Via The Morning News. Enjoy, or cringe. This is a great illustration of the classic old saw, Opinions are like assholes; everybody's got one and everybody thinks everyone else's stinks. Lolita, Lord of the Flies, To The Lighthouse, Gravity's Rainbow, usually dismissed in one sentence, or two. And before anyone asks, no, to the best of my knowledge, none of these were written by Gawker commenters:

Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov (1955)

“1) I’m bored. 2) He uses too many allusions to other novels, so that if you’re not well read, this book makes no sense. 3) Most American readers are not fluent in French, so to have conversations or interjections in French with no translation is plain dumb. 4) Did I mention I was bored? 5) As with another reviewer, I agree, he uses a lot of huge words that just slow a person down. And it’s not for theatrics either, it’s just huge words mid-sentence when describing something simple. Nothing in the sense of imagery is gained. 6) Also, to sum it up, it’s a story about a pedophile.”

Lord of the Flies by William Golding (1955)

“I am obsessed with Survivor, so I thought it would be fun. WRONG!!! It is incredibly boring and disgusting. I was very much disturbed when I found young children killing each other. I think that anyone with a conscience would agree with me.”

The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien (1954)

“The book is not readable because of the overuse of adverbs.”

Naked Lunch by William Burroughs (1959)

“I’m a Steely Dan fan so naturally I wanted to read the book they thought compelling enough to name their band after an element of.”

Native Son by Richard Wright (1940)

“Well…someone who murders anyone…out of panic (which is a really stupid, irrational reason) does not deserve any sympathy. I felt the book was mainly about black people hating white people…as usual. Now, tell me anyone…if there was a book about a white person facing discrimination in Africa…or being killed because stones are thrown at them, then everyone would look down on them. Poorly written.”