Things in books that annoy you

[Apache]

If I die my wife will be on the road back to Texas after the funeral.
Apache

[pwalker8]

Originally Posted by Apache

If I die my wife will be on the road back to Texas after the funeral.
Apache

Texas, South Georgia, what's the difference?

[hildea]

I mentioned a few things which annoy me in the thread "Female lead characters":

Originally Posted by hildea

• Where have all the women gone? Ie. almost no female characters. Any character who could be either a man or a woman just happens to be a man.
• Narrative voice or woman's internal dialogue describes her sexy body, in situations where it's alien and irrelevant. For instance woman walking while thinking about politics, and the author takes the time to describe how her breasts move.

Other things which annoy me:

• Characters (especially important characters) who are too one dimensional, all good or all evil or all competent. I abandoned McCullogh's First Man in Rome series halfway through the last of six (or was it five?) books because Gaius Julius Caesar became too annoyingly good at everything he did
• World building which doesn't make sense within its own logic. I don't mind shapeshifters who don't respect conservation of mass -- I'm willing to handwave that. But it annoys me that Ron Weasley has old-fashioned dress robes when his mother is a wizard with lots of experience in household spells -- she could have fixed those robes for him in five minutes with her wand and glance at a fashion magazine
• Plots which hinge on people not talking to each other unless there's a very good reason for them not to do so

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by hildea

• Characters (especially important characters) who are too one dimensional, all good or all evil or all competent. I abandoned McCullogh's First Man in Rome series halfway through the last of six (or was it five?) books because Gaius Julius Caesar became too annoyingly good at everything he did

I remember reading somewhere that Colleen McCullough fell in love with Caesar as she wrote the books and that colored her depiction of him.

• World building which doesn't make sense within its own logic. I don't mind shapeshifters who don't respect conservation of mass -- I'm willing to handwave that. But it annoys me that Ron Weasley has old-fashioned dress robes when his mother is a wizard with lots of experience in household spells -- she could have fixed those robes for him in five minutes with her wand and glance at a fashion magazine

Yes! This is especially common in movies and always bugs me. Instead of enjoying the story, you find yourself thinking "if they could do a, then why does b happen?"

Any of those movies where it's essentially the real world, but it turns out Santa does exist (The Santa Clause, Elf). If Santa is real in your story, then everyone would know it. Where do all those unexplained presents come from?

[Apache]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Texas, South Georgia, what's the difference?

If you are talking Houston, not much.
Apache

[barryem]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

I am quoting you because of your location.

An annoying thing is when a non-fiction book or magazine article moves a major city. I am sorry but Dallas is not and never has been deep in the heart of Texas. It is in north Texas.

It shows either a lack of geography or the ability to google or the author thought they were being smart using in this case an inappropriate but we'll known Texas phrase.

I think the phrase "deep in the heart of Texas" is more about flavor than it's about location.

Barry

[barryem]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

You only have to be born and bred or fully embrace all its idiosyncrasies to be a true Texas.

I was born in Connecticut and moved my family to Texas when I was 5. I lived in Texas till I moved to Arkansas at age 64.

On my last job, which I began just before my 50th birthday, we had a pretty young staff and I was among the older employees and I was sometimes teased about not being a "real Texan". I usually replied "I got here before you did!" and that usually settled things.

Barry

[Anthem]

I hate when different characters (especially ones that don’t know each other or have even remotely similar backgrounds/culture/social circles) use the same idiosyncratic phrases. That only tells you that the book was written by one person with one brain and that one brain couldn’t fathom how incredibly odd it is for such disparate characters to have remarkably similar idiosyncrasies.

[Richwood]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

Any of those movies where it's essentially the real world, but it turns out Santa does exist (The Santa Clause, Elf). If Santa is real in your story, then everyone would know it. Where do all those unexplained presents come from?

I cannot figure out why everyone over 10 or so agrees that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are fictional but with no more actual evidence for their existence God or Gods are firmly believed in by much of the human race including so called intelligent adults who spend their hard earned money supporting organized religion. I know of no more evidence for the existence of any Gods, including the Abrahamaic religions version(s), than I do for dragons, werewolves or fairies. To me they all belong in fantasy books and nowhere else. (sorry if this offends any one).

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by Richwood

I cannot figure out why everyone over 10 or so agrees that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are fictional but with no more actual evidence for their existence God or Gods are firmly believed in by much of the human race including so called intelligent adults who spend their hard earned money supporting organized religion. I know of no more evidence for the existence of any Gods, including the Abrahamaic religions version(s), than I do for dragons, werewolves or fairies. To me they all belong in fantasy books and nowhere else. (sorry if this offends any one).

Be careful before this is kicked to politics and religion. Like you I am an atheist, but as a defense of the opposite view: Both Santa and the Tooth Fairy provide tangible results in specific circumstances. it is not that hard to see that there are no extra presents under the tree, no base of operations at the North Pole and no money not left by parents under a pillow (the Tooth Fairy, when you think about it, is pretty creepy).

For other supernatural beings, the proof required is much more nebulous and with books like Heaven Is For Real, some folks think they have the proof (or at least aren't above manufacturing a story purporting to be evidence).

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Richwood

I cannot figure out why everyone over 10 or so agrees that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are fictional but with no more actual evidence for their existence God or Gods are firmly believed in by much of the human race including so called intelligent adults who spend their hard earned money supporting organized religion. I know of no more evidence for the existence of any Gods, including the Abrahamaic religions version(s), than I do for dragons, werewolves or fairies. To me they all belong in fantasy books and nowhere else. (sorry if this offends any one).

I cannot figure out why you need to go off on an anti-religion tangent.

[ekbell]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

I remember reading somewhere that Colleen McCullough fell in love with Caesar as she wrote the books and that colored her depiction of him.

If the author is female and the hyper-competent character is female, it is stated that the character is a Mary Sue self-insertion; if the author is female and the hyper-competent character is male, it is stated that she fell in love with her character.

At least with Dorothy Sayer I can see why one might believe this (as she married her detective to a woman who bore some resemblance to herself) but sometimes it seems the mere fact of hyper-competent masculinity is considered sufficient proof of falling in love.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by ekbell

If the author is female and the hyper-competent character is female, it is stated that the character is a Mary Sue self-insertion; if the author is female and the hyper-competent character is male, it is stated that she fell in love with her character.

At least with Dorothy Sayer I can see why one might believe this (as she married her detective to a woman who bore some resemblance to herself) but sometimes it seems the mere fact of hyper-competent masculinity is considered sufficient proof of falling in love.

I don't think it's as sexist as you make it sound. Male authors can (and do) also write Mary Sue/Gary Stu characters.

[JSWolf]

Why do we have to be insulting just because the book was written by a woman? Just because a female author writes a strong female character is no reason to get out the insults.

[Araucaria]

Originally Posted by Pulpmeister

.......
Needless variations of "said". A very serious offender was the late E Phillips Oppenheim, who had to have a dialogue tag on virtually every bit of speech, whether it needed it or not, and with almost monomaniacal determination, avoided the word "said", replacing it with things like "begged" when no one was begging, "confided" when nothing was being confided, etc. I made a list once from just 10 pages of one of his novels, and got these:

declared, assured, acknowledged, begged, insisted, exclaimed, pointed out, observed, pleaded, remarked, admitted, reflected, whispered, directed, scoffed, murmured, inquired, muttered, enjoined, complained,; laughed, cried, offered and sighed.

Didn't Oppenheim manage "ejaculated" too? Always used to make me laugh.

[edit]

Aah, I see he did. And others besides....