The Books You Can't/Won't Read

[cb']

Well, college happened, university is coming, and I now have a stack of the books that I had acquired during the year, but not read. Also, there are always the few books that I had bought, and thrown down in disgust soon thereafter. It will be interesting to see what people have neglected in favor of newer, shinier, more sexy books.

The books that are terminally backburnered at the moment are:

Infinite Jest - David Foster Wallace
Neuromancer - William Gibson
Gardens of the Moon - Steven Erikson
The Origin of Species - Chucky D
and
Dreams of Steel - Glen Cook

The books I haven't got around to using for kindling yet are:

Guards! Guards! - Terry Pratchett
Garden of Rama - Arthur C. Clarke
Chainfire - Terry Goodkind

[Euda]

War and Peace

[Silverfuck]

Anything Charles Dickens, Jane Austen, or Virginia Woolf. They all bore the crap out of me.

[Cliche Guevara]

I picked up harry potter in korean to try and learn the language better for when I go. Ill eventually get around to reading it but its a struggle and half though.

also one of these days Im going to read the 105 year old book I found, but its some religious text about Jeremiah

Hmm, books I could never read/finish. I could never get through Pihkal (although Im almost done, by which I mean book part). Also I bought this book about bouddica I never managed to get through, but thats historical fiction for you.

books for kindling, someone gave me the book "the gospel according to the simpsons" when I was young, Ive yet too read. Hm, and Dan Browns "Digital fortress" also deserves to burn.

[Monkmaster]

Anything Charles Dickens, Jane Austen, or Virginia Woolf. They all bore the crap out of me.

One of my dumbass friends reads Jane Austen out of boredom. :eek:

[Raptor Ribs]

Steven King.

[PROJECT PAT]

Steven King.

this. also tom clancy.

[Mantikore]

i never got to finish Prey by michael Crichton

[Euliyae]

Dean Koontz

[Zygo Orbitale]

Steven King.

Is he anything like Stephen King?

[lolocaust]

I'll never read 1984 again, it made me incredibly depressed when I read it. It's an amazingly written book, and I think the fact that it affected me so much really shows that.

I also haven't been able to get through all of Walden, short as it is. It's interesting, but I keep getting distracted from it way too easily.

[ants in my poptarts]

i never got to finish Prey by michael Crichton
You missed out.

Dean Koontz

Dean Koontz can get fucked with a wiffle ball bat.

I tried reading Ulysses. Epic fail after 3 pages.

[PROJECT PAT]

I tried reading Ulysses. Epic fail after 3 pages.

Ulysses is the most amazing thing that I have ever read. Pure art.

[ants in my poptarts]

Ulysses is the most amazing thing that I have ever read. Pure art.

You actually, like, knew what the fuck was goin on?

[zingalong]

I tried to read 'catch 22' on three separate occasions and each time i gave up after the first 50 pages. It just sucks so bad i have given up permanatly. Why does everyone think it's so amazing?

[PROJECT PAT]

You actually, like, knew what the fuck was goin on?

it took a lot of effort. I would read a chapter. Check wikipedia to get the short standare english version as well as look up the words I didn't know. Then read the chapter again.

And when I finished it doing that I read it a second time without doing all that shit.

[VolcanBaru]

I don't know because it always ended up "Why the fuck did I read this shit?".

[zingalong]

it took a lot of effort. I would read a chapter. Check wikipedia to get the short standare english version as well as look up the words I didn't know. Then read the chapter again.

And when I finished it doing that I read it a second time without doing all that shit.

That my friends is pure dedication.:bluecool:

[cb']

That my friends is pure dedication.:bluecool:

Fuck, I know I had do do it with Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway. I am going back and re-reading it for a paper, if I ever fucking get around to it. Modernist writing is bullshit.

[Marty McFly]

Mouth Full of Rocks.

A book about the FFL.

Can't find it in libraries, book shops, on ebay, on book websites (excluding amazon, but they wont ship that book to aus).

So... :(

Any one got it and willing to part with it? Name a price.

[t-bolt]

The only book I've never finished is Don Quixote. He sallies forth into the countryside...he gets beat up...he sallies forth again and gets the shit kicked out of him again!

I paid good money for that book though,I'm going to finish it one day even if it kills me.:mad:

[Banana]

I can't believe no one has said Stephanie Meyer yet. I know it's a huge craze right now but holy shit her books are really NOT that great.

Also I won't read most shit from the YA section of the library. Sometimes I find a jewel but that's rare. Don't really have any specific titles or authors for ya guys.

[Chazz]

I would say new books in general. There are so many great classics I don't see the point wasting my time with a new best seller that may not be any good.

[Silverfuck]

I would say new books in general. There are so many great classics I don't see the point wasting my time with a new best seller that may not be any good.

That works both ways, you know. A book isn't good just because it's a classic. There are a lot of so-called 'classics' that are absolute rubbish. You're missing out on a lot of amazing books just because they're not old and acclaimed. And that's quite foolish.

[psycho_8b]

Harry Potter books - The Rowling woman.

[no-modern-romance]

Dickens... I just can't do it. I just don't get it.

[Phlegm!]

I tried to read 'catch 22' on three separate occasions and each time i gave up after the first 50 pages. It just sucks so bad i have given up permanatly. Why does everyone think it's so amazing?

I concur. It's incredibly confusing at times, but overall I'd say I yield ambivalent feelings for it.

[Chazz]

That works both ways, you know. A book isn't good just because it's a classic. There are a lot of so-called 'classics' that are absolute rubbish. You're missing out on a lot of amazing books just because they're not old and acclaimed. And that's quite foolish.

Well at the speed I read (which is slow) I like some kinda guarantee that a book is going to be good or at least important in the world of literature. If a book has survived for 15 years It probably has something worth while in it and I'll give it a go. There are just so many books I need some kind of filter to help me decide what to read. Maybe all writers can stop writing for a couple years so i can catch up...

[PROJECT PAT]

Well at the speed I read (which is slow) I like some kinda guarantee that a book is going to be good or at least important in the world of literature. If a book has survived for 15 years It probably has something worth while in it and I'll give it a go. There are just so many books I need some kind of filter to help me decide what to read. Maybe all writers can stop writing for a couple years so i can catch up...

I don't think I would call anything written in 1994 a classic. . .

[Chazz]

I don't think I would call anything written in 1994 a classic. . .

I meant that something having been around a decade or two and widely acclaimed as being my second criteria, first being is absolute classic. I just dig deeper holes every time I speak...

[ZeroMalarki]

Fellowship of the Rings

I can read fantasy or sci-fi but that book is a horticultural guide in Elven. I don't care about the songs, poems or every blade of grass described. Fuck Tom Bombadillo.

[supperrfreek]

Off topic: I've always wanted to read all of the most "offensive" books of literary merit examples would include tropic of cancer and 120 days of sodom.

I can't read pride and prejudice or wuthering heights: fuck women's rights........no jk, it just seems like whenever I read a book written by a woman they're crammed to the gills with details I don't have the time for and don't need to hear.

[Silverfuck]

Off topic: I've always wanted to read all of the most "offensive" books of literary merit examples would include tropic of cancer and 120 days of sodom.

I can't read pride and prejudice or wuthering heights: fuck women's rights........no jk, it just seems like whenever I read a book written by a woman they're crammed to the gills with details I don't have the time for and don't need to hear.

I read the first half of 120 Days of Sodom, and it was pretty disappointing. I mean, it's pretty disgusting and all, and I did kind of skim the last bits to see if it really did get as bad as it was supposed to, and it just kind of seemed forced, like, "Ooooh look at me, I'm the Marquis de Sade, look how offensive and provocative I am!" So don't get your hopes up or anything, unless you're really into shit-eating, and the term 'frigging.'

[thatdudeinthewoods]

I tried to read 'catch 22' on three separate occasions and each time i gave up after the first 50 pages. It just sucks so bad i have given up permanatly. Why does everyone think it's so amazing?

Catch 22 is the funniest book that I have ever read. However, I did not read it until I was 35 and could appreciate it for what it is. Wait 10 years and read it again.

[thatdudeinthewoods]

Well, college happened, university is coming, and I now have a stack of the books that I had acquired during the year, but not read. Also, there are always the few books that I had bought, and thrown down in disgust soon thereafter. It will be interesting to see what people have neglected in favor of newer, shinier, more sexy books.

The books that are terminally backburnered at the moment are:

Infinite Jest - David Foster Wallace
Neuromancer - William Gibson
Gardens of the Moon - Steven Erikson
The Origin of Species - Chucky D
and
Dreams of Steel - Glen Cook

The books I haven't got around to using for kindling yet are:

Guards! Guards! - Terry Pratchett
Garden of Rama - Arthur C. Clarke
Chainfire - Terry Goodkind

It took me four attempts to get through Neuromancer myself. I am still trying to decide if I liked it. :)

[thatdudeinthewoods]

Ulysses is the most amazing thing that I have ever read. Pure art.

Art? Yes, okay. But is it a novel?

[InspiredByMe]

I am proud to say that I made it through Ulysses, and understood about 75% of it.

The Years of Rice and Salt, don't know who it is by and don't care.

[supperrfreek]

I read the first half of 120 Days of Sodom, and it was pretty disappointing. I mean, it's pretty disgusting and all, and I did kind of skim the last bits to see if it really did get as bad as it was supposed to, and it just kind of seemed forced, like, "Ooooh look at me, I'm the Marquis de Sade, look how offensive and provocative I am!" So don't get your hopes up or anything, unless you're really into shit-eating, and the term 'frigging.'

oh, thanks for the warning. But I'm still kinda looking forward to it. I skimmed the wikipedia page for it, it sounded kinda decent in terms of something depraved and disgusting to broaden the whore-izons of my aristocrats joke.

[Rizzo in a box]

Kafka

too many nights...tripping balls...paranoia...

[cb']

It took me four attempts to get through Neuromancer myself. I am still trying to decide if I liked it. :)

Hm, well it's on the top of the unread heap now, and I will need to read a book to keep awake this afternoon. I'll tell you whether you liked it or not :bluecool:

Also, I just remembered my signed copy of Children of Dune (Herbert), which I threw down in disgust sixty pages in. Could he have made any of the characters less likable? I am not sure.

[Necro[keely]a]

I'll never read 1984 again, it made me incredibly depressed when I read it. It's an amazingly written book, and I think the fact that it affected me so much really shows that.


I loved 1984, although I still claim Animal Farm is better.
We studied it in Year 10 Advanced English, and it was probably the best book we've ever done in school.

I tried to read 'catch 22' on three separate occasions and each time i gave up after the first 50 pages. It just sucks so bad i have given up permanatly. Why does everyone think it's so amazing?

It takes a while to get into, but once you do, it's worth it.
I loved it.

I can not read The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy no matter how hard I try.
But as for authors I do love:
- Chuck Palahnuik <3
- Bret Easton Eilis.
- Hubert Selby Jnr.
- Anthony Burgess
- George Orwell

[Necro[keely]a]

Have just noted that quite a few books being discussed ITT are transgressive fiction.
Given I wrote an essay on it a few weeks ago, I will now post the first 500 words (for no apparent reason). Enjoy!


Transgressive fiction as a critical paradigm
Transgressive literature is a genre of fiction in which the protagonist and characters feel confined by societal norms and expectations and who use illicit means to break free of these confines, often shocking readers and responders with socially unacceptable behaivour. Because they are rebelling against the basic norms of society, protagonists of transgressional fiction may be portrayed as mentally ill, unlawful and/or nihilistic. It is based on the premise that knowledge is to be found at the edge of experience and that the body is the site for gaining knowledge. Transgressive literature is a literary genre defined by graphic exploration of taboo topics, and often overlaps with minimalist literature in the short sentence structure of typical Transgressive fiction.

Through applying my understanding of transgressive fiction to the 1978 book, Requiem for a Dream, by Hubert Selby, Jnr, I have begun to ask myself questions about the popularity and resonance of the genre itself. I am almost having a metaphysical crisis over transgressive literature. Why does it exist? We read works like Requiem for a Dream with the intent of entertainment, and yet for so many persons the life portrayed in the novel is ordinary.
What is the purpose of shock value through fiction in a world where all we have to do is look around and we're faced with the most quintessentially illicit individuals, whether we are intending to find this or not?
When all that is necessary is to turn on our televisions at 6.00pm and suddenly incest, opiates, bestiality, mental illness, mutilation and urban violence are nothing if not commonplace.
Why, then, do I choose to seek out, and take pleasure in this rebellion from societal norms and expectations through transgressive fiction as a critical paradigm?
The basic ideas of transgressive fiction are by no means new. Many works that are now considered classics dealt with controversial themes. However, the effect transgressive literature has on an audience has been altered. Why do we continue to find intrests in transgressive fiction, when it is further from ‘fiction’ than ever?
Whilst heroin addiction and the abuse of diet pills, and the stark similarity between the two seeminly different drugs, was far from regular and normal in the nineteen seventies, Hubert Selby Jnr found popularity in his works nevertheless, as it was so far removed from reality and societal norm, that people could find entertainment in it. This was exemplified in other works such as A Clockwork Orage and American Psycho. More recently, we are seeing the occurrence, and knowledge of these taboo incidences rising dramatically, and transgressive fiction serves as a tangible medium for sharing these truths about the human condition. It has gone from entertainment value through the believed abstraction that the ideas portrayed in transgressive fiction explore a part of life most people would never have contact with, one that is outside the realm of socially acceptable possibility, to a style of literature that is essentially reflective of the cold truth in society, and in turn, the effect transgressive fiction has presently is still entertaining, but often fascinating and scary, as it is recognised as almost usual.
Perhaps then, the main and most valuable aspect of transgressive fiction is to give people an insight into what it is like to experience those events and situations depicted in this style of literature, without having to psychially involve themselves. It gives them a means of escape, with a level of safety associated with it that the ‘real thing’ could never allow.

[cb']

a;516682']
I can not read The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy no matter how hard I try.

You can just skip over the singing parts, you know. They don't add much to the story. Tom Bombadil isn't really mentioned after the first book, either. It's a shit slog, for sure, but it's worth it.

[KillSwitch_J]

Steven King.

Steven king? I don't know why anyone wouldn't want to read his books.:confused:

[cb']

Steven king? I don't know why anyone wouldn't want to read his books.:confused:

The Dark Tower was relatively good. I would recommend the first four to anyone.

[Moderator]

Trying to read Requiem For A Dream was like attempting to cut my leg off with a blunt needle.

[water bottle]

Jane Austen

Fuckin' this. I had to read Pride & Prejudice for an English class once upon a time... dreadful experience.

[Yggdrasil]

That unbearable cunt Moses. I mean, really? Your first one, Genesis, was a complete crock, and from then on it's a slippery slide to shitdom. 5 books, really?

:D

Anyhow, I don't care for the likes of people like..

Rowling; she bores me half to death with her drivel

Stephanie whatsthatcunt'sname: After much insisting from my younger sister, I gave Twilight a quickglance. I couldn't get through very far without pulling a Toothlessjoe (:rolleyes:)

Rudyard Kipling: I just hate everything by him. It's all terrible in my opinion.

C.S Lewis: I don't like his writing style

Dawkins is a bit of an enigma in my book. I love the points he tries to get across, but his writing style is just a wee bit tedious. I skip whole paragraphs in his books to avoid that crap. Still, I enjoy them as a whole. Kinda like Tolkien. It's good one you brush off a page or ten. And why so much hate for Dickens here, I've always found his works enjoyable (well, the one's I've read, anyhow)

[Norm]

The bible nuff said

[Cliche Guevara]

That unbearable cunt Moses. I mean, really? Your first one, Genesis, was a complete crock, and from then on it's a slippery slide to shitdom. 5 books, really?

:D

Anyhow, I don't care for the likes of people like..

Rowling; she bores me half to death with her drivel

Stephanie whatsthatcunt'sname: After much insisting from my younger sister, I gave Twilight a quickglance. I couldn't get through very far without pulling a Toothlessjoe (:rolleyes:)

Rudyard Kipling: I just hate everything by him. It's all terrible in my opinion.

C.S Lewis: I don't like his writing style

Dawkins is a bit of an enigma in my book. I love the points he tries to get across, but his writing style is just a wee bit tedious. I skip whole paragraphs in his books to avoid that crap. Still, I enjoy them as a whole. Kinda like Tolkien. It's good one you brush off a page or ten. And why so much hate for Dickens here, I've always found his works enjoyable (well, the one's I've read, anyhow)

kings is pretty cool though.

[thatdudeinthewoods]

The bible nuff said

Yeah, the Bible is a pretty tough read. Not a single explosion or car crash.:)

[lolocaust]

Yeah, the Bible is a pretty tough read. Not a single explosion or car crash.:)

Can you imagine? The Ten Commandments, as directed by Michael Bay. Starring Samuel L. Jackson.

on topic, in addition to what I said earlier, I can't seem to enjoy anything by George Bernard Shaw. Everything he writes sounds obnoxiously pretentious to me.

[HorribleBurningItch]

The Dark Tower was relatively good. I would recommend the first four to anyone.

i love stephen king and a friend loaned me all the books and it took me a year and a half to read them all because i kept getting pissed and putting them down but then thinking "i've read this far, might as well finish".

got to the end and the whole thing just fucking started over again. whenever i see the guy that told me i would think it was awesome, i am gonna break his kneecaps. i can't stand shitty resolutions.

[PROJECT PAT]

i love stephen king and a friend loaned me all the books and it took me a year and a half to read them all because i kept getting pissed and putting them down but then thinking "i've read this far, might as well finish".

got to the end and the whole thing just fucking started over again. whenever i see the guy that told me i would think it was awesome, i am gonna break his kneecaps. i can't stand shitty resolutions.

stephen king is terrible. If someone likes his books I automatically know that they suck.

[george]

Gone with the Wind.
War and Peace, or any Tolstoy
Anything by Balzac.
Moby Dick.
Harry Potter.
D.H. Lawrence.
The bible, qur'an, tor rah, ect.

clockwork orange. (too much slang)

Anything by that danielle steel asshole.

The list goes on and on. But one that gets me is.

Chuck Palanuik.

I can't stand the way he writes. Fuck his prose, and half bit stories. I made it through a few novels of his, and I didn't like any of them.

[thatdudeinthewoods]

Anything by that danielle steel asshole.


Danielle Steel's asshole writes too? I had no idea. :)

[PROJECT PAT]

Danielle Steel's asshole writes too? I had no idea. :)

that sounds like a joke someone would have made in the second grade.

[Rizzo in a box]

lol no one else ever got freaked out by kafka during a drug binge?

[Yggdrasil]

Chuck Palanuik.

I can't stand the way he writes. Fuck his prose, and half bit stories. I made it through a few novels of his, and I didn't like any of them.

Choke was stupendous, are you daft?

[thatdudeinthewoods]

that sounds like a joke someone would have made in the second grade.

Actually, I didn't hear my first asshole joke until the fourth grade. But I went to a Catholic school. ;)

Here's something else I would never read. This is truly horrible. I feel sorry for Mama. I bet she feels she is going to be the next Pearl S. Buck... http://maynovel.wordpress.com/

[ArmsMerchant]

I tried three times to read The Satanic Verses--I dunno, it just got too--weird? Self-indulgent?

[Snoopy]

Books.

[thatdudeinthewoods]

I tried three times to read The Satanic Verses--I dunno, it just got too--weird? Self-indulgent?

Right. The Satanic Versus was impossible to read. I was always looking over my shoulder hoping that a suicide bomber would kill me before I read one more page of this dribble.

[Raziel]

Bible
Quran

OP:Terry Pratchett writes good stuff, and if your too lazy to read, dl some audiobook

[Generic Box Of Cookies]

Moby Dick. Badass story, but hard reading.

[thatdudeinthewoods]

Moby Dick. Badass story, but hard reading.

"Call me unreadable" :)

[george]

Choke was stupendous, are you daft?

Choke was hardly good.

I would see the movie if it came out.

But it's hard to believe some guy makes money to support his mother by choking himself to near death in restaurants. Then receiving money from all these random ya-hoos who feel remorse or as if they did something great for the guy.

I had other problems with the book. I forget the whole cult story now, but it's been a few years since I've read the book.

I always preferred Irvine Welsh to Chuck P.

[cb']

OP:Terry Pratchett writes good stuff, and if your too lazy to read, dl some audiobook

I think that an audiobook would be worse: alternating between smug 'Her Majesty's' English and transcribed dialect was one of the things that made it punishing to read, and I am a LOT worse at understanding spoken accent than written. The audiobook for Foundation was impenetrable to me, and the guy spoke in an fucking American accent.

[waldaberz]

L. Ron Hubbard.

[TreyMcFly]

Brave New World; Ive tried multiple times to get through it but it just doesn't interest me.

[KillSwitch_J]

Hm, and Dan Browns "Digital fortress" also deserves to burn.

I've actually just started reading this one CG. I'll let you know what I think of it when I'm done.

[cb']

Actually managed to finish neuromancer, so scratch that one. Wasn't much good, I just can't afford to buy new books. :mad:

[Today]

Nobody call can themself an atheist and not have read the bible. They may only call themselves ignorant.

As is anyone who thinks such a statement is anti or pro religion.

[Aldaraia]

"Twilight", a female friend told me it was a great book about vampires since I was fond of them, (this was before the movie was produced) and she lent it to me. I got about 20 pages in before giving up. Fuck that book, I quickly realized it was all fluff and fill, one line dialogues and inane conversations. After seeing the tween phenomenon taking place over the movie, I'm quite glad I didn't torture myself with that book anymore than I had too. :mad:

Adding on another is "Speaker for the Dead, I liked the sci-fi theme of the first, but I felt this one drifted away and I didn't understand WTF was going on, I'll give it another read after I re-read its predecessor.

Also the "Tale of Two Cities" comes in mind, besides boring me, the slang in it ended up throwing me off big time, didn't read that one for long.

[Naffy]

TWILIGHT.

[cb']

Nobody call can themself an atheist and not have read the bible. They may only call themselves ignorant.

As is anyone who thinks such a statement is anti or pro religion.

I'm allowed to think that you're retarded, right? For one, atheism is against all religions, so I can call you ignorant for not having read the chronicles of the flying spaghetti monster by the same token. Secondly, you don't have to have any foreknowledge to be an atheist, for the same reason one can reject the presence of an imaginary friend without knowing what color his awesome spaceship is. Third, stop fucking trolling.

--

Add on Sir Thomas More's 'Utopia', I just tried reading it again, and it was fucking brutal.

[Today]

I'm allowed to think that you're retarded, right? For one, atheism is against all religions, so I can call you ignorant for not having read the chronicles of the flying spaghetti monster by the same token. Secondly, you don't have to have any foreknowledge to be an atheist, for the same reason one can reject the presence of an imaginary friend without knowing what color his awesome spaceship is. Third, stop fucking trolling.

--

Epic facepalm. And I mean epic. I'm not trolling, you're just yet another close minded muppet who's done a very poor job of coming to his own unique and original standpoint on all things religious. You've fallen into a trap from which you cannot escape. Thanks for playing.

[Snoopy]

Epic facepalm. And I mean epic. I'm not trolling, you're just yet another close minded muppet who's done a very poor job of coming to his own unique and original standpoint on all things religious. You've fallen into a trap from which you cannot escape. Thanks for playing.

No, actually you got served.

[Today]

No, actually you got served.

If it's a once in a blue moon occasion where you're not just trying to be a dick for the lulz, explain to me where in his argument he has at least any kind of a point, and I will show you otherwise.

[MrNatowski]

The burden of proof rests on the one making the claim, not the one refuting it. As an atheist it's not my responsibility to read the scripture of every religion and prove them all wrong, it's the responsibility of the theist to prove that their God (Yahweh, Allah, Buddha, Quezacotl, etc) is the one true god out of all the tens of thousands of "One true gods" that people believe in.

And before anyone calls me ignorant, despite my position I have read the entire bible as well as parts of the Qur'an and the Torah. I've also attended church and been pressured by my parents, countless friends, and even ex girlfriends to believe in their god, and when I ask why I should believe in (Richard Dawkin's Quote)

"A petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomanical, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

the only response I get is that I need to have faith? :confused: Why should I have any more faith in YOUR god than any of the other thousands of gods out there? Usually the response is something along the lines of "The bible just makes sense. I can FEEL Jesus and even though there's no proof, I know he's there." :facepalm:

Oh, and to answer the original question, definitely Twilight.

[Snoopy]

Epic facepalm. And I mean epic. I'm not trolling, you're just yet another close minded muppet who's done a very poor job of coming to his own unique and original standpoint on all things religious. You've fallen into a trap from which you cannot escape. Thanks for playing.

Doesn't really matter what he says. You say that in order to be an atheist, one has to read the bible first. This statement is so fucking dumb. His comeback was pretty funny actually. You're either just failtrolling or are a dumb fucking jackass. Considering you are not a troll, the dumb jackass is the more fitting explanation to your stupid remark.

Your remark on atheism was so dumb, that it doesn't even need any refuting or serious approach. Either way, he served you good. Now shut up and quit your baaaaawling.

[z he lives]

stephen king is terrible. If someone likes his books I automatically know that they suck.

What books of his have you read? Do you know how to read?

[PROJECT PAT]

What books of his have you read? Do you know how to read?

Let me think about it. . .

Dostoevsky, Mishima, O'Conner, Hemingway, Faulkner, Maugham, Joyce, Twain, Fitzgerald, Salinger to name a few.

:facepalm: stephen fucking king :facepalm:

[Snoopy]

Stephen King's stories can only excite middle aged house wives. You also have to be high on speed not to fall asleep due to his awful writing style. Again, something only middle aged house wives can handle.

[Today]

Doesn't really matter what he says. You say that in order to be an atheist, one has to read the bible first. This statement is so fucking dumb. His comeback was pretty funny actually. You're either just failtrolling or are a dumb fucking jackass. Considering you are not a troll, the dumb jackass is the more fitting explanation to your stupid remark.

Your remark on atheism was so dumb, that it doesn't even need any refuting or serious approach. Either way, he served you good. Now shut up and quit your baaaaawling.

No, you're right, I wasn't trolling (though I didn't claim to be). I was overcome by a gust of extreme arrogance.

Such a statement was indeed pretty stupid, no matter how right it is or isn't, and so I do retract the statement - though this is not to be taken as 'acknowledging' the statement is incorrect - because I don't. I don't believe it is still arrogance to maintain the argument that it is correct, when accompanied by my argument which I did not provide.

You guys are completely wrong (well, not actually Snoopy who hasn't made assumptions and jumped guns), by that is my problem that you have no idea what I'm talking about. I am willing to start again if there is anything intelligent here who wishes to debate 'the thing that I have not yet said' for the purposes of education, and not do a Star Wars Fan and fill the thread with copouts, segueways, and cheap shot technicalities. I am willing to.

[Today]

The burden of proof rests on the one making the claim, not the one refuting it. As an atheist it's not my responsibility to read the scripture of every religion and prove them all wrong, it's the responsibility of the theist to prove that their God (Yahweh, Allah, Buddha, Quezacotl, etc) is the one true god out of all the tens of thousands of "One true gods" that people believe in.

And before anyone calls me ignorant, despite my position I have read the entire bible as well as parts of the Qur'an and the Torah. I've also attended church and been pressured by my parents, countless friends, and even ex girlfriends to believe in their god, and when I ask why I should believe in (Richard Dawkin's Quote)

"A petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomanical, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully."

the only response I get is that I need to have faith? :confused: Why should I have any more faith in YOUR god than any of the other thousands of gods out there? Usually the response is something along the lines of "The bible just makes sense. I can FEEL Jesus and even though there's no proof, I know he's there." :facepalm:


What the fuck are you talking about?


P.S. It's rhetorical, see above.

[Snoopy]

No, you're right, I wasn't trolling (though I didn't claim to be). I was overcome by a gust of extreme arrogance.

Such a statement was indeed pretty stupid, no matter how right it is or isn't, and so I do retract the statement - though this is not to be taken as 'acknowledging' the statement is incorrect - because I don't. I don't believe it is still arrogance to maintain the argument that it is correct, when accompanied by my argument which I did not provide.

You guys are completely wrong (well, not actually Snoopy who hasn't made assumptions and jumped guns), by that is my problem that you have no idea what I'm talking about. I am willing to start again if there is anything intelligent here who wishes to debate 'the thing that I have not yet said' for the purposes of education, and not do a Star Wars Fan and fill the thread with copouts, segueways, and cheap shot technicalities. I am willing to.

So basically what you're saying is that you realized your statement was stupid and you retracted it but not really because you're too proud?

lolwut? :confused:

[Blizzard Spock]

Topic was books you can't/won't read, right? Just checking.

Infinite Jest. I know, I know- I'm sure it's worth the effort, just can't make the leap. I read two paragraphs a few years ago and it's been making a great doorstop ever since.

[dirtyangelswithfaces]

Stuff I bought for university classes but never read (or never got past page 20 or so): Middlemarch (George Elliot), Manhattan Transfer (Doctorow), Austen/Brontë shite, Max Havelaar (famous Dutch book set in Indonesia during the colonial period)
Gravity's Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon. I keep telling myself to read it but when I start I just can't put in the effort. I'm a sissy aren't I? :(