Comments | rj_anderson: Unreasonable Expectations? (Part 1 of 2)

rj_anderson

Unreasonable Expectations? (Part 1 of 2)

Oct 20, 2010 15:20

I've seen a couple of criticisms cropping up in reviews lately -- not reviews of my own books necessarily, but of some very fine books by other authors. They're often stated somewhat crankily, as though they are universal rules and every author worth her word count ought to know better than to flout them -- but as a matter of fact they are ( Read more... )

writing, books, essays

Comments 34

pontisbright October 20 2010, 19:40:18 UTC

The one that always springs to my mind is Arthur Dent in Hitch-Hiker's Guide. He's the ultimate 'guy that stuff happens to' - but how ridiculous would his story be if he suddenly leapt into the fray claiming to know better than anyone else how to deal with a Vogon in full flood?

Looking forward to your thoughts on #2!

rj_anderson October 20 2010, 19:49:02 UTC

Oh, that is a good one! The eternally befuddled [Babel]fish-out-of-water protagonist is sometimes exactly the right one for a story.

Perhaps it's a little more obvious that such a protagonist is needed when the worldbuilding is central to the story. Alice in Wonderland or Gulliver's Travels is this kind of tale, as is HHGTHG in its modern way; I'd also include D.M. Cornish's Foundling, in which the hero is a sweet young boy making his goggle-eyed way through a big scary world full of monsters and strange people.

Or as C.S. Lewis put it, "Every good writer knows that the more unusual the scenes and events of his story are, the slighter, the more ordinary, the more typical his persons should be. Hence Gulliver is a commonplace little man and Alice a commonplace little girl."

pontisbright October 20 2010, 21:09:45 UTC

Ooh, what a lovely quote to have at your fingertips!

(And re the below, I have a suspicion I know the blockbuster you're talking about, and YES, THAT. Many many odd writing/editorial choices there.)

mary_j_59 October 21 2010, 18:16:08 UTC

Yes - love that quote! It sounds like a couple of Chesterton essays my sister and Adam Gidwitz were just citing at a library meeting.

And I don't mean to spam this thread, really. I'm just curious. What on earth is HHGTHG? I've been trying to figure it out, but can't. Is it a book I should read?

Thread 5

olmue October 20 2010, 20:07:59 UTC

Well, sometimes I think the problem is simply that the reader had a certain kind of book in mind, and was miffed that the book they picked up wasn't that. The reader just kept trying to turn it into a different story, one the reader wanted but that wasn't really part of the author's vision at all. My advice to that person is, go find another book? Because you may not like that book, but someone else likely gets it and loves it.

There is a famous book that gets that criticism a lot (the MC not doing enough). It didn't bother me, because the interesting part of the book for me was the struggle an important secondary character was going through, ie, trying not to eat his girlfriend/the main character. And seeing that ultimate triumph play out was what made the book satisfying to me. It was okay for me that it wasn't the MC having that struggle. But some readers receive that book differently. *shrugs*

rj_anderson October 20 2010, 20:12:50 UTC

I do sometimes have a problem when the MC gets knocked out at the climax of the book and doesn't actually witness the big showdown, but has to be told about it afterward. That seems to me a problem that afflicted not only the book you're talking about but another big blockbuster that came out just a few weeks ago, and in both cases it made me wonder why the author made that choice.

imaginarycircus October 20 2010, 20:17:27 UTC

Where to even start?

The Hunger Games--things happen and Katniss reacts.
Catcher in the Rye - Holden is mostly an observer
The Sound and The Fury to a certain extent
Harry Potter? He is always reacting to Voldemort's actions until the end.

I know there are tons more.

rj_anderson October 20 2010, 20:50:31 UTC

The Great Gatsby? Nick is really just an observer throughout, with only a little plot to call his own.

I don't think Harry counts, though, as he does do some pretty spectacular things to advance the plot and try to thwart the villains he encounters along the way, even if he doesn't always realize the significance or repercussions of his actions.

imaginarycircus October 20 2010, 20:55:00 UTC

I think there are so many ways to tell stories, and even good, smart ways to break rules and still tell a great story. Those sort of blanket "you must never do X" rules make me cranky.

Though when I work with beginning writers I do try to get them to see that withholding info doesn't increase tension 99% of the time--it just leads to inadvertent hilarity at the writer's expense. My favorite example of this is a novel MS that I read in a slush pile that started off describing a woman with a "mysterious metal object under her skirt." lol It was a gun, but it really sounded like something else.

brandy_painter October 20 2010, 20:22:45 UTC

Thanks for writing this. I've been seeing it crop up a lot lately as well. As a writer of reviews it is good for me to be challenged about how and why certain phrases are used in the world of review writing.

I am currently reading Blind Justice by Bruce Alexander and that is told from the POV of a 13 year old who is of the observer/reactor type. I am thoroughly enjoying the story and this status has in no way diminished my respect for the character.

I am very much looking forward to tomorrow's post.

rj_anderson October 20 2010, 20:51:07 UTC

Love your icon! Thanks for weighing in and I'm glad you found this post interesting!

brandy_painter October 20 2010, 23:02:34 UTC

I didn't make the icon (it's credited) but I love that quote. It is from G.K. Chesterton.

I was thinking about this topic while making dinner and I thought of another book. Henry York in The 100 Cupboards by N.D. Wilson is definitely a passive character. It isn't until the second book of the trilogy that he starts to take initiative in anything. And that first book is awesome just the same.

nuranar October 20 2010, 20:33:17 UTC

I think this is a lovely topic. :p I haven't anything particular to add for #1, since my mind invariably becomes a blank when invited to give examples of anything. But I have noticed these, and similar, critiques of fiction lately. (Mostly on LJ, which may give fanfic color to the reviews I see and my conclusions ( ... )

rj_anderson October 20 2010, 20:54:16 UTC

The fanfic angle you brought up is very interesting. I'm not sure it's what's behind these particular reviewers' reactions, but in at least some cases it might have been an influence.

And it's also interesting to me that people seem to find Mary Sues (or rather, characters they deem deserving of that epithet) in fiction a lot more obnoxious than they find the obvious Marty Stus like Sherlock Holmes, James Bond etc. Apparently it's perfectly fine for men to be extraordinarily good at something (or everything), but as soon as women start being extraordinary in a similar way they need to be cut down to size?

nuranar October 20 2010, 21:19:18 UTC

Actually I meant both male and female Sues/Stus; I just neglected to specify. For some inexplicable reason I have come to vastly prefer male protagonists in what I read, and I'm well aware of the criticisms leveled at both genders. There are other reasons for the sheer numbers of Marys versus Martys, but I honestly wasn't considering that. It was interesting to read in previous comments that Harry Potter is may be a passive protagoniist, when on LJ many people consider him a Stu ( ... )