• beliquititious@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve read it twice, and I agree. The plot amounts to spoiled, rich children take their ball and go home because they’re mad the poors won’t let them strip the world of resources for personal gain. The author makes it clear throughout the text that Dagny, Hank, and Galt are the heros for fucking off to larp as robber barons in the 1880’s.

      As a philosophic text objectivism is naive at best and a cynical justification for authoritarianism at its worst.

    • SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      It’s not the worst book I’ve read, but Anthem is close. I never had the urge to read Atlas Shrugged after that. The details of the evil, collectivist society are just so over-the-top, and the plot is just such obvious author-wish-fulfillment jack-off-ery. In my head canon, there’s an epilogue to the story which picks up a year later: Gaea has died in childbirth due to a breech baby, and Prometheus is crippled from a broken leg that healed badly. Hey, maybe there are benefits to society after all, y’know?

    • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I tried with it, I really fucking did. But GAWD was it so insufferable to hear how amazing and brilliant all these titans of business were so vastly more intelligent than the rest of the world. I got like a third of the way through before realizing I hated all of the charcters and didn’t care abiut what they were doing. So I decided to spend my time elsewhere.

  • funkforager@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Rich dad poor dad. Rich dad never existed. It’s all made up grift and, consequentially, people fall for it and make expensive life investment decisions after it.

    • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Vaguely remembering what that craze was about, the basic idea that if you have savings you should invest them was good. Not sure if he ever added the diversify and wait patiently bit. Generally all “rich guy books” belong in the trash.

  • Soapbox1858@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Catcher In The Rye

    What a miserable experience reading the whiney thoughts of that little shithead.

    Maybe it would have been more relatable if I read it at 15, but I read it at like 28 and it was insufferable.

    A close second is The Great Gatsby. I kept waiting for something interesting to happen and then just like that it was over.

    • inb4_FoundTheVegan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yuuuup. I enjoy Catcher, it’s one of my faves but it’s greatest asset is also it’s biggest flaw. Holden is a convincing mind and thought process of a spoiled teenager. It’s great as a character study, but the charcter is an naive and arrogant jerk so being in his mindset is just frustrating.

      Honestly reminds me of Lolita, which is a horror story told from the point of view from the monster. You really gotta read in between the lines because the character is actively lying to you. Holden does the same.

      I don’t fault anyone for not liking either, they are rough reads. But if you’re a fan of unreliable narrators then they are a lot of fun.

      • punkaccountant@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I actually am a fan of unreliable narrators, but they can’t also be insufferable assholes. I can’t stand that book and I did read it when I was 15!

        That said, I understand it’s not really meant to be a cherished story…but if I’m gonna read about someone I would actively hate, I’ll stick to non-fiction for that.

    • spittingimage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Catcher In The Rye was assigned reading for me in school at 15. All I saw was a character impulsively making his own life harder and harder.

  • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    the scarlet letter. I found it extremely unrelatable, and generally boring. I think The Crucible play by the same author arthur miller* conveys the same overarching principles about religious hypocrisy and herd mentality in a much more interesting way.

    • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      Possibly showing my ignorance here, but The Crucible is by Arthur Miller, and The Scarlet Letter is by Nathaniel Hawthorne - did either of them write a work with the other title as well? I can’t find anything to suggest they did, but I might be missing something.

  • InputZero@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Foundations by Isaac Asimov. It’s a great story but it’s a tough read. Way better as an audiobook.

    • NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I like it but i noticed while reading it that Isaac Asimov has such an optimistic 1950s view, it can be challenging to keep reading with such limited conflict.

    • boatswain@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I really enjoyed the first three: they were pretty obviously just a bunch of short stories set in the same universe. The later books where he tried to write actual novels were not great though. He could do great short stories, but IMO wasn’t much of a novelist.

  • Alice@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 months ago

    When I was a kid I absolutely loved The Chronicles of Narnia and I hated The Last Battle. I thought King Tirian was an unpleasant asshole and I thought killing the Pevensies sucked because they all go to Narnia Heaven forever while Susan has to bury them.

    It probably wasn’t a bad book but it felt like it ended my childhood.

  • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    Of books I’ve completed, Thomas Hardy’s The Mayor of Casterbridge. Read it at school, hated it (as well as Far from the Madding Crowd and Tess of the D’Urbervilles) - full of ridiculous coincidences. And also utterly miserable to boot.

    I started reading The Da Vinci Code, but gave up after the very first page.

    • Sadbutdru@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I… actually liked the Da Vinci Code 😶‍🌫️. I think I even read the sequel/ the author’s next book. I mean, I was a teenager at the time it came out, looking for some light holiday reading… I think my mum had read it and thought I would enjoy it…

      • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ah, fair enough, and each to their own - and to be fair, millions of others apparently liked it too, so maybe I should have kept going! 😁

      • SanguinePar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Exactly. And I’m not being a book snob here, I’ve read plenty of books that weren’t the height of intellectualism. But it’s so BAD… 😁

  • Che Banana@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    The grapes of wrath. I hate read that in about 5 days in HSchool and still cannot stand it. The other books we were assigned I enjoyed…but this motherfucker, nope.

    • incogtino@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I thought reading The Grapes of Wrath was like watching Requiem for a Dream - I’m glad I did it once, and I will never do it again

  • demoman@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Into the Wild” by Jon Krakauer. I read it in high school so maybe I wouldn’t hate it as much as I do if I wasn’t forced to read it, but the plot is basically about a booksmart kid who decides to leave his rich parents and society behind to live in remote Alaska. The book follows Chris McCandless along his journey from the Eastern part of the country, through the South, and finally up the West coast and to Alaska (hitchhiking mostly). When he gets to Alaska, instead of actually being prepared and realizing the risk, he goes into “Into the Wild” incredibly unprepared - he ends up having to stay at his remote camp well into the spring because he didn’t consider all the snow melting would render the river blocking his path back to society completely uncrossable. He ends up dying because he ruins most of a moose by failing to properly smoke the meat, and eats a poisionous plant out of desperation. Obviously this could have been avoided by just doing the proper research or bringing extra food (he only brought a few pounds of rice, and the guy who drove him to his final stop literally told him it was a bad idea to do this with so few supplies and only a .22 rifle). Basically his horrible death could have been easily avoided if he wasn’t such an idiot.

    The author clearly had a ton of respect for the guy, because he spent a year or two peicing all this together. He spoke about Chris (the unprepared trancendentalist wannabe) with a great deal of reverence, acting like he was a martyr for a cause unclear to me. Why you would want to spend years of your life in an attempt to immortalize an idiot, I am not sure. The author also decided to randomly interrupt the main story with a few chapters about his own moronic adventures, which made an already bad book worse.

  • Otter@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Charles Dickens wasn’t fun, back when we covered it in school

    • Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I saw it as a play, and it was amazing. Never understood why English teachers have students read plays. The whole point of a play is to have it performed. It’s like trying to teach swimming in an empty pool.

  • faultypidgeon@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    Fourth Wing by Rebecca Yaos. I was expecting a nice fantasy story with dragons and shit. But the romance part of it was just so annoying. “Oh look that dude is so hot…” at every. single. occasion. I could’ve known beforehand that this book is more targeted towards female readers, but sometimes I just like to go to the book store and buy a book based on the blurb. Since then I made the new rule to keep my distance to books that mention TikTok or #BookTok on the cover.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      I had the same experience! It HAD to have been astroturfing. The reviews were simply glowing but it’s honestly one of the worst books I’ve ever read. It’s not even so bad it’s good, it’s just page upon page of cringe cliche.

  • PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Harry Potter. I tried to read first book but couldn’t, the cringyness was high and the naming convention was straight up from 90’s bad fantasy book parody. It’s like one of the few books i not finished after i started, and i read a lot. And while the others are just forgettable experiences, HP is constantly in my face in media, reminding me of it.

    • Farvana@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      The first book was a Roald Dahl ripoff, and I enjoyed it for that. Everything was downhill from there.

    • rekabis@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      TBH it’s meant for children, and essentially plays to their sense of humour and simple imaginations. Honestly, I found the first movie - with all of its hand-holding exposé and slavish devotion to the book - to be far more cringe. The original readers - and what person, really, went to see the movie without having read the book first? - could have benefitted from a more subtle and better-presented script.