What Makes a Bad Book Good?

[sartorias]

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

Comments

[eneit]

I liked Jennifer Fallon's agent's observation that she'd likely not win any awards beause her novels had a plot. Sort of puts the whole good book/bad book into perspective.

My favourites of yesteryear, the editing might make me cringe in comparison to today's standards (Le Guin's Earthsea books for example) but the characters and plot are still strong enough to keep them on my re-read shelf.

In Pullman's case I lost a lot of interest in the ending because of the way he slammed through his particular message over matter. I enjoyed the books, but he lost the "buy outright" vote from me, and quite a few others. Not because of the message he was pushing, but because he chose to sacrifice the story to give the message. Possibly not the desired effect.

[sartorias]

I've seen that comment about plot, and it always puzzles me, as plot is a strong element of many award winners.

yeah, on Pullman.

[alanajoli]

Since the Pullman example has already been covered, I'll steer clear and bring up another controversial one: Dan Brown's DaVinci Code, which I read over a span of 24 hours and felt I'd spent exactly as much time on the book as it deserved. To me, it was lighthearted fun, well paced by the nature of its short chapters, but otherwise not terribly well written--the use of language did not enthrall me, the characters seemed static, etc., etc. It's certainly no more poorly written than many of the romance novels I've read (and I don't say this to disparage romance novels--their intent is to be written to formula, and that's exactly why I read them, but due to that very fact, it must be very difficult for the writers to write something inherently impressive and still stay inside the rules). But to the customers at my bookstore, it was the next most brilliant thing that revealed some hidden Truth they'd never before discovered

[sartorias]

Yeah....it could be there are standards, like there are rainbows. But every time you try to pin it down, it slides off. Yet is still there.

[dame_grise]

There was this fantasy series a few years ago--I won't name names--that I thought was dreadfully written. There were entire sequences repeated nearly verbatim from different points of view, or when characters went through similar experiences, everything was repeated, so by the third time through, I was skipping pages. However, I ended up really liking two of the characters and wanted to see what happened to them.

In the end, I think it was sadly all-to-predictable an end, but I still had a hard time letting go of the books, because of the characters. I even bought them to read them, instead of reading them at the library, which is what I tend to do with things that I think are borderline (or when I have NO money).

[athenais]

Why is it that I can love an easy fix novel, but I can never put up with an easy fix tv show? My emotional investment is easily roused by fiction, I think, but not by someone else's vision made manifest.

[sartorias]

I've thught about that too. It could be that there are levels to easy fixes--that when, in the case of a tv show, you can quote several lines ahead and then you hear pretty much what you expected, there just isn't any "pique and surprise" element left. In a book, one can find enough rewards, perhaps. Although sometimes not. There was one popular author whose book I attempted, kept thinking I'd read it, but it had just come out. Turned out it was such a distillation of current expected tropes (to my eyes) that it felt like familiar territory.

[pjthompson]

I like a good "experiential" book, but when life is dishing c*** there is nothing like an easy answer and a pure escape. I couldn't exist on that alone, but I understand the need and at times I don't want to think, I want to surrender some portion of my judgment (though I never surrender completely) and just go along with something. There will always be a market for that, but I doubt many of those books will stand the ol' Test of Time (the one test you can't cheat on).

A good book for me isn't necessarily one with high literary standards. For me, it's whether the book lives up to its own internal promises, the truth of its characters, the well-thought out plot resolutions, and tells a cranking good yarn. A bad book is one that fails on any of those particulars, that makes me feel cheated because the author skipped along just getting the words on the page and didn't really stay true to the world s/he created. I may read those for an entertainment, but I probably won't read anything else by that writer.

[sartorias]

Ye[. I agree right down the line. (I was attempting to stand outside and look at the whole matter, though I dunno how successful that was.0

[pjthompson]

Good/bad always is a personal choice except in the long run, I think. And it's really hard for us to step outside of time. :-) I think you did a pretty good job, though, of making it Big Picture rather than personal picture.

[sartorias]

*g*