[LongDongSilver]

You have got to be kidding me.. I actually read the first hunger games book stuck in a family beach house and it is SHIT

Catcher in the rye is a great book, Holden Caulfield is an excellent character.

[da_zeb]

(02-06-2016 02:32 PM)emuelle1 Wrote:  

I actually liked the Hunger Games books. At least, outside of the teenage love triangle crap. I thought they were really insightful as to how tyranny and rebellion work.

One of the supposedly popular books I can't stand is Catcher In The Rye. I forced myself to read half of it, then looked up some cliff's notes to see how it ended. I couldn't stand the main character. I read an article recently claiming it's an encoded Freemason ritual, but I'm never picking it up again to verify that claim.

Totally agree on Catcher in the Rye. It was the one book I couldn't finish in English Literature in high school. I gave up about halfway through and bullshitted my way through the writing assignment.

[Vinny]

Twilight - by Stephenie Meyer

[SirTimothy]

No More Christian Nice Guy - by Paul Coughlin

I read this book back when I was just barely starting to scratch the surface of the red pill. I had read "No More Mr. Nice Guy", thought it was fairly good, and being a Christian I wanted to see how a "Christian" version would compare.

I was pretty disappointed. It starts off being vaguely pro-masculine, but after admitting that feminism "overreacted", it goes on to imply that it was the evil horny misogynist men's fault that feminism had to happen in the first place. The fact that feminism was responsible for Roe v. Wade and a subsequent 50 million abortions was not even mentioned, which is kind of weird for a Christian author.

The rest of the book goes on talking about how Christian men should not be nice-guy wimps, but instead be bold, truthful, tough, fearless, etc. But it gives almost no idea of what this looks like in the real world, even in the "practical help" chapter. The writing overall felt weirdly female. And the way it makes excuses for feminism is pretty ironic for a book that says to boldly tell the unvarnished, masculine truth.

2/10 Would Not Read Again. If you want good, masculine, Christian reading, try Dalrock's blog.

[emuelle1]

As a Christian, I highly recommend avoiding many of the popular Christian books. I wish Moses had left an 11th commandment that pastors are not allowed to write books. Most Christian authors (pastors especially) have about 5 minutes of material that have to be stretched across 300+ pages, especially in mainstream publishing. They do this the same way they get through an hour long sermon: lots of stories, anecdotes, and repetition.

I also believe the majority of Christian books are written for the baby, not the mature Christian. So you pick up a book that you think you'll learn something from, and the book is little more than the basic Gospel. I'm already a believer; why are you preaching the Gospel at me if I've already accepted it? Oh, right, just in case that one person in 300 million who has never heard it before accidentally picks the book up so he can be saved.

Likewise, stay away from the majority of Christian marriage and relationship books. I'm not saying there aren't good ones out there; but most of them are regurgitated feminist new age crap. Or just a pastor rambling a page of material into 300.

On to better things... I concur on "The Celestrine Prophesy". The guy wrote a follow up book which is even worse.

Kiyosaki wrote a book in 2009 called "Conspiracy of the Rich". Most of the material concurs with things you'll read in "The Creature From Jekyll Island". One story in there I thought was utter bullshit. He claims while he was in Vietnam, he flew his helicopter into Cambodia to buy gold. The guy admits to taking a Marine Corps helicopter into enemy territory to buy gold? I thought it was Hollywood bullshit and unlikely. And I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations on things like misappropriation of government property, unauthorized missions, and conduct unbecoming an officer.

(02-12-2016 07:08 PM)SirTimothy Wrote:  

No More Christian Nice Guy - by Paul Coughlin

I read this book back when I was just barely starting to scratch the surface of the red pill. I had read "No More Mr. Nice Guy", thought it was fairly good, and being a Christian I wanted to see how a "Christian" version would compare.

I was pretty disappointed. It starts off being vaguely pro-masculine, but after admitting that feminism "overreacted", it goes on to imply that it was the evil horny misogynist men's fault that feminism had to happen in the first place. The fact that feminism was responsible for Roe v. Wade and a subsequent 50 million abortions was not even mentioned, which is kind of weird for a Christian author.

The rest of the book goes on talking about how Christian men should not be nice-guy wimps, but instead be bold, truthful, tough, fearless, etc. But it gives almost no idea of what this looks like in the real world, even in the "practical help" chapter. The writing overall felt weirdly female. And the way it makes excuses for feminism is pretty ironic for a book that says to boldly tell the unvarnished, masculine truth.

2/10 Would Not Read Again. If you want good, masculine, Christian reading, try Dalrock's blog.

[QuietDog]

Jane Eyre - Charlotte Bronte

Probably the worst book I've had the misfortune to read, the fact that feminists love this book (didn't know that when I started it) says everything you need to know. A good buddy of mine who is an Indian immigrant and who's english is not the best, had to write an essay about it for University and wanted me to proofread it. I thought "This is considered a classic right? I'll just read it and then I can really help him." I'd also read some Jane Austen novels which were alright, this was not.

The story centers around a young orphan who after a few misadventures winds up working as a governess for the wealthy, mercurial Lord Rochester with a mysterious past. Bronte explains how Jane's strong personality eventually wins him over which is baffling because to me Jane Eyre comes across as smug, bland and overbearing. Bronte also goes to great length so the reader understands that Jane is not much of a looker. Rochester ends up passing over beautiful noblewomen in favor of a busted, uninteresting and full of herself Jane. Its no wonder feminists like it

It was also one of the worst pieces of writing I've ever read, every sentence is overlong and yet manages to not say very much at the same time.

Basically the whole thing reads as a painfully long-winded fantasy of a woman who could never attract a desirable suitor (which Bronte could not, her husband was broke and she turned him down at first) but believed she deserved one for being 'strong' aka a pain in the ass

I get why feminists laud the idiotic themes of the book but the fact that this poorly written nonsense is considered a 'classic' by some is beyond me.

I really should've stopped reading a third of the way through but I hate not finishing books

[Paracelsus]

(02-12-2016 07:27 PM)emuelle1 Wrote:  

Kiyosaki wrote a book in 2009 called "Conspiracy of the Rich". Most of the material concurs with things you'll read in "The Creature From Jekyll Island". One story in there I thought was utter bullshit. He claims while he was in Vietnam, he flew his helicopter into Cambodia to buy gold. The guy admits to taking a Marine Corps helicopter into enemy territory to buy gold? I thought it was Hollywood bullshit and unlikely. And I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations on things like misappropriation of government property, unauthorized missions, and conduct unbecoming an officer.

At the risk of labouring the point, Kiyosaki's stories in respect of his Vietnam experiences change regularly. In his earlier books he'd imply that he deserted from the military because he was conflicted about shooting a Vietnamese boy who was playing in a helicopter. The real story essentially came out that he just missed a boat to come back to the States and thus was listed for a while as AWOL.

Even his "I'm a tough Marine Corps guy" story is somewhat bullshit. Though the USMC is depressingly willing to affirm him as a proud product of theirs, in reality his military service isn't quite so hardcore. In his earliest books, he said he was accepted into the US Merchant Marine Academy. John Reed goes on in his breakdown of Kiyosaki's bullshit:

Quote:

Did Kiyosaki go through Marine Platoon Leader School? Nope.

So how did he get to be a Marine?

He was a Navy officer in helicopter school. The Vietnam war was winding down, so the Navy decided they had too many pilots and decided to stop training Kiyosaki and his fight-school classmates to save money. The Marines, on the other hand, still wanted more helicopter pilots. By letting Kiyosaki and his helicopter classmates make a lateral transfer to the Marine Corps, the Marines could save the amount of money the Navy had already spent training them. In other words, to the Marine Corps, Kiyosaki was a pilot trainee who was “on sale” for half price or “overstock.”

In World War II, officers who graduated from Officer Candidate School were called “90-day wonders.” By that standard, Kiyosaki is a “zero-day wonder” in terms of Marine training—an instant Marine. He passed no “crucible” or its predecessor tests. He just filled out some paperwork and made a wardrobe change.

Did he serve in the Marine Corps? Yes.

I have no problem with his claiming he served in the Marine Corps. But in his interview on the Marine Corps Web site and elsewhere, he has laid on the “Marine Corps made me what I am today” stuff pretty thick for a guy who came through the Marine Corps’ “back door,” skipping the notoriously difficult training that virtually all other Marines had to complete successfully before they could “claim the title of United States Marines.”

[debeguiled]

(02-12-2016 07:27 PM)emuelle1 Wrote:  

I wish Moses had left an 11th commandment that pastors are not allowed to write books.

Classic.

[Aurini]

Seconds:

Dianetics: I read about half of it. Endless repetitions about how our thetans are messed up, because all of our mothers tried to abort us with coat-hangers but failed. Seriously. We all got coat-hanger raped in the womb, according to him, it comes up at least once a chapter.

Catcher in the Rye: The story of a mentally ill, selfish little twerp, who refuses to grow up. Peter pan with meandering nothing and an obsession with sex. If he'd been the villain of the piece - a damaged little monster who drags his family down - it could have been a good exploration of mental illness. Instead, we're supposed to accept him as a protagonist and sympathize with him, when all he does is walk around calling people phony.

I think this is where the outrage stemmed from; people said it was the sex and prostitution (note: he doesn't even fuck the prostitute, so her pimp almost beats him up), but I think the real anger came from glorifying such a shit heel.

Original:

On the Road: poorly written garbage about Kerouac and his loser friends mooching off of the good will of others, exploiting and degrading the high trust society of the fifties, with no catharsis, no lessons learned, just patheity at the end of the trip. If any of us had lived back then, it would have been so easy to rebuild from scratch; go to a small town, and somebody would help you out with a job and a place to stay. Guys like Kerouac destroyed that for the rest of us.

[emuelle1]

Paracelsus, I've read Reed's review of Kiyosaki. It's a classic.

I know a former Marine Cobra pilot. He got into Real Estate, and worships at the Altar of the Great Kiyosaki. He's thrilled about RK having been a Marine. I showed him Reed's analysis of RK's service record, and somehow he either doesn't get or doesn't have a problem with the fact that Kiyosaki didn't go through OCS and TBS or any of the other Marine Officer training. Doesn't bother him, because somehow he sees great wisdom in "Rich Dad, Poor Dad", which itself is an article of fiction. I suspect it was ghost written anyway.

[oilbreh]

(02-13-2016 02:09 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

Seconds:

Catcher in the Rye: The story of a mentally ill, selfish little twerp, who refuses to grow up. Peter pan with meandering nothing and an obsession with sex. If he'd been the villain of the piece - a damaged little monster who drags his family down - it could have been a good exploration of mental illness. Instead, we're supposed to accept him as a protagonist and sympathize with him, when all he does is walk around calling people phony.

I think this is where the outrage stemmed from; people said it was the sex and prostitution (note: he doesn't even fuck the prostitute, so her pimp almost beats him up), but I think the real anger came from glorifying such a shit heel.

Original:

On the Road: poorly written garbage about Kerouac and his loser friends mooching off of the good will of others, exploiting and degrading the high trust society of the fifties, with no catharsis, no lessons learned, just patheity at the end of the trip. If any of us had lived back then, it would have been so easy to rebuild from scratch; go to a small town, and somebody would help you out with a job and a place to stay. Guys like Kerouac destroyed that for the rest of us.

Beg to differ about Catcher in the Rye, there is a lot more going on. He's a teenager, you really expect a book written in the mind of a teen kid not having anything to do with sex in 24 hours? There are hints of abuse and loss of innocence. Its more of a commentary about how society abuses the innocent to fit them into the structure of society. Its also a short read and easy read. Regarding his family, he does feel sympathy for his family. He just falls apart and has a yolo moment.

I only watched the movie adaptation of The Road, but based on what I saw I think I agree with you.

[Agastya]

I actually wouldn't recommend V.S Naipaul's "Among the Believers". The overall tone of the book was just depressing and heavy. The guy does have some good insights about Islam, but they're buried underneath hundreds of pages of useless conversations and the author's general pessimism and negativity.

[TheMadGreek]

(02-06-2016 06:24 PM)EDantes Wrote:  

120 Days of Sodom by Marquis De Sade

Worse than any horror film ever made; I couldn't finish it on my first try, but read it if you dare

Fuck that book and especially the movie. No wonder the director was murdered.

[puckerman]

I can't believe Ernest Hemingway hasn't come up yet. I had to read him in high school and couldn't stand him.

[fokker]

(02-13-2016 02:09 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

Seconds:

Dianetics: I read about half of it. Endless repetitions about how our thetans are messed up, because all of our mothers tried to abort us with coat-hangers but failed. Seriously. We all got coat-hanger raped in the womb, according to him, it comes up at least once a chapter.

Catcher in the Rye: The story of a mentally ill, selfish little twerp, who refuses to grow up. Peter pan with meandering nothing and an obsession with sex. If he'd been the villain of the piece - a damaged little monster who drags his family down - it could have been a good exploration of mental illness. Instead, we're supposed to accept him as a protagonist and sympathize with him, when all he does is walk around calling people phony.

I think this is where the outrage stemmed from; people said it was the sex and prostitution (note: he doesn't even fuck the prostitute, so her pimp almost beats him up), but I think the real anger came from glorifying such a shit heel.

Original:

On the Road: poorly written garbage about Kerouac and his loser friends mooching off of the good will of others, exploiting and degrading the high trust society of the fifties, with no catharsis, no lessons learned, just patheity at the end of the trip. If any of us had lived back then, it would have been so easy to rebuild from scratch; go to a small town, and somebody would help you out with a job and a place to stay. Guys like Kerouac destroyed that for the rest of us.

I actually liked On the Road and Catcher in the Rye. Can't judge Dianetics - I've never read it.

[Pride male]

^If you havent read Dianetics, dont.

[The Beast1]

(02-09-2016 05:46 PM)Truth Teller Wrote:  

I can't believe 50 Shades of Grey hasn't shown up yet.

I read highly technical works in my field for fun, but couldn't get through 70 pages of this shit.

I put in my post 2nd from the top

[DamienCasanova]

Re: Catcher in the Rye

I think it's an excellent book, and a literary classic.

Holden Caulfield isn't a typical sympathetic narrator though, I don't think you're really supposed to like him at all. I think he's entertaining in an anti-establishment and rebellious sort of way, at first it's kind of funny how he tells everyone off and calls everyone phony. But the more you learn about him the more you realize you are in the mind of a man who is slowly losing his sanity and his grip on reality. I've read it in different times in my life and had very different reactions to it as well. When I was in high school it was a funny rebellious book to me, as an adult it's more of a reality kick to the face for today's youth. It's also quite realistic, young adulthood/college is the most likely time for people to develop mental illnesses, and it's a very true to life picture of a boy trying and struggling to be a man, but coming apart at the seams internally and externally.

[BIG BOSS]

The Satanic Verses. 2 pages.

[Off The Reservation]

Eat Pray Love

Must not read but more importantly must not buy. I didn't want this cunt to get any more money so I bought a used copy at Goodwill then threw it away.

It is a horrifying tale indeed. Rich bitch leaves her husband who wanted kids to travel around spending money at Indian spiritual retreats and ends up with an old Brazilian man that gives her constant attention.

[FireStarter]

I liked the writing style of On the Road. But there was no story, no plot. Just Jack describing a couple years of his life.

If there was a point to this book I didn't see it.

I'll second anyone who put On the Road by Jack Kerouac on the Must Not Read list.

Another one to second is The Celestine Prophecy. I started reading it but it was just boring.

And one that hasn't been mentioned in this thread is The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle. He has some valid points but the useful stuff he writes could be said in 10 pages. The rest is either garbage or just filler.

[Orion]

(02-12-2016 07:27 PM)emuelle1 Wrote:  

As a Christian, I highly recommend avoiding many of the popular Christian books. I wish Moses had left an 11th commandment that pastors are not allowed to write books. Most Christian authors (pastors especially) have about 5 minutes of material that have to be stretched across 300+ pages, especially in mainstream publishing. They do this the same way they get through an hour long sermon: lots of stories, anecdotes, and repetition.

It's funny how medieval writers such as Augustine were much more open minded than contemporary pastor-writers on subject of pretty much anything.

Pastor writers are obsessed about seeing satan in everything. Their satan-centered worldview made me try to skip such passages in past, then get annoyed by seeing repetition of that pattern, and ultimately, i just stopped reading what preachers have to say on secular topics.

And i say this as a believer. It's sad when you enjoy more a discussion with a new age liberal nowadays than with a deluded blue pill preacher who cannot move past a 1920's lynch mob Christian mentality, despite displaying high intellectual competence otherwise.

[Max Henrich]

"The female man" by feminist Joanna Russ. Some people say you should read what your enemy wrote to get informations, but I think that advice only holds if your enemy is male. That woman was simply screwed up.

Don't know about Eat, Pray, Love.

[Stirfry]

I realize I am a little late to the discussion here, but I disagree about "Guns, Germs and Steel." If anything, it's a fairly red pill book, with a sort of "might makes right" theme. Or at least, Jared Diamond tries to explain how some civilizations got the "might" (and had no problems using it) while others didn't, or more accurately, couldn't. More importantly, he backs up his assertions with data from archaeologists and paleontologists, as you might expect from someone who is a member of the National Academy of Sciences.

[Sherman]

When I was younger, I had two roomates who were deep into Scientology. They both woke up one day and realized it was a cult and left. But they both still maintained that the Dianetics auditing was the most effective thing they ever did.

Koran - I'm sick of hearing about Islam and don't intend to ever read this trash.