Southern writer, Pat Conroy, has been highly acclaimed by so any. I tried to read his last book about Charleston, where I now live. I found it not only unreadable, but appalling.

Woodnymph - Although I really liked Conroy's Prince of Tides (despite its dark subject matter), like you, I had to quickly give up on South of Broad, the novel set in Charleston.

I've long been interested in Pat Conroy and always felt bad that he endured such extreme psychological difficulties. The Wikipedia article about him includes a very sad quote comparing the pleasure Conroy's third wife, Cassandra King, took in writing, compared to his own experience: "I'll hear her cackle with laughter at some funny line she's written. I've never cackled with laughter at a single line I've ever written. None of it has given me pleasure. She writes with pleasure and joy, and I sit there in gloom and darkness."

Kathy...I don't know if I would call Albom dense...but I certainly agree that he has a healthy amount of naiveté that could be annoying to a reader. I tended to overlook that and concentrated on Morrie's contributions when I read the book. However, anyone who could write The First Phone Call From Heaven and some of his other somewhat mystical books surely might have a narrow public appeal. I think he's an idealist who wants to rid the world he knows of harmful aspects. His works are appealing to me when I need a breather from the harsh realities of life around me. I think books are often mentally medicinal...perhaps therapeutic ...to me and in that light, I often read what appeals to me at the moment...which may not be the most popular item in print. Albom's books stretch my imagination and lead me to a curious comfort zone...not always of this planet. Daydreaming in print. :-)

Oh, Kathy, you reminded me that Prince of Tides is on my list of worst books I've read, too. :)

Donna

Possession by A.S. Byatt. I remember I heard a great interview with her on NPR and thought I'd pick up the book. I hated it. But, I still enjoy hearing her interviewed.

Merryworld, all that faux Victorian poetry in Byatt's Possession made me loathe it, although I usually don't mind poetry and often love it.

The worst book I've tried to read was that 50 Shades . . . thing. But I didn't try to enjoy it, so it doesn't really count in my tally.

Here are a few that made me miserable while reading them. I'm no longer sure which was the worst.

Room by Emma Donoghue

The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold

One Thousand White Women: The Journals of May Dodd by Jim Fergus

I Know This Much Is True by Wally Lamb

The above four are the books that made me decide that I didn't want to belong to a book club/group where I felt obligated to read the selection for a discussion.

Possession is the book I couldn't think of. I didn't get far into it.

I read at least 50 to 100 pages of the books below, but disliked them so much, I couldn't finish them:

The Egyptologist --- Arthur Phillips. The worst ever.

The Fig Eater --- Jody Shields (this book was disturbing)

Fall on Your Knees --- Anne Marie McDonald

Vee, I remember loving Costain's "Black Rose" and "Silver Chalice" in my teens but probably not so much now! Apparently there are historical mistakes, which would bother me.

I have tried to persevere with many books and given up. Too many to name or recall the titles. They are usually badly written mysteries as I rarely try to read "worthy novels" excepting I did try "Wuthering Heights" as far as the first page!

Annpan, yes Wuthering Heights was another non-starter. I got through the first couple of chapters and gave up, although Dido/Diana, who used to be part of RP, lived in Haworth where the Bronte's grew up . . . and died . . . and was an English teacher, tried to persuade me to persevere; but I couldn't.

I just couldn't enjoy The Secret History by Donna Tartt, although most people seem to love it.

Freidag - Yikes! I really liked three of your least-favorite books:

Room by Emma Donoghue
The Lovely Bones by Alice Sebold
I Know This Much Is True by Wally Lamb

I certainly understand that the dark subject matter of all three is off-putting, and would not be for everyone. But I found them all very compelling.

Yoyo - Your topic is making me think too hard!

I'm glad I'm not alone in hating "Wuthering Heights". Also found "The Mill on the Floss" a bit weird and dark. On the other hand, I loved Tartt's "the Secret History" and have read it several times. It's interesting how different we all are in our reading tastes here.

I adored Wuthering Heights, but then I read it 40 years ago - in my late teens, when that all seemed very romantic. No doubt it would no longer appeal. It was a mistake for me to re-read Jane Eyre; I won't do that to Wuthering Heights.

Kathy, I'm not surprised that you found the Donoghue, Sebold, and Lamb books compelling. It seems that many readers have. I suspect I am an oddball in respect to those books, as well as One Thousand White Women. All seem to be particularly favored by what I call book club readers. Not that I am saying there's anything inherently peculiar about book clubs or their members, but I do know that I do not share their taste very often. I'm actually not sorry that I read those books, but I absolutely never want to read them again. I found them too depressing. One Thousand . . . characters, on the other hand, struck me as one silly stereotype after another.

I just thought of another book that I didn't enjoy at all: We Were the Mulvaneys by Joyce Carol Oates. Carolyn may agree with me on that one. :-)

Woodnymph, I have had problems with every George Eliot book I've tried to read. The Mill on the Floss left me in dismay when I first read it in my early teens. It did not improve for me when I read it as an adult.

Reader, your mention of The Fig Eater rang a bell with me, although I have no clear recall of anything about it. I looked it up in my book log and found that I read it in 2001. Apparently I found it sufficiently interesting to finish and give three stars, but I have no idea why.

Frieda - It's interesting that you categorize the Donoghue, Sebold and Lamb books as being favored by book club readers. Oddly, none of those three books have been selections of my book club. Still, I am one of those book club readers I suppose, even when reading my own selections, so your assessment may be spot on. I didn't happen to read One Thousand White Women by the way, simply because it did not appeal to me.

Your mention of Joyce Carol Oates brought up memories of yet another unpleasant reading experience. I read her lengthy novel, A Bloodsmoor Romance, many years ago. So long ago, in fact, that it was during my youthful "I must finish every book I start" period. Finishing the book did prevent me from ever picking up another Oates book though, so perhaps it served a good purpose.

Yes, Frieda, I wholeheartedly agree with hating We Were the Mulvaneys. For such a "perfect" family to fall apart over one member's mistake didn't say much for their perfection! Love? Forgiveness? To me, that's what makes a family. I have never read another Oates book either, Kathy.

I also loved Wuthering Heights, but I read it as a teenager, too. I have reread Jane Eyre and still like it.

Frieda, I agree with you regarding books popular with book group readers -- personally, I've found these highly-touted books to be far too dark and dysfunctional for my taste, though obviously they are powerful stories -- to this day I can't crack an egg without thinking about ROOM, which on the whole makes my experience of having read it even more miserable as I can't just wipe it from the memory banks. I am also not a fan of Donna Tartt, an opinion based solely upon reading The Goldfinch. I liked parts of it, but thought it was needlessly (endlessly!) long and lacked a decent ending. To further support your point, I read both of these with my book group.

Count me as a fan of Possession, though. I will confess I only skimmed the poetry parts in order to get back to the story, which I enjoyed.

I loved Jane Eyre as a teen and read it multiple times. However, I was never a fan of Wuthering Heights, I just didn't get the Heathcliff attraction and wasn't that fond of Kathy, either. Just too much angst and drama.

A number of these books discussed above I've heard of but have never attempted to read.

My "worst book" list is comprised of The Goldfinch by Tartt. Forget it. Also just about anything by Dickens.. and I've tried to read many of his simply because I believed "an educated person should be able to say they've read at least one Dickens." Well, at-almost-65 I've given up. For the sake of full disclosure I will say I read Christmas Carol every Christmas and I do enjoy Cricket on the Hearth too, but that's it. A Gentleman in Moscow was another book - it was highly recommended - I just couldn't get into it.

I saw Thomas Costain listed here and while I don't remember reading his fiction, his non-fiction books (I think there are four) on the Plantagenets I thoroughly enjoyed. Read them years ago while I was in high school.

Here's another raised hand for loving Jane Eyre, but not-so-much Wuthering Heights.

I'm sure there are many other books on my "Worst" list, but I just can't think of them.

Oh good, someone else who does not enjoy reading Dickens. I could only get through "A Tale of Two Cities" and "A Christmas Carol." I find his books bleak and dark, for the most part. It seems odd, as we share the same birthday.

I did like "Possession" but like another reader, I just skipped over the poems.

The Book Of Air And Shadows by Michael Gruber. UGH.

Coming late to the party here, but chalk up one more who liked Jane Eyre, but couldn't get through Wuthering Heights, although I tried twice. Another book that I wanted to like, but couldn't get past the first 50 or so pages was Giants in the Earth; I've tried twice to read that too.

A more recent book that falls in this category for me was Nick Harkaway's Gnomon. It got spectacular reviews, but I could barely get through it. In addition to unnecessarily abstruse vocabulary (does one really need to use 'brinjal' for eggplant purple? come on....), the story is told by multiple personas, some of whom are 'real' and others software constructs (maybe!), who just ramble on and on and on and on. Such an interesting concept novel that I really wanted to like it, but so little plot for so many words - it could have been half its length.

I gave up on A Gentleman in Moscow on the first try, but so many here raved about it that I tried it again. I stuck with it then suddenly realized I was sucked into it! It was like being there in the hotel.

Donna

Re Possessions a book I have never read.

I just noticed it mentioned in an 'obit' in the Telegraph (it might seem ghoulish but I find out so much info from the various reports of the deaths among the Great and the Good). The Cambridge don, Eric Griffiths, apparently well known for his acerbic tongue was on a TV arts show with AS Byatt and 'dismissed her prize-winning book as "the kind of novel I'd write if I didn't know I couldn't write a novel." She was not a happy bunny after that remark.

Vee - "...not a happy bunny..." LOL. We say " not a happy camper" !

Bon, I think I like "bunny" much better! :)

. . . not a happy bunny

Is the bunny one of those furry creatures with long ears and a constantly twitching nose? It's certainly an amusing image that comes to my mind, but is it the right image, Vee? What's the origin of the phrase, do you know?

Frieda, no idea where the expression comes from and you ask if they are "furry creatures . . . ." You must be familiar with the childish expression 'bunny rabbit' and I don't know where that word comes from either . . . think of Bugs Bunny, although I never think of him as cuddly rather more toothy and crafty. So . . . that's all folks!

A bunny is a baby rabbit......like a fawn is a baby deer.......and a calf is a baby cow......and so forth ! " beh, deh, beh, deh, beh, deh...that's all folks ! "

Vee, thanks for your reply. Sorry, I didn't have a chance to respond before now. I had to turn off my device.

Like Yvonne, I thought "not a happy bunny" was a funny variation of what Americans say, which is usually "not a happy camper," although I've heard "not a happy puppy" occasionally.

I suppose all of them are examples of sayings that nobody knows where they came from. They don't have to make sense, either.

"Not a happy camper" does make a certain amount of sense to me, however, as I relate it to being somewhere I don't particularly want to be -- as at summer youth camp when I was an adolescent or camping in a tent on the rim of a volcano after I married a volcanologist.

I can imagine Ms. Byatt not wanting to be there in the company of Eric Griffiths after his sarcastic comment. Somehow, though, thinking of Ms. Byatt as a bunny -- even an unhappy one -- is laughably absurd to me. In the U.S. very physically attractive women enthusiasts are sometimes called "bunnies," such as ski bunnies (snow or water). Then there's the famous Playboy Bunny . . . Not at all how I think of Antonia Susan Byatt. :-)

Australians would once probably have said 'not a happy camper', but in 2000 there was a TV ad in which an employee named Jan forgot to put in the company's name in the Yellow Pages - a phone book of businesses. The boss, when she finds out, says 'Not Happy, Jan!' and that's stuck.

When I was 9 I went to a Girl Scout camp for a week . My friend also went and after one day she was so homesick her mother had to come and cart her whimpering self back home ! I felt abandoned since she was going to be MY security blanket while away from home .......she was not a happy camper for sure.

I have been "camping" (i.e. spent the night in an RV) for two nights out of my entire life, and I assure you all I was most unhappy! Camping is definitely not - my - thing. :) My DH and his sister will reminisce on and on about the Methodist Youth Camp, and I shudder and thank God and my parents that they never sent me to camp.

Donna

An RV is what I'd call " glamping ". If you don't have mice, ants, spiders and possibly a skunk or bear out there as you stumble to the outhouse, it's not true camping !

There is a lovely hotel in Ithaca NY which offers the experience of glamping (glamourous camping) . They have erected several large tents on the acreage behind the hotel and each is furnished with actual hotel room funishings and electricity. They also have a social building with showers and bathrooms for the glampers use. Meals are delivered to your tent as well. What an odd hybrid experience .

Bon, that is perfect for me. I am a 'bitey' magnet and at present have been given two large insect bites although I am indoors!

The last time I slept in a tent was when I was a Girl Guide in England, some seventy years ago. I was allowed a camp bed instead of a sleeping bag because of health problems and my mother wouldn't let me go otherwise!

Annpan, I get bitten by everything that flies, crawls, wriggles . . . no 'anti' insect cream/spay makes any difference.

The last time I camped, many years ago, I awoke in the night to find a very large and slimy slug making its way up my front and trying to get into my sleeping-bag. Yuk and double yuck.

I can't read Margaret Atwood and have really given it a chance. I don't even remember now why because after a couple of attempts I just gave up. Too bad because her work is so often recommended to me.

I love Jane Eyre still, and count it among my lifetime favorite books. I've probably read it a dozen times at least. My favorite aspect at this time of life was my least favorite aspect when I read it as a teenaged girl. I love it that Rochester is brought low and Jane raised high, so that they can marry as equals.

As for Wuthering Heights, I find it interesting rather than enthralling. Sometimes people read it as a romance, which it is not. It is a story of obsession, not love. I don't think that either Heathcliff or Catherine are actually meant to be liked. They are two damaged people who might have done better together than apart. Hindley is the nastiest character, in my opinion. I've only read it twice, and probably won't read it again, but who knows? There is a copy on my shelf just in case. I try to own all the books I might want to re-read, as you can never depend on a library to keep your favorites.

As for books I've struggled to read and given up in despair, they are legion. I've decided that there are too many enjoyable books in this world to waste my time on books I dislike. If I had to pick one it would probably be Confederacy of Dunces, though to be fair, I didn't struggle very long.

bleusblue2......I completely agree ! Margaret Atwood is difficult to enjoy. I also don't agree with all the praise.

bleusblue2 and yoyobon - I have the same feeling about Margaret Atwood books, although I admit it is based on my reading just one - The Handmaid's Tale. Google tells me that she has written a lot of books, so perhaps one or two of them are enjoyable? Does anyone know?

Re: Mags Atwood books........I read The Blind Assasin and hated it. The only good thing is that it cured me from ever being tempted by her again.

I really liked several of Marg. Atwood's earlier works: Cat's Eye, for one. I also liked her poetry several decades ago.

I read the first few Atwood books, and I don't like them either.

Vee, how come you can say bitten and we can't say gotten? I'm another whom the biters like.

Carolyn, I give you permission to say anything you wish(en) ! :0)

Can't answer that Carolyn! Didn't know you in the US don't use bitten. Does this mean you would say "I was badly bit by an ant"?

I have also noticed in US usage the word fit is used when we would say fitted. eg 'The new 'fridge fitted into the corner of the kitchen'

Re gotten. Is it used in 'formal' speech, as in a legal document for eg?

While on the subject . . . I've noticed that in the US you say two times whereas we say twice , although the use of thrice (three times) is now considered archaic/Biblical.

We would say " I was bitten by ...." and " the fridge fit into the space".....

But we do say "twice" … don't we? (I do.) But not to the exclusion of "two times." Hmmm...

We do say twice, and gotten is considered to be perfectly correct for any occasion.

But I have noticed that using "-er" for almost any situation is slowly eroding into using "more" instead. I suspect that people are confused as to which they should use, so they default to "more" as it seems safer to them. So now we have people saying "He runs more fast than any of the other athletes". Sigh.

Yes, also " more funner " , " more harder"........ are common errors which I jump to correct with my young grandson.

I just remembered that I did not like Hilary Mantel's "Bring Up the Bodies." I kept hearing how fantastic it was and really tried to get into it, but just could not stay with the writing style.