But I'm never able not to see the writing problems with something. It
matters most to me when something smacks of laziness -- that the writers
don't have any respect for their characters or the audience but want us to
handwave obvious problems and jerk the characters around on strings to make
them do what the plot requires.
I can't get past that either. Although...
It depends on the book and my mood. And to an extent it is admittedly a
subjective thing.
All genres, including surprisingly enough, literary have those issues. The
best-sellers, weirdly are among the worst offenders. And I can't stand the
romance novels at the top of the best-seller list or found in book stores.
I like the ones off the beaten track, which subvert the genre and do weird
things. But you have to find them on Amazon and they are often rec'd by
word of mouth or on places like Good Reads or SmartBitches.
SmartBitches isn't reliable, because taste varies, and they love
contemporary, which tends to annoy me. (Mainly because I have difficulty
buying the same gender/wealth inequalities emerging in a contemporary than
I do in a historical. And I often want to strangle the heroine for being an
idiot and sticking with the guy, when she can easily leave. In historicals,
that's harder to do. Also historicals have the added benefit of being in
the past and not relevant to today's world -- so better escape.) I'm not a
fan of contemporary -- the writing is lazy, and the characters often
under-developed. (Although there are exceptions.) Not a fan of Nora Roberts
(I find her deathly dull), Debbie Macomber, or any of the known ones.
Although no one is as bad as Danielle Steel, who doesn't bother with
dialogue or to develop her characters much at all, and is a watered down
version of Sydney Sheldon. So I do agree the genre does get a bad rap for a
reason - quite often the writer is playing to the publisher or the
readership which wants their formula and trope dang-it, and will only buy
books that give it to them. And a lot of writers write too fast, and
there's a formulistic style to their writing that like you said above,
smacks of laziness.
This, however, is also unfortunately true of the other genres. I've lost
count of how many bad mysteries and sci-fic books I've read, not to mention
comic books. (I binge-read mystery novels over a period of twenty years
possibly more before I finally got burned out on the genre, the serial
killer trope basically did me in. Agatha Christie, Conan Doyle, Robert
Harris, JA Jance, MJ McGregor (which is out of print now), Patricia
Cornwell, Robert Parker, Tony Hillerman, VJ Warchowski, Janet Evonouviche,
John D. McDonald, PD James, Minette Walters (the best of the bunch), Ruth
Rendell (aka PD James), David Baldouchi, Scot Turow, John Grisham, Elmore
Leonard (who I loved) Carl Hianssin, Sara Paretsky, etc.)
There's something about having to push out five - ten books a year that
diminishes the writing. Read one mystery/legal thriller that was so bad, it
was funny, nothing worked, and my suspension of disbelief flew out the
window. Can't remember the name of it. David Baldaccio is popular, but
redundant. James Patterson - sigh, can't read him, such a lazy writer --
assuming he even writes them any longer.
no subject
But I'm never able not to see the writing problems with something. It matters most to me when something smacks of laziness -- that the writers don't have any respect for their characters or the audience but want us to handwave obvious problems and jerk the characters around on strings to make them do what the plot requires.
I can't get past that either. Although...
It depends on the book and my mood. And to an extent it is admittedly a subjective thing.
All genres, including surprisingly enough, literary have those issues. The best-sellers, weirdly are among the worst offenders. And I can't stand the romance novels at the top of the best-seller list or found in book stores. I like the ones off the beaten track, which subvert the genre and do weird things. But you have to find them on Amazon and they are often rec'd by word of mouth or on places like Good Reads or SmartBitches.
SmartBitches isn't reliable, because taste varies, and they love contemporary, which tends to annoy me. (Mainly because I have difficulty buying the same gender/wealth inequalities emerging in a contemporary than I do in a historical. And I often want to strangle the heroine for being an idiot and sticking with the guy, when she can easily leave. In historicals, that's harder to do. Also historicals have the added benefit of being in the past and not relevant to today's world -- so better escape.) I'm not a fan of contemporary -- the writing is lazy, and the characters often under-developed. (Although there are exceptions.) Not a fan of Nora Roberts (I find her deathly dull), Debbie Macomber, or any of the known ones. Although no one is as bad as Danielle Steel, who doesn't bother with dialogue or to develop her characters much at all, and is a watered down version of Sydney Sheldon. So I do agree the genre does get a bad rap for a reason - quite often the writer is playing to the publisher or the readership which wants their formula and trope dang-it, and will only buy books that give it to them. And a lot of writers write too fast, and there's a formulistic style to their writing that like you said above, smacks of laziness.
This, however, is also unfortunately true of the other genres. I've lost count of how many bad mysteries and sci-fic books I've read, not to mention comic books. (I binge-read mystery novels over a period of twenty years possibly more before I finally got burned out on the genre, the serial killer trope basically did me in. Agatha Christie, Conan Doyle, Robert Harris, JA Jance, MJ McGregor (which is out of print now), Patricia Cornwell, Robert Parker, Tony Hillerman, VJ Warchowski, Janet Evonouviche, John D. McDonald, PD James, Minette Walters (the best of the bunch), Ruth Rendell (aka PD James), David Baldouchi, Scot Turow, John Grisham, Elmore Leonard (who I loved) Carl Hianssin, Sara Paretsky, etc.)
There's something about having to push out five - ten books a year that diminishes the writing. Read one mystery/legal thriller that was so bad, it was funny, nothing worked, and my suspension of disbelief flew out the window. Can't remember the name of it. David Baldaccio is popular, but redundant. James Patterson - sigh, can't read him, such a lazy writer -- assuming he even writes them any longer.