Books I Loathed discussion

Before I go further, I just want to say that I don't necessarily loathe Neil Gaiman. I just sort of meh him. I do feel like I'm alone in this, though, and I was wondering if anyone else felt the same way.

I've read several of his books: "Coraline," "Stardust," "The Graveyard Book" and "M is for Magic."

The last one of these was a book of short stories that I got in a used book store and sometimes wonder if there were only five printed because I seem to be the only person who's read it.

The thing is, I feel like Gaiman is trying to be very edgy and creepy, but nothing ever really sticks with me. I read Coraline when I was around twelve and I remember being creeped out, but I don't really remember anything specific. However, there are scenes from other books that I still think about even though I read them ages ago. Gaiman doesn't really do this for me.

I'm less of a fan of The Graveyard Book than I am of Coraline. As I said above, I read M is for Magic and one of the stories in this book is word for word one of the chapters in The Graveyard Book. This is a fairly minor annoyance, but overall I didn't really like the book. Again, nothing really stuck with me and a times the plot seemed really disjointed and episodic (is that the word I'm looking for?) There were also parts of the book that I just didn't understand why this was happening (The Demon Gate). I also wasn't big on the whole, Jack of All Trades main plot thing. I just found it really weird and not sufficiently explained.

Stardust, though, is by far my least favorite Gaiman book. I saw that movie first and loved it. It's one of my favorite movies ever, so of course I was really excited to read the book. However, everything I liked about the movie either wasn't in the book at all or was given about two paragraphs (the pirate ship). I also didn't like the overall tone of the book and was put off by, I'm not sure what to call it, the crudeness? Again, though, I don't even really remember that much about the book because I never take anything away from Gaiman's books.

Maybe it's because I've never read any of Gaiman's really popular books (American Gods, for instance) but I just don't get the Gaiman hype. He just seems very overrated to me. Like I said, I don't hate his books (except for maybe Stardust, I thought that was pretty terrible) but I don't understand why people love them.

Anyone share my feelings? Please don't say I'm all alone.

I've read three of Gaiman's works -- Good Omens, American Gods, and Anansi Boys. I thought Good Omens was okay; I really liked American Gods and would love it if not for the fact that the climax/resolution was extraordinarily similar to the one in Good Omens (the war is coming! people are gathering! and then... they work out their differences and decide not to go through with it); and Anansi Boys was kinda meh. I think he's a good author, just not a great author. I have Neverwhere on tap for this month - maybe that'll change my mind.

I am an unabashed Neil Gaiman fan. If he writes it, I'll read it.
I guess it all comes down to a matter of personal taste.

Ooh I loved Stardust. But I have to agree, I don't get (or don't like?) the Gaiman hype. I tried reading Neverwhere a while back and I couldn't get past 5 pages, I think. But that may have been because it was an ebook, so I might give him another try.

I love what he does all the time. I am like PookyGurl, an unabashed lover of Gaiman. taking a part of a book and using it as a short is brilliant. Gives you an idea of the whole. Great idea!

Neil Gaiman is like Tolkein for me. I have to spend a lot of time in his books for me to really comprehend and enjoy them. I think you have to spend a weekend reading The Graveyard Book, Coraline, Stardust and American Gods. I am a fan, but I wasn't at first.

Grace wrote: "Before I go further, I just want to say that I don't necessarily loathe Neil Gaiman. I just sort of meh him. I do feel like I'm alone in this, though, and I was wondering if anyone else felt the sa..."

Yes, I do also. The first thing I knew about him was that we went to see the movie Stardust which I did love so I thought I would like his books but the only one I like is M is for Magic. The rest just grossed me out or wandered around in strange places.

I would suggest to anyone to read either Anansi Boys or American Gods, that is when Neil Gaiman is at his best if you don't like him. I personally think he's one of the most talented storytellers ever published, but he's definitely not for everyone.

Guitar Chick wrote: "Neil Gaiman is like Tolkein for me. I have to spend a lot of time in his books for me to really comprehend and enjoy them. I think you have to spend a weekend reading The Graveyard Book, Coraline, ..."

Very good point! His brilliance tends to take a while to sink in. =)

Carolyn wrote: "I would suggest to anyone to read either Anansi Boys or American Gods, that is when Neil Gaiman is at his best if you don't like him. I personally think he's one of the most talented storytellers e..."

I read half of American Gods and that was enough to last me a life time. GAG!

Well he isn't for everyone, but he's very much for me, ha.

Carolyn wrote: "I would suggest to anyone to read either Anansi Boys or American Gods, that is when Neil Gaiman is at his best if you don't like him. I personally think he's one of the most talented storytellers e..."

Interesting. I absolutely loathed "American Gods", but rather liked "Stardust" and "Neverwhere".

Kiwiria wrote: "Carolyn wrote: "I would suggest to anyone to read either Anansi Boys or American Gods, that is when Neil Gaiman is at his best if you don't like him. I personally think he's one of the most talente..."

I must admit I loved Stardust and Neverwhere as well. He doesn't quite stick to one set way of writing, it's dynamic. So I guess different tastes could fit into it. Have you read The Graveyard Book?

No, I haven't. Even "Stardust" I only liked, I haven't loved anything he wrote (actually by far preferred the movie). Life is too short for mediocre writers ;-) If I do end up reading more of his work, It'll probably be that one though... Well, that or "Good Omens" - I rather like Terry Pratchett :-)

I like Coraline and the Graveyard Book the best, but they aim more towards kids/tweens.

I've always liked Gaiman better as a comic author than a book author. His books feel so episodic.

Chrysoula wrote: "I've always liked Gaiman better as a comic author than a book author. His books feel so episodic."

Yeah, Chrysoula. I definitely felt that way. Especially with The Graveyard Book.

Why are there only a handful of people who genuinely hate Neil Gaiman? Even here, when talking about authors people loathe!

Reasons, reasons. Brace yourselves :P

Firstly, I remember the first book I read by him was Coraline, not long after it had come out, in school with my class. I have liked almost every book I've read at school (save Dracula), except for this. All of us who read it, except one girl I think, hated it. We all found it boring and trying-too-hard when it came to being creepy.

I find his writing childlike, as if aimed at YA (ignoring Coraline and the Graveyard Book, of course). I mean, Tolkien managed to break the mould and stop fantasy being an adolescent thing...if it's going to be written like YA, keep it in YA (a genre I enjoy, but I like to keep it separate). Just bad writing, often stilted, in my opinion, and flat.

Thirdly, he has become some amount of King of Fantasy (or perhaps a Prince under George R.R. Martin), which really gets to me. Not only do I not like him, I think the only reason for their popularity is their casual and not-that-serious tone, as much as he might try to bring it to his books. A style he shares, perhaps, with Jim Butcher - except less urban in some books. Again, the whole thing that I believe he should be classified as YA.

Fourthly, the hype, oh gosh the hype. I know two people who don't like Gaiman. I work in a bookstore, and my job before that was a volunteer at a second hand bookstore where I ran the sci-fi and fantasy section. And yet, still, I have only encountered two people who dislike him! It's not just the hype - though that gets to me - its just the general fact almost everyone who has read him loves at least that particular book they have read.

And lastly, he himself. I try not to judge in regards to character of author. But for Gaiman, I make an exception. There are many things about him that I've seen and read from interviews, as well as his whole almost-celebrity thing, that rubs me up the wrong way totally and completely. Cannot watch anything with him without my heckles going up.

I've read Neverwhere, most of American Gods, a chapter of Anansi Boys Coraline, and quite a few of his short stories. I dislike...yeah, all of them. I completely and utterly hate Neil Gaiman and his writing.

Sorry. 3am ramble after working all day makes this more irritable than I would of liked, but glad to have it all out of my system now! I understand this is all down to opinion, it's just that mine is very...strong on the matter, clearly. Sorry.

I've only read American Gods, which I disliked immensely. I felt like there wasn't enough variance among the characters (they were all laconic, hard-nosed drifters) and for a book that promised to be packed with mythology, it felt like how things happened (that bit where they step out of time for example) was never explained, but brushed off. "Oh, it's not important, you don't need to know. So anyway."

I know a lot of people who love Gaiman and I'm sure he's a quality writer. But his style runs so counter to my particular tastes, I just can't deal with him.

I just bought The Graveyard Book by Gaiman and after reading this thread, I'm looking forward to reading it and forming my own opinion on his writing style. So far, I've only seen movies that were produced off of his book so we shall see. :-)

I haven't figured out the Gaiman appeal. I've read American Gods, Coraline (and watched the film), and one of the comic books (I forget which one), but still can't understand why everyone finds him so phenomenal. He's a totally capable writer, and if you're okay with a straightforward fantasy or adventure story, he's fine. But I want a book to resonate more deeply, to be more philosophical and cut closer to the bone--like Pullman, Atwood, or Stanislaw Lem. Even P.K. Dick, who's actually a bit of a hack in terms of prose, writes fiction that dislodges something.

I guess Gaiman is more dark fantasy and less sci-fi, but he still strikes me as a touch shallow. I'm willing to give him another go with The Graveyard Book (still on my list), but I expect my response will be the same: competent, imaginative writing that doesn't quite push far enough for me.

Sharon, I agree completely. You've articulated my thoughts very well. But I wouldn't even go so far as to call him dark fantasy. When I think back on his books I remember that he was trying to dark, but it just doesn't stay once I've finished reading. You mentioned Pullman and even though I haven't read The Golden Compass or the Subtle Knife in a really long time, I still remember the horrifying and dark scenes from his books as if I read them yesterday. Pullman sticks with me, Gaiman does not.

I read The Graveyard Book recently and really liked it -- it's probably my favorite Gaiman thus far. He's still not a consistent author for me, but that one definitely worked.

Grace wrote: "Sharon, I agree completely. You've articulated my thoughts very well. But I wouldn't even go so far as to call him dark fantasy. When I think back on his books I remember that he was trying to dark..."

Oh, I guess I mean "dark" in comparison to that fantasy which delineates good and bad characters fairly clearly and simply (I'm thinking Tolkien and C.S. Lewis here). Gaiman seems to write stories that revel in shadows, focusing on heroes who cross into underworlds, or characters who might superficially be considered evil (like Shadow in Gods), yet aren't. I guess the publishing/genre definition of "dark fantasy" encompasses horror, which I didn't mean to suggest. At any rate, dark or not, Gaiman's stories never transcend past basic narrative for me and consequently don't, as you say, stick.

I actually pretty much loathe Gaiman's work, and 90% of the people I've met who were diehard fans of his have been total assholes, which, I mean, I know it's not his fault that my ex-boyfriend threatened to punch me because I think Gaiman's overrated, but, y'know, I definitely think it says something about the underlying themes of his stories. I haven't read enough of him to really trace lines around though.

For me, the main reason I loathe his work is that it's full of plotholes, underdeveloped characters, stilted dialogue that's written solely to be quotable and not with any emotion from the characters in question, a heavy hand when it comes to creepiness and horror, and a tendency to -- like with the pretentious (and still dull) dialogue, idolize it's own cleverness over the actual art and form of a story. Rather than fill his characters with motivation and passion and emotions and values and all the things that go into a good character who can move the story along, he plots out a story with a "twist" that's undoubtedly been done before, takes away a happy ending from where everyone is presumably expecting it, and awarding it to a less deserving character who, in any other narrative that tried to do the same thing, probably had been more deserving, but in Gaiman's narrative is, like everyone else, a stock character, a poorly fleshed out representation of what I would assume to be Gaiman's high school traumas, because for some reason everyone seems to be obsessed with their high school traumas these days.

And yet despite this, in any discussion of fantasy or fairy tales or mythology, people are immediately taken with sentiments like, "Oh, Gaiman did it this way!" and "Gaiman already did this!" even though it's very rarely something that only Gaiman has done. . . . it's very frustrating.

It's not Gaiman's fault I hate him, but I hate him nonetheless.

Savannah wrote: "I know it's not his fault that my ex-boyfriend threatened to punch me because I think Gaiman's overrated, but, y'know…"

Yikes! Glad he's your ex-boyfriend! :(

Since this post, I read Ocean at the End of the Lane. It's not bad, actually. Not amazing, but probably the best thing I've read by him. I also heard him speak, and I do appreciate his dedication to his fans (at the reading I went to, he hung around for 9 hours--until the last of the 1,000 people there had their books signed). But still. I also read The Graveyard Book a little while ago and wasn't terribly impressed. I guess I'm done with him. I don't think I've ever tried so hard to like a writer--though in this case, it was really that I was trying to understand the appeal. Even if I don't like his work, I can appreciate that he respects his fans and really tries to connect with them.

I actually like Gaiman....but I started with his short story collection "Smoke and Mirrors" which is wonderful and made me a fan. I can see where you're coming from though about the overrated bit, but I don't think he's a bad author by any longshot. But hey, different strokes for different folks, no harm there :)

I actually saw the Coraline stop motion film (one of my favorite animated films of all time) before I took the book out of my local library. I was around thirteen at the time but it still creeped me out. I didn't really want to give it a reread though, tried the Graveyard book, didn't finish but that was my fault not the writing. I just had too much to do to properly sit down and read for a few hours.

I truly thought I was the only person in the world who utterly loathed Neil Gaiman. I can't understand why - he's immensely popular, he seems amiable enough, he's the BBC's go-to guy when they talk about writing (are there no other writers?) and he seems quite intelligent. I thought perhaps it was envy but I'm not sure I could be bothered to be jealous of someone who writes books that I hate. And I really hate them. I'm currently reading American Gods in some sort of misguided attempt to perhaps change my mind or at least give him a fair trial. It is, after all, his fattest book, so I thought I'd get a good idea of what his writing is like. That, and it's won just about every award in the universe. But WHY?? It's so patchy it makes a patchwork quilt look monotone. The occasional good line doesn't rescue writing that is essentially cliched and haphazard with a story line that has pretensions of grandeur but is really just derivative. There might have been a good idea in there once but it has become lost in endless drivel about very little. I should also add that I truly hate Neverwhere. I tried to watch it on TV years ago and it was such garbage that I gave up halfway through the first episode. The huge production on Radio 4 possibly fared better but again I found myself walking away, bored with the phenomenal silliness of it all. My daughter has tried to convince me that Coraline is brilliant but I got bored watching that too. I just don't get it. This is "weird" for the masses, pretentious weird, not proper weird, like he learnt how to do weird-by-numbers. An immense relief to get this off my chest! I thought I was alone in this and was even embarrassed about it. Nothing I'm saying here, I know, is new - others in this forum have said it before me. But there's solidarity in lack of appeal.
Ultimately I think that Neil Gaiman has nothing to say, which must be fatal for a writer.

I'm reluctant to read any more of Gaiman's works because I picked up The Ocean at the End of the Lane once and put it down within thirty pages. So pretentious and trying-too-hard to be creepy. I'll give The Graveyard Book a try because I have it at home, but my expectations are not very high.

Susannah wrote: "I truly thought I was the only person in the world who utterly loathed Neil Gaiman. I can't understand why - he's immensely popular, he seems amiable enough, he's the BBC's go-to guy when they tal..."

Here, here!

That's exactly what it is -- weirdness for the masses, by the numbers. And the people who gobble it up are all people who'd rather pretend to be weird and misunderstood than to think for themselves or understand others.

Sorry, I don't mean to put you in an uncomfortable position, but "weirdness by the numbers" is probably the first time I've heard it put into words in a way that clicked. Pretentious, trying to hard, yes, all that, but that doesn't explain it exactly. A formula to appear weird without actually being weird does.

(And certainly explains why there are so many people who try too hard to be weird. *sighs*)

Susannah wrote: "I truly thought I was the only person in the world who utterly loathed Neil Gaiman. I can't understand why - he's immensely popular, he seems amiable enough, he's the BBC's go-to guy when they tal..."

Perfectly put! I don't even have anything to add, just that this is exactly how I feel.

I don't loathe him,...I thinks its more of a hit and miss with him, or a love/hate relationship. I loved 'Coraline' and 'The Graveyard Book' but hated 'American Gods.'

You're not alone at all. "Meh" is the perfect summary, actually. I don't loathe Gaiman on his own, until his batshit crazy fans get involved and start their hymns of praise. He can tell a decent story, but he has no pacing and the shakiest command of structure. His use of language can be poetic one day and then drift into painfully purple the next. And much of his macabre sensibility is the kind that goth and horror inclined teenagers mistake for profundity when it's merely pretentious. A competent writer, but far from a genius let alone the god-on-earth some imagine.

PookyGurl wrote: "I am an unabashed Neil Gaiman fan. If he writes it, I'll read it.
I guess it all comes down to a matter of personal taste."
Me too! Loved the Sandman series.

I'm one of those readers who began by loving Gaiman, but have come to a point where his more recent stuff leaves no lasting impact. As much as I recall loving Coraline, Stardust, and Neverwhere, I found The Ocean At The End of the Lane rather disappointing, lacking much of what made Coraline readable. Am currently stuck on his latest short story anthology with little or no inclination to finish it, might have to discard it as a DNF.

Sandman is brilliant. everything else I've tried is mediocre and derivative. American Gods is terrible.

I have only read Stardust of his books, and it was the first time I thought, "Wow, the movie made this 1000 times better." I was so shocked by the profanity and language, especially since none of that was in the film. The book had no charm whatsoever, and I completely agree that all the best parts from the film were hardly even mentioned in the book. In retrospect, my least-favourite teacher really likes Neil Gaiman, so that should have been a clue for me right there not to touch the book!!

I loved Neverwhere but American Gods left me confused. The Graveyard Book I enjoyed a lot.

I hate to say this but if Sandman was depicted in a more detailed, coherent style I think I'd find it a lot more accessible than I do in its current form.

I LOVE CORALINE BEST BOOK EVER!
sorry

PookyGurl wrote: "I am an unabashed Neil Gaiman fan. If he writes it, I'll read it.
I guess it all comes down to a matter of personal taste."

me too!!!

Hi person from 8 years ago,

I recently wrote the sentence "Neil Gaiman is a bad writer" in a forum, and then, seeking company, I googled the phrase. There were zero results besides, "I don't think Neil Gaiman is a bad writer, but..."

Like you, I meh Neil Gaiman. I don't loathe him. I just don't understand why he's so, so loved.

I'm glad to have found this thread.

Jenn wrote: "Hi person from 8 years ago,

I recently wrote the sentence "Neil Gaiman is a bad writer" in a forum, and then, seeking company, I googled the phrase. There were zero results besides, "I don't think..."

I'm glad that you found some solidarity! I haven't picked up another Gaiman book since writing this XD

OMG I found this thread and group serendipitously and I love it! I also have an unpopular dislike for Neil Gaiman that I could not figure out how to express for the longest time. My hot take is this:

Neil Gaiman writes fantasy for people who don't read fantasy.

I have a hard time with him, because I think he is a good writer, but I just can't get behind his stuff most of the time. Too whimsical and too clever by far.

I started reading American Gods and had to stop, it was truly awful. Gaiman is the Dan Brown of fantasy fiction. The worst part is a good friend has got me the Audible version on Sandman and it's 11hrs long - it's awful! But it's a good job I do a lot of driving and listening at the same time.

Reading Gaiman is like being in someone else's dreams for a while. That is either a love or hate situation. I think he's a lyrical writer and I've quite enjoyed a lot of what he's done but can understand why some loathe him. He can be creepy just for the sake of creepiness instead of for any moral or story driven reason. My favorite was Neverwhere. I was disappointed that wasn't a series. He wrote a short story about a short man who goes to a some creepy cave with another man which left me bewildered and thinking about it a lot since the atmosphere of the story stayed with me. I can't remember the name but it still creeps me out to think about it.

Sarah wrote: "Reading Gaiman is like being in someone else's dreams for a while. That is either a love or hate situation. I think he's a lyrical writer and I've quite enjoyed a lot of what he's done but can unde..."

Sheesh, I managed to endure the full Audible dramatisation of The Sandman - good luck to you who embark on that journey. My main umbridge with Neil Gaiman is that he has taken a very, very rich vein of British anti-establishmentarianism, taken it's pre-Christian sensibilities and bastardised it. In a similar way to JK Rowling actually, for me, as a Yorkshireman, there isn't enough subtlety or artifice in his (Gaiman's) cliche-ridden composition. I have only read one Stephen King novel (Cujo) and found my sense of dismay the same.

I love that this thread still gets attention. I enjoy reading these comments every few months.

Delighted to find this thread! I have no particular dislike for the man, but the reaction to his work baffles me. Neither the books not the films/TV are anything other than mediocre. His writing is so lacking in humanity that it reads in a similar manner to translations of Julius Caesar - functional at best. A lot of his ideas have so much potential, but his expression of those ideas is what I might expect from a dead salmon; he should team up with someone who understands how words can illuminate and bring things to life. Where adaptations of his work have been successful, eg 'Coraline' and 'Stardust', it is evident that success is due to someone more competent doing the script writing, taking his core ideas and articulating in a way of which he simply is not capable. Where he writes or is closely involved in the writing of the script (eg 'American Gods' or 'Good Omens') the productions are mediocre to terrible; partly saved only by strong performers in the various roles.
At least I am forewarned now that anything with Neil Gaiman's name attached is likely to disappoint at best!