In your immodesty you are probably wrong. You are probably not as good a writer as you think you are. Your stuff only reads that well, identifies that well with yourself.

The fact is that many styles and a lot of material only appeals to a certain group. If you don't think this million best seller's stuff is any good, chances are greater that you simply aren't in that group that his or her stuff appeals to than that he or she is fooling the entire world that his or her stuff doesn't stink to high heaven.

It is called THE masterpeice of science fiction--and it very well may be.
It was a brilliant world/universe that Frank Herbert created. I loved the complexities, but as to style, it gets a 2 out of 10.
Most of the people I know are still confused about the plot because it was so poorly explained, on every page there were at least three words that were unpronounceable(making it very difficult to read.) and ideas that were almost impossible to wrap ones mind around. Many people give up on Dune for the odd names the characters have alone.
As to style, it certainly is not a strict POV. Throughout the book you are bombarded with thoughts from different characters from every direction. However that is more unusual than bad.

All in all a great story, but a book I would not have soldiered through the first 200 pages had I not been garuanteed that it was worth the effort.
Anyway, I, too, am going to garuantee that it IS worth the effort.

in summation: Great story, but Herebert's storytelling is confusing at best.

Well, what-do-ya-know, I thought it was just a movie with Christian Bale and Russell Crowe, and a good one at that. But, noticing your review, I can see why it might make for a dull book. It's a western, enough said . I kid. But seriously, interesting topic.

All except a very few short stories (the Skitty ones) are grating. Somebody should hold her head beneath the great whirring, clacking blades of the printing press and make her recant and swear on her inkstained soul to "Show, not tell."

Anybody read Foundation?
Sure you have, we all have.
Is it not the biggest info dump that has ever been written?
Did anybody find it exciting? I didn't. If you DID tell me why cause I am feeling like a dope for not understanding what millions have seen in this (uck) 'classic'.

Okay i just know somebody is going to say: "Exciting" isnt what it aimed at. It was for enlightened minds, unlike yours.

I would like a better insight than I am just a dope (because I already know that ).

Do I like the trilogy? Well, yes, probably my favorite Asimov fiction book. But is it good science fiction? I'm not sure, either about the trilogy, or a definition of "good science fiction."

(Just "thinking about," mind you, not "rereading"...my copy is inaccessable without a lot of effort, being behind a big stack of boxes.)

I will be sure to stay away from Seagull.

There have been several books (and movies, and TV series, and so on), that I liked when I was a kid, but didn't "hold up" when I reread them much more recently. I guess tastes do shift with time. But on the other hand, some works improve as I've aged. It balances out.

For the record I'm limiting my choices to books published by reputable houses. I'm positive their's a lot of self-published drivel that's worse. But withuot further ado.....

The absolute, worst book I have ever read is Matthew Reilly's Seven Deadly Wonders. This book transcends bad, turning it into pure gold.

For a start, the author's seething jealousy of Dan Brown is palpatible, not unlike some of the writer's here's attitude towards Paolini. He references the DaVinci Code several times, and the book is clearly his missguided attempt to replicate Brown's success by drumming up the biggest possible scandal he can think of.

The plot is terrible. A bunch of mercenaries search for piece's of the 'golden capstone' in the bellies of the wonders of the ancient world, trying desperately to find them before the Tarturus sun. The fate of the world is on the line! I don't have time to go into the details, but it involves Natzi's, terrorists, a prophecy, a giant american army, and more traps then you can think of, with each escape narrower and more cheesey then the last.

The prose is terrible. Sterling examples include (I'm paraphrasing)

quote:

---

The tower was tall and sleek. It jutted into the gorge. It was topped by a spiked parapet and a spiral staircase ran down the other side.

On the other side of the gorge was an identical tower. It too jutted into the gorge. It too was topped by a spiked parapet, and it too had a spiral staircase running down the side.

---

It also contains the funniest line I've ever read:

quote:

---

The wily old nazi lunged at him with a knife!

---

Finally, and perhaps worst of all, Reilly has two infuriating habits. He. Really. Overuses. Telegraphic Sentences. Like. All. The. Time. (I am aware that just inserting a period doesn't make a sentence telegraphic, you'll just have to imagine the frequency). And he italicizes. Not the words you or I would italicize, but words seemingly chosen at random. Words like knife and his. He italicizes on average two or three words per page. I wish I was exaggerating.

Anyway, as this long, drawn out rant comes to a close, the message I would like to leave you with is, read this book! It is hilarious.

Isaac's Storm by Eric Larson, which I picked up 'cause the subject (the Galveston-smashing hurricane around the turn of the last century) was interesting to me...but I didn't care for something in the way it was written, something hard to put a finger on but something that left a bad taste in my mouth.

That should be on the jacket cover! You will have a hard time keeping me away from this book now. Thanks smncameron

I think they were great for their time, even if the same style today wouldn't make it past an agent.

You can see the same thing in movies -- back when most actors had mainly stage experience, their performances looked exaggerated and god-awful on the rare occasion I'm forced to watch one. Did people really think Zero Mostel was funny?

It's been a growing suspicion with me, that Asimov "made it" because he happened to live in New York City and was willing to go to the Street & Smith editorial offices and meet personally with John W. Campbell...I'm not sure his early stuff would have gotten a second look if there hadn't been a personal contact.

The ending disappointed me, though. The love story was a little too sudden, and the rush at the end did seem out of character and unrealistic to me. The young girls love affair with the college boy struck me as strange, and the final showdown poorly handled too.... Still, I recommend it to people, with a warning on the ending. That first three quarters, though... wonderful.

I recently tried to read "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. I couldn't get past the overly pretentious writing by Rand.

I read his books, buy don't like to admit it in public. The only reason I slogged through the Dune prequels and sequels was I HAD to know how the story ended (and he delivered). His writing is very staid, I enjoy the Seven Suns novels, but his writing is often distracting. He has some nice ideas and characters but his prose style does not carry them well.

quote:

---

There is a special place in hell for people named Paolini :-)

---

Stephanie Meyer has weirdly addictive books, but they drone on sometimes and don't feel all that well developed. In her Twilight series the lead female is a classic Mary Sue. The males all just fall for her. I'm waiting for her next book to really see if I can fully respect her story. If the lead character is turned vampire, then no, I don't think I can and she belongs in this thread. It's just too predictable!

Also I enjoy Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrel, but I've been revisiting it since I bought it a couple of years ago and still haven't been able to finish it. I don't agree with it being put out there as "Harry Potter for Grown-ups" though. It just isn't comparable to me.