I admit I'm very impulsive when it comes to books- when I see interesting series I buy everything or at least add it to my neverending TBR list.

The result is two bookcases of books and countless titles shipped to local hospital unopened because I felt overhelmed by the mess. I got complete paralysis when it comes to deciding what to read so often I just give up. I borrow piles of books that I have to return to library because I can't extend it endlessly.

In new year I want to be more deliberate and actually curate my reading to get something reminding a steady reading streak.

Any tips? Tricks?

Welcome readers,

Have you ever wanted to ask something but you didn't feel like it deserved its own post but it isn't covered by one of our other scheduled posts? Allow us to introduce you to our new Simple Questions thread! Twice a week, every Tuesday and Saturday, a new Simple Questions thread will be posted for you to ask anything you'd like. And please look for other questions in this thread that you could also answer! A reminder that this is not the thread to ask for book recommendations. All book recommendations should be asked in /r/suggestmeabook or our Weekly Recommendation Thread.

Thank you and enjoy!

The quotes are because I skipped the footnotes, so i'm not sure if i can say I read it since there were so many footnotes.

I'm not sure how I feel about the book. joe is a delight and should be a national treasure, but disappears in the last 20% of the book. i only read this book because Terry Eagleton made it sound like such a creepfest in his book "On Evil." But it's not really creepy. It's pretty funny at times, but not enough of the time for it to not feel like a slog sometimes. I might also have been coming down with a low key head cold in the last 20% of the book, and that might have affected my perception of it.

My question is: was the narrator actually evil? who was the main motivator behind the robbery and killing, divney or narrator? or am i asking the wrong questions here and missing some major point (since i skipped all the footnotes...)?

And in general, what did y'all think of this book? to be honest i'm more confused more than anything else.

Dark Matter by Blake Crouch is genuinely I think one of the most poorly written books I might have ever read. There's a decent amount of people on here who hate it as well, so I wont go into that.

At the end of the day, it is a trashy, easy read, colleen hoover, dan brown type book, if that's what some people like reading so be it.

My problem, is that if you hear it recommended somewhere, like I did, do a a quick glance through Goodreads, glance at some reddit posts, you would never get that impression. Good Reads raves about it, it won some award apparently, the tagline under the goodreads google link says its "brilliantly plotted".

It objectively, is not brilliantly plotted. A lot of whether you like a book or not, is taste, its subjective, but there are objective things too, people study literature and there are things that make good writing and bad writing. Dark Matter reads like poor fan fiction, its like if an Avengers movie was a book.

I don't mean to be pretentious, you can enjoy Dan Brown and Avengers movies, but lets not call it brilliant writing or masterpieces or works of art.

I guess my frustration and my point ultimately, is that I like to go into a book with very little information which makes it really hard to tell whether a book is actually worth reading or not.

With movies, you can get a pretty good idea on its quality by glancing at things like Rotten Tomatoes, with books though its a total shot in the dark it seems.

Maybe I rely too heavily on GoodReads, but there's also no other option to my knowledge, the second thing is I guess I have a hard time DNR'ing, once I'm a few pages in, I'm commited and I want to finish it, I trick myself, saying or hoping it will get better.

Iv had this happen to me a few times, though not to this scale and I'm just not really sure how to actually avoid it without giving too much info away

Frank Herbert’s Dune series is one of the most ambitious works of science fiction ever written. It’s sprawling, philosophical, and deeply complex, full of political intrigue, ecological insights, and questions about power and destiny. What makes the series so remarkable, though, isn’t necessarily the strength of each individual book. None of them, for me, are among the best books I’ve ever read. But taken together, the Dune Frank Herbert’s Dune series is one of the most ambitious works of science fiction ever written. It’s sprawling, philosophical, and deeply complex, full of political intrigue, ecological insights, and questions about power and destiny. What makes the series so remarkable, though, isn’t necessarily the strength of each individual book. None of them, for me, are among the best books I’ve ever read. But taken together, the Dune series is absolutely one of the best series I’ve ever experienced. The sum is truly greater than its parts.

My journey with Dune has been a mix of awe, frustration, and moments of profound reflection. Add to that Denis Villeneuve’s stunning movie adaptations, and Dune has become more than just a series for me—it’s a world I’ve lived in, thought about, and will never forget.

Dune: A Masterpiece of World-Building

The first book, Dune, is where it all begins, and it’s undeniably fantastic. Herbert’s ability to create a universe so layered, so alive, is unparalleled. Arrakis feels like a character in its own right, and the interplay between the Fremen, the spice, and the sandworms is unforgettable. Paul Atreides’ rise to power as the prophesied leader of the Fremen, Muad’Dib, is a fascinating and deeply human story set against a backdrop of galactic-scale politics and intrigue.

That said, while Dune is a towering achievement in science fiction, it doesn’t quite crack my personal “best books ever” list. It’s not perfect—it can be dense and slow in places—but it’s so unique, so rich, that it’s impossible not to be swept away by its vision.

Watching Denis Villeneuve’s Dune: Part One before reading the book brought that world vividly to life for me. I saw Dune Part One on a whim. I hadn’t heard of Dune before that as I was really just getting into reading at the time. The movie’s stunning cinematography, Hans Zimmer’s otherworldly score, and the pitch-perfect performances elevated the story. Seeing Arrakis, the spice fields, and the sandworms on the big screen made diving into the book much easier than it would have been otherwise.

Dune Messiah: Smaller, But Powerful

The second book, Dune Messiah, takes the grandeur of Dune and turns it inward. It’s a quieter, more introspective story, following Paul Atreides as he grapples with the consequences of his rule and the prophecy that has shaped his life.

This book has a tragic quality that I really appreciated. Paul is no longer the bright young leader we met in Dune. He’s a man weighed down by the cost of his power, haunted by the violent acts committed in his name. It’s not as expansive or as immediately gripping as Dune, but it adds incredible depth to the series.

Children of Dune: Uneven but Necessary

Children of Dune bridges the original trilogy and the dramatic shift that happens later in the series. It focuses on Paul’s children, Leto II and Ghanima, as they grapple with their father’s legacy and the path their lives must take.

This novel was a mixed bag for me. Some parts dragged, and the pacing felt off at times, but there were also flashes of brilliance—especially Leto II’s evolution into the figure who will dominate the series’ future. While I didn’t enjoy it as much as Dune or Dune Messiah, it contains important moments that make it a necessary part of the saga. One of the most powerful of these is Alia’s tragic conclusion. As the regent of the Imperium, she struggles to maintain control over her mind as the voices of her ancestors, particularly the malevolent influence of her grandfather, Baron Harkonnen, take over. Her internal battle becomes unbearable, and she descends into madness, growing paranoid and tyrannical. Ultimately, facing the loss of her power and the imminent threat of the Fremen turning against her, Alia chooses to end her life by jumping from the window of the Keep. This act is both a tragic surrender to her fate and a final attempt to free herself from the Baron’s control.

God Emperor of Dune: A Bold Pivot

God Emperor of Dune is where the series takes a massive leap forward. Thousands of years have passed, and Leto II, now a human-sandworm hybrid, rules over humanity as a godlike figure.

This book is incredibly divisive, but I loved it. It’s philosophical, strange, and deeply introspective. Leto’s vision for humanity, his Golden Path, and his musings on power and sacrifice make for a fascinating, if slower, read. Herbert’s willingness to completely reimagine the series at this point is part of what makes Dune such an ambitious and singular work.

Heretics of Dune: The Low Point

This is where the series stumbled for me. Heretics of Dune introduces new characters and factions, and the story feels disconnected from the earlier books. It was a slog to get through, and I found myself struggling to stay invested.

That said, it’s not skippable. It sets up the events of Chapterhouse: Dune, and without that connection, the final book wouldn’t have the same impact. Still, if it didn’t directly tie into the ending, I’d be tempted to tell readers to skip it.

Chapterhouse: Dune: A Strong Finish

Thankfully, the series picks up again with Chapterhouse: Dune. This book focuses heavily on the Bene Gesserit, and their intricate scheming and power plays make for a compelling read. The story felt tighter and more engaging than Heretics, and it served as a satisfying conclusion to the series.

The final chapter, though, is what sticks with me the most. The mysterious old man and woman who appear at the end add an enigmatic layer to the story. It’s an open-ended, haunting conclusion that leaves you with more questions than answers—exactly the kind of ending that fits the sprawling, complex nature of Dune.

The Movies: Dune: Part One and Part Two

Denis Villeneuve’s movies have been a revelation. Dune: Part One was a masterpiece, capturing the heart of the first half of the book with stunning visuals and a deep respect for Herbert’s world.

When I finally saw Part Two, it was everything I hoped it would be. The movie picks up seamlessly where the first left off, showing Paul’s transformation into Muad’Dib and the Fremen’s fight against the Harkonnens. The final confrontation with Feyd-Rautha was intense and satisfying, and the visuals were breathtaking.

Chani’s role was expanded beautifully, and her relationship with Paul felt authentic and poignant. The political tension, the weight of destiny, and the sheer spectacle of Arrakis came through so vividly. Zimmer’s score was once again extraordinary, and Villeneuve proved he could handle the more action-heavy second half of the story while keeping the depth intact. 

Although there were some major departures, I think Denis Villeneuve truly understands the spirit of Dune. His passion for the source material is clear to see when watching his films. These two adaptations were perfect in my opinion. I can't wait to see what he brings for Dune Messiah.

Final Thoughts

The Dune series is an unforgettable journey. Each book has its strengths and weaknesses, but together, they form a singular, monumental work of science fiction. The individual novels may not rank among my all-time favourites, but as a series, Dune is one of the best I’ve ever read.

Villeneuve’s films have only enhanced that experience, bringing the world of Arrakis to life in ways I never imagined possible. Whether you’re reading the books, watching the movies, or doing both, Dune is an experience that stays with you long after it’s over—a testament to Herbert’s vision and the enduring power of science fiction. But this is a story for everyone, not just fans of science fiction. It’s a brilliant reflection of humanity and is a story worth investing your time in.

i just finished the memoir and am confused about a few things.

1. grandma sweet P - was terrible to Djani, but seemed to be sweet with the grandkids, why
2. did Djani have a mental illness? he seemed to move between normal to rage-filled at the snap of fingers
3. why didn't Safiya take Djani to court
4. why did they keep going back to the house even when they left, could they not make it on their own
5. for all the positives her mother had, why did she let the father beat Safiya over the shoes, push her back into the beating

As I don’t want to hurt the author’s feelings, I never rate a book 1 star. Imagine putting in all that effort and time to write a book, only to get a 1 star rating, that must be really disheartening. For books I don't like or even bad books I give 4 stars and explain in the comments why it received that rating. I think this provides better feedback for the author, as they’ll understand why the book didn’t earn 5 stars. Also, before I read a book I do some research so most of the books I finish, I really enjoy. There are only a few that I don't like, but as far as I remember I've never rated a book 1 star. Also, I don't think a 5 star rating is always sufficient, a 10 point scale would be better. If that were available, I could rate a book 6 or 7 if I didn't like it, but never 1 star.

In a lot of books written by men (if it’s not glaringly obvious), I’m noticing this undercurrent of misogyny in a lot of their books I try to read. I’m currently reading “The Shadow of the Wind” by Carlos Ruiz Zafón, and the way women are described is just gross, makes me roll my eyes, and I honestly don’t feel like I want to pick up the book anymore because of it. I’m enjoying the plot otherwise, but it just gives me this nasty feeling any time a woman’s appearance is described. And this isn’t even close to being the worst example. I often DNF books with male authors because it seems like they just view women as sexual objects and not really deep characters. It makes it harder for me to relate to the story.

Ta-Nehisi Coates is a crucial writer for this era we find ourselves in now, in this chaotic year of 2024.

When so much seems to be going wrong in the world, it’s important to have writers and artists lay out how the world is (and how the world should be), to interpret and express the contradictions and horrors of America, and of the world America has made.

For some activists who are very tuned into certain current events, Coates’ book The Message won’t quite say anything new. But that isn’t really the point. It’s not a history book—it’s not meant to be a scholarly review of everything racist within America and in those countries propped up by American support.

Rather, The Message is a personal book by a writer who overlays these issues through the filter of his own experiences. And that is where its true value lies.

This memoir is made up of three essays, each more powerful than the last. In the first, Coates goes to Senegal to reflect on his African heritage. It’s a fascinating insight, and he gets into his own inner conflict over his lifelong connection to his very name. It’s a perspective on the African American experience not often explored: How Black African nationalism inspired his parents to give him the name Ta-Nehisi, and how he has had questioned the validity of that.

The theme of racial pride by way of imagining past empires, some real and some fictional, it’s something he goes back to again and again. It gives the reader much to think about.

At least there is some optimism as he finds himself pleasantly surprised by the development in Senegal. Even as that surprise comes with his own reckonings for being so instinctively pessimistic beforehand. If nothing else, it’s an excellent travelogue about a country seldom written about.

The second essay is extremely topical, and more directly focused on the land of his own birth, in which he goes to South Carolina to visit those who have used his previous works to fight against censorship. It’s a study on how America has rewritten its own history for the sake of white supremacy, and how America continues to do so right now in so many Southern states. Sadly, in the wake of the last election, moral panics about DEI and CRT are as relevant as ever. Sometimes these fights are won, and Coates indeed speaks of how inspirational the power of writing can be, but overall there is a sense that the forces of justice are currently losing.

In fact, there’s a feeling of profound sorrow prevalent in this book. A sense of loss, and even guilt, as Coates travels the world and finds so much failure in these systems that we live by. And that brings us to the final essay: He goes to Palestine. It covers more than half the book, and the majority of the discourse Coates is currently going through as well.

It gets deep. Coates has strong things to say about Israel and the occupation. A careful and meticulous writer, his is a is a very well-thought out book that does not try to be bombastic. It is admittedly not meant to be some overarching and objective history lesson. As Coates explains, there are already plenty of Israeli points of views in the West. He is instead seeking out a chance to tell the Palestinian side, as fairly as possible.

There is plenty of research herein. Coates can be a serious journalist when he needs to be. But again, the most poignant of these writings is simply the stories of going to Palestine and Israel, to Hebron and the settlements and East Jerusalem, and then explaining what happened there with humanity and empathy.

When criticism of Israel comes up, there are always those who immediately bring up the Holocaust. And not without cause, it is certainly part of the context of the history of Zionism. So let me say that Coates does write very much about the history of anti-Semitism, of the legacy of the Holocaust and Nazis and of how Jews were absolutely singled out throughout the racist era of Europe in the 1800s and beyond. He goes back to this repeatedly throughout the book, quoting the early Zionists and contrasting on the sad irony of how so many did support colonialism and how so many white supremacists have supported Zionism.

“Your oppression won’t save you,” is a key line. It doesn’t just refer to the Jews of history and the Israelis of today. It’s something that refers to everyone. The ultimate tragedy of history is that those who were oppressed often become the oppressors to others. He even mentions Liberia as an example, as no group is spared this lesson.

Coates also writes about his guilt concerning his explosive 2014 Atlantic article, ‘The Case for Reparations.’ He then used postwar German reparations given to Israel as an example in his case, and now realizes how wrong he was for expecting nation-states to be accurate representatives on the suffering of individuals. He was never an expert on international affairs, and had always thought it was too complex to delve into. (I happen to think he’s too hard on himself with all the guilt, it’s unfortunate but he’s hardly unique in that. It’s ultimately a positive thing to grow and change as one learns more.)

There is much writing about writing. As said, these are major world issues but this is still a personal memoir. He regrets putting so much faith in journalism, in expecting the institution of the Atlantic to truly make a difference. He speaks of his other books as his children, with plenty of flaws therein, and wonders if he has been true to himself all along with his mainstream writing career.

Sadly, The Message has proven to be perhaps his timeliest book. Written before October 7th of last year and the subsequent—and brutal—Gaza war, it now matters so much. Personally, I’ve found his current media tour in promoting this book and discussing its controversies to be invaluable in bringing these issues to the forefront.

Much has been already been written by others comparing the Israeli occupation of Palestine to the system of apartheid. And Coates does do his homework and researches well, speaking of Bantustans and ties to South Africa during the latter country’s oppressive past. Plenty of dates and quotes showing the history of Zionism and the development of the modern state of Israel. But what the book is truly about, is simply the people he meets and listens to. Simply the telling of their stories—and an ending on a final note lamenting the lack of Palestinian voices in the world of journalism.

As a Black man from America, Coates cannot help but liken the occupation to Jim Crow. The comparisons are valid, and inevitable.

At last, Coates returns to the themes from earlier in the book. About the narratives people tell themselves to justify who they are and what they have done.

“What I saw in the city of David was so familiar to me. The search for self in the mythic past, filled with kings, and sanctified by an approximation of science.”

It’s not just about Israel. It’s about African Americans, it’s about pride and what could have been if history went another way. It’s about Ta-Nehisi Coates’ own life, and it’s about the stories that were told to oppress his people and other peoples over the centuries.

And, it’s certainly about America.

Let me start by saying I'm not trying to do this to be a speed reader. I spent the last 32 years of my life by reading without an inner monologue.

Idk how long it happened, but my inner monologue is loud as fuck now and I can't turn it off. I hate reading like this. It's making me never wanna read again, I refuse to accept it.

Has anyone been in a similar boat? I'm open to anything, even getting high to make it stop.

Hi everyone!

What are you reading? What have you recently finished reading? What do you think of it? We want to know!

We're displaying the books found in this thread in the book strip at the top of the page. If you want the books you're reading included, use the formatting below.

Formatting your book info

Post your book info in this format:

the title, by the author

For example:

The Bogus Title, by Stephen King

• This formatting is voluntary but will help us include your selections in the book strip banner.

• Entering your book data in this format will make it easy to collect the data, and the bold text will make the books titles stand out and might be a little easier to read.

• Enter as many books per post as you like but only the parent comments will be included. Replies to parent comments will be ignored for data collection.

• To help prevent errors in data collection, please double check your spelling of the title and author.

NEW: Would you like to ask the author you are reading (or just finished reading) a question? Type !invite in your comment and we will reach out to them to request they join us for a community Ask Me Anything event!

-Your Friendly /r/books Moderator Team

Hello readers!

Every Monday, we will post a calendar with the date and topic of that week's threads and we will update it to include links as those threads go live. All times are Eastern US.

I understand that triggers can be subjective and vary by people but we all know general triggers from explicit content like SA, death, suicide, abuse, substance use, etc. that are commonly recognized and books should be required to list these as a warning of the content, likes movies do. Additionally, if you’re going to contain explicit content, it is simple to include crisis numbers… if your book is about dying by suicide, how hard is it to include a little “if you have thoughts or feelings of hurting yourself of others, call 988”. Books should have some regulation when covering those types of topics.

I don’t want to have to read entire reviews that spoil a book just to get an idea of whether certain triggers may be included. Just my opinion!

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/01/opinion/pride-prejudice-jane-austen.html?unlocked_article_code=1.eE4.iRPy.I62uy82HS4SZ&smid=url-share

Reading this essay reminded me that, yes indeed, Austen comes down pretty hard on sanctimonious bookworm Mary, sister #3 in Pride and Prejudice. The essay quotes some of that. It also mentions a new novel, told from Mary's perspective, the BBC series is adapting for a 10-part series.

Plain women finally get their say!

You know that feeling when you finish a book, and while you liked it, you can’t help but think, “What if it ended differently?” Maybe the characters made a choice you didn’t agree with, or the plot left too many loose ends.

For me, it was 1984. I get why the ending is the way it is, but part of me wonders how the story would have felt if Winston had actually succeeded in resisting the Party. Would it still be as powerful?

Have you ever read a book and imagined a different ending? What would you have changed, and why?

5-Stars!

This book was a recommendation from Goodreads because I enjoyed A Very Short Stay in Hell by Steven L Peck. The cover kind of grabbed me and the description hooked me:

“Three strangers are condemned to live together in darkness, crushed together in a concrete stall so small that they can never sit down. Liquid food drips down from above. Waste drains through a grid on the floor. So begins one of the strangest, most surreal comments on the human experience, on love and hatred and the human ability to find good in any situation, no matter how difficult.”

I’m not the best at reviewing books, honestly the description above from the back cover sets up the story perfectly. The writing is very descriptive and the prose are amazing vivid and disturbing. The world the author paints is a nightmare and yet…there’s definitely beauty in the filth.

How much did I love this book? It arrived on my doorstep this morning at around 09:00, I was reading it by 09:10. It’s now 13:40 and I’ve finished the book (it’s only 125 pages) and I’m now rushing to tell you all it’s a page turner for sure! I’ve never sat down and read a book from cover to cover in one sitting, not even a short one like this. I was truly captivated.

I was promised great love and a heartbreaking ending, and that’s the only reason i was putting off reading this book. It sounded like just the book that would devastate me. Don’t get me wrong, the book is certainly sad, but in a somber, drab way, not in a heartbreaking, stay with you for a long time after you finished it kind of way.

Throughout the entire book bad things just pile on for our protagonist Patroclus. There really aren’t many moments of reprieve, the dread is ever present in the book. The main thing i felt for him is pity and then annoyance for being so passive. The only time he ever showed any agency is when he was following Achilles around, making sure he stayed by his side.

When they were in the mountains, with a god who could supposedly teach them anything, any skill, fighting or life, Patroclus apparently didn’t learn much of anything. They were in that cave in the mountains for years. Just the two of them and the teacher who could teach him anything…

The romantic relationship is not fleshed out. For the most part Achilles is an aloof character, we don’t really know the boy, and later the man, we see him through Patroclus’ eyes only. And from his perspective, everything is perfect, from his beauty, to his excellence, to his “mischief” and sense of humour. Also, apparently Achilles is somewhat of a pacifist in his early days. Now, I don’t know much about Greek mythology, but i know this just isn’t so lol.

The war sucked though. I would also hate if i had to go, so understood them there. Fuck Agamemnon and Menelaus, and fuck Paris and Helen of Troy too.

Like i said, this book is sad throughout, and even after both of them died, things somehow still managed to get worse.

If we didn’t get that resolution and small glimmer of hope in the last few minutes of the book, my rating would go from 3, to literally 1,5. This book didn’t devastate me into a heartbreak, but it slowly drowned me into numbness.

Please don't read on if you haven't read this book:

I want to explore Letty's motivations to turn her friends into the police by reenacting what potentially happened when she went to the Police Station:

--

Letty: Hello Officer, I want to report a crime. My friends who I am complicit in murder with are plotting to stop the empire from waging unjustified war against China potentially saving the lives of 10s of thousands of people.

Officer: Oh thats horrible, how are they planning on stopping this.

Letty: They plan on passing out fliers in London to influence public opinion as well as writing members of parliament to get them to vote against the motion to go to war.

Officer: Dastardly! We can't have that, tell me their location and we will raid them asap!

Letty: Theyre at the Old Library. I just have two requests: I'd like to join your raid and I'd like a gun.

Officer: Do you even know how to use a gun?

Letty: I'm the daughter of an admiral who believes women shouldn't be allowed to read and are only good for Marriage, of course he taught me to use a gun.

Officer: As the daughter of an admiral if I put you in harms way and something happened I would be hanged, correct?

Letty: Yes absolutely.

Officer: Very well, here's a gun, I'd like you on the vanguard of the raid. I think its best if you confront your friends with a gun.

Letty: (Proceeds to shoot one of her friends dead for no reason).

fin

-- Seems to check out, I was worried her actions were unjustified but after writing this out I see why it all unfolded the way it did.

I’ve just finished Vanity Fair and loved it, one of the most fascinating portrayals of 19th Century society I’ve ever read. I loved Thackerays satirical voice as the narrator.

Becky Sharp is as interesting character as they come, I was alternately repulsed and charmed by her cunning and devious methods of getting her own way. I know it’s not made explicit in the book, but I got the impression that she may have been subject to sexual abuse as a child, which informs why she acts the way she does as an adult.

1. We’re told she had to coax and cajole all of the men her father was in debt to, and she was surrounded by her fathers adult friends from an early age

2. It’s said near the beginning that she was “a woman” from very early in her life

3. There’s a passage where it says she’s pondering sadly about the “dark times” in her childhood. This could refer only to poverty, but there are other ways to read it.

This tracks with how she uses her sexuality to manipulate men into serving her - this is all she knows about how to get by in the world.

And it also makes sense with why she might hate Rawdon junior, because she resents him for having the childhood she never got to have.

Further, it makes sense why she is borderline obsessed with the Marquess of Steyne - a much older man who she may be drawn to due to her past trauma. Also, this is one of the only characters in the book who strikes genuine fear into her. This may be explained by him simply being one of the most powerful and cunning people ever in her circle, but again, there are other ways to read it.

I’m using none of this to excuse Becky ruining other characters lives, abusing and neglecting her son, betraying her husband, killing Jos(?!) etc, but it gave me an understanding of her character that made sense and assisted in my ability to empathise with her.

I’d be really interested to hear if anyone else has arrived at this conclusion. Or maybe this take is common! Amazing book, 5/5.

Hello readers and welcome to our Weekly FAQ thread! Our topic this week is: How do I get through an uninteresting book? Sometimes we want to read something because we're "supposed to" and want to say that we did. Or, it's something that needs to be read for a school assignment. Either way, how do you get through books you find uninteresting?

You can view previous FAQ threads here in our wiki.

Thank you and enjoy!

Hello readers and welcome! Every month this thread will be posted for you to discuss new and upcoming releases! Our only rules are:

1. The books being discussed must have been published within the last three months OR are being published this month.

2. No direct sales links.

3. And you are allowed to promote your own writing as long as you follow the first two rules.

That's it! Please discuss and have fun!

I am 400 pages into the book. The story is great, the world building, the houses, the planets all are great. I know what is going in the story but it's very very boring. I can't read it because of the complex words....I have to look again again in dictionary for the words , i just cant read the full page without searching in dictionary. I thought that when paul and his mother will go into the desert it will be very easy to read but it became more complex. I cant understand the places he is explaining... Like "They came to a series of dropping shelves and beyond them, saw a fissure with its ledge outlined by moonshadow leading along the vestibule". And now i cant understand the part where paul pack is lost in the fissure , how he find it using compass and spice and water. Usually when i like a book i always think about it whole day what is going to happen , also at nights i will think about it , will wake to read at night, my morning will start with reading. The book is just spoiling the interest for my reading. I really want to finish it but i cantttt. ‘I cannot make anyone understand what is happening inside me. I cannot even explain it to myself.’