Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott Nicholson
Thanks, Grace--why does anyone assume the average reader cares about "good writing"? They clearly don't. Twilight is not well written. Patterson is merely competent on a craft level.
In fiction, most people love great stories, which is why we have to beat kids over the head to get them to read "classics" in high school that are "good for them." The most common result being we have teens who despise reading.
The average reader is pretty good at knowing what he or she likes, though. It's one of the growing pains of the era, and worth it to have a little crap for the chance at lots of fresh voices and experimentation.
|
I do enjoy many of the classics, and love the feeling you get from finishing a very satisfying, meaningful book. In my "real life," I read lots of non-fiction, some of it dealing with very serious and heavy concepts, some of it dense with medical terminology and psychological case studies. So in my "escape life," I don't always want to read serious, coming-of-age stories, or novels dealing with beating the odds or whatnot. My job deals heavily with the emotional realm, so I prefer my hobby reading to be light and different than real life.
This actually makes me wonder how many of our reading choices mirror our lives and how many are as different as we can find? Do hospice workers seek out books dealing with end-of-life choices? Do cops like to read mysteries mirroring their jobs? My non-fiction is in tune with my job, but my fiction is often pure brain candy. We all need a break, right?
For the record, I wouldn't rate most of Patterson's books or the Twilight Saga with 5 stars (although I have read and been amused by both). I find both writing styles to be lacking. 