Most boring book?

I understand the premise of the book, and it was actually a scandalous story for its time but as a 17 year old that was forced to read it as part of a summer reading project, I was dreadfully bored with it. The old english style of writing was very difficult to read and the story was very much opposite of what my preference of literature was at the time. Still is to be honest, but I think today I might appreciate it more if I ever decided to try and read it again.

I understand (and I tend to think it was deliberately dry, so as not to offend the moralists). But yes, you probably would appreciate it more now.

It is amazing with how much good literature out there, how much crap gets assigned, altho I suppose it's different with others. I did like Lord of the Flies tho.

Myself as well. I use to read Stephen King books at 10 and on. I read a couple recently and was just disgusted. Tho he can crank out a short story that's decent. But yeah, I probably started to only read non fiction around 21. But I loved history. I did read this awesome novel called The Booke of Days, that was written based on true events of the first crusade. It was fleshed out but followed a historical narrative. I really love Caesar's book on the Celtic wars. Or Gallic. You can get it online. I know it's translated but it's so wonderfully articulated, in an economical manner.

Just how shallow the writing really was. Besides jokes and gore. He was better before he started to crank out 5 books a year but not that much. And I'm not saying this with bias politically, I really liked it when young. The Body was a good novella. I reread the Tommyknockers 5 years ago. So empty. Such simplistic fleshing out. But the f_____r has stamina, cocaine or no. Both vanned or not.

Don't bother with anything since 2000.

His best work was his cokehead years lol but I did read it when I was younger so I was probably more impressive. He did gather alot of interesting ideas for his style.

Yeah, he got smacked by a van driven by someone high on something. It actually wouldn't surprise me if he had done the same, as dark and physiological tortured as he seems, to someone he hit and run decades ago. That's pure conjecture, obviously, without merit. But he bought the van and beat it with a sledgehammer, like that means anything.

Oh no :(

I hated the Twelfth Night reading it in school.

Shakespeare's?

Yeah. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelfth_Night

I'm not saying it's bad, just that it bored me as a teen and I didn't mind other Shakespeare.

I understand. Not one of his best.

I just didn't find it funny. And he does have some killer lines.

Yeah, yeah, you can hate me for saying that if you want. I don't care. It is the worst writing style I have ever read. And the stories could be so compelling, all the still used tropes and character types are already there. But if anyone today would publish a story written like that people would laugh at it. And rightly so. I had better writing skills than that when I was in second grade. It's repetetive, there is absolutely no tension or story arc, not even variation of sentence structure. It's just a list of things and people and things and people and people and things... I have seen dictionaries with more coherence.

I’m guessing you’re an atheist? I feel ya, I skipped probably over half the Old Testament and a good chunk of the New because I just couldn’t get through it, it was so boring. You would think the word of an omniscient deity would be a more interesting read...

Well, I am. But I don't think I would think differently about the writing style if I was a Christian. Like I said, the stories could be very captivating if they were written better. I mean there are new adaptations all the time, mostly for kids, that tell the same stories but more lively and more in the form of an actual story rather than an accountant's statement of matters. But ever since these texts have been viewed as "given by god" it is apparently not allowed to update them and after that all discussions have only been about which of the texts count and which don't - apart from that whole thing with the new testament where a bunch of people added their accounts of this Jesus person and the discussions over which of those , if any, count as canon were added to the original discussions - and the answers vary depending on which church you follow. But apparently, it is a sacrilege to change even one word unless you have translated it (badly) from even older versions and people just make a new church out of that book because it is "closer to the original". But ever since the middle ages, when people's writing style really progressed and improved, there have been no updates. People seem to think it has to be written in such a style because it is so authentic to what happened 2000 or more years ago. But almost all the languages you can get a print in these days did not exist when the stories were written. And the translations were usually written in the current form of that language, be it Latin, German, English, Spanish, Italian,... so people at the time would understand the stories - apart from the ones kept in Latin in the middle ages so the clerus could use it to lord over the peasants who didn't know any latin. It's always a bad sign when you have to trust someone to tell you what your religious texts tell you to do. Anyway, why is it so wrong to adapt the texts to our current language? It might even make a great TV show or series of movies. These are very visual times. Even Lord of the Rings didn't quote the book to the syllable when it was adapted and that was only written a century ago. So much potential, yet you have to be pretty fanatic to actually read it all these days because it's written so badly...

It's a pastiche.

Of the great writing style of hebrews from 2600 years ago? And even if it is, it lost in each translation since...

I liked the story about Ruth. And the Song is Solomon is beautifully erotic.
But yeah, the rest is rather snoozy.

Yeah, but even the stories that are quite interesting you sort of have to read past the words themselves and imagine what they were actually trying to say... And what exactly was the point of telling the same story four times??? Either you accept a certain set of details as your canon and write your one story using that or you're after an actual historic account of what happened which means you have to include every account and not just the four you like best...

Eh, not my religion, not my god. And I guess you'll have to look at the motives of the original contributors and the editors who decided what would go in there.

All I'm saying is that I don't agree with the editorial choices made. 😉

Okey dokey

The math textbook they made me read from all the time

Oh, I bet! I always found math boring.

But The Red Ponynwas a close second.

I hear you on "Pride and Prejudice", definitely not a fan.

The Denny’s menu. I know it’s not a book but They never seem to have any creative names. But the menus at Friendly’s are creative, and they have ice cream unlike Denny’s

LOL! I like the Shoney's menu.

Probably this one, but I don't read that much books anyway

Oh, love this play!!

I tried to read Don Quixote but couldn't get through a few chapters....

Yeah? I rather enjoyed it.

Im sure some people like it, I thought it was a bit too olden day talking for me. To each his own tho

Your days as president are numbered, heretic.

Oof. Just cuzi dont like Don Quixote??? Dont worry, im reading walden. I have to for school and its actually interesting. No plot, bu interesting.

Yeah, my grandfather had a farm when I was a kid. I'd spend hours just tilting at his windmill. Good times.

lol

I can see this...zzzzzzzz

LOL

hmm, Heidi.