UKC

What do you think is the single worst book ever written?

I present:

http://www.amazon.com/Control-Christian-Marriages-Priesthood-Children/dp/14...

"Birth Control is Sinful in the Christian Marriages and also Robbing God of Priesthood Children!!"

Everything about this book is sublimely bad, from the front cover to the title, from the subject matter to the fact that the entire book is written in ALL CAPS. To sweeten the deal, the list price is $150 and it has an Amazon rank of almost ten million!

I challenge anyone to find any book as comprehensively bad as this one...

In reply to Only a hill:

It's got to be better than Catch 22 then.....

E

In reply to Only a hill: I like the first review

"My wife and I were actually quite impressed with this item. Between the two of us it took 9 days to finish and I must say I found it hard to get used to during the first few sittings, but gradualy became more comfortable as time went on.

Although neither of us paid too much attention to the content, the sheer volume and quality of the paper contained within was pleasantly suprizing. The paper feels crisp, heavy and tough, yet the pages seperate with just the slightest tug of a thumb and forefinger.

The only real controversy this book created for my wife and I was mostly my fault. You see after I finished the last page I was too lazy to replace the book with another and I left the empty cover sitting on top of the sistern. Let me tell you I copped a nagging!

Overall the item was an interesting change, but we found it a bit expensive and not as suitable as the regular stuff available at the supermarket. Together my wife and I have decided just to stick with normal sorbent two-ply rolls from now on, and would suggest others do the same. "

In reply to MG:
Some of the reviews are works of genius. I particularly liked "Perhaps this book itself is a form of birth control."

In reply to Only a hill:

Yeah, the reviews are up there with this:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Mountain-Three-Short-Sleeve/dp/B000NZW3JS

In reply to Only a hill:

The bible.

In reply to Only a hill:


Read it, have you?

Cradle by Arthur C. Clarke (with Gentry Lee, possibly), is pretty bad.

In reply to Only a hill:

Amateurs

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Penetrating-Wagners-Ring-Capo-Paperback/dp/03068043...

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Admittedly no, and I wouldn't usually pass judgement on a book without reading it, but I think this one is a special case

In reply to Only a hill: there are probably lots of worse books that I've never read, but the worst one I actually reached the end of is Lionel Shriver's 'Double Fault'. Boring plot, unsympathetic characters, dull writing - and the towering arrogance of a section of notes at the back from the author, instructing reading groups on what to think about it all and how to discuss it...

In reply to Only a hill: There's that one about a genuine someone or other, written by Alex something or other...

In reply to Only a hill:

This list has a few contenders: http://www.jest.com/article/164431/10-insane-self-published-books

I'm particularly intrigued by 'Latawnya, the Naughty Horse, Learns to say "No" to Drugs', which can be yours for the princely sum of £201 from Amazon.

In reply to Only a hill: the Bible ,

In reply to gd303uk:

Why?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

From the reviews:

"My girlfriend and I have often talked about how we could tackle the Ring, but neither of us were ever brave enough to take the plunge. It always seemed too daunting - many of our more flamboyant of friends had tried it, and said it just didn't do anything for them. Only once, after a few too many glasses of red wine did I surprise my girlfriend by slipping it in to our regular playlist, and this all ended in tears, and we were both left feeling very confused.

So imagine our delight when finally the door was opened to us by this fantastic book, and we could finally begin the beautiful (if at times harrowing) journey of penetrating such a tightly structured work. Not only had the author clearly been as nervous as us both in his earlier, less experienced years, but he used this experience to take us both by the hand (metaphorically of course!), and slowly guide us in, starting with the opening gentle movements, and moving to the deeply satisfying conclusion.

What's surprised us both is how this pleasure was not short lived. My girlfriend and I seem able to return to the ring again and again, and if anything it just gets more intense every time."

In reply to estivoautumnal:

Also, it's not a book in any conventional sense, except for its shape. It's a compendium of many books and writings of very variable quality. The best of it, in the King James version, ranks with the best writing in the English language. The worst is terrible.

In reply to estivoautumnal:

Because he thought it made a good soundbite or sounded controversial.

In reply to Only a hill: Hippopotamus by Steven Fry

In reply to Only a hill:

This is atrocious:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Todhra-Dennis-Gray/dp/0955015812

Reviewed (if that's the right word) here:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/gear/review.php?id=146

In reply to Only a hill:

First book that came to mind is this:
http://www.amazon.com/Bodys-Recollection-Being-Phenomenological-Deconstruct...

Complete drivel.

look at the images lol

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61%2BFYpF9e8L.jpg

In reply to Only a hill:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_%28book%29

This is the absolute worst kind of drivel.

In reply to DaveHK:

because its a shit book poorly written and translated,, nowhere near as good as lord of the rings or the amber spyglass etc. given a choice which would you read; any classic or the holy bible?

In reply to Only a hill:

This one looks crap.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/2009-2014-Outlook-Toilet-Seats-Greater/dp/B001T44Z0...

Some piece of James Joyce toss, I would imagine. Life's far too short...

In reply to David Gainor:

Agreed, I defy anybody to tell me they read and enjoyed Ulysses.

In reply to David Gainor:


Haha, I was going to suggest Ulysses , painful , but feared it would be considered too controversial to do so.

In reply to gd303uk:

The Holy Bible is a classic is it not?

In a choice between LOTR and the Bible I would probably take the Bible.

Even the film was better. Yul Brynner and Charlton Heston were both excellent.

In reply to Tom Last:

Interesting choice.

If this link works I suggest you read the review titled "The Secret saved my Life!", read it all. Just hope the link works.

http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Rhonda-Byrne/dp/1582701709

In reply to estivoautumnal: I admit the Heston bible movie is better than The Lord of the rings. Films, but not the book,, the bible is not a classic by a long shot, give me; the idiot or the whale any day over the bible even the house on pooh corner is a better read, and no one gets killed because of it, For that alone the others are better books as well as better reads.

In reply to gd303uk:

I'll stick with Calvino's definitions of what makes a classic.

In reply to Only a hill: I cannot finish Anna Karenina. I don' think it's the worst book, but I don't like it. pointless drivel.

In reply to estivoautumnal: good for you , would Calvino not like the idiot or the whale?

In reply to Only a hill: Can't believe Atlas Shrugged hasn't been mentioned yet.

In reply to gd303uk:

Don't know what he would have liked. It is a definition rather than a preference.

In reply to estivoautumnal: and from "his definitions" would you dismiss books like the idiot or the whale and consider them not to be classics?
. Does he do a list of definitions for films ?

In reply to gd303uk:

The only book I've dismissed is Lord of the Rings.

Only an idiot would dismiss the Idiot. Moby Dick is the most classic of classics.

In reply to Only a hill:

Perhaps predictably this has turned into 'books I don't like' rather than 'worst book ever'.

In reply to estivoautumnal: : shouldn't we all invent our own ideal library of our classics, consisting of books we have read and that have meant something to us, and books which we intend to read which we suppose might mean something to us, also leave a section of empty spaces for surprises and chance discoveries.
The bible gets a big swerve for me.

In reply to DaveHK:

Back on track.

http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/what-if-you-are-a-horse-in-human-form-jason...

In reply to gd303uk:

I have no intention of reading the Bible. It's a huge pile of guff. Just like LOTR. It is however a classic.

In reply to estivoautumnal: hehe, ok,
They are both classics in somebodies library just not ours,
The bible is the worst classic book ever written but the op book could give it a run for the money and maybe the Torah

In reply to Removed User:

Hehe, wasn't expecting that. Nice creative review, cheers!

In reply to Tom Last:

Neither was I when I first saw it.

In reply to Only a hill:

The Descent was the worst I've read for many a year

In reply to Only a hill: some sort of dan brown omnibus would rank highly

In reply to Only a hill:

I give you "The Rainbow Fish".

New Agey children's book you couldn't avoid in the 90s, main message was that you have to buy kindness and friendship.
CB

In reply to estivoautumnal:

I'm actually tempted to buy this...

In reply to ThunderCat:

I think it deals with some important issues.

In reply to ThunderCat:
Rein in your enthusiasm, you don't want to be saddled with crap book.

</coat>

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

Brilliant. I shall remember this for the next time I'm asked to review something so bad that words fail me!

In reply to Only a hill:

Anything by Jack Kerouac.

In reply to Only a hill:

About 15% of anything written by Ian McEwan. Specifically, the last 15% of each book. One day, I'll get round to rewriting the ending of at least Enduring Love and Amsterdam so that they don't lose their nerve and spoil the story.

In reply to Jonny2vests:

Brilliant!

In reply to Only a hill: The dictionary.

Started off with an aardvark, there was a murder..turned out this zebra did it.....first time he was mentioned in the whole book!

Total nonsense

In reply to Only a hill:

When I was a lot younger I could never decide whether Illuminatus! was the best or worst book I had read. Flashes of brilliance separated by chapter after chapter of utter drivel.

In reply to Only a hill:

No contest:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1LPA5YOND6TGD

In reply to estivoautumnal:

It's just like Dallas - he dies and then comes back to life.

In reply to davidbeynon:

Yes, I really wanted to like these books but as you say...

In reply to hoodmonkey:

Marvellous stuff! Is it bad that I now want to read this book out of morbid curiosity?

In reply to Only a hill:

"Of all the things to think, he never thought he'd think that."


I think I might have to read it too!

In reply to Only a hill:

"It infiltrated his lungs, filling them with a kind of innovativeness he had never felt before."

To be fair, although they got their vocabulary right, Arthur C. Clarke (and I think Gentry Lee) didn't do much better in the aforementioned "Cradle". And they were properly respected, and publishing via a "proper" publisher and so on....

In reply to gd303uk:

We could also invent our own ticklists of climbs which are ideal for us, meaningful and important days out. (In fact we all do.)

It still wouldn't alter the fact that Tophet Wall, Right Unconquerable, Pleasure Dome and Right Wall are amongst the all-time classics of British climbing.

In reply to seankenny:

You mean until someone comes along and tells us one or more of them are over-rated. Jessing aside, some people don't know their arse from their elbow in terms of quality which is why bookshops are full of shite and things like The Master and Margerita hardly get any publicity for decades. FFS some of the best selling books in recent times are a derivative s&m fanstasy dressed up as freeing women to be erotic and and a church conspiricy theory dressed up as being based on truth. Just open a page at random in those 'masterpieces' and read it out loud. I have no issue with such genre books per say but that they become major bestsellers is depressing. Should I tell Jackie Collins all is forgiven?

Reading "Transitions" at the moment... thank you Dave.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Know what you mean re: Amsterdam, I was ok with Enduring Love and Saturday.

And on that note: Mrs Smillas feeling for Snow - potentially great and then self-destructed in a major way.

In reply to butteredfrog:

really?

In reply to Offwidth:

Well yes!

I think of the posters who hate Catch 22 or Anna Karenina as the literary equivalent of people who find shoddy clip ups in grotty old quarries the highlight of the climbing experience.

In reply to seankenny:

I suspect most of them just think they are being funny, but they should really stick to the day job. The points on some of Mc'Ewan's books and especially Smilla hit a nerve though: still a bad ending doesn't a crap book make. Equally the fact that someone like Kerouak is over-rated doesn't make his work crap either. More mundanely in the 'ME' generation anything 'I' don't like MUST be rubbish.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Oh come on. He has a bit of problem in actually telling a story, but that's a minor point, they're great books. On Chesil Beach and Solar both end well I thought. Saturday is more in the Enduring Love mould.

In reply to Offwidth:

McEwan writes great chapters but less-good books. Agreed, Kerouac is over-rated, but still a good insight into a social movement whose way of life has gone from outsider to mainstream.

In reply to seankenny:

Sopt on.

Oh well, the 'ME's will be on everything 'I' like MUST be great on the other thread now.

In reply to Offwidth:

Catcher in the Rye.

Nothing happens, absolutely nothing.

it says nothing about youth and growing up. It says nothing about anything!

Ceratinly the most disapointing book, probably the worst as well.

In reply to Removed User:

There there dear, there's always Wilbur Smith or Dan Brown if you need a little action.




Perhaps it said it, but you were struggling to hear?

In reply to Only a hill:

I present you with these two works of 'Fiction':
http://www.amazon.co.uk/D.-W.-Cockburn/e/B0052XZO2O

Total and utter rubbish!

In reply to Removed User:

No pictures either, or stickers.

In reply to Only a hill:

Has anyone read anything by 'Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings'?

Apparently, it's supposed to be pretty bad.

In reply to seankenny:

What is you point? Is it that we can't invent our own library of classics as defined by Calvino?

In reply to Bulls Crack:

On the road isn't sparkling, in fact I nearly packed it in through shear boredom about half way through.

Ok maybe its because I'm dyslexic but the lack of punctuation just adds to the torture.

In response to another poster, Catch 22 is a great book.

In reply to butteredfrog:


Yeah, I guess it must be because people keep saying so. Maybe you had to be there.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

You would have to be insane to want be there so if you are complaining you must be sane and you have no excuse to leave. As the title says.

In reply to Only a hill:

The worst mountaineering book I've read is undoubtedly Neville Shulman's 'Zen explorations in remotest New Guinea'. Vanity publishing doesn't begin to cover it, this man's lack of self-awareness is almost hilarious. Almost. The amazon reviews are worth a read:

http://www.amazon.com/Zen-Explorations-Remotest-New-Guinea/dp/1840240059/re...

No idea how this guy gets published or how he gets big names to write flattering forewords. I can only imagine he is incredibly rich.

In reply to Only a hill:

The worst mountaineering book I've read is undoubtedly Neville Shulman's 'Zen explorations in remotest New Guinea'. Vanity publishing doesn't begin to cover it, this man's lack of self-awareness is almost hilarious. Almost. The amazon reviews are worth a read:

http://www.amazon.com/Zen-Explorations-Remotest-New-Guinea/dp/1840240059/re...

No idea how this guy gets published or how he gets big names to write flattering forewords. I can only imagine he is incredibly rich.

In reply to butteredfrog:

Well, each to their own. I read it in one sitting on a longish train journey and after a while I found that the prose syncopated to the rhythm of the train...which, whilst not a road trip..had resonance.

In reply to Offwidth:

You're welcome. Ingenious, I thought.

In reply to Only a hill:

One last plug for the review of this book.

http://www.amazon.com/Secret-Rhonda-Byrne/dp/1582701709

Trust me the review 'The Secret saved my life!' is worth reading. Just read it all.

In reply to Only a hill:

Depending on whether you are a fan of his,or not;

Morrisey's long awaited autobiography has hit the shells.

On the cover of one of the broadsheets Yeaterday ,I noticed the first line of a review ,which went along the lines of;

'Typical ,whining self pity.....'

In reply to Only a hill:

Shelves.not shells.

F*ck off IPad .

In reply to andymac:
Anything by Jim Perrin.
Pretentious git.

In reply to mattsccm:
Apologies.
Delete last word.
IMHO

In reply to mattsccm:

I have at some points found Perrin to be pretentious but when he's good he's good. I grew up as a climber with his 'On the Rock' column.

In reply to DaveN: Dan Brown: Digital Fortress. I tried, and tried, and tried. Then I realized it was taking minutes off my life and had to stop.

In reply to mattsccm:

"Anything by Jim Perrin.
Pretentious git."

Another colouring book and sticker fan? Give me pretention over trash anyday.

In reply to DaveHK:

I once wrote to him to accuse him of, as I recall, 'self-conscious sequipedalian neologism' in a guidebook review. And I thought he was pretentious!

'West' is a fine and moving book. Almost certainly his last, given the subject matter.

In reply to Only a hill: This is a fairly horrible book...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Secret_(book)

In reply to seankenny:

Well I certainly tried, I soldiered on through the whole book. Thinking it might buck up, but nothing.

Its not a lack of action, I thought Genration X was fantastic and little happens in that.

I guess I just found no way to relate to it. I supose more accurately I would say it was the worst highly rated (by other people) book ever written.

In reply to Removed User: Ha ha, just noticed I'm not the only one to mention this book. Obivously makes it the 'Worst Book Ever Written' (by democratic election).

In reply to Removed User:


Yeah I think that happens a lot.

I supose more accurately I would say it was the worst highly rated (by other people) book ever written.

Given your first statement, I wouldn't say it was "worst". Some stuff you just don't relate to. Doesn't mean it's bad, necessarily, just that you don't get it. Happens to everyone. I don't like Raymond Carver too much, I can appreciate that lots of people find him an amazing writer but his stuff just doesn't do it for me. That's different to "worst writer".

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

No. I never said it was one for the worst book ever written list. I can't make that statement as I've never read it, nor ever even seen one. Several years ago I was lucky enough to be alerted to the review that I have been encouraging people to read. It rates as one of the best reviews I've ever read. Read it all, and you'll see why I plugged it.

However at least people have said it was bad, and mentioned it by name, so yes perhaps it is the winner after all.

In reply to mattsccm: Fwiw I think Jim Perrin books are superb, Travels with the Flea and Portrait of Snowdonia are superb.Menlove is a stunning bio and the chapter in 'essays' where he talks about loss is so moving. Each to their own I suppose

In reply to Only a hill:

"What do you think is the single worst book ever written?"

I wouldn't know because I never read bad books

In reply to Only a hill: Basically any footballing auto biography.. I've read a few excellent ones, but many are just I ran, I scored.. Neville's and Schmeichels were good but both are very analytical, intelligent guys. Keanes was good for its raw honesty but again a basic account, so from a fan interesting but that was it.

Scholes was so poor it was untrue.. basically a picture book. Giggs's not great. I've read most over the years and most you can pick up and read in a day, easy reading but devoid of any thought or analysis.. just a raw account.

But most player's books are written too early, or too quickly with no thought, basically underlining their lack of intelligence. Rooney wrote his at 20 years of age.

Managers on the other hand, the Fergusons, Bobby Robsons, Jack Charlton write good books because they think about the game and give bigger picture stories.

I generally love reading autobiographies but rarely read a sporting one now, politicians or reporters (Simpsons was superb) are far more insightful and normally written at the right time, rather than to make a quick book on the back of fame..

In reply to Trangia:

really..

The other one was the God Delusion.. which I know will upset people. I just couldn't get into it. Awful. As a scientist I like evidence to be presented but with that I felt I was being told what to think..

And the last one 'Born to Run'.. a 'factual account' of barefoot running which was just misleading and poorly presented. A nice fictional book, but not the book it promises.

In reply to Removed User: No, I never said that you said it was the worst book ever written. :P

In reply to IainRUK: I think the best book on football ever written is 'Football in Sheffield' which was reprinted by Geoff Birtles under the Dark Peak cover. Obviously I might be biased, but it's a good read for anyone keen on football history.

In reply to IainRUK:

Yes, if I don't like a book I stop reading it.

Agree with you about the God Delusion. Some convincing arguments, but incredibly badly presented

In reply to Only a hill:
I've read these two :

Better Never To Have Been
http://tinyurl.com/nvyjp2v

Stray Shopping Carts of Eastern North America
http://tinyurl.com/2ccny6

The first was rather heavy, the second less so but it's hard to believe either were written in the first place.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Hope you're right about On Chesil Beach. I've brought it with me to read while I'm working away and so far I'm really struggling with it, even when the only competition is 60 channels of crap US television.

In reply to Only a hill:

Catcher in the Rye.

Took me 3 months to wade through it. So utterly, utterly dull.

In reply to teflonpete:

People who like Catcher in the Rye tend to be fanatical, so I expect you will be denounced as an idiot within seconds.

I think you have to first read it when you are going through a narcissistic teenager phase to identify with the protagonist, otherwise it is just tiresome.

In reply to Only a hill:

The worst book I ever saw was some alt-history mountaineering book about Aleister Crowley. Can't remember the authors name of the top of my head...

'

In reply to Only a hill:

The worst book I've ever tried to read was The Da Vinci Code. I didn't succeed; the prose style was so atrocious that I started bleeding out of my ears on about p.3. I had to be rushed into Casualty for an emergency E.M.Forster transfusion.

The worst mountaineering book I've ever read was Into Thin Air, by Jon Krakauer. I did finish this, but had it ever stopped bloody raining in the Zermatt campsite, or had I had access to anything else to read, I'm sure I wouldn't have. Here too the problem was that the author had no idea how to construct an English sentence. It was so badly written that it was impossible to tell what was meant to be going on. And after a bit, who cared?

In reply to davidbeynon:

I'd appreciate an Amazon review if you've read it!

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Dan Brown is a very clever man. He has a formula engineered for selling books - but he doesn't write from his heart, and it shows. I think he is a clever businessman rather than an artist. A writer must of course have both qualities, but there must be balance ...

In reply to Only a hill:

Gormenghast by Mervyn Peake. Like wading through treacle in lead boots carrying a hippo on your back towing an ocean liner. I attempted it 5 times and never got past page 3 and i like a bit of fantasy literatur

In reply to scarface:

Worst book and you judge from page 3? Anyhow, Fantasy is a modern genre that doesn't always bolt on well to such unique works. Anyone else who hates it also shouldn't read Moorcock's wonderful celebration: Gloriana.

In reply to Only a hill:

It's on my list for when I finally get around to buying an e-reader.

In reply to davidbeynon:
Cool. It's available in paperback as well (and now you get the Kindle version for free if you buy the paperback from Amazon).

In reply to Offwidth:

Worst because i am avid reader and i couldn't get past page 3. Moorcock has been read and enjoyed.

In reply to Tim Chappell:


Agree, utterly dull too - makes the Silmarillion look like Treasure Island.

In reply to scarface:

That describes LOTR for me.

CB

In reply to Only a hill:

Oh all right. I'll stick the paperback on my next order.

I'll be coming after you if it belongs on this thread though!

In reply to scarface:

Specifically Gloriana?

In reply to Only a hill:

http://www.amazon.com/My-Adventures-Cyberspace-Jude-Calvert-Toulmin/dp/0956...

sorry but its the only book i had to put down as i just couldn't finish it

In reply to Only a hill:

lord of the rings. bloody awful Long winded boring article where women Barely exist and theres more plot holes than a Mexican soap opera.

In reply to Choss:

What plot holes?

I can think of only one defect in the narrative: the hobbits don't know how to abseil. But that's hardly fatal.

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Come on Tim. I get you defending Christianity, but lord of the rings?

Its f*cked up. Privileged hobbit and his gay as lickSpittle simpering servant boy. That Sam did everything but stick his tongue up his master and Betters jacksie.

So, reinforce class slavery and Stereotypes, of course ill die for you boss.

Women, where are they?

Sorry, went off on one there.

Just get them gert big eagles to Fly that Ring to that volcano and Drop it in.

Oh sorry they cant, because the whole thing is pish!

7;^)

In reply to Choss:
What do you expect? - it's a piece of literature of its time.

For all its flaws (and I don't deny it is flawed), The Lord of the Rings remains a damned good tale. It's certainly not the worst book ever written...

In reply to Only a hill:

But surely this thread is about subjective Opinion of books?

In my opinion, its the worst book ever written. Turgid, boring, mysoginist, poor people Sacrificing, and dire. And the films are even worse.

In reply to Only a hill:

Anything by Irvine Welsh. Ok, I've only read Trainspotting and bits of Ecstasy, so them specifically.

In reply to Choss:



Ah yes, my favourite bit of Monty Python and the Holy Grail surfaces again. "Look! Look! I'm being oppressed! Here we see the violence inherent in the feudal system!"



Nah. That's not a plot loophole. There's an obvious reason why this wouldn't work, namely the Nazgul.

I first read TLOTR when I was six. I've read it about 50 times since

In reply to Choss:

Do you really think it's worse than the book I quote in my OP?

In reply to Tim Chappell:

I first read it as a Kid as well. Then again as a young adult. My first impressions were Right, its Dreadful.

I dont get the whole Tolkien worship thing, and campaign for all the route names at goblin coombe to be be Changed. Including the name goblin coombe. Thats what started the Climb name rot.

I suggest tick Alley would be more Appropriate

In reply to Only a hill:

Never read the book in your OP, but would Risk it rather than read anything by Tolkien. He was a douche

In reply to Tim Chappell:

I read it on a three day solo trip in Knoydart. Buying it was one the worst decisions of my life.

I'm pretty sure it could have been written by a computer.

In reply to Removed User:


I hope it didn't spoil Knoydart for you. The best bit of mainland Scotland, just about, and the worst historical whocareswhodunit ever, just about... what a combination.

In reply to Tim Chappell:

I can't imagine how anyone would want to go to Knoydart and take that, of all things, as bad weather reading. Being so far removed from nature and life, and as someone else has said, robotic.

In reply to Removed User:
>. Buying it was one the worst decisions of my life.
>


Though I have to say--if that's as bad as it's got for you, you've got lucky. Just think, you could have joined the army at 15y11m, married Dale Winton, or bought a charming villa just a stone's throw from Fukushima...

In reply to Only a hill: "Bones" by Kathy Reich.

And to think she gets paid to write more and more utter shite.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


I can think of *one* purpose for which I might take the Da Vinci Code on a backpacking trip to Knoydart. But I think I'd rather use the old moss, wash, dettol technique.

In reply to Tim Chappell:

Early christians buried a document in Knoydart before being killed in an attack by picts. It confirmed the blood line of Jesus did continue. If you go there you will meet a top female mathematician with smouldering eyes who will help you solve an 18th century suduko book with hidden mathematical clues that will also eventually, as an aside, help stop a plot to kill Alex Salmond. End chapter. Next.

In reply to Tim Chappell:


I love TLOTR, but this one really does bother me. It's not obvious that it wouldn't work, because it depends on relative speeds of determined eagle vs angry Nazgul. Gandalf could have done the sums and made a plan, provided that he knew the maximum speed both of the eagles and of the Nazgul. So ... get the ring as far south as possible. Summon an eagle. Nazgul can be distracted by getting Aragorn to jump up and down in front of a palantir (saying nur-nur-ni-nur-nur), so you work out how far north that has to happen in order to get the Nazgul far enough away to be unable to catch up with the eagle. Add in a European swallow carrying a coconut and you are home and dry.

In reply to BusyLizzie:

But in the beginning them nazgul are Mooching around the Shire lisping Badly the name Baggins to fat hobbits.

They are on horses, much slower than eagles, Especially giant mutant talking ones. They would lose the Race to mordor, Leaving voldemort without his Flying Lizard Riding henchmen.

At that Point eagle picks up ring, with Frodo attached if Necessary, Flies off to mount gloom, doing eagle to eagle relay if needed. Then Drop ring, with Frodo attached Preferably. Job done.

In reply to Choss:

A key point of the book was the getting of the ring to mount doom ended up as a neat fate-driven conjuring trick to distract the eye of Sauron. Sure an eagle might have worked but flying it in would have been spotted early on the 'radar' and the risk of failure being high and the consequencies unthinkable... Back on topic, even on your list of faults there are worse classics out there (before we delve into dross) so it appears you have chosen to dislike it more than your own logic would deserve.

In reply to Choss: So you've read it twice, and you seem to be thinking about it a quite a lot. Are you sure you dislike it so much?

In reply to Choss: Yes, that would have worked. So the real problem was that Gandalf didn't make a plan early enough, because while everyone was still in the Shire he hadn't understood what was going on. "Let's work the problem, gentlemen; let's not make it worse by guessing" (from the Apollo 13 film).

In reply to BusyLizzie:


For a terrifying moment there I thought you were serious, and had morphed into a dreary Dungeons & Dragons type loon... then the European swallow codeword got us back on track

In reply to Choss:

Mount Gloom? Pay more attention in class please, Mr Choss.

As for Vol-- Volde-- SAY NOT THE NAME!

In reply to Only a hill:

Darkmans by Nicola Barker is the absolutely worst thing I have ever read. I am still flabbergasted how it ever made the Booker shortlist.
Truly abysmal.

In reply to Only a hill:

This is one of the best reviews of a bad book I have read:

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1LPA5YOND6TGD

In reply to Only a hill:

Prozac Nation by Elizabeth Wurtzel. Read it nearly 20 years ago and it still makes me angry!

In reply to Only a hill:
STOP THE THREAD!

I have found, definitively, the worst book ever written.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Class-Book-Baby-Names-ebook/dp/B00DY3LMN4/ref=sr_1_...

In reply to Only a hill:

Nah. That's not dramatically terrible, it's just a boring loo-side-reading stocking-filler. It's just lazy, self-absorbed London socialites thinking they're being funny and clever when they're being utterly predictable. It's like an overheard conversation outside a creche in Chelsea.

Your first is still the worst.