, (some of his books I love, others are real stinkers) but he's made more money and fans than 99% of us will.
> 
> I don't think there's any particular authors who's work I totally hate. But some of their books have been bad, imo. Stephen King comes to mind.
> 
> Edit: Let's add John Saul. Sometimes great, sometimes terrible.


i doubt many have actually sat down and read mein kampf. the list is just famous or popular people who have wrote books 
 that it's fashionable to hate on. i don't really like koontz or his writing much, but i also don't think he deserves to be on a "worst authors" list. none of them i've read do.


----------



## Sam (Jan 5, 2014)

Tom Clancy. 

Seriously? The first seven books of the Jack Ryan series are as exceptional a set of thrillers as you could ever hope to read.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jan 5, 2014)

Sam said:


> Tom Clancy.
> 
> Seriously? The first seven books of the Jack Ryan series are as exceptional a set of thrillers as you could ever hope to read.



Lol It's just people hating the mainstream. There's no way Dan Brown should be on that list. It's why Stephanie Meyer is on it. And I'm surprised by the absence of one or two others.


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jan 5, 2014)

Sam said:


> Tom Clancy.
> 
> Seriously? The first seven books of the Jack Ryan series are as exceptional a set of thrillers as you could ever hope to read.



Lol It's just people hating the mainstream. There's no way Dan Brown should be on that list. It's why Stephanie Meyer is on it. And I'm surprised by the absence of one or two others.


----------



## SqualidMisnomer (Jan 5, 2014)

Pidgeon84 said:


> Lol It's just people hating the mainstream. There's no way Dan Brown should be on that list. It's why Stephanie Meyer is on it. And I'm surprised by the absence of one or two others.


Yeah, the list is ridiculously biased and most likely uninformed...

Dan Brown, Ayn Rand and Adolf Hitler are, in my opinion, some of the best writers that I've read, and the popularity of their works contradict the list entirely.


----------



## dale (Jan 5, 2014)

SqualidMisnomer said:


> Yeah, the list is ridiculously biased and most likely uninformed...
> 
> Dan Brown, Ayn Rand and Adolf Hitler are, in my opinion, some of the best writers that I've read, and the popularity of their works contradict the list entirely.



those people wrote controversial books, though. that's why they made the list. the same with coulter and a couple others, to a lesser extent.
especially hitler. i think it would be hard to judge whether hitler was an actually good writer or not, unless you understood how to read german.
 because many times...the translation of books into different languages doesn't articulate the writer's true form as he/she wrote them in the original.


----------



## OliverGrey (Jan 8, 2014)

I think Stephen Hawking is the right answer.


----------



## dale (Jan 8, 2014)

OliverGrey said:


> I think Stephen Hawking is the right answer.



well, that's obvious. it's hard to right when you can't lift your arms.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 8, 2014)

The only author that disappointed me, when I could _see _he had ability, was Terry Brookes.

I enjoyed the Sword of Shannara, but as I read beyond (Elfstones I think) I had the unshakeable impression that is work was not... unique...


----------



## BobtailCon (Jan 8, 2014)

I like James Patterson....


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 8, 2014)

I have not read anyone on that list, but as someone said it is not the authors, it is what they write, the early Walter Scott is great for example, later when he was famous, paid by the word, knighted, and could sell anything, he wrote things I never finished, rare for me to give up.

Same with Kipling, his earlier stories are great, in later life when he was writing to try and impress a literary establishment he is still readable, but there was a definite decline of quality.


----------



## OliverGrey (Jan 8, 2014)

In all seriousness, this list, in my mind, has nothing to do with ability. The people on here are just big controversial writers. Stephanie Meyer, L. Ron Hubbard, Hitler, Ayn Rand. None of these people are on here because they're writing skills are particularly lacking. Except maybe James Paterson. I've heard his books aren't very good, but still I wouldn't vote for him because I haven't read any of his work.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 8, 2014)

I find myself disagreeing with everyone on this thread. The logic, rationale and the comparative paradigm is just brutally skewed. Isn't it fairly safe to say that 99.9% of everything that reaches 'THE BEST' is generally going to suck like an anti-matter powered Shop-Vac? 

I mean c'mon...name any field where the best, top selling 100 of anything are also the 100 consistently giving quality work, time after time after time.Ok, Michael Jackson is / was one of the top selling Soul / Pop / Rythmn & Blues artists of all time - a freak, but the man had talent. He could sing, he could dance, wrote great, memorable, catchy and timeless tunes. 

Bieber, Madonna, Beyonce, Katy Perry, Lady KAKA, Rhianna, One Direction, Myley Cyrus, Selena Gomez, Pink .... hell even the Beatles and the Stones .... is anyone going to swear that this is just as good as it gets, that these artists consistently put out the best music on the planet and as such are rewarded with record (record) sales? They always put out / have put out only their best effort and would never release a song / album that wasn't up to the highest standard?

Oh, c'mon. Adversely, has Hemingway, McMurtry, McCarthy, Joyce, Poe, Shakespeare, Cervantes, Dickens, Twain, Austen, Faulkner, Tolstoy, Dumas or Dostoyevsky ever had a number 1 Bestseller?

My favorite restaurant Don Alfonso's (Traditional Spanish Cuisine) closed down. They opened up 15 new McDonalds.

25 Mom and Pop specialty boutiques were bulldozed under to make way for a new Walmart. 

Didn't Jethro Tull win as best Heavy Metal band at the Grammies one year? 
How about the Academy Awards? Tons of Hollywood tripe has won out over Foreign films year after year. Not to mention the ridiculous winner vs. nominees year after year. 

I'd say the list is right on the money (as far as those artists that I've read...which is most of them) They are all POPULAR AUTHORS which by definition doesn't necesarrily have anything to do with the number of books sold (although they do sell massive amounts) ... popular in this instance means conforming to the populace...ie: selling out to make a buck. Not rocking the boat, conforming, not being too controversial, following the trends, not taking any chances. 

Of the authors on the list there are only 4 that I have respect for and who I would read again.... (although they have disappointed horribly in the past on a few of their novels)Anne Rice Dean Koontz Tom Clancy Robert James Waller (writes mush but has an economy of prose unmatched by anyone I've read)The rest? Wouldn't pass gas in a windstorm for their best work.A writer could learn more from reading Cormac McCarthy's 'Blood Meridian' 100 times than by reading 100 novels by any and all of these HACKS. 

That said, I also dislike dissing.  These authors are free to write what they do just as Beiber is free to sing what he sings.  It's entertainment for the dull masses.  It just doesn't interest me in the least.  

David Gordon Burke


----------



## Bruno Spatola (Jan 8, 2014)

What an utterly pointless list of names. Is this what some people use their brains for? Without constructive comments backing it up, it just looks like a meek attempt to defame people they don't like. Is it just me? That's a colossal waste of time, right?

Ah well. I've only ever written lists of things that annoy me a little, like pet peeves, but mostly I make lists of things I love.


----------



## dale (Jan 8, 2014)

Gavrushka said:


> The only author that disappointed me, when I could _see _he had ability, was Terry Brookes.
> 
> I enjoyed the Sword of Shannara, but as I read beyond (Elfstones I think) I had the unshakeable impression that is work was not... unique...



mine was anne rice. i thought "the witching hour" was beautiful and beautifully written. she became garbage the more she progressed.


----------



## Jeko (Jan 8, 2014)

> The logic, rationale and the comparative paradigm is just brutally skewed. Isn't it fairly safe to say that 99.9% of everything that reaches 'THE BEST' is generally going to suck like an anti-matter powered Shop-Vac?



Depends what lens of literary criticism you adopt.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 8, 2014)

I may be wide of the mark, but when you're an amateur writer, it seems popular to dislike popular writers.


----------



## dale (Jan 8, 2014)

Gavrushka said:


> I may be wide of the mark, but when you're an amateur writer, it seems popular to dislike popular writers.



i think this goes for more than just writers. i think once anyone achieves any sense of notoriety, people will hate for reasons of envy.


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 8, 2014)

dale said:


> i think this goes for more than just writers. i think once anyone achieves any sense of notoriety, people will hate for reasons of envy.



I soooooo want to be hated sometime soon!


----------



## Carlton (Jan 8, 2014)

Do not get me wrong for I am a Stephen King junkie, but when it comes to a bad-awful novel, I elect *Cell* by King. What of waste of money/time. Yuk.

As far a novelist I would have to say *Neal Stephenson*. I can hear the eruption now, _Stephenson_? I recognize that the man is a fine American novelist yet his writing does not work for me. Sorry. 

(Stephenson reminds me_ (somewhat)_ of *Umberto Eco*; I am a hardcore Eco fan. Weird.)


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 8, 2014)

Nora Roberts is named on that list, which I find absurd. I've read her and she, in my opinion, writes exceptionally well. Well enough that her prose could be taught in a writing course as a prime example of how to wield Limited Third POV.

Her genre, Romance, gets smacked all the time by critics though, so it shouldn't come as a surprise. Nevermind the fact that she churns out nearly one novel every month—a feat that few other than James Patterson, with his co-writers, can manage.

I bet that those voting for that list haven't even read half the authors on there. *slaps forehead*


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 8, 2014)

Carlton said:


> Do not get me wrong for I am a Stephen King junkie, but when it comes to a bad-awful novel, I elect *Cell* by King. What of waste of money/time. Yuk.
> 
> As far a novelist I would have to say *Neal Stephenson*. I can hear the eruption now, _Stephenson_? I recognize that the man is a fine American novelist yet his writing does not work for me. Sorry.
> 
> (Stephenson reminds me_ (somewhat)_ of *Umberto Eco*; I am a hardcore Eco fan. Weird.)



Sacrilege! Stephenson is highly entertaining! Who else can take us through such an enjoyable ride, involving an MMO, kidnapping, money laundering, terrorists, survivalists, world travel, hacking and a hike through the mountains while dodging snipers!  ("Reamde" in case anyone was wondering.)

I do agree that King can write some stinkers, here and there. I'm not a fan of his stories, but I love his characters.


----------



## Carlton (Jan 8, 2014)

Morkonan said:


> I do agree that King can write some stinkers, here and there. I'm not a fan of his stories, but I love his characters.



Are you familiar with King's Dark Tower series?


----------



## Pidgeon84 (Jan 8, 2014)

Where's Orson Scott Card? I know he's a good writer but you would think such a homophobe would make the list.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 9, 2014)

dale said:


> mine was anne rice. i thought "the witching hour" was beautiful and beautifully written. she became garbage the more she progressed.



The Witching Hour was AMAZING.  One of the best I've read in the last twenty years.  (I read a lot)
The first four or five of the Vampire Chronicles were great too.   Then it started to get redundant.
Her series on Jesus Christ is just laughable though.  She lost me on the first page.

David Gordon Burke


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 9, 2014)

Pidgeon84 said:


> There's no way Dan Brown should be on that list.



I can think of two very good reasons Dan Brown should be on that list.
1.  The Lost Symbol
2. Inferno

Oh, and let's not forget the scene in Angels and Demons where the Protag falls out of a helicopter or gets pushed out of an airplane and plummets to earth, slowing his fall with a bed sheet or something.  Lands in the Ocean.  Survives.  Is up and running around within three pages.  It was like reading Wile E Coyote.  Please.

David Gordon Burke


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 9, 2014)

Carlton said:


> when it comes to a bad-awful novel, I elect *Cell* by King. What of waste of money/time. Yuk.



Don't even touch King's *The Plant.*  Unbelievably bad.

David Gordon Burke


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 9, 2014)

dale said:


> i think this goes for more than just writers. i think once anyone achieves any sense of notoriety, people will hate for reasons of envy.


I think your choice of words is contradicting your point.
no·to·ri·e·ty
ˌnōtəˈrīətē/
_noun_
noun: *notoriety*the state of being famous or well known for some bad quality or deed.  

But following your example that people will hate for reasons of envy, wouldn't the inverse also be true.  That the great majority of sheeple are so damned lazy that they will just LOVE anything that is popular?  

As a matter of fact, this has been proven.  We have it hard-wired into our brains to seek out celebrity, to nuzzle up to the popular, to accept the accepted.  
I am reminded of an episode of Boston Legal ... Alan Shore closes a case with comments about Monkeys who forego their favorite fruity beverage to gaze lovingly at a photo of their resident Chimp Celebrity.  

Hmmmmm.  Right there you have the Twilight phenom explained in less than 100 words.  Sheeple, Monkeys.  

David Gordon Burke


----------



## dale (Jan 9, 2014)

David Gordon Burke said:


> I think your choice of words is contradicting your point.
> no·to·ri·e·ty
> ˌnōtəˈrīətē/
> _noun_
> ...



but to a lot of "artists", mainstream popularity is a "bad deed" in itself.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 9, 2014)

dale said:


> but to a lot of "artists", mainstream popularity is a "bad deed" in itself.



Your "Quotation" marks around "Artists" are so apropo.  I don't feel that this thread has turned into the kind of whine fest that it could have.  I believe (hope, pray, have faith) that most writers here see writing as a creative passion and outlet before they see it as a cash cow.  If BTW a person was to see writing as a way to make a ton of cash, I'd advise to get a three peaked hat with little bells on the points and dance for the King.  Sheesh.


Would I (you, anyone), if given the choice between the kind of fame Cormac McCarthy has (All the Pretty Horses, No Country for Old Men, The Road etc.) and the kind of fame James Patterson has (Shite) choose to write in the style of the latter simply because his paycheck is bigger?  

If the answer is YES then you aren't a writer - you're a wordsmith ... you fashion words into money in the same way that a cook at McDonalds turns cows into cash.  A literary Strumpet.  A Published Puta.  

The simple fact of this conversation is that in this day and age, the only seemingly viable ambition is the one that eats your own integrity and destroys the planet along the way.  I'd rather sell 25,000 ebooks a year than sell one million hard copies, thank you very much.  

Could we maybe have a discussion on lesser known authors?  How about these guys.  As authors in traing, we would be wise to learn from the best, not the bestseller.

Yann Martel
Khaled Hosseini
Garth Stein
Charles Frazier
Dennis Lehane
Harlan Coben

David Gordon Burke


----------



## Gavrushka (Jan 9, 2014)

I think there is a lesson to be learned when we, who wish to have our words read, have views on what is good reading that is at odds with the wider public.

I think a good analogy would be a group of pompous amateur Thespians who'd never taint their craft by considering taking a television role in a soap opera.

IF we break our backs trying to distance our writing from the popular variety, doesn't that make us unpopular? Isn't the simpler truth that we just ain't good enough to produce work that the public want to read en masse, and we'd rather suggest we were being true to our art, than limited by our talent?


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 9, 2014)

David Gordon Burke said:


> Would I (you, anyone), if given the choice between the kind of fame Cormac McCarthy has (All the Pretty Horses, No Country for Old Men, The Road etc.) and the kind of fame James Patterson has (Shite) choose to write in the style of the latter simply because his paycheck is bigger?
> 
> If the answer is YES then you aren't a writer - you're a wordsmith ... you fashion words into money in the same way that a cook at McDonalds turns cows into cash.  A literary Strumpet.  A Published Puta.



It's all down to a matter of perspective. You prefer McCarthy over Patterson. Another person prefers Patterson over McCarthy. And so on, and so forth. 

I found this interesting, from an interview with James Patterson (since he's always being attacked for being the #1 author):

*Is storytelling what matters most to you?
*
Well, it’s one thing that matters. There are a lot of ways to write good books. You can have ‘The Corrections,’ which is very complicated sociology, or James Joyce, where the allusions and the writing are stunning. But my work is just pure storytelling. I don’t think there is anything to hate here, but I also don’t sit around feeling like I should take big bows. In terms of the number of memorable characters I’ve created, however, I think that’s pretty cool. The rest of it—it is what it is. I just don’t like it when people take cheap shots.

*But surely, those shots are part of your success?*

There’s that. I’m not a writer’s writer. I’m not a craftsman. I could be, and that would be a one-book-a-year operation… If I now said I was writing only one book this year, not 10, (my publishers) would have a heart attack.


----------



## Terry D (Jan 9, 2014)

As a reader there are a number of writers I avoid because I don't like their style, or their stories: Bentley Little and James Patterson top that list for me. As a writer who would love to make a living from my work, I don't hold that same judgement. I can't sit here and write that Patterson, or Meyer, or King, or Brown are bad writers. I may have issues with their style, or technique, but it obviously works. I'm not an artist, and fiction doesn't have to be art to be 'good', all it has to be is satisfying for the reader. Obviously all the 'brand name' writers fulfill that requirement. If I could hit on some schlock formula that would generate me a 10 million dollar book deal, I'd do it in a heartbeat, but that's where this whole idea of these supposedly "bad" writers breaks down. If their writing is so remedial, their storytelling so poor, then why aren't all the "good" writers beating them at their own game?


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 9, 2014)

Terry D said:


> If I could hit on some schlock formula that would generate me a 10 million dollar book deal, I'd do it in a heartbeat



Me, too, Terry. Me, too. 

We are such sell-outs! :grief:


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 9, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> Me, too, Terry. Me, too.
> 
> We are such sell-outs! :grief:



Could we combine our geniuses? 10 million split three ways would still be worth having.


----------



## Justin Rocket (Jan 10, 2014)

An artist's job is to sell his/her work.  One of the biggest attacks on art, today, is the NEA's grants.  It leads to shallow "art" like putting a cross in a jar of urine.

If I can find a way to be true to my personal beliefs and make millions of dollars, I'll do it.

That having been said, stories about teen girls falling in love with not-so-monstrous teen boys (in particular, teen boys who glitter) is not something I'm in the market for.


----------



## harrybarry (Jan 22, 2014)

Great discussion everyone. Can't believe so many responses to this thread. Also just noticed that 50 shades of Grey author El James was added to the list. lol I personally like her book.


----------



## Kyle R (Jan 22, 2014)

harrybarry said:


> Great discussion everyone. Can't believe so many responses to this thread. Also just noticed that 50 shades of Grey author El James was added to the list. lol I personally like her book.



The ironic thing about you liking _Fifty Shades of Grey_ and disliking _Twilight_ is that _Fifty Shades_ was originally written as fan fiction of _Twilight_, when E.L. James chose to write about Edward and Bella's behind-the-door moments. :shock:

When the story went to publication, _Edward Cullen_ was renamed to _Christian Grey_ and _Bella_ was renamed to _Anastasia_ to avoid copyright infringement.


----------



## J Anfinson (Jan 22, 2014)

KyleColorado said:


> The ironic thing about you liking _Fifty Shades of Grey_ and disliking _Twilight_ is that _Fifty Shades_ was originally written as fan fiction of _Twilight_, when E.L. James chose to write about Edward and Bella's behind-the-door moments. :shock:
> 
> When the story went to publication, _Edward Cullen_ was renamed to _Christian Grey_ and _Bella_ was renamed to _Anastasia_ to avoid copyright infringement.



Interesting. You learn something new every day.


----------



## David Gordon Burke (Jan 22, 2014)

Terry D said:


> As a reader there are a number of writers I avoid because I don't like their style, or their stories: Bentley Little and James Patterson top that list for me. As a writer who would love to make a living from my work, I don't hold that same judgement. I can't sit here and write that Patterson, or Meyer, or King, or Brown are bad writers. I may have issues with their style, or technique, but it obviously works. I'm not an artist, and fiction doesn't have to be art to be 'good', all it has to be is satisfying for the reader. Obviously all the 'brand name' writers fulfill that requirement. If I could hit on some schlock formula that would generate me a 10 million dollar book deal, I'd do it in a heartbeat, but that's where this whole idea of these supposedly "bad" writers breaks down. If their writing is so remedial, their storytelling so poor, then why aren't all the "good" writers beating them at their own game?



Ooooh Terry.  You are opening up a real can of worms with that conversation.  I'd have to say the answer to your final question would come down to a simple equation "Lack of Education + X Box + Reality TV + Sponge Bob = Bad Reader"  Dumbed down masses aren't likely to tackle anything in print that is more complex than the average episode of friends.  

Satisfaction and art are only relative terms if you grade on a curve.  Low expectation makes satisfaction easy.  
Why aren't the 'good' writers beating the hacks at their own game?  Because unlike those people who WOULD sell-out...they won't.  
Surely Cormac McCarthy could churn out a book every month.  But then he'd be James Patterson.  
Thomas Harris has only written 5 novels in his life.  (Genius every one)  

David Gordon Burke


----------



## GonneLights (Jan 22, 2014)

LMAO@Meyer being more hated than Hitler. That's... yeah. Mein Kampf was awful, anyway. I mean it isn't just 'I want to kill everyone' but it's like, 80 pages of bone-dry prose about growing up in a middle-class family, and that's as far as I got. Trying to read that book I was convinced that really it was _mein _kampf. 

I will choose another antisemitic & antiziganist nerd, though, for my #1. Mencius Moldbug 

Not only is Moldbug even more terrible a reactionary than Hitler (just, mercifully, without any political power), but his writing is just so _awful... __Ugh!_ And he has inspired a movement of equally terrible writers to take up their pen and defend scientific racism, eugenics, 'secular traditionalism', 'techno-commercialism', and other such... Nonsense. In a movement called the 'Dark Enlightenment'. Which you all must read up on for laughs & bad prose. 

As for Meyer - I mean, I don't _like _the works, and I find them dangerous (the way she romanticizes what is more or less abuse) - but... More than Lovecraft or Miller who's racism & antisemitism respectively is written off as a ~product of their time~, Meyer really _is _a product of her time, I think. And she has come out and admitted that these books are more or less her own fantasies about relationships. And... that's the very sad thing, to me. What Meyer thinks is a good relationship - a fantasy relationship! - is one this is blatantly abusive... And, that's... Very sad, and speaks a lot about the times we live in. So... I can't say a bad word about Meyer, I can't...


----------



## Deleted member 53128 (Jan 22, 2014)

Seems like this list you've posted was compiled by either people who don't read a lot, or people who are literary hipsters. A lot of those authors write either really good books, or mediocre books that are fun and easy to read so they're popular, but by no means don't write bad books. Even Hitler's position on the list should be considered; I've never actually read Mein Kampf myself, but for a person who made so good speeches I wouldn't imagine it's bad when considered solely as a literary work. Furthermore a lot of those people have written books that are guide books, mainly christian ones it seems. Those books shouldn't be listed on the same list as mainly entertainment (for lack of a better word) authors as a guide books content can't be considered by it's literary prowess but rather by it's usefulness and truthfulness.

IN ADDITION: I don't mind Stephanie Meyer's books, but I wish she never wrote them because of the popular image of a vampire is now a hot guy who sparkles in the sun.


----------



## Folcro (Jan 22, 2014)

Sam said:


> Tom Clancy.
> 
> Seriously? The first seven books of the Jack Ryan series are as exceptional a set of thrillers as you could ever hope to read.



I agree with many aspects of that list with the same exception as Sam. I think Clancy is (_was_... damn it) extraordinary. To have such wonderful and creative prose when most of your expertise comes from technical military knowledge puts him in the same category of wonderful as Chrichton. 

The only other thing with which I find myself in disagreement is that Patterson is as far back as 7. In my opinion, it is he who should be number one.


----------



## Morkonan (Jan 23, 2014)

Carlton said:


> Are you familiar with King's Dark Tower series?



Sorry I missed this. Yes, I read the first couple of books. I didn't like them. But, again, I love his characters and his ability to make each one of them interesting. But, there are few stories of his that I truly like. (I loved "The Stand" in its entirety.)


----------



## ToBeInspired (Jan 24, 2014)

It all depends on personal taste. If I read a genre that I'm not particularly interested in I'm less likely to admire the author.

I can believe Stephanie Meyer isn't #1. She has a large amount of fans. While her fantasy based themes are little silly, she does write a romantic teen novel well. There are far more ludicrous fantasy novels as well. Her "sparkling" vampires is nothing compared to some of what that has been put into print.

Most of my disliked authors come from free e-books. Bad grammar, punctuality, and virtually no sign of literacy in any form... that puts you on the dislike list. Bad writing seems to go there in principal, actually.


----------



## Folcro (Jan 24, 2014)

ToBeInspired said:


> She has a large amount of fans.



Probably the main reason she's so disliked. At least most bad writers get low sales.



ToBeInspired said:


> Bad grammar, punctuality, and virtually no sign of literacy in any form...



So... Stephanie Meyer?


----------



## Jeko (Jan 24, 2014)

> she does write a romantic teen novel well.



I know authors who write romantic teen novels well. Meyer is not one of them.


----------



## harrybarry (Jan 31, 2014)

Cadence said:


> I know authors who write romantic teen novels well. Meyer is not one of them.



LMAO. I'm laughing here at work where it's suppose to be quite. haha.


----------



## Justin Rocket (Jan 31, 2014)

I'm thinking I might put Tolkien at #1.  That's because ponderous opstipation and its affect on dramatic movement does not appeal to me.


----------



## Schrody (Jan 31, 2014)

It's not that I dislike authors, as I dislike their work. I mean, I think Catcher in the rye was boring, but I don't hate or dislike J. D. Sallinger :wink:


----------



## Jeko (Jan 31, 2014)

> It's not that I dislike authors, as I dislike their work. I mean, I think Catcher in the rye was boring, but I don't hate or dislike J. D. Sallinger :wink:



*like*


----------



## Schrody (Jan 31, 2014)

Cadence said:


> *like*



Many people do


----------



## alanmt (Jan 31, 2014)

I have difficulty with King's ability to tell 80% of an amazing story and then fizzle.

But my No.1 is easily Christopher Paolini


----------

