Nothing quite like a good stupid book.

I have read my fair share of controversial, or ground breaking books. Some of them were required, others I read on my own. Such names as Huxley, Camous, and Achebe come to mind. Granted I enjoyed those books, and have learned from them. When I sit down at night and read; like I usually do, I find my self drawn towards nothing more than a good stupid book. Call it a brain break or something. Take for instance for years I’ve been reading the Xanth series by Piers Anthony. These books are by no means on any level close to the books written by the authors I named above, but I can’t help but to like them. Simple story of adventure and romance. Xanth has nearly the same plot in every book (there are over 20 or so), but I have enjoyed them all. I also find myself digging through boxes at home and finding books like “My Teacher is an Alien”, and “super Fudge”. I’ve also recently purchased a bag full of Raul Daul books (Charlie and the Chocalate Factory). I wish to find out if I am alone in my secret obssesion for a good stupid book.

You’re looking for people to admit they read “stupid books”?

I like the Dumb Bunnies series of kids’ books, but they’re not stupid.

And I adore the comic book Groo, but they aren’t stupid either.

Sorry, can’t help ya.

Do comic books count?

I have way too many DC superhero comics, by the way.

I’m not sure “stupid” is the word for it. Maybe “fluff”, something that doesn’t take any deep thought to read and enjoy. Especially compared to the first list. I know I classify Xanth as fluff, and I recall liking them when I used to read them.

I rarely have time to read anything that isn’t a text book anymore, but I love Terry Brooks. I just started re reading the Shannara series when I need a break from textbook stuff and I’ve read “Stardancer” by Spider and Jeanne Robinson I don’t know how many times, as well as Spider’s Callahan’s stories. Oh, and Zelazny’s Amber series. I love them all, but they’re fluff.

I like to go for mindless entertainment at times. Some books are made to become involved with, to work at and appreciate on a deeper level. Others are one night stand (one nightstand?) sorts of books. Right now, I’m reading The Brethren by John Grisham. It’s pretty stupid, and I enjoy it.

While Charlie And The Chocolate Factory is a book targeted at younger readers, Roald Dahl is hardly a writer of stupid books IMO.

Don’t dis Roald, Arden! Please. He writes books for young children, admittedly, but his books targeted to- well, everyone…they are damned good.

Okay but a “fluff” book. Let me see now…usually I read a book that specifically advertised towards young adults, or teenagers. Of course, that backfires when it turns out to be a really good book, but most of those books seem pretty easy, and toned down.

Right now i’m not reading anything like that, though. Will get back to you though.


Me? Not I! By no means do I consider “fluff” to equal “stupid”. To me, fluff doesn’t require any deep thought on my part for me to enjoy it. Stupid is just that. When I call a book stupid, I consider it a waste of paper. Besides, I would never call Roald stupid. I grew up reading his stuff. [probably contributed to my odd sense of humor. :)]

I’m sorry; i think i should have addresed that to Mighty_Maxx…Post retracted. :slight_smile:

I love a good “stupid,” “fluff,” book. I read one or two real books and one or two fluff books each week. If I tried to read only substancial books, I would get burned out and depressed. Some fluff books I like:[ul][li]Patricia Cornwell[]Michael Crichton(his first books were terrible, but his last few have been pretty good.)[]Anne Rice[]Gore Vidal[]Dominick DunneWillaim Bayer (his psyodonym writes even better books).[/ul][/li]
Unfortunately, most of the fluff books I read are really bad.

I like Roald Dahl. Most of his work was written for adults, it’s just that his childrens books were more popular. I wouldn’t consider his books fluff - Most of them are pretty dark.

I prefer to think of books of this variety as “brain candy”. Nice once in a while, but you wouldn’t want a steady diet of them. Generally when in the mood for this type of reading I like books with lots of comic book style action. Stuff like James Bond, Harry Harrison (Stainless Steel Rat series, Bill the Galactic Hero series).

As a young teen I became a fan of a fairly obscure (in North America) sci-fi series called Perry Rhodan. It ran somewhere around 120 books in English (originally in German). These are good old “zap and blam” style stories, complete with interstellar fleets and lots of aliens, hostile and good. I still reread these, usually in blocks of 10. That way, it usually takes a year to reread the whole run. They have apparently started the series in English again; I’m going to check it out as soon as I’m done here.

Everyone is right. Stupid is a harsh word. When I decided to use stupid intead of “fluff”, it was due to a friend of mine making fun of me.

“Why do you read those stupid books?” he says

So it pissed me off, and thats where this thread came from. I"m happy to see that I’m not the only one that partakes in a little simple reading.

I read the “Destroyer” books.

English teacher of mine once called such books as listed above, and including romance novels etc., “chewing gum for the mind”.

That’s how I prefer to think of them. And yes, I have “less than academic” books on my sheves which I keep and read and re-read …

Like the novelisation of “The Death Of Superman”. Can’t help it, I’m a fan …

Just so you don’t feel so isolated, me too. Every time he says “I am created Shiva, the Destroyer! Death, Shatterer of Worlds!” I am just on the floor. And it can be some pretty good sarcasm and social commentary. Too bad that the movie didn’t come out quite so well, even with Joel Grey in it. I think we have double copies of #1, if you’re interested…

My own fluff books are pretty much anything by Christopher Stasheff, Alan Dean Foster, and Robert Adams.

Yeah, well OK THEN DAMMIT. YES, I DO READ TACKY ROMANCES. There. Happy now? But they gotta be at least competently written and plotted. Amanda Quick, early Jayne Anne Krentz, Kay Hooper, Teresa Medeieros and the odd Iris Johansen.

I have the four Star Wars books (including Episode 1)that are based on the scripts (the first three Star Wars movies are put into one paperback book). I plan on getting Episode 2 and Episode 3 books in the future.


Well, i have read EVERY Star Wars book written before 1998, although, I woulddnt necessarily call them fluff. I re-read books A LOT. I don’t know, I just like a book, when i already know what is going to happen. A little bit of something you can count on in this crazy world. One of my favorites is Henry Sugar by Roald Dahl. Love that book.

BabySitter’s Club, Sweet Vally twins, and Nancy Drew.
Every now and then I find my old collection of books from like elementary/mddle school, and pull one out and read it. Nothing like a grade 6 reading level to make you feel smart when you figure out who did it before Nancy!

Do vidoegames count? I usually enjoy videogames that challenge me to think and solve puzzles (i.e. The Neverhood). But sometimes I just gotta blow stuff up (i.e. Doom).

I’ll admit these are stupid books, but I still enjoyed them–Valley of the Dolls and Hammer of the Gods. Nothing like the decadence of fame to waste your time. . .

I simply cannot think of the books mentioned in this thread as ‘stupid’. It’s much simpler and apposite to consider of such fare as ‘junk reading’.

Just as the human body cannot exist forever on a steady diet of tofu and the like, and must occasionally splurge (may I use the word ‘binge’?) on chips and dip, tacos, burgers, anything deep-fried, ice cream – on junk food, in short, so the human psyche must pause in its steady intellectual diet of Melville, Dickens, and the Great Russians to ingest junk reading.

Junk is tasty, enjoyable, short (maybe), fun, harmless, and recharges the batteries in both cases.

As someone who ingests mountains of technical material, I find the only way to keep my reading speed up at all is to treat myself to some junk as a break.