Stupidities and irritations in novels

[UnquietDad]

What are the things which annoy you most in fiction? Things characters do, assumptions authors make, etc?

I think my number one has to be the "affluence assumption", where people who are supposedly worrying about money still "have" to send Jonty and Jocasta to the lovely little prep school and violin lessons. (Mind you, there's enough of that on here.)

DW has just finished reading these, which feature such laughable idiocies as a state primary school where people talk about "first years" and "second years" and which has its own dedicated science block and music block.

There are an awful lot of thirty- and forty-something women writing novels these days who are out of touch with any reality beyond their cosy little London mums-and-coffees-and-gym circle. And - surprise, surprise - they are books about cosy little London mums-and-coffees-and-gym circles.

No, more irritating than lots of research, is lack of research! Inappropriate referencing of other cultures/countries is my particular bugbear. Also happens a LOT in journalism - I understand you're writing for the Times (of London), but really, please take the time to understand the basics of the culture you're writing about before pontificating.

I see it with Africa. But I'm sure if you're Chinese/South American/japanese whatever you spot such ridiculous analogies.

Just checked your website UQD - looking forward to 'A' next year ...

I did actually start writing a serious historical novel about ten years ago, and spent a year in the British Library on and off, doing some really hard core research, plus doing some international travel to research sites.

It was so bloody awful written up that it has become a joke amongst my relatives and the few friends I dared to show it to. They still snort with laughter when they quote bits of it.

I can't be too cross with them as it is truly dire, I must confess, and even makes me laugh. I read too much Anya Seaton as a teenager, clearly.

Anything you want to know about Caribbean childbirth practices in the 1600s, by the way, and I am your woman ...

Ooh SpringySunshine - that is so true! I trained as a typesetter and I am outraged at typos and shoddy editing!

I read a "literary" book a while back where a minor character completely name-changed! I can't remember what it was - I was outraged!

Typos are a menace with small publishers.

Yes yes on the typos. That always frustrates me too. Don't they have people to check this stuff!?!

RustyBear - got to write the damn thing first. I'm off!

...................>>>>

[that poppity-poppity-poppity PEEEOW cartoon running noise]

I've catted you UQD. My first time. How long does it usually take? I need an answer NOW.

Patience is not my strong point!

Oh yes, too much research thrown onto the page just to show off is terrible. Gave up on The Interpretation of Murder even though it was for my book club and I usually make the effort.

Too little research is just as irritating, though. I have always refrained from writing to the author because that would be taking pedantry too far, but strikes me as bloody lazy to fail to check the facts when you are charging people for your insights.

OK Springy, here we go. Sorry if this is a hijack.

Gordon flicked back his greying yet boyish fringe, and gazed across the panelled room at the eager undergraduate perched on his sofa. My god, the gown suited her, especially as her black stockings peeking out from underneath gave a foretaste of extra curricular interests to come.

"That was a very good essay, Miranda, a very good essay indeed. I think we'll have to be thinking about postgraduate studies for you in a year or two. Now, you wanted me to look at this funding application of yours? Why don't you bring it over and we'll see how it's shaping up?"

The mantelpiece clock ticked. In the distance there was the clatter of a trolley taking dishes over to the Refectory for Formal Hall that evening. Miranda looked at him innocently and uncrossed her long legs very slowly. Little did Gordon know that buried within her voluminous undergraduate gown was a special hi-tech transmitting device, designed by a couple of CompSci postgrads, streaming the entire tutorial over the internet to subscribers. Gordon was about to become the victim of a new student entrepreneurship experiment ...

being friends with writers can be quite irritating if they are pedantic about detail.

I remember going out for a lovely lunch where my dear friend asked me to have the bouillabaisse and describe it in great detail as he didn't eat fish but wanted to put it in his next book. He even took notes.

This thread is a bit narky.

Who has time to read books they find annoying? Now, what on earth is the point of that?

I haven't read any Chick LIt I don't think, I might have read one. But presumably they are successful because people like or are comforted by the formula? And they were quite new once I suppose, and then everyone published to try and capture the same market. Fair enough, doesn't mean you have to read them. Also doesn't mean that anyone shouldn't write them imho.

If you stand in front of a table in Waterstones there are hundreds of individual voices in front of you, from around the world. If they won't do - walk six steps and look on a shelf.

There are so many books out there - why do people keep reading books they find annoying with protagonists who talk about their clothes size?

Read something else. Something you will enjoy.

I hate dissing threads, especially ones about books. UQD you do start these quite a lot it seems to me. Why?

it is the stuff of book groups though isn't it 100 - where you all get together and rip a book to shreds (not literally - no pun intended)

this thread is born from such activity - and also probably quite useful to writers.

and it is not about finding books annoying but things in books authors use that are annoying.

Well, normally, the blurb on the back doesn't say, "Mary, size 14 but hating it and desperately wanting to be size 10, dreamt of meeting a 6 foot, rugby playing hunk with dark hair and green eyes who had an excellent sense of humour and loved small children so much he would swoop them into his arms and tickle them whenever he saw them...."

So nine times out of ten you're half way through the bloody thing before you realise how diabolically tortuous it is!

Or even worse, you're enjoying it and then the author cops out and ends it soo appallingly badly you're left angry and irritated for hours (or days in my case, but we're not talking about me! )

Boffin, that's fab I particularly like 'a foretaste of extra curricular interests to come'

& ahundredtimes, it's not a 'dissing' thread. It's a general thread of literary criticism. Just because it's negative criticism doesn't make it any less valid or worthwhile than positive.

Yes, I suppose so. But UQD is always gnawing away at women who write about the playground, or are posh, or who have a name or just simply have had the temerity to write a successful book.

Mind you, I've never been to a book group so I don't know! Do people never talk about why they liked something?
Actually I've never been to a book group because I worry that someone will say something like 'Well yes, I did read War and Peace, but I've been to Russia and it was nothing like that, so I don't think it was believable.' There's nothing you can say to that. Bridget Jones was no good and not believable because she'd have been sacked. This strikes me as a very odd way to read a work of fiction. . . .

but that might just be me.

flossie t - emporer's children.

dh tried so hard to ge tme a good book, and from the cover i was encouraged, but about 100 pages in i'm losing interest.

this is meant to be about 3 friends - not one scene with all of them in it yet!
how come she has 'lifestyle' funding to sit at home & write such tosh?

i also hate too much description once the 'real action' gets going, e.g. the nightingale floor.

Oh sorry, didn't realize it was literary criticism. Okay.

ahundredtimes, I agree.

And you can so tell what kind of book it's gonna be from the blurb. That's the point of it, isn't it?

I read a book every other day for pleasure. Most of them are entirely unmemorable, but I don't necessarily see this as a problem.

You see it seems to be that if you read a chick lit book or a crime book - then you know what you are getting so why then pretend it's criticism.

So I don't understand how or why you'd then sit around afterwards and say

'Oh my god, that was so predictable, because like the detective tried to SOLVE THE CRIME. Oh my god, I just knew he'd do that - didn't you. So typical, so predictable.'

ok, so you should accept a character for how they are in the world created, not real life (otherwise how would science fiction work), but i still do find incredibly 'ditzy' characters just bloody annoying. i mean, they get written as if they're terribly amusing & endearing, but in real life, most of us would find them tiresome & actually try not to be their friend/partner. who wants a friend who phones you at 3 in the morning cos they're locked out/burst a pipe ... again. most people just turn grumpy & say 'no', in chic lit (and on tv) men fall over themselves for such quirky characters.

grr..

(can you tell i try to be organised, and would like THAT to be a sexy characteristic, just for once)

That's not how I'd viewed this thread at all. Obviously we're looking at it in different ways. I thought that it was a discussion of bad / lazy writing that can ruin an otherwise good book.

Even if it's not a genre that you enjoy, you can appreciate its worth. & equally you can enjoy a genre that has little other worth than that enjoyment.

Yes, true Springy. And actually I've never really read Chick lit, so I shouldn't comment because I don't know what the annoyances therein!