www.ditl.org

Inspired by the Twilight Bashing Thread. Most of us there have agreed that the books are pretty bad, but far from the worst. So, what book have you read that you'd rate as the worst waste of paper you'd ever wasted your time reading?

The Gunslinger. I've read plenty of books that I've got to the end of and concluded that I'm a) not reading it again and b) not getting anything else by that author, but that's then only one I've got two-thirds through (and it's pretty thin to start with) and decided "I'm not wasting my time finishing this shit".

The first one is slow-ish, but the series as a whole is the best stuff I've ever read. Just goes to show how opinion varies.

Who would've thought that Seafort and I would have vastly different opinions on something?

Worst thing I've ever read... I'd have to say Rainbow Six by Tom Clancy. I had pretty much the same reaction Seafort had to The Gunslinger, except I only got about halfway through before I put it down for good.

I think I would go with Vurt.

First off, it's one of those sci fi books which is written in "future-speak". The entire book is written in futuristic slang which is very hard to decipher. I didn't really start to work out what half of it meant until about half way through.

Example : the word Vurt refers to virtual reality. In this future, VR programs are produced as "feathers". You tickel yourself in the throat with these feathers, and have a VR experience. And they do seem to be talking about real, actual feathers here. It doesn't seem to be an odd slang term.

The basic story is that a lot of people are addicted to Vurt, and we follow a gang who spend their time trying to acquire feathers to use. But as a backstory... the gang's leader experimented with some kind of special Vurt feather - different colours do different things, and she got some special colour nobody had seen before. In her Vurt experience she vanished completely, being replaced by some sort of living blob which he calls "The Thing from Outer Space".

Throughout the book there are ghosts, monsters, and various apparently supernatural things. These are all talked about as though they are perfectly real, but I couldn't decide whether they were just Vurt hallucination-versions of real things, or what.

It was an awful, painful book, and I only got through it because it became a kind of endurance test for me.

GrahamKennedy wrote:I think I would go with Vurt.

First off, it's one of those sci fi books which is written in "future-speak". The entire book is written in futuristic slang which is very hard to decipher. I didn't really start to work out what half of it meant until about half way through.

Example : the word Vurt refers to virtual reality. In this future, VR programs are produced as "feathers". You tickel yourself in the throat with these feathers, and have a VR experience. And they do seem to be talking about real, actual feathers here. It doesn't seem to be an odd slang term.

The basic story is that a lot of people are addicted to Vurt, and we follow a gang who spend their time trying to acquire feathers to use. But as a backstory... the gang's leader experimented with some kind of special Vurt feather - different colours do different things, and she got some special colour nobody had seen before. In her Vurt experience she vanished completely, being replaced by some sort of living blob which he calls "The Thing from Outer Space".

Throughout the book there are ghosts, monsters, and various apparently supernatural things. These are all talked about as though they are perfectly real, but I couldn't decide whether they were just Vurt hallucination-versions of real things, or what.

It was an awful, painful book, and I only got through it because it became a kind of endurance test for me.

Oh God!

That sounds like it's would be painful to think about. in fact, it is.

I'm going to be VERY unpopular for this opinion. But I DETEST Shakespeare. None of his works change my opinion.

I detested Jane Eyre. I know its a classic book, but it takes at least 3 hours of straight reading to know what the fuck is actually going on. It's so intricately detailed, we're saturated beyond belief with incredibly sickly adjectives. It's so confusing for anyone who doesnt date from the 17th century.

The Secret Diary of Adrian Mole, aged 13 3/4 would be on my nomination list for sure. At first i liked it, but the second time i read it it was awful.

The Catcher in the Rye, the only book I was forced to read in highschool that I could not make myself finish. I can't even remember any details from it now (probably my mind trying to protect me by blanking out the memories), but I recall thinking "This is such crap!" about ever five minutes while trying to read it.

Renowned forum member Lazar staggered through the ornately vaulted archway, wondering with his last breath what had compelled him to read The Da Vinci Code.

That comes to mind at the moment... Johnny Got His Gun. There's probably one that was worse, but I don't remember it.


Wait no... Palin's Going Rogue... I read the first few pages, so I think that would count.

I know I may lose my sci-fi nerd credentials for this, but...

Spook City. Now, I am as big a fan of William Gibson's Neuromancer as there is. In fact, I am of the opinion that it is as important to 20th-21st century science fiction as Heinlein or Aasimov. However, Spook City was all the form of Neuromancer and none of the substance.

Forever Midnight.

Its an Predator Novel and a total waste of paper.

re: catcher in the rye and deep's choice, agreed
I collect books especially since a friend retired and donated a good portion of his shop stock, and have to admit that there's nothing worse than a kim newman horror novella, his multitudinous homages, nods of the hat, tips of the wink and references are fine but he is not articulate or precise, his rhetoric is too flowery also....

Pete, you've read Forever Midnight? I'm so sorry.