Authors, critics, and editors on "great books" that aren't all that great.

Overrated

By Juliet Lapidos - Posted Thursday, Aug. 11, 2011 - SLATE

Every year for the past three years I've read a Thomas Hardy novel, and every year I've been sorely disappointed. I couldn't get into Tess of the d'Urbervilles, found Jude the Obscure too preachy, and deemed The Return of the Native simply dull. Hardy had reverse-Hollywood syndrome: He never met a horribly depressing ending he didn't like. And, in the manner of Hollywood, this gets pretty repetitive.

Perhaps I'm to blame. Hardy, after all, is a bona fide literary master—the kind who shows up on college syllabi. (That's why I keep reading him: I'm planning to start Far From the Madding Crowd in a month or two.) But wherever the fault may lie, Hardy, to me, is one of the "greats" who just isn't all that great. I feel the same way about several works on the Modern Library's 100 Best Novels of the 20^th century list, including Of Human Bondage (get over her already!), and Under the Volcano (yeah, yeah, drink another mescal).

Thomas HardyBecause philistinism loves company, I asked a number of authors, critics, and editors, to confess their least favorite "must read." Below, James Joyce, J.D. Salinger, whoever's responsible for Beowulf, and other beloved writers take a drubbing.

—Juliet Lapidos, deputy books editor


More here, (you might be surprised at some of those listed).