Hosted by That Artsy Reader Girl
One of the interesting ways my reading habits have changed since I was a kid or a teenager is that I’m much less interesting in reading long books these days. If something is more than 200 to maybe 250 pages, it generally needs to be a story I think will be a five-star read for me in order for me to finish it.
I’m glad I read much longer books when I was younger and had more time for such doorstoppers as some of them did have excellent storylines, but I can also see the value in trimming down side quests and lengthy descriptive passages in order to make the reading experience a faster one.
Here are some books that I think would have been better if they were shorter. Some of them are classics as books from roughly 100+ years ago were often more verbose than what is published today due to how English has evolved since then.
1. The Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien (as well as the sequels, of course!)
2. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë
3. The Pillars of the Earth (Kingsbridge, #1) by Ken Follett
4. The Stand by Stephen King
5. Great Expectations by Charles Dickens
6. A Tale of Two Cities by Charles Dickens
7. The House of the Seven Gables by Nathaniel Hawthorne
8. Like Water for Chocolate by Laura Esquivel
9. Paradise Lost by John Milton
10. The Years of Rice and Salt by Kim Stanley Robinson
I just finished two big books this summer that would have greatly benefited from a good editor…Charles Dickens’ Nicholas Nickleby and an old young adult book, Captain Fracasse. People do tend to go on and on when you get paid by the word.
So very true!
Oh yes the Ken Follet books are huge!
They sure are. 🙂
I remember thinking the same thing when I read The House of the Seven Gables.
🙂
Oft, boy! There’s definetly some books that could use loosing a few hundred pages in the middle. I used to always notice it in older classics, but it seems to be making a comeback in a lot of Kindle Unlimited books.
Interesting that it’s coming back!
There used to be readers digest condensed books that would cut all the side quests out😂 I don’t know if they still do them though!
Oh, that’s awesome. What a great idea.
Size is probably one reason I’ve never tried Years of Rice and Salt!
I don’t blame you there!
OhMyGosh! I should have done this topic – it’s perfect for me. 😉 I’m so not a long book reader. The contemporary I’m reading now is like 350 or 370 something pages and for the genre, that feels long. I think this is part of why I don’t attempt classic lit! Thanks for visiting my website today.
Please feel free to borrow it in the future if you wish. 🙂
I too haven’t been in the mood to read long books lately and I wonder if it’s a trend that will continue 🫣 The only one I’ve read on your list is Pillars of the Earth and while I did enjoy it, I agree that it could’ve been shorter… I feel like all of Follett’s books are chonksters though!
Yes, they sure are. I’m glad you get it.
I focused on books with too many pages today too, but I picked out ones that are still on my TBR. I can’t disagree with your assessment about Stephen King, either—though I have only read a different book of his (11/22/63) I also think that book would have benefited from fewer sidequests and some judicious trimming.
He is the king of side quests. Haha.
I don’t mind a big book but it’s got to be really good!
That makes sense. 🙂
This is a great topic.
Thank you. 🙂
I love big books but sometimes it feels like they just add pages to add pages! I should have done this topic. What a fun spin!
Feel free to borrow it in the future! And thanks.
I loved The Lord of The Rings but I also definitely agree it could have been shortened! I also found I tend to prefer shorter books over longer books lately.
Cool. 🙂
ALL of Dickens except the Christmas Carol! What a good list.
Yes! 😀 And thanks.
I have read some books that really did need less pages! Great topic!
Thank you.
A few years ago, I didn’t care how many pages a book had as long as I was enjoying it. But now I hesitate if it’s over 300 pages.
Pam @ Read! Bake! Create!
https://readbakecreate.com/authors-take-notes-ten-things-i-want-more-of/
It’s interesting so many of us feel this way now!
I am not a fan of those huge tomes. I read a few Ken Follet books when I was younger, but not anymore. My attention isn’t what it used to be. These are great choices though. Someone mentioned Reader’s Digest Condensed versions, and I read a few of those over the years. They were really good. I don’t know if they still do them, though.
Thank you. I’ll have to see if I can find any condensed versions. What a great idea.
I agree with on The Lord of the Rings
🙂
There was a time, when I was a teen and in my early 20s, that I picked the longest books I could find because I was trying to get bang for my buck! I read so many 1000p tomes or picked series that had like 5 or 6 x 800p books lol. And I do still like a chunky novel occasionally but so often now, when I’ve got a pile of books, I’ll gravitate to the shortest one on there. One that I know I can knock over quickly.
I have a few Ken Follett’s on my shelf. Why are they all SO BIG lol. I haven’t tackled any of them yet.
that makes total sense. But, yeah, Follett’s books are all huge from what I’ve seen.
Oh yeah some absolutely require a trim. As much as I sometimes do love reading about side quests, I do like to get to the point as well.
For sure. 🙂
The Stand is a biggie. I read the expanded version and loved it, but… it’s sooo long!
Yep! Even the miniseries was really, really long.
Ken Follet books are so good, but they are huge! totally agree with that one!
I’m glad you get it.
ahhh I feel your pain 😅 if I see a book has more than 450 pages on GR it’s automatically a no for me. If you couldn’t say it in 350 pages, maybe you shouldn’t say it 😂
Heh, yes!
I haven’t read Lord of the Rings, but I once owned the books because I got them as a gift. It was a pocket set and the font was so tiny because of how long they were.
Interesting!