Glens Falls (NY) Online Book Discussion Group discussion
ABOUT BOOKS AND READING
>
What annoys you in books?
It disturbs me when one of the main characters in a novel is not introduced until way into the story.Also, I think some endings are contrived just to wrap it all up. This doesn't satisfy me. nina
I agree, Nina. Some endings seem very rushed and aren't satisfying at all. It's as though the author has painted himself into a corner and doesn't know how to get out. :)
I certainly agree about the endings not being well done or rushed. I feel cheated.Preaching - I detest it. Make a point & move on. Hammering it to death just bores me. I just put down a book, in part, for that very reason. I happened to agree with most of the philosophy & really understood what the author was driving at, but it became repetitive. Characters were introduced just to help make the same points over & over. Enough!!!
I can't stand when an author is long-winded. I prefer they get to the point.
I agree about how annoying "preachy" stories are. I found The Shack very annoying for that reason.Yes, long-winded, wordy writing is a turn-off. I get tired of too much description too. I especially hate a book which starts out with a scene description. My eyes glaze over on page one. I like a book which captures my interest immediately by starting out with an interesting character, an intriguing situation, or even some good dialogue. Sometimes inner thoughts written in the first-person make a good opening paragraph, IF the thoughts are thought-provoking. But please, no flowery description!
Another thing which annoys me in books is when they number only every other page. I often copy passages or lines from books and it's annoying to look up and not see a page number. I know that's a small thing but it bothers the heck out of me!
I don't like it either. Not for any particular reason, I just don't.
I do not like overdoing anything. Don't give me six pages of description in one chunk--be concise. Writing a murder murder? I expect some vilence but don't drench me in gore. A lot of today overlong books have too much of everything. Padding to help the story along.
Jackie, it's nice to have some support! LOLMary JL, Yes, I agree. I recognize "padding" in a story when I see it! I especially dislike descriptions of dreams; they usually don't move the story along. Occasionally they may provide some interesting psychological perspectives, but not usually.
It's a fine line, some padding is necessary or it's over too quickly but mostly I feel it's not necessary, especially when it adds nothing to the story. I have less patience for it in movies, I must confess.
Yes, Jackie, we see "padding" in movies too, as you've mentioned before, elsewhere... for example, long walks down hallways.
Arrhhh! That's the one thing that drives me utterly insane. Why would any writer or director think I have any desire to see someone walk down a hall? My life isn't that boring yet, lolIt's just such a waste of time. I'll yell at the TV, Get to it already!
My new pet peeve is resurrecting characters. I've read a couple of series lately where the authors 'kill' off a character & then bring them back. In one case, Jim Butcher's Codex Alera series, the series really didn't need the character back except for creating a happy ending. Actually, NO character of any importance is really killed except one & that one was very old & dying anyway. Otherwise, thousands die every book, except the main characters, both good & bad.
The other series has an obvious problem to be resolved & uses a magical resurrection as a lead in to the next book. If you have read Blood Promise, the 4th book of the Vampire Academy series, or are not planning to read the series, then read the spoiler below.
(view spoiler)
Maybe I'm being harsh. It's not as if it isn't a well foreshadowed magical fix & it is kind of a YA PNR book. I just expected better. Silly me.
Jim wrote: I've read a couple of series lately where the authors 'kill' off a character & then bring them back. That or dream sequences where everything that happened didn't really happen. I feel cheated, as if the author backed himself into a corner and lacks the imagination to figure an inventive way out.
This ploy is like a bad soap opera.
About dead main characters, this is why I love A Song of Ice and Fire series: GRRM has taken huge risks in killing off main characters.. and they stay dead. No magical resurrections, no mistakes in the pronouncement of death; dead is dead and there isn't no coming back. I respect that a whole lot more than a cheap way out. And it works within this series and always manages to further the plot, once you get over the initial shock of a character you love being killed, that is.
I've noticed that in the HBO show, Jackie. Yes, Martin is brutal.
It feels more honest. Bad $h*+ happens to good people. After reading so much fantasy and getting used to all the hearts and flowers kind of endings, it makes a pretty interesting book when these unexpected things happen. And it makes my emotional attachment all the more intense.
How did you like the HBO show, Jim? Have you read it? I am completely obsessed by the series (book and TV), I think I'm living in Westeros more than in the real world; I think about it all the time. Seriously. All The Time. I even dream about it. Just goes to show the power of Martin's writing.
I haven't read the books & probably won't any time soon - too big a TBR - & I hear the series is still under construction with long times between books. I may start getting them, when & if.I like the show quite a bit. We actually got HBO just so we could catch it & True Blood.
GOT and TB are both excellent shows. It's worth paying for HBO, it's the only reason I have it too.It's an excellent series and the only reason I started reading before it was completed is because of the TV series. I prefer to read first, view later. And I'm glad I did, it's one of the best times I ever had. But I'll be crying soon, because I'm on the last book and then what? Wait years for the next one? I can hear the whining now....lol
Recently I thought of something else which annoys me in a book. I get annoyed when an author doesn't make clear who is doing the talking, especially in a long passage of "back and forth" dialogue.
It's also annoying when the author uses the words "he" or "she" and it isn't clear which "he" or "she" is being referred to. The rule is that the "he/she" should refer to the last person mentioned, but not all authors seem to follow that rule.The rule concerns "antecedents". An antecedent is a word or phrase which a pronoun refers back to.
For example, in the sentence "Mary threw the ball to Jane and she caught it", "Jane" is the antecedent of "she".
I agree, Joy. The sentence you provided is clear that it's Jane who caught the ball. But many authors are not clear.
I get annoyed at the back and forth with no clear idea of who's talking, I have to go back and count it out, #1 said this, #2 said that, #1 said this, etc. It's a time waster, and I'm resentful of that.
Jackie wrote: "I agree, Joy. The sentence you provided is clear that it's Jane who caught the ball. But many authors are not clear.
I get annoyed at the back and forth with no clear idea of who's talking, I ..."
Jackie, I'm glad to see someone else who feels as I do about this. I'm very finicky about correct grammar and language usage. After all, clarity is important in storytelling. Some authors don't care about clarity. Some want to be innovative with their style, but sometimes it means that the clarity suffers. Of course, what's clear to one person isn't clear to another, but some authors seem to enjoy challenging the reader's ability to figure things out for themselves! Sadists! LOL
I can give some leeway on grammar if it's in a dialogue, people don't always speak with proper grammar but that's where I draw the line. I notice it and it distracts me.
i agree. I'm not a grammar freak, but not being clear as to who is saying or doing what is just poor writing. That's why I couldn't read Lord of Misrule. Half the time I wasn't sure if the character was speaking aloud or not or even which one it was. Artsy, stream-of-consciousness just confuses me & isn't worth the effort to read.
I am really annoyed at excessive descriptions of sex. I know how it's done; I do not need six pages describing every single movement. Certain books can have sex scenes--but well written ones! Same with four-letter words. Some writers have the idea "well, it's okay now to do this"---so they use a four letter word every other sentence.
Mary JL, I heartily agree, on both points! And I agree with a lot of the comments made above, as well.
I concur. It's become quite the trend with many supernatural books. When I see the words "explicit sex" in the description, that ends any interest I have. Besides, I want my supernaturals to scare the hell outta me, not have sex with them.
I pretty much agree with you all, but the later Anita Blake books ticked me off because they didn't even have good sex scenes. The heroine talked about it & relationships for pages on end without even doing the deed. If she had got down to business, I could skip it, but all the babbling wound up containing a few important bits. It was so buried that I wound up missing half of them by just skimming through.
That's even worse, burying the treasure amidst the trash.
That pretty much sums up books 10 - 18 of the Anita Blake series, Jackie. It looks like she's getting back on track & I'm hoping she'll wrap the series up in another book or two, though. I'd like to see it come to a decent end.
Goodreads doesn't have much about Anita Blake. No listing of her books:http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/...
Wonder why.
I see a list of search-hits here (showing her books):
http://www.goodreads.com/search?utf8=...
Oh, Laurell K. Hamilton is the author! Who's Anita Blake? Must be a character, eh?
Found the following on Laurell K. Hamilton:
Laurell K. Hamilton Danse Macabre - Ölümcül Dans Anita Blake - 14
Laurell K. Hamilton Zincirlenmiş Narkissos Anita Blake - 10
Must be an error somewhere.
The only LKH book I read was Nightseer which I really loved. I waited a long time for a sequel because it ended in a way that more could be forthcoming...but it never happened. None of her other books appealed to me though she has many fans who feel otherwise.
Jackie wrote: "The only LKH book I read was Nightseer which I really loved. ..."Ah, shape-shifting dragons! Where have I seen or read about shape-shifting before? Might have been The Black Unicorn or To Ride Hell's Chasm or maybe both. It's an interesting plot device.
Joy, Anita Blake is Hamilton's series character, a tough P.I. who has necromancy abilities and deals with nefarious behavior by vampires and werewolves. She's the character that sort of kicked off the contemporary "Paranormal Romance" phenomenon in the book trade. I haven't read any of the books, but I've heard about them for years, from various sources.
Werner wrote: "Joy, Anita Blake is Hamilton's series character, a tough P.I. who has necromancy abilities and deals with nefarious behavior by vampires and werewolves. She's the character that sort of kicked off..."Werner, thanks for explaining about Anita Blake.
In my previous post (Message #33) I thought there was a GR bug relating to the author link to Laurell K. Hamilton. But now I see that it works: Laurell K. Hamilton.
Problem solved. :)
Sorry about the confusion, Joy. Yes, Werner got it. The first few books were super. Jackie, I have Nightseer, but haven't read it yet. Don't know why. Hamilton has another series out there, Merry Gentry, that had a pretty good first book, but the series rapidly went downhill.
Rumor has it that Hamilton married the head of her fan club about the time her books went downhill. She started writing these horrible, long winded S&M, bondage orgy scenes into everything. She took tough, spunky Anita Blake from a good detective to queen of a bestial harem - literally. As I mentioned earlier, it wasn't even good porn. Blech. Completely different than how the series started.
Wow, that's disturbing how one choice can affect so much. And marrying the head of a fan club is disturbing in itself. Now I'm completely creeped out. She had no chance of me buying or reading her books anyway. I thought I saw a review from you about Nightseer. I'll have to go and check.
Yep, you gave it 3 stars and wrote: Not part of her series & her first book of all, I think. Not bad.You probably read it a while ago and forgot, you read a lot of books. It happens to me too. Half the time I forget what I've read until someone mentions it.
Oops, I answered the 'Nightseer' in another topic. Oh well. I think you're doing yourself a disservice by not reading the first few of the Anita Blake series. Get them used, she won't see a dime. IMO, they were the earliest & best of the genre the way it is today. She took it a step above what Saberhagen & Rice did.
That's something that annoys me about genre junkies & I just did it. What's the first book in a genre? I can't define a genre much less the first in a subgenre, but it really bugs me when people say that Anne Rice was the first to bring vampires into the mainstream. Saberhagen did it better & earlier. Thorn is a masterpiece featuring Dracula, told from his POV with lots of dips into the past. It's in the middle of his series chronologically, although it is one of the earlier ones published, I think.
If I see them I'll get them. I'm more into world building fantasy but if Anita is good, I'll enjoy it. I need a break from all the intensity of world building deep fantasy every now and then.Anne Rice, what a laugh. She's not all that good anyway, another long winded blowhard. I definitely want to read Thorn. I hope I can find it at the upcoming library book sale. I got the first three in his Book of Swords series at the last one I went to.
Interesting conversation, Jim and Jackie. I enjoy reading other people's opinions. :) You never know what you're going to learn... or at least familiarize yourself with. Even though I'm not acquainted with the fantasy and sci-fi books you talk about, it's interesting to hear you discuss them.
I found the following at David Giltinan's GR profile:http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/16...
(I thought it would fit in this thread.) :)
=============================================
10 common sources of disappointment in a book:
1.Failed to match brilliance of author's previous work
2.Author appears stuck in a rut
3.Characters decent but deathly boring, or appallingly unsympathetic
4. Plot miserably depressing
5. Sheer orneriness (mine)
6.Some particular authorial tic runs amok (e.g. prolixity; excessive dependence on footnotes, brand names)
7. Too.much.freaking.suburban.anomie.
8. Author's failure to understand that the reader needs to be engaged in order to sit through an account of author's hideous past
9. Pretentious postmodern claptrap, sacrificing plot in favor of stylistic gimmickry of one kind or another.
10. All brain. No heart.
====================================================
I especially agree with #8!
Unless you're "engaged" you might as well close the book!
Joy wrote: it's interesting to hear you discuss them. One thing about scifi/fantasy fans is we're passionate about our genre; second thing, we love talking about it. lol
Jackie wrote: "... One thing about scifi/fantasy fans is we're passionate about our genre; second thing, we love talking about it. lol"I hear ya, Jackie! LOL
It's fun talking about things with people who have the same interests. It's more fun than exchanging forced pleasantries, but that's a skill too. Part of easing social situations.
"Ultimately the bond of all companionship, whether in marriage or friendship, is conversation." -Oscar Wilde
Good list, Joy, however, I don't get: "7. Too.much.freaking.suburban.anomie." What does that mean?It is fun discussing books with others. That's one of the things that drew Marg & I together. When we merged our libraries, we had a lot of duplicates. Of the several thousand books in the house now, I'll bet over half are ones that we both enjoy.
Jim wrote: "Good list, Joy, however, I don't get: "7. Too.much.freaking.suburban.anomie." What does that mean?It is fun discussing books with others. That's one of the things that drew Marg & I together. ..."
I'll ask the fellow who wrote it. :)
Interesting about the duplicate books. Birds of a feather... :)
Jim, you're right; if by bringing vampires "into the mainstream," you mean treating them as actual literary characters with individual personalities and moral volition, Saberhagen did this in his treatment of Dracula, and he published the first book of his series in 1975, the year before Interview with the Vampire appeared. He does a better job of it than Rice, too, IMO, based on what I've read of the two. (We also shouldn't forget that Barnabas Collins on the old TV series Dark Shadows preceded Rice's writings by even longer; the possibility that a soap opera could ever have influenced subsequent writers never seems to even be discussed in literary polite society, but I for one wouldn't discount the possibility.) At times in the past, I've been one of those people who've credited Rice with a "first" status she doesn't deserve; mea culpa! That said, I think Rice actually did tend to have a bigger influence on other writers and genre fans in this regard than Saberhagen did, simply because of the accident that her book became better known. (The fact that it got adapted as a movie gave it a boost in that respect.)Barb and I have overlapping tastes in books, too. There are some genres that one of us likes while the other one tends not to (or tends to just like some individual examples of it, more selectively); but we're both fantasy fans, and both appreciate tales of adventure and mystery, and pretty much anything with a strong heroine.
Joy, I'll say a hearty "Amen!" to David Giltinan's list! Numbers 4 and 9 are probably my most common peeves. (Though unsympathetic main characters turn me against a book or story pretty quickly, too!)
Werner, yes, I need to feel a connection with the characters. Otherwise I can't continue reading.
Glens Falls (NY) Online Book Discussion Group
Books mentioned in this topic
Morgan's Run (other topics)Thorn (other topics)
The Black Unicorn (other topics)
To Ride Hell's Chasm (other topics)
Nightseer (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
A.M. Homes (other topics)Rick Moody (other topics)
Laurell K. Hamilton (other topics)
Laurell K. Hamilton (other topics)
Anita Blake (other topics)
More...
For example, I am "annoyed" by a sophomoric style of writing. I'm "annoyed" by confusing plots. I'm annoyed when an author introduces too many characters at once, without developing any one of them well enough. I'm annoyed by books which are unreadable. I'm annoyed when prizes are given out to books which "annoy" me. :)
What annoys you as you read?