# Worst book ever (1 Viewer)



## NeutralGoodNormie (Oct 28, 2019)

Everyone on Writing Forums, what is *the absolute worst book you’ve ever read?* For me personally, that would go to _Empress Theresa_ by Norman Boutin.


----------



## Sir-KP (Oct 28, 2019)

May I humbly suggest that on top of stating which one is bad, explain why it is so in your view?

That would be helpful to many here that have just started or still learning the ropes.


I don't really read novels other than historical ones so I can't contribute one.


----------



## NeutralGoodNormie (Oct 28, 2019)

I bought the book awhile ago out of bile fascination. It’s a 400-page doorstopper filled with flat, boring characters, a protagonist who’s a blatant Mary Sue, a lack of “plot” to speak of, MASSIVE plotholes, various story elements that just don’t make sense, bad pacing, tons of grammatical and spelling errors, and so on, so forth. Below’s a link to a website that has the first few chapters:

http://empresstheresa.com/

Click the link if you don’t value your sanity.


----------



## BornForBurning (Oct 28, 2019)

Rapunzel Let Down by Regina Doman. My irl writing group reads this outloud and it always ends with everyone dissolving into confused laughter. The initial plot device is that the love interest is adopted by an evil feminist stepmother and kept locked in a tower because her mom hates men but also hates Hispanics and aboriginals for some reason even though the love interest is Hispanic. Then every negative stereotype the 'villain' has is confirmed when the main protagonist sneaks into the tower and has sex with the love interest while she is incapacitated in a bathtub. The stepmother is portrayed as being emotional and irrational for having a problem with this. Oh yes and the evil feminist stepmother is also trying to force her adopted daughter into a relationship with a teenage lesbian named _Minot_ (?????????) who at one point goes on a three-page long rant about the different colors and what kinds of sexuality they represent. There's also a gay pedophile gardener who cut off someone's finger and buried it in the garden. After the MC has definitely consensual sex with the love interest he meets her extended Hispanic family, who are _all illegal immigrants. _ALL OF THEM. Towards the end, the main protagonist is kidnapped by the gay pedophile gardener, wacky BDSM hijinks ensue. 
"At least you didn't pick dark blue, the most despicable of colors."


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 28, 2019)

The worst books ever are the ones that don't get finished.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 28, 2019)

NeutralGoodNormie said:


> Everyone on Writing Forums, what is *the absolute worst book you’ve ever read?* For me personally, that would go to _Empress Theresa_ by Norman Boutin.



Oh and I thought that name sounded familiar. Your hero was here.

https://www.writingforums.com/threads/137382-Empress-Theresa-it-s-on-Amazon-KINDLE?highlight=boutin


----------



## Sir-KP (Oct 29, 2019)

Well, that thread was fascinating to read at least.

lol


----------



## Terry D (Oct 29, 2019)

NeutralGoodNormie said:


> Everyone on Writing Forums, what is *the absolute worst book you’ve ever read?* For me personally, that would go to _Empress Theresa_ by Norman Boutin.



Norman is a former member of Writing Forums (don't blame us, please). He went by the user name of emperesstheresa. Doing a search for that user name will be more interesting than the book, I promise.


----------



## Amnesiac (Oct 29, 2019)

"The Unburied," by Charles Paliser. The "unfinished" would be a  better title. I read as much as I could stand, years ago, and finally just gave it to Goodwill. It just fell completely flat. There was no real character development, the story sagged and dragged, and I finally thought, "Why am I killing myself to read this?" So I stopped.

There was another novel and it was so lousy, I didn't get beyond the first chapter. The author was introducing the characters of a family, and wrote, "Her brother looked so handsome in his uniform, as he marched off to the Army." Uh... Uniforms are issued AFTER arriving for Boot, and soldiers learn Drill and Ceremony, (aka "marching") while they are _IN_ Boot. A little basic homework, or even just a ​casual conversation with a veteran would have prevented this kind of crap. That book, and I wish I could remember the title, went straight into the round file.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 29, 2019)

Excluding the self-published efforts by deluded fools (who I genuinely do feel sorry for and for whom ridiculing on a forum seems pointless and unkind) and sticking solely to products from major publishing houses that contain seasoned publishing professionals who should have (and almost certainly did) know better, I would say some of my 'worst' are:

- Twilight by Stephanie Meyer: Not necessarily unreadable prose, but an idiotic story by every measure. Infantile dialog, poorly-formed characters and a generally horrible message.

- The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown: A book built on dishonesty isn't necessarily the end of the world but the writing is extremely basic and often riddled with flaws that should have been caught, the characters limited, the entire premise - which is interesting from a thriller standpoint - the only reason to read it, and as mentioned that premise is dishonest, in the sense googling pretty much anything mentioned shows that this 'true story' is largely bullshit. Part of my animosity is I see this book as part of a wider problem in the world when it comes to spurious conspiracy 'theories'. It's essentially a religious-themed Pizzagate.

- Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand: Pseudo-intellectual gibberish with a nasty streak.

- Ulysses by James Joyce: Just plain gibberish. Claims that it furthered literature are unfounded. I don't believe anybody likes this book, they just pretend to.

- Rose Madder by Stephen King: I just really hate this book. I remember reading it as a teenager and it being a sort of lesson in disappointment. I would consider it a 'first' not so much in terms of bad writing but in how to really ass up a good beginning. The first couple of chapters are excellent. The premise is infectious. The book then pivots rapidly and the last half of it feels like a big 'fuck you'. I don't consider it a bad book so much as an offensive one.


----------



## J.T. Chris (Oct 29, 2019)

I found that book _Eragon_ to be pretty lackluster, but considering it was written by a fourteen-year old I'll give it a pass.


----------



## JJBuchholz (Oct 29, 2019)

There have been several, unfortunately. The worst book I have ever read is one I can't remember nowadays (a good thing, methinks), so I'll mention the second worst book I have read, which actually sits on my bookshelf.

The book is called, "The Stollenberg Legacy" by Brian Callison. In a nutshell, it's about a man who's roommate (and several others) are killed in pursuit of a lost cache of treasure that was hidden by a Nazi war criminal. The issues I have with the book are as follows:

1) Too many chapters in the middle of the book drag the story through the mud, slowing everything down significantly.
2) The protagonist is hard to like, as he just keeps stumbling from one issue to another without recourse.
3) There are a lot of characters that have their development cut short by an unsurprising death, and you can see it coming.
4) The build-up to the reveal of the antagonist's identity is wasted when the two suspects end up not being anything close
to the killer, and a third party is brought in.
5) Ending was predictable.

From a writer's point of view, this novel could have been over in half of what the author took to tell the story. Many chapters
are just boring, and drag on hopelessly. I only read the book until the end to see how it all concluded, and was disappointed.

It takes a LOT for me to dislike a book. This one made me almost despise it.

-JJB


----------



## velo (Oct 29, 2019)

Gotta be honest, The Gunslinger series from Stephen King.  

I've never regarded King as a good writer but he's a great storyteller.  I totally get that this was his _magnum opus_ intended to unify all of his stories into one macroverse.  

Of my many major dislikes of this series I think the biggest is kind of on me.  The opening line of the first book, "The man in black flad across the desert and the gunslinger followed." is maybe one of the, if not the, most evocative opening lines I've ever read.  BUT...that created some automatic expectations on my part and very quickly the disappointment set int.  

Just in case anyone hasn't read, I'll hide the potential spoilers...

[spoiler2="Potential Spoilers"]The female character with multiple personalities was terrible to read, as well.  I feel like he wrote it to be as offensive as possible and it worked.  I don't really get offended but this was way over the top gratuitous.  

I was hating the books by the end of the second but I trudged on hoping all the rave reviews were going to pan out...I had to quit when King himself showed up in the story.  What in the actual?  I dropped the series at that point and never returned.  Not read anything by King since and I doubt I will.


[/spoiler2]


----------



## velo (Oct 29, 2019)

Oooo....almost forgot...when I was a teen and totally engrossed in reading only scifi and fantasy I read the entire _Mission Earth_ series from L. Ron Hubbard.  I didn't like it even then but this was pre-internet and I didn't have access to a tonne of books....also there was a fair bit of graphic sex in it and as a teenaged boy....well, anything that talked about female body parts was about the best I could hope for in those days.  

I'm actually embarrassed to admit I read that even as a kid.  Total crap.


----------



## BornForBurning (Oct 29, 2019)

> L. Ron Hubbard


Hubbard is just really really not a good author. I tried reading _Battlefield Earth _and it was a slog. On paper, it's something I'd love but the characters are just awful. They are ridiculously flat. 'Cardboard' doesn't do it justice. It's one of those books where the hero does something purely because it's the typical 'heroic' thing to do and he's the hero so he's gotta do it. Everything is a cliche. _Everything. _It's sci-fi written by algorithm.


----------



## velo (Oct 29, 2019)

Same with the series I mentioned.  Even as a 15 year old I knew it was crap but I read the bloody thing.  

Hubbard was a whackaloon.


----------



## BadHouses (Oct 29, 2019)

The most frustrating professional thing I've ever read was King's "Delores Clairborne."  I also have a vague memory of hating a chapter about a dude farting uncontrollably in "Dreamcatcher."  Does that sound right?


----------



## Cephus (Oct 29, 2019)

velo said:


> Gotta be honest, The Gunslinger series from Stephen King.



I don't know if that's the worst but it was pretty bad. I had a friend who loved it and kept trying to get me to read it. She gave me her copy and I think I got through maybe 1/3 of the first book, then gave it back. It was just boring. I kept waiting for something to happen and it never did. And I used to like King, at least back in the 70s and early 80s. I was a big fan, until he got too big for his britches and people were afraid to tell him to get an editor. He's like J.K. Rowling in that regard. Thanks, but no thanks.


----------



## Squalid Glass (Oct 29, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> - Ulysses by James Joyce: Just plain gibberish. Claims that it furthered literature are unfounded. I don't believe anybody likes this book, they just pretend to.



Ya know ... I don't disagree.

For me, it's _Daniel Deronda _by George Eliot. Long and pointless.


----------



## JohnCalliganWrites (Oct 29, 2019)

I feel like on the 10 scale, a book I can read that far into but fail to finish is like a 6 out of 10. There is so much worse. Most of the stuff I've written comes to mind.


----------



## Annoying kid (Oct 30, 2019)

J.T. Chris said:


> I found that book _Eragon_ to be pretty lackluster, but considering it was written by a fourteen-year old I'll give it a pass.



He started it age 15 and Eldest was worse as barely anything happens. 
I think each sequel is progressively worse by default as the storytelling mistakes add up so it's nonsense built on nonsense.


----------



## Amnesiac (Oct 30, 2019)

I won't read anything by Stephen King, anymore. He's become formulaic. You can take most of his characters from any of his stories and plug them into any of his other stories with scarcely a hiccup. His early stuff was pretty cool. Now? Meh....

Orson Scott Card's, "Ender's Game" was good. Trying to dig more money out of everyone with sequel after sequel: Yeah, not so much.


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 30, 2019)

Amnesiac said:


> I won't read anything by Stephen King, anymore. He's become formulaic. You can take most of his characters from any of his stories and plug them into any of his other stories with scarcely a hiccup. His early stuff was pretty cool. Now? Meh....



I'm in two minds. He's still a 'good writer'. His stories remain highly readable and that's shown by the sales figures. There's nothing *wrong* with his books even now. They certainly aren't the worst (except Rose Madder, fuck that book). 

But...yeah, I agree. Reading a King book in 2019 feels like going to a craft brewery and buying a Bud Light or going to a world-class Chinese restaurant and ordering French Fries. It speaks to a certain lack of imagination on the part of the consumer, or at least a need for familiarity. I don't read much King these days, not because I don't like him, but because his stories simply don't reinvent. They used to. Books like Misery, Carrie, _The Stand_, Dolores Claiborne, The Shining...there was a time when these felt like real trailblazers. Even druggy bullshit like _Tommyknockers _and _Dreamcatcher _were full of imagination, if not good writing.

The most notable character change I recall from King's books over the last four years was in _Elevation _in which featured a not particularly interesting lesbian couple, to much excited prominence (their sexuality is literally mentioned in every synopsis and blurb, like it's equivalent to them having a superpower or something), and that was pretty much the only time I believe he has included any LGBTQ+ characters in his major novels. That felt slightly tokenistic anyway, but leaving aside any possible opportunism on King's part and/or pressure from his publisher to please-for-the-love-of-god-stop-framing-most-of-your-work-through-the-lens-of-middle-aged-hetero-Americans-its-2019-for-fucks-sake-Stephen-you've-been-doing-this-since-1975 it was just not _interesting_. A reluctance for an author to consider any reality much beyond their own is a problem for me. In 2019, King is STILL writing about Derry and Castle Fucking Rock. He is STILL writing more or less in the same style, using the same themes and stock characters and tropes or King-ism. He is STILL more often than not fixated in the same literary world he created forty years ago. Why is that? It's not like he has to worry about a publisher turning him down or anybody not buying his work or giving it at least a respectable review. If Fifty Shades Of Grey had Stephen King's name on the front cover I bet any money it would still be shortlisted for a Stoker Award. That's the level of adoration he enjoys.

The answer is because he doesn't want to, and doesn't need to. I suspect, at the end of the day, Stephen just doesn't have the interest in trying to progress his writing anymore. I don't blame him for that, the man is a great writer, has contributed a great deal to all of us. He is also in his seventies. But I'm not going to rush out to buy his new stuff anymore. There's just no point. I doubt even Stephen King would still be reading Stephen King at this point. It seems what makes an interesting character to King generally begins and ends with having somebody who is otherwise reasonably privileged be shown as psychologically, chemically, or physically tormented. Which is fine, but from a writer of his pedigree and prestige I would like more than just a smear of ketchup on my Award-Winning-Chinese-chef made French fries.


----------



## Amnesiac (Oct 30, 2019)

Perfectly stated, Lucky.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 31, 2019)

Maybe not the worst book I have ever come across, but it is up there with them. 'The guest cat' by Takashi Hiraide. I bought it because usually if someone bothers to translate a book it has something going for it, plus it says 'New York Times best seller' on the front cover. It is a rubbish translation, I would guess by a Japanese person that spoke some English rather than the other way round. It has Japanese style constructions and grammar. Plus it is really badly written, long descriptions of the local geography that simply left me feeling lost and don't appear to serve any purpose, for example.

I was going to say one of the worst books I had read, but it is so bad I gave up on chapter seven, page thirty, It does have short chapters. I can only think it is the literary equivalent of cat pictures on facebook, I see no other attraction.


----------



## seigfried007 (Oct 31, 2019)

Olly Buckle said:


> Maybe not the worst book I have ever come across, but it is up there with them. 'The guest cat' by Takashi Hiraide. I bought it because usually if someone bothers to translate a book it has something going for it, plus it says 'New York Times best seller' on the front cover. It is a rubbish translation, I would guess by a Japanese person that spoke some English rather than the other way round. It has Japanese style constructions and grammar. Plus it is really badly written, long descriptions of the local geography that simply left me feeling lost and don't appear to serve any purpose, for example.
> 
> I was going to say one of the worst books I had read, but it is so bad I gave up on chapter seven, page thirty, It does have short chapters. I can only think it is the literary equivalent of cat pictures on facebook, I see no other attraction.



(I wrote a 'just' in here, but decided against it 'cause I love ya   ) Was it the short chapters that made it the literary equivalent of cat pictures on facebook or something else?

My WIP has short chapters for a lot of reasons. Average chapter is 1.3K and four pages long (TNR 14pt, single-spaced). They're all between 500 words and 3K, but the vast majority are between 1.2-1.3K. I like to give the reader ample stopping points because the subject matter can get heavy, awkward, overwhelming; the story can switch gears quickly or otherwise change focus, and I like to give the reader a heads up. Plus, I'd set out to make it a serial release and wanted to keep all the chapters roughly the same length. I also like to title the chapters, and so short chapters gives me plenty more chapter headings to stick in.


----------



## Kyle R (Oct 31, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> I don't read much King these days, not because I don't like him, but because his stories simply don't reinvent.



I find myself wondering if such a fate awaits _all_ authors at a certain point. Perhaps it's after you've published 20 novels. Or 50. Or maybe it's closer to 100 (which is around where King is, currently).

At some point, maybe it's inevitable that a writer will finally settle into a creative rut, and everything that comes afterward will feel like "more of the same." (See: Nora Roberts, for example.)

Not that it's necessarily a bad thing. I'm sure some readers absolutely, 100% _want_ more of the same.

But I find it interesting to ponder, nonetheless. :-k


----------



## luckyscars (Oct 31, 2019)

Kyle R said:


> I find myself wondering if such a fate awaits _all_ authors at a certain point. Perhaps it's after you've published 20 novels. Or 50. Or maybe it's closer to 100 (which is around where King is, currently).
> 
> At some point, maybe it's inevitable that a writer will finally settle into a creative rut, and everything that comes afterward will feel like "more of the same." (See: Nora Roberts, for example.)
> 
> ...



It goes beyond writers, it’s more about the human condition I think.

My wife’s uncle was a professional artist based out of New York. He painted portraits. They’re pretty good, I mean, they’re portraits rich people commission of things like family members (especially graduation) pets, occasionally a celebrity, that sort of thing. They’re the kind of paintings that look more or less like photographs with some kind of blue-effect on, but they’re good and he would charge several thousand for a sitting. It wasn’t until he died that we found the collection of paintings he kept in storage from when he had studied in Florence as a young man. Those “secret” paintings were insanely good, much better than any of the portrait paintings, these were honesty the kind you could expect to see in a good modern art gallery. They were of all kinds of things, crazy psychedelic landscapes, Picasso-Style subversion, etc. They looked like art. I wondered why he stopped painting like that but the answer was obvious: He found a niche in dull portraits that paid well and that, presumably, he enjoyed. I don’t doubt that he did enjoy it, but I do doubt he found his paintings to be “art” as opposed to “work” in the end.

And that’s King in 2019 for me. Painting his high-value portraits, occasionally dabbling in a new fruity twist, but mostly on autopilot, writing the way an architect draws an apartment block. And yes it probably is inevitable. Desirable even, maybe.


----------



## BornForBurning (Oct 31, 2019)

> I find myself wondering if such a fate awaits all authors at a certain point. Perhaps it's after you've published 20 novels. Or 50. Or maybe it's closer to 100 (which is around where King is, currently).





> Not that it's necessarily a bad thing. I'm sure some readers absolutely, 100% _want more of the same._


I mean I can say that I rarely appreciate when an artist 'evolves' their style...Priest tried doing that in the late 80s and it sucked. Now they're in their sixties and producing stuff that sounds like a heavier version of what they were playing at their height and both me and the critics think it's great. Most artists are good at one thing. It's rare that you find people like Quorthon who can radically transform their style and still keep the fans happy. There was an interesting study that showed men tend to have creative slumps in their early 30s, which incidentally correlates with when criminals tend to reform. King evolving his writing might be even worse than him rehashing, who knows. As a writer myself, I can't really blame him for rehashing. I know I'm only really interested in telling a few specific types of stories, just like I only enjoy a few specific styles of music. 
Personally, my knowledge of King starts and ends with the IT tv movie. And my brother describing this one creepy scene in some book, I think it was called _Thankful Things_? Or something like that. But there was this old dude fantasizing about twisting a teenage girl's nipples until she cried. wtf


----------



## Terry D (Oct 31, 2019)

Kyle R said:


> I find myself wondering if such a fate awaits _all_ authors at a certain point. Perhaps it's after you've published 20 novels. Or 50. Or maybe it's closer to 100 (which is around where King is, currently).
> 
> At some point, maybe it's inevitable that a writer will finally settle into a creative rut, and everything that comes afterward will feel like "more of the same." (See: Nora Roberts, for example.)
> 
> ...



Off the top of my head I can think of one author who has managed to avoid this 'trap', Dan Simmons. Originally a horror writer -- and a damned good one (read Summer of Night, or Carrion Comfort for proof) -- he branched out into SF and won numerous awards, mystery fiction, historical fiction, and more.

Stephen King gets a bad rap precisely _because_ his style and content have evolved e.g. "I liked his early stuff, but..."


----------



## BornForBurning (Oct 31, 2019)

> Off the top of my head I can think of one author who has managed to avoid this 'trap', Dan Simmons. Originally a horror writer -- and a damned good one (read Summer of Night, or Carrion Comfort for proof) -- he branched out into SF and won numerous awards, mystery fiction, historical fiction, and more.


Ray Bradbury had a similar career evolution.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Oct 31, 2019)

seigfried007 said:


> (I wrote a 'just' in here, but decided against it 'cause I love ya   ) Was it the short chapters that made it the literary equivalent of cat pictures on facebook or something else?
> 
> My WIP has short chapters for a lot of reasons. Average chapter is 1.3K and four pages long (TNR 14pt, single-spaced). They're all between 500 words and 3K, but the vast majority are between 1.2-1.3K. I like to give the reader ample stopping points because the subject matter can get heavy, awkward, overwhelming; the story can switch gears quickly or otherwise change focus, and I like to give the reader a heads up. Plus, I'd set out to make it a serial release and wanted to keep all the chapters roughly the same length. I also like to title the chapters, and so short chapters gives me plenty more chapter headings to stick in.



The short chapters were one of the better things about it; no there was quite a lot of description of the cat and the cat playing that I think would appeal to 'cat lovers', but by chapter seven no actual story was emerging.


----------



## luckyscars (Nov 1, 2019)

Terry D said:


> Stephen King gets a bad rap precisely _because_ his style and content have evolved e.g. "I liked his early stuff, but..."



Evolution would, by definition, imply his style/content has become more complex or intricate. With a few notable exceptions, there's no way IMO King's work has become more challenging to either read or understand than his 80's/90's/early 2000's work. A good chunk of it has been a revisiting of his previous themes, devices, tropes, settings, sometimes even the same characters.

Telekinesis, for example,features prominently in Doctor Sleep, End of Watch and (so I hear, have not yet read it) The Institute. I struggle with describing an author who has deployed the same general device three times in seven years (having already used it numerous times throughout his earlier career) as having become more complex. Other reader's mileage may vary, of course.

But let's say it has evolved, I don't think that's necessarily behind the 'bad rap' for most people. It certainly isn't for me. Change isn't synonymous with evolution. My '97 Honda Accord has changed over the years, but its still the same car. Part of what makes me able to say I think King's work has become less interesting in recent years is because I don't dislike it. I still find it very readable and occasionally engaging. I just don't think it's particularly innovative genre fiction in the way it used to be and I don't really grasp how anybody but the most die-hard of fans can pretend otherwise.

It is obvious to me that the next SK novel _probably_ isn't going to be wildly different than the last one, or the five before it. It will probably still involve the standard setting (America, probably a small town, likely in the North East, quite possibly one of the _exact same _towns he has used before) and involve a roster of characters who, despite having some cosmetic differences (and inevitably a supernatural power or two), will mostly all come from the same sort of demographic and economic background as the characters present in most other King books.  It will probably have a white protagonist of a culturally Christian persuasion, most likely male, and with a distinctly WASP-y name (Hodges, Carey, Torrance, White, etc.). There is a better than 50% chance it will revolve around some kind of nasty crime. It will almost certainly be written in third-person past tense (possibly first-person if King is feeling jazzy) and follow more or less the standard structure for mainstream genre fiction. It will be marketed heavily, receive good reviews across the board, spend a few weeks on the Bestseller shelves, earn a modest "Oh yes that was good, isn't he good?" from most readers, before falling out of the public consciousness and into the supermarket clearance racks rather quickly. And that, in a nutshell, summarizes the bulk of King's writing in the 2010's.

There is nothing inherently wrong with any of this. In fact, the repetition (or consistency, if you like) is undoubtedly as much of a draw for those who love King keep reading him as they are the reason why people like me (who like him fine but also really like variety) are increasingly bored with King's relentless tendency to dress his dog in different outfits and pretend it isn't the same animal most every time. It definitely has nothing to do with the writing having 'evolved' beyond us, I promise.


----------



## Cephus (Nov 1, 2019)

Kyle R said:


> I find myself wondering if such a fate awaits _all_ authors at a certain point. Perhaps it's after you've published 20 novels. Or 50. Or maybe it's closer to 100 (which is around where King is, currently).
> 
> At some point, maybe it's inevitable that a writer will finally settle into a creative rut, and everything that comes afterward will feel like "more of the same." (See: Nora Roberts, for example.)
> 
> ...



I think King has reached the point in his career where he doesn't really have to try. He's made his name and now, no matter what he puts out, he's going to get read. He gets massive advances because his publisher knows he's going to get read. He just has to keep producing but he doesn't have to impress. He's also one of those writers who insists on shoving his personal politics into his books and that's the point where I stop reading, even if I did enjoy the books otherwise, which in King's case, I don't.


----------



## Cephus (Nov 1, 2019)

Terry D said:


> Stephen King gets a bad rap precisely _because_ his style and content have evolved e.g. "I liked his early stuff, but..."



Just because someone evolves doesn't mean they evolve in a positive direction.


----------



## Terry D (Nov 1, 2019)

King bashing has become a genre unto itself. King doesn't need me to defend his skills, the 30 or so literary awards he's won do that better than I can, not to mention winning the popular vote based on sales. Everyone is entitled to his, or her own opinion, naturally, but I enjoy King's work and, in my opinion, his work today is far different than his early stuff. Does he use the same trope occasionally? Sure, but so do most authors. Does he use it in the same way each time? Not at all. _Doctor Sleep_ was mentioned above, about the only aspect of that book which mirrors _The Shining_ is the main character. The situations and story-line are completely different. Anyone who can call _11/22/63_, _The Mr. Mercedes_ trilogy, _The Outsider_, or _The Institute_ derivative of anything else King has written, either hasn't read them, is a fool, or is a liar... IMO.


----------



## Amnesiac (Nov 1, 2019)

11.22.63 _was_​ pretty amazing. Credit where credit is due.


----------



## luckyscars (Nov 1, 2019)

Terry D said:


> King bashing has become a genre unto itself. King doesn't need me to defend his skills, the 30 or so literary awards he's won do that better than I can, not to mention winning the popular vote based on sales. Everyone is entitled to his, or her own opinion, naturally, but I enjoy King's work and, in my opinion, his work today is far different than his early stuff. Does he use the same trope occasionally? Sure, but so do most authors. Does he use it in the same way each time? Not at all. _Doctor Sleep_ was mentioned above, about the only aspect of that book which mirrors _The Shining_ is the main character. The situations and story-line are completely different. Anyone who can call _11/22/63_, _The Mr. Mercedes_ trilogy, _The Outsider_, or _The Institute_ derivative of anything else King has written, either hasn't read them, is a fool, or is a liar... IMO.



“Derivative” is the wrong word to use, because for something to be derivative it would have to be borrowing from a different writer’s work,  a different source. One book cannot be derivative of another if both are by the same writer, it doesn’t make sense. A better word would be “repetitive”.

Nobody is bashing King. It’s not bashing to point out the limitations of a book or writer, it’s criticism. I have defended King from any labeling of “worst book ever” already in this thread and am entitled to clarify that position in a manner that may be at odds with your opinion without ad hominem attacks. Let’s leave it there.


----------



## Terry D (Nov 1, 2019)

luckyscars said:


> “Derivative” is the wrong word to use, because for something to be derivative it would have to be borrowing from a different writer’s work,  a different source. One book cannot be derivative of another if both are by the same writer, it doesn’t make sense. A better word would be “repetitive”.
> 
> Nobody is bashing King. It’s not bashing to point out the limitations of a book or writer, it’s criticism. I have defended King from any labeling of “worst book ever” already in this thread and am entitled to clarify that position in a manner that may be at odds with your opinion without ad hominem attacks. Let’s leave it there.



Let's not. Since you admit to not having read King's recent work, and are basing your opinions on "what you hear", there was no "ad hominem attack" -- no 'attack' of any sort. I clearly stated that folks who believe the way you do may not have read his work, implying, therefore, that they don't have the data to make an informed argument. 

The description you shared of King's settings, characters, themes, and so forth could be made of Twain also, or Dickens, or Steinbeck, Faulkner, Hemingway, Angelou, Chandler, Christie, or almost any other author.


----------



## BornForBurning (Nov 1, 2019)

Okay you guys want a terrible book here's a real bad one: _Calculus, Early Transcendentals. _Zero plot, non-existent characters, and the prose often degenerates into seemingly random combinations of letters and numbers.


----------



## Tiger (Nov 1, 2019)

I don't know any worse books, give me some idea guys.


----------



## Cephus (Nov 1, 2019)

Terry D said:


> King bashing has become a genre unto itself. King doesn't need me to defend his skills, the 30 or so literary awards he's won do that better than I can, not to mention winning the popular vote based on sales. Everyone is entitled to his, or her own opinion, naturally, but I enjoy King's work and, in my opinion, his work today is far different than his early stuff. Does he use the same trope occasionally? Sure, but so do most authors. Does he use it in the same way each time? Not at all. _Doctor Sleep_ was mentioned above, about the only aspect of that book which mirrors _The Shining_ is the main character. The situations and story-line are completely different. Anyone who can call _11/22/63_, _The Mr. Mercedes_ trilogy, _The Outsider_, or _The Institute_ derivative of anything else King has written, either hasn't read them, is a fool, or is a liar... IMO.



No one is bashing anyone. Legitimate criticism is not bashing.


----------



## velo (Nov 1, 2019)

NeutralGoodNormie said:


> http://empresstheresa.com/
> 
> Click the link if you don’t value your sanity.



Wow oh wow...the amazon reviews are horrid.  Makes me scared to ever publish anything, LOL


----------



## NeutralGoodNormie (Nov 1, 2019)

velo said:


> Wow oh wow...the amazon reviews are horrid.  Makes me scared to ever publish anything, LOL


And ya know what’s funny? This book was how I got introduced to WF. Fredrik Knudsen did a YouTube video about _Empress Theresa_, and he mentioned his behavior on Writing Forums. Norman has clapped back at _EVERY SINGLE PERSON_ who’s criticized his book, even when they genuinely trying to help him. If I’m to say it myself, Norman deserved that permaban, and he’s also no longer able to directly respond to Amazon reviews either.


----------



## luckyscars (Nov 1, 2019)

Terry D said:


> Let's not. Since you admit to not having read King's recent work, and are basing your opinions on "what you hear", there was no "ad hominem attack" -- no 'attack' of any sort. I clearly stated that folks who believe the way you do may not have read his work, implying, therefore, that they don't have the data to make an informed argument.
> 
> The description you shared of King's settings, characters, themes, and so forth could be made of Twain also, or Dickens, or Steinbeck, Faulkner, Hemingway, Angelou, Chandler, Christie, or almost any other author.



I never said I hadn't read his recent work. I said I had not read _one_ of the books in the course of mentioning _three_. The other two I referred to I most certainly had read (in addition to the vast majority of King novels over the years) so perhaps you think I'm only two thirds a 'liar' or a 'fool'. 

Regardless, that language and tone is obviously inappropriate for this discussion, enough that I have zero interest in reading or responding to anything further you have to say.


----------



## luckyscars (Nov 2, 2019)

Tiger said:


> I don't know any worse books, give me some idea guys.



A lot of older YA novels are pretty terrible by modern standards. It's hard to treat them harshly, but the reality is a lot just haven't aged well and are fairly moronic compared to YA nowadays.

British author Enid Blyton was an author I discovered recently while researching my 1940's time travel book and couldn't quite believe was until quite recently (and possibly still is) hugely popular in England. It seems her books are riddled with racism, misogyny and just general 'cringe'. Reading those was like entering a time capsule. Objectively awful, though.


----------



## luckyscars (Nov 2, 2019)

NeutralGoodNormie said:


> And ya know what’s funny? This book was how I got introduced to WF. Fredrik Knudsen did a YouTube video about _Empress Theresa_, and he mentioned his behavior on Writing Forums. Norman has clapped back at _EVERY SINGLE PERSON_ who’s criticized his book, even when they genuinely trying to help him. If I’m to say it myself, Norman deserved that permaban, and he’s also no longer able to directly respond to Amazon reviews either.



(Sorry for the triple post)

I am fairly sure Norman is mentally ill. I don't _know _that of course, and mental illness is no excuse for being unpleasant beyond a reasonable point, but I tend to want to tread carefully with this stuff, when it comes to online personas that are so extreme in their lack of self-awareness and so inferior in their ability to engage. I remember thinking that even back when he was on here posting, which is why I never engaged. Sometimes the fruit hangs too low. I feel that way about Tommy Wiseau.

 I accept that its part of the inspiration for this thread and not necessarily malicious, but I don't know if it's worth spending a lot of time on. If he isn't mentally ill, I'm sure deep down he knows how foolish he is perceived. If he is mentally ill, we should be careful. This board is not, I believe, locked to public viewing and I'm pretty sure shows up on search results.


----------



## Umree (Nov 3, 2019)

Worst book so far? _Twentynine Palms _by Daniel Pyne. A bit of backstory:

I used to work in an eCommerce company and every day on my way home from work, I would pass by my local used bookstore. The bookstore is the only one in the immediate area and therefore gets a lot of foot traffic. As such, the owners are so overstocked by books that they have a free book bin outside the shop. I started shifting through the free bin every day to find things to read and discovered this gem of a book there.

Why is it bad?
Well, there are several formatting and story inconsistencies. For example, the first chapter is about 20+ pages long whereas chapter 4 is roughly 3 sentences. My guess is that the author was trying to create a suspenseful focal point, but that seems like such an amateur technique to me. Furthermore, there are sections wherein the actions of the characters simply make no sense. A bit further than halfway into the book, there is a scene where the MC must make a phone call. So, he asks one of the people he's with for a cellphone -- that makes sense. But then he takes the cellphone into a nearby phone booth to make the phone call and the description of this is so muddled that it makes it seem like he used the phone in the phone booth despite having the cellphone in hand. It's almost like the writer took a break mid-page and came back to it later having forgotten what he was writing about.

Pretty much all the characters are one-dimensional and the book is generally not suspenseful. I did have fun reading it though, I must admit. At the very least it was entertaining.


----------

