decide
February 26th, 2025
Because the Koran is the most overrated book in the history of the written word.
Latest book…
Random oldie…
February 26, 2010-
- NICE T-SHIRT (Thank you for not provoking my uncontrollable lust). Currently unavailable.
In the next episode, Mo gets his revenge: ‘Read the Bible, decide for yourself.’
Worst holy book award was a tie between the Koran and the Book of Mormon. The Koran only edged it out because there are more people who don’t think it’s terrible and are willing to blow someone up to prove it.
third rate bible fan fiction disguised as a fantasy novel by Toilet Viking
might as well title it ‘Jihadists of Gor”
Some of the surahs start with something like “In the name of the merciful and the compassionate” and then go into descriptions of torture with apparent relish. It didn’t add up for me. Re the book of Mormon Mark Twain called it ‘Chloroform’ in print and, as has been pointed out, it contains a book of Ether. Yes, I do know that Chloroform is not an Ether.
Aren’t any of old L Ron Hubbard’s works up there with the best of the worst?
Here, in umurika, we don’t read nuthin. damn propaganda every way you turn. Just stfu and listen up as chaos reigns. Things will be better when entropy gets its chance.
Here in Umurika, we just are content to stfu and listen as entropy gains a foothold.
Brilliant, but don’t forget the Hadiths.
Commented above, but here I repeat:
Worst holy book ever? Be fair: there’s the “The Book of Mormon” and “Dianetics”. If you want so-bad-it’s-good, then try “The Book Of The SubGenius”. Mark Twain called the Book of Mormon “Chloroform in print”.
“worst” is a subjective judgement, and a case can be made for Book of Mormon or Hubbard’s nonsense. However, “most overrated” is more quantifiable. The number of people who think the Koran is the epitome of divine perfection is much greater than the number who think similarly of either of those other books put together.
Having said that, do either the BoM or Hubbard’s nonsense express the same level of contempt and promises of violence to non-believers? I don’t know. I haven’t read them.
I agree with you wholeheartedly Author. I don’t care if someone’s magical book says that I am going to hell if I don’t believe in the magical book. When the magical book instructs it’s adherents to kill me for not believing in the magical book, then I have a big problem.
I have to point out that Mormons on the whole tend to be decent, prosperous, and well behaved people, and that this very likely has something to do with the specifics of their Book. That doesn’t mean the book isn’t nonsense; rather my point is that not all nonsense is equally bad. In fact some nonsense can even improve people’s lives, the classic example being people who hit bottom, then “find God” and get their act together. It doesn’t matter whether a word of it is true, what matters is results.
Author, I too have not read BoM nor teh Q’ or the œvres of Hubbard.
I did read somewhere that LRon first tried (and failed) writing sci-fi before going for tax exempt status and that pbuh couldn’t write at all.* Mr Smith must have had the gift of the pen at least (or stylus, though his gold tablets got lost).
* In fairness, I too would be challenged to write anything at all in Arabic. How is that Book so long?
I’ve read a couple Hubbard sci-fis, mediocre pulp. That said, there were writers who churned out worse stuff who lasted longer at it.
As for whether Mormons owe their virtues to their book … I doubt it. There’s a good deal of cultural variation among the peoples of the world, and if there’s any correlation between the religion and society, I expect it’s usually in the other direction. That certainly goes for Islam – those people were already like that.
Supposedly a lot of people in traditionally Catholic South America have been converting to Protestantism, and I’ve seen a number of reports over the years saying that this often leads to them cleaning up their behavior; i.e., drinking less, becoming more entrepreneurial, etc. If so this would certainly suggest that belief can influence society. Honestly, this strikes me as something one would expect to be true!
I’m slightly acquainted with one instance of that phenomenon, a Brazilian church, Congregação Cristã Brasil or something to that effect. Because we have in common a passion for contrabass wind instruments. They have great big member orchestras, and there enough guys (women not allowed to play) looking for a bigger saxophone that Brazil had its own bass saxophone industry.
Anyway, I don’t doubt that people who want to live that way, find it very rewarding, clean up their act, etc. Is this going to happen because their bunk literature hits the magic chord in their head that straightens them out? No. It can be any crapola.
The faith itself may do something to their heads – regardless of the object of faith, there must be something about believing a preposterous thing that other people also believe. The rest is the society that forms around it.
And you can find stories of people who literally had their “come to Jesus” moment, adopted some religious faith and turned their lives around. Is Jesus required? No, I bet not. Wotan, Isis, Krishna, you name it. The religious dogma involved is interchangeable.
By the way, I went and re-read (skimmed) a Hubbard story that came out in Analog. The guy who ran that pulp was a fan, published a version of Dianetics in a series in the magazine, editorial promotion etc. Anyway … writing good fiction is hard work. You have to come up with a story with all kinds of dramatic happenings, spend the time to make it readable, and Hubbard was up for most of it. Plenty of drama at various levels, plot, some sci fi interest. Afterwards, though, I was sorry I’d read it. The good stuff gets all that, and on top of it, it engages something positive the reader. You like characters, you’re inspired in some way. Hubbard spun quite a yarn, but … no. Remarkably deficient there. It’s interesting that he went on to found an especially sinister religion-or-whatever-it-is.
Worst Book? Tess O’durbevilles obviously or anything written be the Brontes…take your pick…
I once tried to track down the source of the story about Hubbard saying that the easiest way to make a million dollars was start a religion. It’s been a while, but as I remember it now the source was some guy who, years later, reported that he had heard Hubbard say it during a speech at a science fiction convention. Hubbard did speak at the convention, and the guy was someone who could have been there, so as history goes not ironclad, but not bad either.
I tried to read up on his story, but there were so many ups and downs I lost track. It doesn’t sound though like he had it very good, and right off hand that seems to me to be the rule for authors of religions – the people who really profit are opportunists who jump on it. while the author is either insufficiently opportunistic or (in this case) too messed up. The exceptions that come to mind are Sun Myung Moon, and Li Hongzhi (Falun Gong founder.)
What I read many moons ago, was that LRon borrowed a yat (boat) (damm eenglish speling) from a friend and sold it for cash.
When he got caught out (spelign again) was when he Got Religion and made it out f*king over his old friend. Paid much better.
Subsequently transferred into a different dimension, ‘cos he never dies.
Unclear whether LRon departed in a wingless DC3; it may cost considerable money to know. For a fact.
Ask Dustin, Travolta or that pilot actor.
Battlefield Earth, the L. Ron Hubbard novel made into a movie by John Travolta, was reviewed in the New York Times on May 12, 2000. Quoth the Times: “It may be a bit early to make such judgments, but ”Battlefield Earth’ may well turn out to be the worst movie of this century.”
I love it when a movie review comes up with a really good burn, and this one is one of my favorites.
There are more quotes from various reviewers on Wikipedia. They are hilarious.
@M27Holts
Worst book?
“Bridget Jones’s Diary”
“Bloodline” by Sydney Sheldon (left behind by the previous tenants of a flat I moved into – and I can see why).
I read the Hubbard epic, all 10 books when I was 15. And in no way is any of those books in the same class as Asimov or Heinlein…but subjectively to me vastly superior to any of the books by Hardy, Bronte’s and Jane Austen…different Genre to be sure but as any schoolboy made to read such trash and told it was Genius…give me a break…the Emperor is stark bollock naked for sure…
@M27Holts
I read a lot of Intergalactic Potboiler Sci-Fi when younger, but never came across Hubbard’s stuff. The only one worth a damn IMHO was Phil K. Dick. Even his weakest efforts had more ideas in them than other authors’ best work.
I’m unread in Hardy or Bronte (but I have some second-hand books of theirs that are on the reading list).
But I have to object about lumping Austen in with “trash”. I’ve only read Pride & Prejudice and Sense & Sensibility, but they’re both marvellous. I was fortunate enough to read them as an adult – maybe I’d have hated them if I’d been forced to read them at school: I’d have missed their parodic and satirical content.
It’s why I detested “Bridget Jones’s Diary” so much… I expected a satire like P&P… but found something more like “Sex & The City” level of vapidity and dumb acceptance of anti-feminist, consumerist values.
Another “worst book” – in fact a whole series of the damned things…
The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant, Unbeliever.
Unutterable dreck. Only good for “Clench Racing”… From Wikipedia…
[From] an essay by Nick Lowe, in which Lowe suggested “a way to derive pleasure from Stephen Donaldson books. (Needless to say, it doesn’t involve reading them.)”[3] This proposal involved a game he called “Clench Racing”, wherein players each open a volume of the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant to a random page; the winner is the first to find the word “clench”. Lowe describes it as a “fast” game – “sixty seconds is unusually drawn out”.
I read the first one, when I found it on the shelf at a place I was staying, and felt kind of stained afterwards. Something in common with Hubbard here. As for Philip K Dick … I swear I have read some of that stuff, but can’t remember any of it … probably memories erased by someone controlling our reality.
M27Holts
For some other very good SF writers, I would recommend Poul Anderson who wrote a *lot* between about 1950 & his death in the early 20 aughts. More recently. Lois McMaster Bujold, with her Vorkosigan series. Andy Weir, who wrote “The Martian”, “Artemis”, and “Project Hail Mary”.
I have Poul Anderson in my Library , probably about 5000 fiction books, I read thousands of books betwixt 8 yo and 25…However, I still regard Hardy and Austen as the most overrated Authors ever. compare with Trollope and Dickens for true giants of the genre…My Favourite Author? Terry Pratchett or Douglas Adams, take your pick?
I also have thousands of non Fiction. Best Authors? , Hitchens, Dennett and Dawkins…