Certain friends keep urging me to read another Dan Brown book.
I've tried three so far. Doesn't the three strike rule still exist?
I hate his "blockbuster movie spec script" writing style.
I loathe his (lack of) characterization.
I despise his ludicrous claims of "based on fact".
"But...but...he writes stories that are based on real stuff! Doesn't that make it cool?"
...no.
I don't mind that -they- like him. More power to them. But I'm sick and tired of finding a copy of Deception Point with a scribbled note to "try it one more time". Posted by Corwin (Member # 5705) on :
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: "But...but...he writes stories that are based on real stuff!"
Paper?
And you certainly have my permission to dislike Dan Brown.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Ditto.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
I don't like Stephen King. I have only finished two books: The Shining, which was very good, and The Long Walk (he wrote as Richard Bachman), which was bad. I can't get past the first two chapters in any of his other works. His writing style has never been appealing to me.
So many people become excited about his books, I just don't get it. Why should I like Stephen King's work, because he's popular? That can't be my top criterium.
On the other hand, King's books are turned in to good movies. I have seen Misery, The Green Mile, The Shawshank Redemption, The Langoliers, and The Shining. Of these, The Shining was the only one I didn't like. Go figure. Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I'm not a fan of Dan Brown either - for pretty much the same reasons you mentioned.
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
Yeah, I don't like Stephen King either. He writes page turners, and I turn the pages, but when I'm done there's a bad taste in my mind. I prefer to read books that are better.
There's nothing wrong with popular stuff, but it's usually enjoyed most by people who don't read very much, and haven't been exposed much to anything better. Like popular music, popular writing is sometimes even pretty good!
It's not that all classics are better than all popular books. Classics were once popular, too. It's just that when your field of selection spans several thousand years, and every culture that we have written records of, then naturally you're going to have better odds of getting something good than if you confine yourself to the last 10 or so years in one culture, ours.
The reason many people prefer popular books, I guess, is that there's no need to reach out their brains to encompass a different time and place. The quality of the good books provides the motivation for me to make that leap, plus I read enough that it's a familiar thing to me now, so it doesn't make a book obscure or anything just because it's set in 19th century Russia <mmmMmMMmM> or 18th century Britain <big grin> or Argentina during the early to mid 20th c. <licks lips>, or 7th c. BCE in the Pelopponesian or whatever. Immersing in a different culture is part of the fun.
But anyway, if you want stories and characters that are really honest, intelligent, and true, and inspire you to reach out and reach up, stories and characters that you fall in love with, that make you more than you are, that change your life, then you need to open the field to all of human recorded history. Most people who do this for any length of time, don't think very highly, by comparison, of Stephen King or Dan Brown. Again, I'm not saying that all popular books are bad and all classics are good. Just that your tastes develop and you'll likely find something that engages your heart, mind, and spirit in a much more full and satisfying way if you look further. =) And you can tell your friends I say so.
My suggestion to you is to find and read great books, and then agree to read one of their books on the condition that they read a book you suggest for them. Worst case is you waste an afternoon swatting up something dull and stupid. Best case is they discover good books too, and soon are seeking out and finding great new stuff to pass along to you. =)
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
You're killing me here! I loved "The Long Walk." It's actually the only Stephen King book I've liked so far. It was so twisted and it kept me on the edge of my seat straight through. Plus, it wasn't 10,000 pages long.
But you see, the world is full of so many people with so many different tastes. We don't all have to like the same authors. I read one Dan Brown book ("Angels and Demons") and I'd call it ok at best. I haven't rushed out to buy another one. If we all liked the same thing, life would be pretty boring.
And certainly, Dan Brown doesn't need you to make him rich..he's already there.
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
I'm not of the set that believes that if something is popular, it must not be any good. Books are better to be judged on quality, IMO.
Tatiana, if you are referring to me when you say "you," then you don't know my reading habits, but if you are using "you" to refer to everyone in general, then you are right.
Some authors are popular because they are good, like Mr. Card (I don't mean to sound like a fanboy, but c'mon, we all know this. ), and others are popular because they market well, like Mr. King.
BTW, I recently finished To Kill A Mockingbird. That is a book that good reason to be popular. It is one of the best ever written in the last 150 years.
Posted by T_Smith (Member # 3734) on :
"But I'm sick and tired of finding a copy of Deception Point with a scribbled note to "try it one more time"."
Wow, your friends must work for AOL.
Posted by lem (Member # 6914) on :
I am confused. Is there a movie link somewhere here that I missed?
Posted by Tatiana (Member # 6776) on :
The Reader, yes, I was using the general "you", because you're right, I don't know everyone's reading habits. I also said twice that not all popular books are bad, so I hope your first line wasn't directed at me. =)
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
I liked the first 3/4 of many of King's works.
Can't stand Dan Brown.
Posted by docmagik (Member # 1131) on :
I felt this way about Vince Flynn. When I heard he was an advisor to 24, I tried him out, but discovered his books are basically the standard, "Guy who is better looking, smarter, and stronger than you does a bunch of stuff you could never do."
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
No, Tatiana, it wasn't. I was just stating my thoughts.
Posted by Counter Bean (Member # 10176) on :
Read one and you have read them all...
Posted by The Reader (Member # 3636) on :
What, newspapers?
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I dislike Frank Herbert. *runs and hides*
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I can't think of authors I dislike completely, but I know I hate "She's Come Undone." It was good the first time I read it, but then I read it again and realized it was full of STEREOTYPES! One stupid stereotype after another. It had no substance to it. I also disliked the book version of Forrest Gump too. It had this quality in it I just hate.
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
I liked the book Stephen King wrote about me.
I haven't tried any Dan Brown yet - the people who truly know me understand that I would hate it.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I was just reading Stephen King yesterday. I think he's spiffy, but at lot of times he writes stuff that creeps me out. I do not like to feel creeped out. So I like Green Mile, Eyes of the Dragon, Shawshank was good, but the movie was a lot better, it brought out all sorts of cool things from that. Apt Pupil scared me, so did the Breathing Method, the Body was great though and I also read the dark half which was just creepy.
Posted by Swampjedi (Member # 7374) on :
By the same token, I often like books at which the hoity toity turn up their noses. R. Jordan's Wheel of Time comes to mind. Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
"The Green Mile" was likable, although disturbing, and I had to get used to the narrator's tendency to jump around.
I have all four of the Bachman books, but I've only finished two of them. "The Long Walk" was different. "Rage" was just nuts. I mean, really nuts. The main character's a little like Holden Caufield on crack.
The first half of "Cell" was interesting, but to be honest with you, I wasn't satisfied with the ending.
--j_k
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I'll go ahead and say it...
I didn't not like the Dan Brown books. I enjoyed them for what they were--pop songs, not symphonies. It's candy. But it wasn't the despicable crap you guys make it out to be. He wrote characters that we can sympathize with without lengthy development or transformation--that's not easy. He knows how to pace action to make the book a page-turner. It reads like a action flick, but does it with some pseudo-intelligent subject matter, which I can't complain about. I didn't know anything about Renaissance art or Roman architecture before Da Vinci and Demons, and those books sparked my interest.
It is unfortunate that these books are considered the greatest of our generation by the masses, but there's not much we smart people can do about that, can we?
Posted by RunningBear (Member # 8477) on :
I enjoy books like I enjoy music, or movies. I like a little bit from almost every genre. I enjoyed reading Desperation most of all, and a few others like The Shining, but not all of them.
I also dislike Frank Herbert's books.
Isn't Richard Bachman Stephen King???
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
Richard Bachman is Stephen King. It was his pen name.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
He wrote characters that we can sympathize with without lengthy development or transformation--that's not easy.
I've never sympathized with any of his characters, because he's never written a character that seemed to have their own "voice" to me. They all sound like sarcastic 12 year olds, frankly.
He knows how to pace action to make the book a page-turner. It reads like a action flick,
It reads like a movie screenplay, right down to him continually telling the reader which big name stars his characters physically resemble.
It is unfortunate that these books are considered the greatest of our generation by the masses, but there's not much we smart people can do about that, can we?
And where did I say I wished no one would read his books? I said quite the opposite, more power to them if they like his stuff. I'm just frustrated that they keep expecting -me- to like it.
Posted by PrometheusBound (Member # 10020) on :
Ken Follet is the only thriller writer I can stand to read. And he's not a writer I'd turn to for much more than an airplane book.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
While reading The DaVinci Code, I wanted to reach through the pages, grab Dan Brown by the neck, and throttle him until he agreed not to write anymore.
I felt the same way about Piers Anthony.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
Relax Puffy!
It seems funny that topic about respecting a person's dislike of an author has turned into a Dan Brown bashing-session which would likely put off anyone who read and enjoyed his books.
But I'm not afraid to say it! I read all four. They're certainly not classics but in with my major, sometimes it nice to rest the brain with a half-way decent "airplane book."
Atleast his writing was better than Terry Pratchett. I know some people like the guy as an author, but I can only read a few pages at a time before his egotistic witticisms drive me up the wall.
I'm currently reading King's "Cell" and I'm not sure about it. I was alittle thrown off by how quickly it jumped into a psuedo-zombie tale, but I'm interested to see how it turns out. I love the twists on the zombie-genre.
But then again, I grew up with King. I loved his short stories as a teen and several of his books distracted me from a painful family move. Misery and Dark Half had me sleeping with the lights on for a week.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
Turn it around the other way.
I read "Eragon" for the first time the other day, and while I didn't think it was stellar writing, I didn't think it was that bad. Parts of it bothered me, stylistically, and a bit on the plot here and there, but it was better than a LOT of sci-fi/fantasy I've read in the past couple years, and after seeing how bad the movie was, I thought it was fantastic in comparison.
I don't know how I would have felt about it if I hadn't read for so long that it sucked, or if I hadn't seen how horrible the movie was, but as of now, I kind of like it, and I'm looking forward to reading "Eldest." To say nothing of the writing, I think it's a fun world he's created.
Is that allowed?
Posted by Samuel Bush (Member # 460) on :
quote: While reading The DaVinci Code, I wanted to reach through the pages, grab Dan Brown by the neck, and throttle him until he agreed not to write anymore.
I felt the same way about Piers Anthony.
Now here is a perfect example of what this thread is talking about. I thoroughly enjoyed “The Da Vinci Code” and I’ve had a lot of fun with many of Piers Anthony’s books - especially the Zanth books. Sure I’m aware of the flaws but enjoyed this stuff nonetheless. But I don’t hold it against folks like Flying Cow who don’t like them. And I would hope my liking that stuff isn’t held against me.
The best teacher I ever had was my high school English teacher, Charles Hunter. He used to tell us that one of his many pet peeves was people gushing, “Oh, you just HAVE to read this book!” He’d tell us that there are just too many books out there and you can’t read them all so it is OK to not like stuff even if all around you are going into spasms of ecstasy over it.
I think the same thing goes for individual tastes in TV, music, and movies. (Although, if one likes David Lynch’s and Paul Verhoeven’s stuff, one may need to seek professional help.)
So, Puffy Treat, there you have one of the best teachers, ever, speaking out from the grave giving you permission to indulge your own tastes in literature.
quote: It is unfortunate that these books are considered the greatest of our generation by the masses, but there's not much we smart people can do about that, can we?
Speaking of masses going into spasms of ecstasy, it seemed like the whole student body of my high school was doing that over “Lord of the Flies.” (Not to be confused with “The Lord of the Rings” which is the greatest work of Literature ever written, and that is not an opinion but a Law Of The Universe. ) So, being the ornery rebellious cuss that I am, I absolutely refused to read “Lord of the Flies,” and haven’t to this day (nearly forty years later). Of course that didn’t stop me from turning in a book report on it and getting an A when I had failed to actually read a book one month and needed something in a hurry. So many students had given oral book reports on it that I felt I didn’t actually need to read it. (Is there a statute of limitations on cheating?)
I believe that Frank Herbert’s name has been mentioned. In 1975 I got to chatting with a professor at BYU while I was cleaning his office one morning. He made the comment that he was amazed by Frank Herbert. What amazed him was that Herbert was able to write such a great book as “Dune” because all of his other works were crap. Of course, Dune is a great book. But keep in mind that he also told me that Asimov’s “Foundation” trilogy was crap. So I’m not sure how much I’m obligated to trust anything this professor says. His attitude was that SF that was not plausible was not good literature. That’s why he objected to Foundation so much because it was not plausible.
So, “Dune” was plausible? What with deformed mutants guiding ships though hyperspace because they could see into the future, and folks running around making prophecies and controlling other people’s minds, and self aware fetuses, and stuff. Go figure. I’m just glad I resisted the urge to take a class from him.
I sure hope professors of SF literature have gotten better over that last 30 years.
As for Steven King, it is OK to not like his stuff but I will say this for “The Long Walk”: It is the best description for what rotating shift work feels like that I have ever read. King also described it pretty good with this line from “The Tommyknockers” pp. 421, “. . . The result was a kind of constant, muddled consciousness across which thin gray veils of sleep were sometimes drawn, like unwashed stockings.”
So there are sometimes gems in even some of the most disturbing literature I guess.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Liking Dan Brown and Piers Anthony lost you points, but you won them back with your crack about Verhoeven. Posted by Samuel Bush (Member # 460) on :
Do I get any points for liking Jane Austen?
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
), and others are popular because they market well, like Mr. King.![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Evil Laugh]](graemlins/evillaugh.gif)
So many students had given oral book reports on it that I felt I didn’t actually need to read it. (Is there a statute of limitations on cheating?)![[Sleep]](graemlins/sleep.gif)
King also described it pretty good with this line from “The Tommyknockers” pp. 421, “. . . The result was a kind of constant, muddled consciousness across which thin gray veils of sleep were sometimes drawn, like unwashed stockings.”![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)