What Makes a Bad Book Good?
I saw a discussion posted on this topic, but by the time I'd discovered it, it had already been taken over by some folks who wanted to brangle about whether or not Harry Potter was "bad" or "good"--each implying their own taste was the standard all should use
( Read more... )
Of course it depends on why they say it's bad. This reminds me of some careless slangs that get thrown around, that writers "obviously" cynically phoned in their book, or pandered to the least common demoninator. That's been hard to disprove until the age of ye Internet, when a few minutes of Googling can usually turn up the author of the so-called bad book working hard, claiming to be thrilled at their stunning new take on [name a trope]....and the enthusiastic encouragement of their readers cheering them on.
Some authors struggle with the errors leaping and bounding to the eye, shooting off nuclear bombs into the authorial brain, once the piece is in print. These may seem small to readers--or there may be a big old honking logic error that escaped everyone due to a zillion drafts or whatever. That's a whole different issue, writers and their works. I have one tentative observation, and that is, the author who thinks the work is perfect, tends to rewrite that work again and again, maybe from different angles, and with upped stakes, but it's pretty much the same.
Reply
Leave a comment