Books I Loathed discussion

There are two books--off the top of my head--that I actually threw across the room upon reading the ending:

"The Horse Whisperer"

and more recently,
"The Story of Edgar Sawtelle

What books have you hurled, stomped on or otherwise abused?

The ultimate was Singer of Souls by Adam Stemple. I was really enjoying it until the last chapter. It took such a mean-spirited turn that I nearly tossed it through the window.

I was outraged at the end of both "Message in a Bottle" and "The Notebook." Perhaps I felt stupid (manipulated), because all the hype led me to expect an easy ending?
*TEETH-GNASHING RAGE*
Anyway, I am not sure if I felt abused by the hype, or by the author, but I heartily blame the author, and both my kids know I will never read another N Sparks. (Impart your obsessions to the next generation).

Umberto Eco's The Mysterious Flame of Queen Loana. It's like he decided he was tired of writing the book so he just stopped.

Jodi Picault's "My Sister's Keeper". The book raised some great questions and it seemed as though the author couldn't figure out how to end it, so came up with this lame excuse.

The ending to My sister's keeper felt sensational--a sell-out.

I completely agree with the comments about My Sister's Keeper. That was beyond lame.

I thought the end of Michel Faber's Crimson Petal and the White was horrid. Great book, but you make a real commitment when you sit down to read that one. The story just sort of ends as though he could just not write any longer. It was such a disappointment. I thought it fell short.

I read Chocolat recently--the ending made the book entirely forgettable. Sometimes the movies are just better than the books. The one book that truly outraged me was Breaking Dawn. I know it's Twilight, and no one expects an epic classic-in-the making walking into it, but the ending to that piece of 'poo' was, in one word, criminal.

I almost disagreed with Leslie on Chocolat until I struggled a bit to figure out what the ending was. Now that I remember how the book ends, I do have to say that it wasn't a good one. Not to a point where I want to throw it out of my window, but it was rather disappointing. I still like the book better than the movie though. It really captures the magic in the chocolate - and I don't even like chocolate. I guess reading the book is the closest I would ever get to indulging chocolate.

Wow, I just love it when I find people I'm in common with when it comes to books that ticked me off.
I completely agree...
My Sister's Keeper
The Notebook
Chocolat

I actually liked the ending of My Sister's Keeper. I just recently read Jodi Picoult's new book, Handle with Care and I wanted to throw that book across the room when I was finished!!!

I didn't like the ending of Dragons of a Vanished Moon. It could have been a little more pleasant than the authors wrote it to be.

I loathed the ending of Huckleberry Finn. That book never seemed to figure out exactly where it wanted to take itself, and it seemed like Twain just got bored with it one day and gave it up.

One book that so totally irked me on the ending was The Historian by Elisabeth Kostova. The book itself was very well written and I loved the history and research that went into writing the novel itself, but the ending KILLED the book for me! Why, oh why did she end it like that? Trying very hard not to spoil it for anybody else. But... grr...

Well, thanks, Tyran. Though I would like to support your opinion and rage in concert with you, maybe I'll skip the book altogether.

Anyone love the ending of Lost?

Tyran wrote: "One book that so totally irked me on the ending was The Historian by Elisabeth Kostova. The book itself was very well written and I loved the history and research that went into writing the novel ..."

I'll spoil it, sort of. Kostova turns Dracula into a totally boring NERD. I hated the ending. I suffered through 900 pages of scenery expecting some sort of a payoff when we finally met him and he was BORING!

i hated the ending of Huckleberry Finn too, not because of what DID happen, but because Twain's tone was becoming increasingly depressing and downhill, to the point that i was sure if it had gone on for another chapter or two, something would happen to kill Huck.

Gretchen,
Didn't you realize at some point that Edgar Sawtelle was Hamlet? As soon as you discover that, you know how it is going to end.
Gerry C

Endings that made me angry - Disgrace.

Oh, and The Appeal by John Grisham.

Definitely wanted to hurl both books out the window.

Cold Mountain by Charles Frazier. I was slavishly devoted to every page until the ending. And I too literally tossed the book across the room in disgust!

I was pretty cross at the end of Cold Mountain myself. I don't really see the need for a book to have a slap-in-the-face ending. I guess that's what makes "fine" contemporary literature out of a romance. (Roll eyes here.) Tragedy enough in real life; who needs people to be creating more in fiction?

Exactly! It felt gimmicky (if that's a word) and tacked-on. If a novel is a romance, it's a romance, and that's perfectly okay. No need to try and make it something other than what it is.

Erica, If you think tragedy has no place in fiction, you will be throwing out the greatest works ever written: "Anna Karenina," "Madame Bovary," "Wuthering Heights," much of Dickens, etc. Of course you could just stick to Jane Austen, I guess, or Harlequin romances. "Harry Potter" has a happy ending. Perhaps you should read book reviews or plot summaries before starting a book that is going to have a tragic ending.

I didn't mean tragedy has NO place in fiction, and I do feel that tragedy adds to a lot of fiction. I loved "Heart of Darkness" and "Poisonwood Bible." My problem is, I do like to read a book without knowing the ending, but I am often looking for certain expectations to be met. Sometimes a complete suprise ending is great ("Year of Wonders") but often I will read the book knowing its pigeonhole.

So, if I know it's gothic horror, I figure some horrible stuff will happen, and if it's described as a "mournful, elegiac beauty," I figure some tragedy will occur. I don't really read Harlequins, but when I read other romances I am expecting 2 lovers to work it out somehow. Thank you, Adrianne, for your support.

I would agree with you that this does not reflect well on my maturity or my literacy IQ. But, oh, well. I do the best I can.

At this very moment I am reading a book without knowing its pigeonhole at all. Very suspenseful!

Why would your literacy IQ be based on your reading tastes? Everyone is different and I don't believe that liking a genre over another might mean that you have a higher or lower literary IQ. I usually don't like tragic endings, especially when they are pointless, however, tragedy serves to show character development, growth and the resiliency of the human spirit.

No Country for Old Men. Did it even have an ending? Did the publisher forget to include it? When the book was printed and bound, did somebody lose a few pages? Did Cormac McCarthy fall asleep and forget to write the ending he had in mind? Did he even have one in mind? Or was he so bored that he just stopped typing? While I was reading it, I kept thinking that I was reading a treatment for a movie by, say, how about the Coen brothers.

I'm all for tragedy when it serves a purpose and is a logical extension of what has been developed in terms of character, plot, etc. If I am wrung out and spent at the end of a novel, often I feel that is the sign of a truly successful effort!

My beef with the ending of Cold Mountain (without giving anything away) is that it seemed forced, as if someone decided that the readers needed a swift kick to the gut in order to make the novel worthwhile. Throwing in an inexplicable "twist" to feign drama seems cheap and lazy.

Classical definition of tragedy is that the main character or characters end off worse than they started and the tragedy was of the character's own making, caused by his or her tragic flaw.

Modern definition of tragedy (and I expect an argument here) is that the main character or characters go through a trying experience and learn something. They become a different person, possibly better, possibly not in a physical/financial/amorous sense, but definitely changed in some way by their experience.

If the character doesn't learn anything by his/her journey, then we the reader do.

If neither character nor reader learned anything or was not changed, then you've been wasting time and money. I mean, why bother?

Take Atonement by Ian McEwan, which I consider the best book written in the past 10-15 years. This definitely qualifies as a tragedy on all sorts of levels. Does the main character learn at the end? Definitely. Is she better off? Only by understanding or coming to terms with her tragedy, which is accomplished through her recounting/acknowledging her role in the tragedy. Thus the title of the book. I really think this is as close to a perfect book as one can find.

As for tragedy and happy endings, well, happy is a very relative term. Entirely contextual in books. And certainly different for each of us.

Tom wrote: "Classical definition of tragedy is that the main character or characters end off worse than they started and the tragedy was of the character's own making, caused by his or her tragic flaw.

Don't forget Tolstoy's quote: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way." I totally agree with your classic definition of tragedy and your comments about Atonement - I consider it the best book of the 21st century so far.

Jackie wrote: "The ending to My sister's keeper felt sensational--a sell-out."

The ending of My Sisters Keeper sucked major time. It felt like she had a deadline to meet or something. Come on her sister recovered from a terminal illness!

The ending of My Sisters Keeper sucked major time. It felt like she had a deadline to meet or something."

Fascinating! To me, the ending of "My Sister's Keeper" was what made the book!

I absolutely HATED the ending of "The Partner" by John Grisham though.

Just a thought, it says something about Margaret Mitchell that no-one has said that they disliked the end of Gone with the Wind. I think it is because having sketched Scarlett as a flawed and somewhat shortsighted heroine, the ending was inevitable. I loathed the follow-up, can't even remember it's name and the ending was so stupid, I believe Miss Mitchell is turning in her grave.

Stephen King isn't good at endings in general.

I'm not a big fan of Jodi Piccoult. All of her books seem to just be too similar to each other. And they're so... stereotypical? Lifetime? I don't know. I actually liked My Sister's Keeper, but I wasn't really satisfied with the ending. It seemed rushed or contrived. I think the whole reason I liked the book was for the brother, who was cool as hell and really touched my lonely teenage heart. (I read it in high school)

I hated the ending to Everfree. It is the third book in a trilogy, and it completely destroys the entire thing. I just pretend that I haven't read that one and that the series ended with Edenborn. It was a totally faked happy ending that was completely uncharacteristic of the characters and the series. He introduced new things, and then didn't do anything with them at all, and actually had the characters willingly ignore them in the end. That isn't like Halloween at all. And the whole Hope thing, and the sight.. ugg. It was terrible. I think that Sagan just got tired of writing that series and wanted to move on, so he threw that book together in one night and made up a terrible ending so he didn't have to think about it. I'm so mad at him for that.
Read the other two books, and stop. You'll be glad you did. I promise you won't miss anything.

Oh, Emily, you've reminded me of "The Princess and Curdie." I'm dating myself. It's the sequel to "The Princess and the Goblin," both written about a thousand years ago for different sensibilities and before there was much in the way of children's literature. I read both many times as a kid, always sad about the tacked on coda. Skipped it entirely when I read the two books to my kids.

I always tell everyone; "Great books!! But don't read the last paragraph of the sequel!! It's entirely unnecessary!" (George MacDonald is probably griping and scowling in his grave right now: "Stupid modern readers don't understand how IMPORTANT that is...")

Haha. I feel the same way about the "sneak peak" to the "sequel" at the end of The Princess Bride. You're just better off skipping it.

it's true, stephen king seems incapable of ending a book well. he'll create a great, creepy situation and then blow it completely at the end, it's uncanny.

nothing's worse than investing time in a long series only to have it peter out or completely flake at the end. the Everworld 12-book series was like that; i can't remember the details anymore but i remember it negated the effort of reading the series.

and of course, there's the famous horrid ending of the Narnia series. can't imagine what he was thinking. and poor susan!

Totally! Poor Susan! Just for lipstick and stockings.

Hmm... endings I hated? Two books come immediately to mind. #1 is a recent read. Jodi Picoults Handle With Care. The final chapter of that book is why I will never read another Jodi Picoult book. Even if her books are well researched and not terribly written. I don't like being so manipulated. What a cheap stunt that ending was. It made everything which came before a complete waste of time, and therefore all the time and emotion that went into it was also a waste of my time.
#2 is Captain Corellis Mandolin, which I read a few years ago, and while my memory of the details of that book is fuzzy. I do remember the ending made me really mad. I LOVED that book, but when I read the end and realized the missed opportunity which had occurred I literally threw the book across the room. The only other time If have been tempted to do that was with Handle with Care. (book #1) I didn't because I was driving my car at the time. ( It was an audio book)

Amanda, I just finished Jodi Picoult's "Handle With Care" and while I liked most of the book, the ending seriously pissed me off.

My Sister's Keeper (happened way to sudden. one sec she was alive, then dead, then book ends)

AND

Breaking Dawn (there should have been a fight)

Mandy -- YES. My Sister's Keeper was quite abrupt, too. I hate it, because her books are interesting and I like how she develops characters, but the endings always just beat me up.

I'm a little new here, but I just finished a book that had an ending so frustrating I threw it across a charter bus. Though that was partially through sheer frustration as well as anger towards the friend that recommended the book to me.

How to Be Good had such an unresolved, redundant ending to it that I couldn't help but hate it. I admit, the ending was probably the best way to go, but absolutely useless to a reader that actually wanted an ending to a book. It felt a bit like those movies that have a "sort-of ending" in case they want to make a sequel, but close things off just enough in case they don't make enough money on the first one.

The Awakening was another ending that, I admit, had me nearly crying in frustration. For the time period in which it was written, the ending was perfect, but in the society in which I've been raised, it seemed so entirely useless. I do appreciate the ending and generally like the book, but I had that longing for something more for Edna that was entirely crushed.

Heather, The Awakening was awful for me, too. I was so angry/disappointed. I'm not a scholar who can pick apart the deeper meaning of things. I just saw a woman wasted. And I hated it.

And was it just me, or did the ending to The Scarlet Letter just suck?

Maybe the point of all these endings is to make you uncomfortable...
A Separate Peace ended abruptly as well but that was the point. Perhaps the point of the build-up of some of these books is the let down.
Some books aren't meant to be warm, fuzzy and easy to read (Crime and Punishment I'm looking in your direction here). Sometimes they're meant to be upsetting, annoying, depressing and disappointing. Just sayin...
I think that it's interesting that these endings are expected to be wrapped up nicely for the reader.

I loved My Sister's Keeper, but I agree the ending was the weakest part of the book. I understand the movie has a different ending.

However, The Awakening is one of my favorite books of all time. The ending is tragic, but not sudden, abrupt, or out of character. If that book had a happy ending it wouldn't have worked--especially not in the time and place in which it took place.

Memoirs of a Geisha is one of the worst books I've ever read and the ending literally made me toss the book across the room. I hated that book and I really, really, really hated the ending. Not only was the ending unbelievable (come on, really?!?), but to reward such a horrible person with what she wanted just made me mad.

Emily - agreed! On the whole, I adore Hawthorne, but the man really seemed to struggle ending his novels. Throughout the book Hester is such a strong, independent, empowered character - and then he has her conclude her life's story with "and then she realized that someday men and women would be equal, but not now, and not starting with her." It's such a cop-out, and it works to negate the rest of the book's women-affirming sentiments.

By far the worst of Hawthorne's bad endings can be found in The Blithedale Romance. That last sentence just undoes the whole book.

Oh, Kristin, I really liked Memoirs of a Geisha...until the end. I didn't think she was an awful person, but I sure thought that ending was the absolute worst...just stupid and completely unrealistic and...well, you get the drift.

I have to re-read Memoirs of a Geisha -- it's been a while. I remember loving it but don't remember the ending.

I remember the ending, and did think that it seemed like Golden just wanted to finish the book before the deadline hit. Other than that, it was a good book.