Which books kicked your butt?

[zeebo]

Maybe they're good books but were just too long, or complicated, or dense, or weird.  Here's mine:

Gravity's Rainbow - Thomas Pynchon
Foucault's Pendulum - Umberto Eco
Infinite Jest - David Foster Wallace
Dhalgren - Samuel Delany
The Silmarillion - J.R.R. Tolkien
The Waves - Virginia Woolf
Godel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid - Douglas Hofstadter

[Jackstar]

The Bible - Council of Nicaea
The Warren Commission Report - More like The Coup D'Thug Commission, amirite?
The 9/11 Commission Report - Don't even get me started. How did any of You People buy any of that load of insipid, nonsensical claptrap humbug?
Project Blue Book - Really? Really??
Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret - Judy Blume. Yeah, I didn't get that one at all.

[WOTR]

Satanic verses took me over a year to slog through... a few pages every now and then was all that I could take.  By the time i was through I thought that Rushdie deserved the fatwa (not for offending a religion but for writing such a pointless, useless book and getting it published.)

Right now I am a couple of months into the biography of Judas.  It would not be possible to write a drier book if you described the stages of paint drying.  I suppose with only three or four references to him in the bible I should have expected this...

[b_dubb]

Atlas Shrugged. I need my dogma served in small bites

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

How far did you make it through Dhalgren, zeebo?  I started it last year and tried to like it, but gave up before I was halfway through.  It had its moments, but it kept getting bogged down in the kind of pretentious twaddle that often passes for art in the seventies.

[zeebo]

How far did you make it through Dhalgren, zeebo?  I started it last year and tried to like it, but gave up before I was halfway through.  It had its moments, but it kept getting bogged down in the kind of pretentious twaddle that often passes for art in the seventies.

You got farther than me.    I think I just got a few chapters in before I got frustrated.  There was some interesting language and structure in it but I just found it too disorienting to stick with. 

[George Drooly]

Dhalgren is a chore not worth completing, for sure. Delany's a very talented, interesting guy though. My favorite of his books is Hogg, which is easily the most disgusting, offensive thing I've ever read. No idea how it was allowed to be published as it's basically 200 pages of "murder, homosexuality, child molestation, incest, coprophilia, coprophagia, urolagnia, anal-oral contact, necrophilia and rape." I'm a first amendment absolutist, but that book... holy cow. Loved it, of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hogg_%28novel%29

[Jackstar]

Ulysses. Fuck Ulysses.

[Little Hater]

Ulysses. Fuck Ulysses.

Oh, Christ yes.

I'm working on the Bible (KJV) but just (finally, praise God) finished Genesis. What in the world made the guy think we would want to know all the tiniest construction details of that tabernacle or whatever ?

[Mind Flayer Monk]

I always thought Dalgren was some sort of attempt to bring Dadaism or that Fluxus or some other weird art stuff to SciFi. Its sort of like a John Steinbeck conversations mashup the way the dialogue worked.
I can't really recommend the book, I read it with some rapid serial visual presentation software. So I guess I didn't invest too much in it.

I will avoid Hogg, I read the plot summary on wikipedia from the link.  The sad thing is that shit happens in the real world.

I find all the Joyce stuff hard. Even the short stories like Araby. Some approachable books that stumped me were Mother Night by Vonnegut and City of Glass by Paul Auster.

How about undecipherable movies? I still don't know what Black Moon or O! Lucky Man are about and if anyone knows please tell me.

[SredniVashtar]

Having recently tried to re-read Ulysses again (about two thirds of the way through this time, before I fainted), I am not sure that it is worth the time or the effort involved just to say that you have read the damned thing. Agenbite of inwit, indeed! I think I baled at the point when Leopold Bloom rubbed one out on the beach in front of the girl with the game leg. For a man who could write things like 'the heaventree of stars hung with humid night-blue fruit', only to get lost in picking the fluff out of his navel, in a literary sense, has always made it such a frustrating read. because he was obviously a genius. Martin Amis once described him as a 'writer's writer' (note the placing of the apostrophe) because Joyce was writing for Joyce, and anyone else is going to struggle to work out what the hell he was on about half the time. Still, it is not Finnegan's Wake, which is beyond unreadable lunacy, and I cannot believe that anyone has read it from start to finish. Although I would like to know who has because I will be needing to punch them in the face.


Anyone with an interest in experimental Irish fiction should try and read At Swim Two-Birds, by Flann O'Brien. Impossible to describe, but worth it if you are prepared to keep an open mind, and maybe read it two or three times before you get his speed. Also, try and read - in no particular order - The Master and Margarita, by Mikhail Bulgakov, Earthly Powers by Anthony Burgess and (a classic, and deservedly so), Catch-22 by Joseph Heller. I mention those four because they have made such an impression on me over the years, and I don't think you can wrong with one or other of them, at least.

Still,  à chacun son goût

[jazmunda]

Maybe they're good books but were just too long, or complicated, or dense, or weird.  Here's mine:

The Silmarillion - J.R.R. Tolkien

The Silmarilion is a tough one.

[bigchucka]

Maybe they're good books but were just too long, or complicated, or dense, or weird.  Here's mine:

Foucault's Pendulum - Umberto Eco
The Silmarillion - J.R.R. Tolkien

I've ran into those brick walls as well.  The Silmarillion is an example of how much work an author sometimes puts into creating their "universe."  If I'm thinking correctly, it was thrown together from his notes after his passing.  I did enjoy reading David Eddings "The Rivan Codex."

Oh, Christ yes.

I'm working on the Bible (KJV) but just (finally, praise God) finished Genesis. What in the world made the guy think we would want to know all the tiniest construction details of that tabernacle or whatever ?

There's things I've seen before that are daily reading guides in order to read the entire Bible in a year.  It surprises me how many people say their Christian enough to preach to other people about the Bible and haven't read it in it's entirety themselves.

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

I tried three times to read Tristram Shandy and it whupped me every time.  It has some hilarious moments, but I always got mired in the turgid 18th Century verbiage.  I did finish Moby Dick, although it took me two years.  Not sure if it was worth it, and I'd be hard pressed to provide a comprehensive review, but at least I can say I read the sucker. I'm damn proud of that! 

[Kelt]

The Silmarilion is a tough one.

I don't even know what the Hell the Silmarilion is supposed to be... is it like a Hobbit Bible or something? 

I'll nominate 'We Never Make Mistakes' be Aleksandr Solzshenitsyn. 

The first part is 'An Incident at Kretchetovka Station', which is all about absolutely nothing happening at a Russian train station during the war.

I'm surprised Hollywood has missed out on turning it into a blockbuster movie, but not really.

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

I don't even know what the Hell the Silmarilion is supposed to be... is it like a Hobbit Bible or something? 

It's a pre-LOtR history of Middle Earth that Tolkien was working on, but he died before finishing it.  His son cobbled the various pieces together and wrote some himself to fill in a few blanks.  I read it years ago and couldn't muster a lot of enthusiasm for it despite being a big LOtR fan at the time. It has an uneven, incomplete feel to it, and as far as I can tell was rushed out by the publisher to cash in onthe LOtR mania of the late seventies.

Here's the whole scoop if you're interested - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion

[aldousburbank]

At eighteen years young, reading Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle".

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

At eighteen years young, reading Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle".

Great book, and if you haven't read it since you were eighteen, give it another go.  You'll definitely get a lot more out of it.  I first read Catch-22 in high school and have to admit I was mainly interested in the dirty parts. Otherwise, it confused the hell out of me.  However, I read it again every few years, and as I accumulated more life experience, I eventually discovered the method to his madness and I get new insights from it every time.  A truly extraordinary book!


"Durham's Pure Leaf Lard is people!  It's peeeeeeople!"

[maureen]

Years ago in the adolescent sociological awakening, Franz Fanon's "The Wretched of the Earth" offered an analysis that I find still applies. We are victims of the neo-colonization.

[zeebo]

Having recently tried to re-read Ulysses again (about two thirds of the way through this time, before I fainted), I am not sure that it is worth the time or the effort involved just to say that you have read the damned thing. Agenbite of inwit, indeed! ...

I almost listed Ulysses, but haven't quite conceded defeat yet.  I did finally get through chapter one with the help of the lively Re:Joyce podcast, so I still have hope.   :

[zeebo]

I tried three times to read Tristram Shandy and it whupped me every time.  It has some hilarious moments, but I always got mired in the turgid 18th Century verbiage.  ...

Yeah I've heard horror stories about that one.   

[McPhallus]

The Silmarillion is the foundation on which LoTR was built.  The background mythology of LoTR wasn't just derivative or something sketched on a notepad.  It was pretty vast.  The book has an academic, detached feel, with few characters you can really relate to or care about.  I doubt Tolkien ever really would've wanted it published.

I'll add my voice to the chorus for Ulysses.  I've only read parts, but it's not easy.

The Confidence Man by Melville is incredibly hard to follow.

Remembrances of Things Past by Proust is tough because it's so relational and meandering.

Michel Foucault (French literary critic) is fascinating but also overly complex.

It's a pre-LOtR history of Middle Earth that Tolkien was working on, but he died before finishing it.  His son cobbled the various pieces together and wrote some himself to fill in a few blanks.  I read it years ago and couldn't muster a lot of enthusiasm for it despite being a big LOtR fan at the time. It has an uneven, incomplete feel to it, and as far as I can tell was rushed out by the publisher to cash in onthe LOtR mania of the late seventies.

Here's the whole scoop if you're interested - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion

[Uncle Duke]

Great book, and if you haven't read it since you were eighteen, give it another go.  You'll definitely get a lot more out of it.  I first read Catch-22 in high school and have to admit I was mainly interested in the dirty parts. Otherwise, it confused the hell out of me.  However, I read it again every few years, and as I accumulated more life experience, I eventually discovered the method to his madness and I get new insights from it every time.  A truly extraordinary book!


"Durham's Pure Leaf Lard is people!  It's peeeeeeople!"

I've read "Catch 22" at least a dozen times. I made every USAF 2Lt assigned to me from the early 90s through my retirement a few years ago read "Catch 22".  One of those guys is now a two star, and he still reads it once a year to, in his words, "keep sane."  I now ask him, "What's the use of being a general if you can't have somebody shot?"

The book that kicked my ass?  "Shogun."  In fact, I've had trouble with Clavell's books in general. 

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

The Silmarillion is the foundation on which LoTR was built.  The background mythology of LoTR wasn't just derivative or something sketched on a notepad.  It was pretty vast.  The book has an academic, detached feel, with few characters you can really relate to or care about.  I doubt Tolkien ever really would've wanted it published.

Didn't mean to imply it was just a few sketches he'd been playing with. It is extensive and detailed, but duller than dishwater in a lot of places--"academic, detached feel" describes it perfectly. I don't know how he felt about publishing it, but it had the feel of something the publisher wanted to rush out while LOtR was riding a big wave of popularity.

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

I've read "Catch 22" at least a dozen times. I made every USAF 2Lt assigned to me from the early 90s through my retirement a few years ago read "Catch 22".  One of those guys is now a two star, and he still reads it once a year to, in his words, "keep sane."  I now ask him, "What's the use of being a general if you can't have somebody shot?"

The book that kicked my ass?  "Shogun."  In fact, I've had trouble with Clavell's books in general.

I only learned a couple of years ago that Heller was a bombardier like Yossarian.  That gave the book a whole new layer of meaning for me.

[ItsOver]

"Differential Equations."  I get a headache just thinking about it.

[Jackstar]

[bigchucka]

I read that and thought Ministry... Psalm 69... not knowing what is generally considered the full album name, just from the lyric in one of the songs... Crowley fan are you?  So is a friend of mine.  Should have seen him the day I had to look up the word "pansexual"...


At one time I heard that one part in "TV2" broke the record for fastest beat in a song.  Wonder why Wiki doesn't mention that if it's true?

[WOTR]

Giving it a bit more thought I have to nominate (I think) "The Greening of America."  I read Future Shock and The Greening of America at roughly the same time and I recall that one was finished and the other was just too much fluff.  I think it was the Greening of America that was full of wishful thoughts and predictions of love and harmony that had long since past (I read the books in the late 90's or early in the new millennium.)  Both books offered somewhat interesting glimpses into a specific time and the thoughts and ideas that they propagated... the one book just went too far in proclamations of things that could never come true so long as "human nature" exists.

...It surprises me how many people say their Christian enough to preach to other people about the Bible and haven't read it in it's entirety themselves.

Does this mean that so long as somebody has read the entire bible, koran, or book of mormon that you are cool with them preaching at you/

[Robert Ghostwolf's Ghost]

Both books offered somewhat interesting glimpses into a specific time and the thoughts and ideas that they propagated... the one book just went too far in proclamations of things that could never come true so long as "human nature" exists.

Unfortunately, human nature will eventually ruin any utopia.