View Single Post
Old 09-28-2011, 03:10 PM   #8
Thierry.C
Connoisseur
Thierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura aboutThierry.C has a spectacular aura about
 
Thierry.C's Avatar
 
Posts: 52
Karma: 4096
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Lausanne (CH)
Device: none yet
For me also it depends on the kind of the book.
For a reference book: irritating, even more so than usually you only learn later on, too late, that it is wrong or blatantly inaccurate. I'll forgive but lose confidence.

For historical retranscriptions or fictions based on real facts, lots of errors can irritate me but I do not bother too much and can usually take some pleasure with the rest of the story. However, it's quite annoying and it rises questioning when an author writes about a subject s/he obviously don't master even though that subject is the main thread of the book...

For fictions without any intention to relate real facts or "credible" facts (such as devices that challenge laws of physics in sci-fi), I do not bother at all if it's coherent overall.

Arrogant authors bother me much more than ignorant ones.

Thierry
Thierry.C is offline   Reply With Quote