They’re boring, self-contradictory messes written by committees of whackos, and they’ve done more harm in the world than any other books:
The Bible. The Torah. The Koran.
Also, the Mill on the Floss because I had to read it in school and it sucked.
What’s so objectionable about The Handmaid’s Tale? It’s a scary/thought-provoking piece of work…unlike some of the works mentioned previously, which apparently made people think only of flames.
More confusion with “The Handmaid’s Tale”; I read it for a science fiction class at university (Best. Course. Evar.) and found it quite a compelling work.
I’ll disagree that all copies of some books shouldn’t be burnt though. I’ve read thousands of books, and can emphatically assure you that some of them (a very small percentage, but some) have a completely negative value to humanity in both use of time and total content.
I’ll agree with the Dianetics… the only reason I have the copy I do is to protect others from it. :P. My two specific ones are a sci-fi novel called “The Fires of Coventry” that despite being a small paperback reads like a winding epic full of throwaway characters and no direction, and a buzzword laden manifesto by the name of “Standing Wave” that in my review of it at the time, I described as being made of words cut out of magazines the author found at a university library.
I’ll make a small plea to save some of Piers Anthony’s works, if only because his novels in the junior high library were some of the most pornographic things I could get my hands on at the time. 
The last few things I have been tempted to fling into the nearest fire, ocean (not very close), or snowbank (much, much closer) were overhyped high-art literary tradition things like Jonathan Franzen’s The Corrections and The Information by Martin Amis, which gave me a headache.
I would not actually burn them because they would pollute the air just as bad as some cheesy romantic suspense. (Or worse, since they are bigger books.)
Can we kill The Truth About Diamonds by Nicole Richie with fire?
I’ve been wondering about that book since I saw it at Barnes & Noble, Kythereia. It doesn’t appear to be a book I would be particularly interested in reading, but given that I’ve heard almost nothing (good or bad) about it, I’ve been curious about Richie’s competency as a writer. Would you mind posting what was that you didn’t like about it?
Well, there are worse books. I guess. Maybe. Somewhere in the world.
But The Truth About Diamonds was just so shallow. It seemed so petty and self-absorbed and vapid that I just couldn’t put up with the main character anymore. It wasn’t even interesting–just nasty high-school level gossip.
I needed a good dose of The Restaurant at the End of the Universe to get over that one.
Well, I hate to say it but that’s pretty much what I would have expected. Thanks for the explanation. 
Hannibal by Thomas Harris.
The Collected Works of Thomas Hardy.
(There must be some Thomas I like…)
(But you could send me your copies of Wuthering Heights and Das Kapital)
The Scarlet Letter, oh how I loathe it.
I actually read, maybe in EW, that it was pretty good, which lead the reviewer to conclude it was probably 110% ghostwritten.
I should probably burn that first edition of the Necronomicon I have.
But it…won’t…let…me…!
After that—I don’t think I’d burn it, but Robert Zubrin’s First Landing deserves to be jumped, kneecapped, and left in a creekbed off a hiking trail at 2 A.M.
It appears that someone didn’t close down the circle correctly after invoking the guardians of the gates, rookie mistake in your first summoning I guess (although usually doing that means you’re not likely to get the chance to make a second).
What a great reference. I think I’m in love with you.
Oh and look, Illuminatiprimus, we’re in the same location! (Most of the time.)
Anyway, to atone for the flirting I will go back on topic and say that if I went to a book burning and no one brought the 1977 edition of The New Secretary’s Deskbook, I would volunteer mine. In the section on “sexual harassment”, it basically tells you that you have to suck it up and re-arrange your habits, office, and life so that the office lech has no access to you. Because as the victim, you are clearly responsible. I know that was the thinking of the time, but to see it laid out there so naked… it makes me want to do something desperate.
I have never been, and never plan to go to, stalking guy ritchie (whatever part of Hell that’s in).
I don’t know many non-Brits who would be able to identify Catherine Tate.
I was going to suggest this, too, not only for the irony but for the fact that the book is so unreadable and rambling, one wonders if Hitler would have been elected chancellor if Germany hadn’t been in such a depression.
But I agree that books, no matter how awful, should be burned. If we do burn books because we do not agree with their content- be it against our politics or just because we think they are bad- we are no better than Hitler. “What starts with the burning of books will end with the burning of men.”
FTR, sometimes Westminster, sometimes Wiltshire, sometimes (the original) London. If that’s what you want to call Hell. I wouldn’t, though, personally I always pictured Hell as being hotter. And drier.
My version of hell is full of chavs and has nothing to read but back issues of Heat - I guess we all have our own personal versions.
I’m in Westminster 9-6 weekdays, email me if you ever want to do coffee (I’ve never met another doper and would quite like to!).
Then the ghostwriter was either a) doing a very good satirical piece of work, or b) just as brainless and vapid as Richie. Blech.
IMHO, of course–if anyone liked it, more props to them. I’d only burn my own copy.
Oh, right, you just had to go and be sensible about it…