Absolutely not, at least for fiction. I hate knowing anything, even the author pics. It colors the story for me and I hate it. I start double thinking everything and making assumptions and I'd rather just be entertained.

For non fiction it's fine, and can add to the authenticity of the work.

You make it sound so sinister. Is there something terrible you discovered about her?

Thank you!! That’s one I’ll definitely be adding to my shelf!

Ted Chiang - Stories of Your Life

It's far from my most hated book, but I viscerally remember the moment I wanted to fling it across the room - I was already hating the story "Seventy-Two Letters," a bad Victorian steampunk pastiche with cartoonishly English names and dialogue, and Chiang wrote that a character "raised his eyebrows." (The horror!)

I had been previously traumatized by a friend's recommendation of Brandon Sanderson's The Final Empire, in which Mr. Sando raises a character's (primarily Kelsier's) eyebrows literally every ten pages because he is either unable to write engaging dialogue and character interactions, or because he must write so quickly to meet his readers' insatiable appetites that he cannot slow down to do so. The intrusion of Sandersonian prose in a collection that was supposed to represent the artistic potential in contemporary SFF enraged me, and though I suppressed the urge to fling the book (it was borrowed from an alleged friend), I put it down in disbelief and, later that night after finishing the collection, composed a tweet thread recounting my harrowing experience.

anyway I'm done taking book reccs from my friends or primarily sff readers cause it ain't working out. peace be upon y'all

I really enjoy the interviews of some authors- Martha Wells, Ryka Aoki, Becky Chambers and Naomi Novik

After doing this with Marion Bradley, the author of Mists Of Avalon, not anymore.

Mine would be Harry Potter 7… And latest “the book of night” by holy black

I loved Middlesex (it reminded me a lot of Salman Rushie's books). For me, though, Virgin Suicides is that perfect rare gem of a book that doesn't have any real analogues. I read Virgin Suicides when much younger and it impacted me in this unexpected emotionally resonant way. It's hard to step outside oneself when judging books!

Eugenides hasn't written much after his first two literary darlings. I couldn't really get into The Marriage Plot and that's his only other novel since 1993. I hope to read more by him one day!

LMAOOOO, I came here to comment about that book. I went to the midnight release at B&N, got the book, and went home to binge read. When I got to that part, I literally threw the book across the room and texted how pissed I was to the friend who went with me.

To this day, I've never finished that book.

I am going to preface this by saying I don’t enjoy open ended endings. So for me- the handmaids tale, and the giver. Great reads but the ends make me infuriated. I also recently watched The Lobster, and if I could have thrown a movie I would have.

The only time I look up anything about authors is if there's some sort of controversy and I'm curious what that's about. It's not something unique to authors for me - I also do not generally look up anything about singers/performers/bands etc. I guess it's never seemed like an interesting thing to do.

I knew someone else would feel this!! Genuinely one of the worst endings ever.

I became suspicious of this book as soon as all the mlm, scentsy, doterra girls I know started waving it around like it was the holy grail.

Rarely. I prefer to keep the artist and the work separate. Very rarely I'll want to know their thought process.

Ha, yes, I forgot to include the author. It's Jeffrey Eugenides!

Interesting. I loved this book because it was so relatable and realistic in its toxicity. I agree in most books you want character growth, but I think the growth here was replaced with the addition of generations, and it allows me to see how that toxic generational cycle passes on. Heathcliff doesn’t start out toxic. He’s just an orphan who actually goes through a favored phase.

Jeffrey Eugenides.

Virgin Suicides is decent, but Middlesex by him is absolutely fantastic.

A Tale for the Time Being by Ruth Ozeki. MY GOD.

Dual narrative. One part - Nao, a Japanese school girl - had a really interesting narrative; the other, a Canadian author called Ruth (really? she had to name the character after herself?) found Nao's diary washed up and was reading it, in between doing all sorts of dreadfully tedious things with her dull, dull partner.

The ending launched into some weird metaphysical dream sequence, and then Nao's section abruptly stopped. It was obvious why, but the fact that I'd wasted so much of my time slogging through the monumentally monotonous 'Ruth' sections to then have zero closure with the 'Nao' sections made me want to hurl it across the room. I was in a cafe when I finished this book so alas could not, but rather swiftly donated it to a second-hand bookshop.

Vanity Fair, and I did actually throw it across the room when I finished it. It was assigned reading for a college class, so I didn't have the option of just not reading it. If I had, I would have just put it down and gotten on with my life.

Why did I hate it? Well, this was a long time ago, but as I recall --

• I was studying 19th century British fiction at the time, and my reading list included Dickens, the Brontes, etc. In my humble opinion, Thackeray is a second-tier writer compared to [at least some of] his contemporaries, and he was just suffering by comparison. You can't read Bleak House one week, Vanity Fair the next, and not notice a difference.
• Becky Sharp sucks. Period, the end.
• I didn't like anyone else, either.

The story goes around some characters each one with their story and each one with dreams and desires that they can’t achieve (medics, psychologists, musicians and a bartender all intertwine).

All of the stories intertwine and all with really raw and sad details. For lack of a better explanation, you read in a beautifull way the rotten desires and rotten core values of reputable people.

But for me the sad part was in the end of the book were the main character realizes the full extent of his psychological problems and realizes the degree of the fantasy relationship he created.

The Atlas Six was very disappointing for me, especially because I got hooked on the sample then bought the book and it tanked immediately after that first 10%. Definitely wanted to throw it against the wall

My biggest issue with it is that there’s not one but two characters that are the “I’m so arrogant and cool but I’m going to join because it’s a fun game for me and I’m bored” types, one that tries to seduce men around her (incredibly cliche) and the other who is just unlikeable. If you write characters that aren’t even interested in the plot, why would the reader be interested in the plot! Not only does it make them not relatable, it doesn’t give us any reason to root for them. Annoys me so much when authors forget that main characters need motive, the best driving force for a plot is desperation

Wow that sounds amazing. Do you have the author?

I cannot stand books that add on action verb phrases without a conjunction. I don’t think I’ve ever DNF a book, but I came close with Kristen Hannah due to this even though I liked the overall plot. I’ve seen it since in other modern writers.

Example: She bent down, reached for the terrible book she threw.

She walked to the balcony, opened the door.

Then she turned for the fireplace, chucked the book inside.

I'll respond with a "good" throwing a book across the room so this isn't just a hate thread.

For me it was the Virgin Suicides, which I read many years before the movie came out so it was more of an unknown novel back then. (It was a popular literary novel upon first publication, so I'm not saying it was truly unknown, just less so.)

I really loved (and still do love) that book. But it's a complex narrative voice, the first person plural, and it's the voice of all the boys of a town, now adults, looking back on these girls they were obsessed with. It's a really interesting way of writing, just a little bit creepy, but also sad, because the narrative "we" voice is writing from adulthood, reminiscing about their youth.

So throughout the book I was thinking why are they so obsessed, still obsessed after so many years, in many ways their lives ruined by this obsession. But it's "they" because there is no clear narrator. It's all of them.

And then I got to the climactic scene and I was so... mad. Mad that the titular event pretty much took a whole town with it. It was beautiful and infuriating to me.

The movie, for what it's worth, was also very good. But in the end I feel like the movie was about the girls and the book was about the boys. Which makes sense. It's hard to capture that first person plural narrative voice in a film.

Interesting! What made it so emotional?