Books you feel were overrated

[ClearSky456]

Just finished Lessons in Chemistry and kind of wondering what all the fuss was about?! Don't get me wrong, I did enjoy it but given so many people had told me I HAD to read it, I was left feeling a bit underwhelmed.

Anyone else felt the same, or anyone felt like this about another book recently? I had the same feeling with Daisy Jones and the Six too.

I didn’t finish The Night Circus, absolutely nothing happened it was so dull and life is too short!

I loved kite runner, it is one of my favourite books. As I was reading it I asked my friend does what I think happens happen and I don’t want to turn the page to find out.

Henry James: Portrait of a Lady. Christ it's dull. By the end I had no image of the main character at all. She was a blank to me (even though we've spent 500 pages in her company). I'm sure it's a masterpiece and all that, but I'll stick to Dickens and Jane Austen. Dickens creates a more vivid, three-dimensional character in just one paragraph than James manages in an entire novel.

Philip Roth: Portnoy's Complaint. Disgusting, vile, charmless central character. And while his descriptions of childhood are amusing, the rest of the book isn't funny at all. I wasn't sure whether we were supposed to laugh at him or pity him or what. Don't tell me if you know. I don't care. I just wanted him to jump off a cliff. After finishing it (I have a thing about finishing novels), I read P. G. Wodehouse to cleanse myself of the memory. In Wodehouse you have all the warmth and charm and humour that Roth lacks. Total mystery to me why this book is admired. OK, he may be a good stylist, but Wodehouse beats him even there.

Captain Corelli’s Manfolin. Sanctimonious, schmaltzy and just boring. Huge hype about 25 yrs ago. Like a mug I also saw the film ( equally underwhelming).

Absolutely agree @TheGander. I’ve tried three times to read that - the last time after we’d had a holiday in Kefalonia. But it’s execrable. Over-written and dull as a result.

I agree too @TheGander although I didn’t see the film.

That film meant I’ve never been able to watch anything with Penelope Cruz in.

Glad it’s not just me. Yes pour Penelope Cruz with her grafted on basket of herbs . If you want to get over the memory, try Vicky Christina Barcelona she’s very good in it. Hilariously plays a deluded artist.

If every single publisher at the time had been a woman, Portnoy’s Complaint would have been dismissed as the insane ramblings of a neurotic pervert and put in the bin.

I love Portnoy’s Complaint and I adore most of Philip Roth’s work, though I tend to stick to his acknowledged best works/my favourites. (He was edited by Diana Athill, there were a lot of women in publishing then as now, it was a very very different time). I can do that while still seeing that it is an entirely male centric view of the world - why would it be anything else?? The problem if there is one is that he/the world thought a make centric view was the only legitimate one.

I don't think you're unusual. It's a funny thing, but some people just cannot read her. My mother is like that. She loves Dickens (she even belongs to a Dickens reading group), and she also likes the Brontes and George Eliot. But she just can't read Austen.

Others love Austen but can't read Dickens. Personally, I love Austen, but I can see why she's not for everyone. On the other hand, I can't read D. H. Lawrence

Wow, that shows I shouldn’t go assuming things. I didn’t know Diana Athill was his editor. How interesting! Thank you 👍🏻

As someone involved with Reading Groups in a professional capacity it's always fun to see the different reactiobs to the same book!

However there are a few books that are generally liked year after year - Gentleman in Moscow, Hamnet, Small Things like These, Girl with the Louding Voice.

Eleanor Catton - Birnam Wood featured heavily in the Dislikes column.

Interesting. I found gentleman in Moscow a little “ synthetic” but can’t put my finger on why. But an enjoyable read nonetheless. I imagine Small Pleasures would do well in a reading group. I loved it.

I know what you mean. I didn’t mind it but I found it in a similar vein to Lessons in Chemistry (which I disliked) - I can’t think of a better word but I know what you mean by synthetic!!

I’m a gardener and at the beginning of the book (a G in Moscow) thers a description of the lilacs in the park (spring summer flowering) and then something about blackberries for sale ( late summer autumn) - I immediately was annoyed and kept looking for flaws - didn’t finish it - I’ve read elsewhere that there were factual errors.

I was disappointed by Twilight - wasnt expecting great literature but thought it would be good crap, if that makes sense!

Instead just found it very dull.

That’s interesting. You sense it was put together by research and not much personal experience. Except of course he messed up on the botanical details!

Yes that’s totally it - like Lessons in Chemistry

its like the author did some rudimentary research and watched some films set in the era but there wasn’t much to support it

and I guess the botany is an example. Maybe they were written by AI!

I get that it's a male-centric viewpoint. The problem, I think, is that it's so utterly charmless. You can have an anti-hero who is funny. But Portnoy is worse than an anti-hero. He's utterly loathsome and repellent. I don't think I have ever hated a literary character more. He made my skin crawl. To be funny, a comedy character has to have some redeeming qualities. There has to be something likeable, or at least pitiable, about them. Think of Basil Fawlty, for example, or David Brent or Mr Micawber. All are flawed, even horrible, but you cannot help liking them. Anyone who likes Portnoy needs psychiatric care.

Evelyn Waugh is vicious and cruel. In his novels, characters are killed off in the most appalling ways, and he has a real contempt for, well, everybody. But his novels have such humour and charm and class that you kind of forgive him.

All I took from Roth was an even deeper love for P. G. Wodehouse. Wodehouse pulled off the miracle of writing deeply funny books that are completely without cruelty. It's astonishing. In general, humour requires and bit of venom and edge to make me laugh. There is none of that in Wodehouse, and yet he's hilarious.

I loved The Nightcircus, so much I’ve read it twice (v rare thing for me).

I have been thoroughly disappointed with all the hyped-up romantasy books - ACOTAR, Fourth Wing, City of Glass, the Vampire one…. I have now given up on that genre (if it even is one).