Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Nice idea! I look forward to seeing some reviews :D

An obvious choice is L. Ron Hubbard, who really was appalling. [auhtor:Michael Moorcock] wrote a lot of garbage in the late 60s and 70s - he often churned out a book a week to make money to support bands he was managing or SF magazines - but i suspect most of his work still in print is the relatively good stuff.

There's lots of bad horror out there - Guy N smith's Crabs books, Shaun Hutson (I went through a bad horror phase as a teenager). I think i've managed to avoid a lot of bad SF (or blanked it out), although - and this is probably going to get me flamed - I find Larry Niven completely unreadable. I just about struggled through Ringworld, some interesting concepts to keep it ticking over, but have abandoned every other book I've picked up by him, notable Rainbow Mars.

I've two book s TBR of interest. I recently picked up a cheap copy of Left Behind, on the theory that it's unfair of me to slag it off without reading it. The other is Bad Book Club by one of my favourite comedians, Robin Ince, about his obsession with terrible literature. In fact, you've inspired me to move that to the top of my TBR pile. I'll keep you posted on what I find...

All-time worst: Any book after the first in John Norman's "Gor" series. Ever see a paragraph that spanned several pages? Repeating diatribes? The only reason the series sold was SEX.

The "very worst" don't get published, so forget about anything from the major publishers. Go to the 99 cent section for Kindle books and look at the 20% samples of the self-published books (you can tell them by the publisher's name that have no web presence or are a vanity outfit). Some of them will be good, but a lot of them will be horrible. Or check out the free section for similar works.

There's an old adage that a good story can survive bad writing. But I believe that a good story NEEDS good writing to be superb. The first book in the Left Behind series is an example of that. The writing got better with the subsequent books (or I got used to the style).

Runelords by David Farland. Worst ever published epic fantasy (well, that i've had the misfortune to read.) A mediocrity in all things combined with the most offensive (lack of) morality i've ever read combine together to a transcendant badness that leaves more obvious candidated far behind.

Robin Ince sounds interesting.

Doctor Who: Coming of the Terraphiles - Horrible, horrible book. In no way does it resemble the Doctor or Amy in any way, shape or form.

The Crystal Star - In the Star Wars Expanded Universe, there are a LOT of books that are just not very good. This one is the worst of the lot.

The Word for World is Forest - I'm probably alone in this, but I hated this book. It was dated, the villain was nothing more than a caricature, and a lot of it was just heavy-handed.

Robert Stanek.

Terry Goodkind.

Richard Knaak (the early stuff, anyway; don't know about his more recent books). I proofread some of these, and it was a slog!

The Host by Stephenie Meyer - Uggh, this was terrible. GO BACK TO TEENAGE SPARKLEPIRES.

Naked Empire by Terry Goodkind - In which the main character becomes an obvious author self-insert to preach his political ideas. What do you mean, you don't like or agree with the main character? Well, you die. And he doesn't have to feel any regret because he's JUST THAT AWESOME.

There's also some really bizarre stuff going on in Anne Bishop's Black Jewels trilogy. It kept me reading at the time, but I was also going "bwuh?" at the names (Saetan, Lucivar) and the magic system (magical stones and (view spoiler)[cock rings (hide spoiler)]. yes, really.) It also has the biggest canon Mary Sue in existence.

What comes to mind is the Echelon series by E. Robert Dunn. It's not all bad, mind, and not the worst which is too absolute for me, but it reads like a screenplay writer wrote it, which I found most annoying.

The 'worser' books I've tried have been unreadable, usually self-edited, self-published books I've been asked to read. My response has always been, "Get a professional editor and then I will read it."

Robert wrote: "Ok, I yield! I can't stop laughing. :-)

I'm feverishly trying to make my first book not suck. The odds (but not the world, just the odds) are against me.

When I do publish I want you, Valerie,..."

You might do some research at "How to Get Published"

A blog devoted to teaching writers how to become "authors" (to me, that means you've actually published something, hopefully via a "real" publisher as opposed to a vanity or self-publishing press).

There are a large variety of articles by a number of people of varying degrees of expertise. Use the search box or the categories on the right side to find articles on areas where you feel weak.

Start with the latest article on the home page (the one on top). I think any writer can be improved by following the advice (within reason) contained in that one.

The Eye of Argon is infamously so bad it's good.

Good or bad is definitely a your mileage may vary thing. A lot of people weren't impressed by some of Heinlein's later work. (I'm thinking of The Number of the Beast and I Will Fear No Evil.)

Agreed! I am a strong Heinlein fan and I Will Fear No Evil is one of heinleins worst.

Perry Rhodan: Thora9there are several iin ther series) are pretty full of cliches and formula writing. They may not be as "worst" as you are looking for--but reading one will show you som things to avoid.

Kernos wrote: "What comes to mind is the Echelon series ... My response has always been, "Get a professional editor and then I will read it."

The label "professional editor" is no guarantee of competence - something all authors should be aware of. If you employ one yourself, read some titles they've edited and if possible communicate with at least a couple of their authors. A good editor isn't going to be cheap - they don't need to be - so check them out thoroughly.

Robert wrote: "Ok, I yield! I can't stop laughing. :-)

I'm feverishly trying to make my first book not suck. The odds (but not the world, just the odds) are against me.

When I do publish I want you, Valerie,..."

Will do! :D Really, I enjoy most books, so when I happen to dislike one it stays with me. The sad thing is that I wasn't really exaggerating with Naked Empire - if you want more verification, go check out its reviews on Amazon. It has a 2.5-average star rating (which should say a lot right there), and the sum of its 1 and 2 star reviews is greater than the sum of its 4 and 5 star reviews...

Completely forgot about Eye of Argon! Also, is one of the most hilarious examples of purple prose ever, apparently from Silk and Steel by Ron Miller. And for sheer horror, here's

Valerie wrote: "Also, this is one of the most hilarious examples of purple prose ever, apparently from Silk and Steel by Ron Miller. ..."

That is...that is...

I barely survived the fields of wheat, but the killing stroke was saved till last, when I learned her eyes were the sound of rain.

[Actually, I read the first and last couple of paragraphs and the rest was such a welter of simile and metaphor that I constantly stuttered to a halt, which is a good lesson in itself. Each paragraph could stand on its own as an example of overdone, but two entire pages? With anacondas?]

Damn Valerie. You had some really bad luck in books. Those links were horrid.

I just can't fathom the amount of suckage on display.

It hurts.

My votes for the worst Fantasy book goes to: Alice at Heart and Lover Enshrined.I just couldn't stop laughing at Alice at Heart and to be honest, I didn't even make it halfway through the book because I thought it simply too godawful to continue. The latter had simply too much what I call "poor-me" syndrome, so much in fact that it took me close to two weeks to finish half of the book. The "poor-me" syndrome was nicely complimented with pages and pages of drug abuse to help emphasize how much the main character hated himself. I think the only reason it has 4 stars is because J.R Ward has such a huge fan base.

Ala wrote: "Damn Valerie. You had some really bad luck in books. Those links were horrid.

I just can't fathom the amount of suckage on display.

It hurts."

Luckily, I haven't read them - I got those links years ago via LiveJournal. However, they're very relevant.

No wonder you're still coherent. :P

I feel bad for Robert if he actually reads those

Another novel that comes to mind is Ivory Sword: The Lore of DAYONE. It was the 1st time I was offered a free copy in exchange for a review. It's an epic fantasy and I see 2 other novels in the series have been published since.

The plot was complex, layered and interesting, if a bit derivative. Language, sentence structure, grammar... made reading difficult. The text didn't flow. Again a good editor would have been a big help. A good bit of sculpting needed doing, IMO. I don't think one can edit (or proof) their own work. I reviewed this some time ago.

Kernos wrote: "Another novel that ... needed doing, IMO. I don't think one can edit (or proof) their own work. ..."

Despite my earlier comment, I absolutely agree with you.

My concern is that there are just as many bad editors as there are bad authors (perhaps more, as many people who set up as independent editors are writers who are failing to generate an income). Writers need to be aware of this.

I wanted to weigh in in defense of Stephenie Meyer's The Host. I liked it a great deal. But then, in spite of my English-major routes and advanced age, I enjoyed the Twilight series. I think The Host is somewhat better written -- and it doesn't use "agony/agonizing" as often as Twilight-etc. do....

Pat wrote: "...My concern is that there are just as many bad editors as there are bad authors (perhaps more, as many people who set up as independent editors are writers who are failing to generate an income). Writers need to be aware of this. "

I'm sure there are too and that there are probably great amateur editors. I wonder if having an virtual author's colony or an author's VPN (like the Inklings, only on the web) would work, having a group of trusted authors critique each other's efforts?

I think what we are all looking for, readers and authors alike, is a way to create, recognize and distribute good literature without a bevy of middlemen taking all the proceeds.

CJ Cherryh one of the great SFF authors is trying something like this now. See

Anything by Terry Goodkind.

it may have already been mentioned.....The Sword of Shannara, of course. UGH.

I would have vote for Renegade's Magic, and The Winds of Dune, could have done without both of those books.

The problem with Renegade's Magic was that it was part of a trilogy that had almost no magic, then this book being the last, had all the magic, which made the main character into a very passive character, but I loved the first two books in the trilogy.

Renegade's Magic was written by Robin Hobb, which up to until that point, most people liked all her other books.

mark wrote: "it may have already been mentioned.....The Sword of Shannara, of course. UGH."

This generally comes up in a discussion like this. But if one was reading in the '70s when it 1st appeared, they were like a breathe of fresh air. I'd read Tolkien 6 or 7 times, when the 1st Shannara trilogy appeared and I had been wanting more epic fantasy for some time. It was the 1st I knew about. Almost totally derivative of Tolkien, but different enough to be enjoyable back then. I quite enjoyed the 1st 2 or 3 trilogies.

But, I agree with all of the series written since, it stands at the lower end of the scale.

Hey at least Sword of Shannara is not The Iron Tower Omnibus by Dennis L. McKiernan, which is the most similar book to Lord of the Rings I have ever heard.

The problem with Sword of Shannara wasn't that it was imitation Tolkien, but that it was shallow imitation Tolkien.

i'm not so young...i read Sword of Shannara in the early 80s! not quite the 70s, but close. i hated it so much, it put me off of fantasy for nearly a decade. thanks a lot, Sword of Shannara!

Valerie wrote: "Robert wrote: "Ok, I yield! I can't stop laughing. :-)

I'm feverishly trying to make my first book not suck. The odds (but not the world, just the odds) are against me.

When I do publish I wan..."

That description was pretty bad in overdoing it. When the author starts to compare the female form to warm mercury, it's time to return that book to the library and never look back.

The Bio of a Space Tyrant series by Piers Anthony. Even as a teenager, when I read everything I could find, I couldn't get through that dreck.

ugh, i had the same experience with Bio of a Space Tyrant. what a rape-fest that one was.

I recently tried some John Ringo, and it was definitely some of the worst prose I ever had the misfortune to read. I was very disappointed, and not least because there were some nifty ideas here and there (when not subsumed under tidal waves of ridiculous political garbage).

Personally I cannot stand to read any Marion Zimmer Bradley or Ursula K. LeGuin. Something in their worldviews is inimical to me.

Piers Anthony comes across as a rancid pervert.

Orson Scott Card has writing abilities but his personal qualities are less attractive than a poisonous toad's.

I love late Heinlein books though. The Number of the Beast is my favorite.

Ruby wrote: "Piers Anthony comes across as a rancid pervert."

Not that I disagree or agree, but why do you feel that way?

Ala wrote: "Ruby wrote: "Piers Anthony comes across as a rancid pervert."

Not that I disagree or agree, but why do you feel that way?"

I stopped reading Piers Anthony during the Immortality series when he had a woman who had been transformed into a man immediately try and rape the nearest woman because s/he wasn't used to controlling all those manly urges.

It was a throw the book across the room moment.

I was thinking mainly of his obsession with young girls' underpants, but that makes a better example. It crops out all over his books. :/

I agree with you on Piers Anthony Ruby, one of my friend all she read or know of his were his basically porn books, which is not good, maybe it has to do with that she was bi.

I liked some of Piers Anthony's stuff, like the story about the human who became a dentist for aliens. It was so pulpy and nerdy, so it was amusing. However, that was not what I was going to say.

I bought his Anthonology at a library book sale, and while some of the stories were enjoyable, others showed some creepiness. In the introduction, he was talking about how sometimes he does not get published because he pushes too many boundaries and went on to say, "I have never had difficulty violating editorial taboos, and have the rejections to prove it. In fact I later wrote an erotic novel, 3.97 Erect, that was too hot for the erotc market; Playboy bounced it as too gross for words."

Ruby wrote: "Personally I cannot stand to read any Marion Zimmer Bradley or Ursula K. LeGuin. Something in their worldviews is inimical to me...."

i'm so curious about what you mean by this!

In fact I later wrote an erotic novel, 3.97 Erect, that was too hot for the erotc market; Playboy bounced it as too gross for words."

somehow "too gross for words" just doesn't sound like an erotic novel to me, piers anthony!

mark wrote: "Ruby wrote: "Personally I cannot stand to read any Marion Zimmer Bradley or Ursula K. LeGuin. Something in their worldviews is inimical to me...."

i'm so curious about what you mean by this!"

I don't know, I just hate everything they write. I've forced myself to read multiple books and short stories of each, and I equally cannot stand any of them. I don't like the people or what happens to them. What do you call that?

automatic antipathy! or "you just don't like their style".

i've certainly enjoyed and even respected leguin. but in a way, she leaves me a bit cold. i could read the original Earthsea trilogy over and over, but for some reason her scifi only intellectually interests me - i don't get much emotional excitement over it.

now MZB...she's a guilty favorite. some of her stuff is great imo. a lot is sorta embarrassing. i've been reading the Darkover novels for over a decade now, i feel like i practically live there. but she is certainly a hit-or-miss author.

Also Terry Brooks and Terry Goodkind and Stephen Donaldson and David Gemmell are on my mental list of authors too dull to read.

Ruby wrote: "Also Terry Brooks and Terry Goodkind and Stephen Donaldson and David Gemmell are on my mental list of authors too dull to read."

I've enjoyed all these authors, but especially Donaldson and Gemmell who I consider much classier the the Terry's. I hate to see them mentioned together.

Fun thread. I haven't read through every response, but as I recall, some of EE Doc Smith's Lensman books were impossible for me to get through. Think bad Heinlein, with tons of exposition and wooden dialogue, and you're on the right track... There were about a million of them, IIRC, and they started out okay but deteriorated quickly. Were they the worst? I dunno, but they were pretty impossible for me, and I can read almost anything.

I adored Doc Smith when I was ten years old which is when I read the Lensman series. Now I couldn't stomach it.

Interesting discussion. I haven't read many of the mentioned books and I don't think I will. However, I do like Ursula LeGuin. Try not to let an author's politics and/or beliefs color my reactions to their work.