What kills a book for you?

[Ryvyan]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Unicorns.

I wanted to say you have no heart, but unicorns really do rarely have a place in most novels.

Originally Posted by CWatkinsNash

I should point out that the things I contributed to this thread don't often make me stop reading a book. It may kill much of the enjoyment that I hope to get from the book, but I usually finish it anyway. I might find myself skimming a bit more than usual, but I do try to get to the end.

Me too, and I'd bitch under my breath all the way till the end.

Originally Posted by DMB

I hate leaden prose by people whose relationship to language is that of a tone-deaf person to music. One such writer IMO is Dan Brown.

OMG YES. I have friends who love his stuff, and the only reason I read most of them was because I picked them up in the first place (see above).

Originally Posted by ebusinesstutor

I disliked Robin Hobb's Soldier Son series for this reason, but I like some of her other works.

The character is such a peculiar one and so vastly different from Fitz (Farseer trilogy was awesome), it was really difficult to like him. I'm so glad the end of the series seems a permanent end to the story.

Originally Posted by anamardoll

2. Unrealistic female characters. (I would say "unrealistic characters" full-stop, but the female issue seems to have cropped up a LOT more in my reading lately.) Also, "strong" female characters who have no goals in life and just follow the hero around doing his bidding.

This, and the fact that authors would write that other people feel that said character is strong, and then qualify that with strange examples of her "strong" traits.

Originally Posted by twowheels

Maybe it's already been said, but I hate when books have a lot of characters with very similar names -- I'm constantly struggling to remember who is who, possibly because I have a tenancy to skim over long and uncommon names and read them as Mr. Sag-----, so if another Mr. Sag--*--- shows up I'm in trouble.

I like Lisa Lutz's "The Spellman Files" but I had a bit of this problem while reading it. It was a physical book I read, or I'd be incredibly cranky at having to flip back for a check.

[Frida Fantastic]

Originally Posted by Aladyleyna

I don't like books that preach too much, and when it is glaringly obvious that the author is trying to convince me of something.

Actually, this is fine for me, even if I disagree with the politics. As long as I am engaged (crying, laughing, or thinking about some ideas in a way that I've never done so before), I'll keep on reading it. I really enjoyed Joanna Russ's The Female Man, but her politics is more up my alley. Ayn Rand on the other hand, I don't agree with her on anything, but her books are still on my TBR list. I think Rand wrote engaging fiction despite her faults, which is why people continue to read her.

Originally Posted by Aladyleyna

Half-assed research also annoys me. Like when an author barely does any research and bases his or her information on hearsay and 'feeling'. Axis Powers Hetalia, though not a novel, pissed me off because of that.

I haven't read Axis Powers, but I think bad research is okay as long as the author knows it's bad research and is doing stuff for the lulz. It really depends on the tone. Bringing up one of my guilty-but-public pleasures, a mangaka like Kouta Hirano knew that Hellsing was 99% divorced from reality, and it's what makes it so fun.

Originally Posted by Ryvyan

This, and the fact that authors would write that other people feel that said character is strong, and then qualify that with strange examples of her "strong" traits.

THIS. It won't necessarily make a book a wall-banger, but it could make a 4-5 star book into a 3 star book if said character is a central character. I don't care about minor characters, but if what the author is showing/telling about protagonists are not consistent, then it's poor writing. Faux action girls = bad writing. Not all characters have to be strong, but writers should stop deceiving themselves.

Another manga example would be Kaoru Kamiya in Rurouni Kenshin. Nobuhiro Watsuki often stated that she's a strong and skilled swordswoman and is the equivalent of a national champion. But apparently everyone they encountered was just so superhumanly strong that she can only take down 1-2 mooks in 255 manga chapters, and she becomes a damsel in distress. Even the little boy that she trains takes down more mooks than her. So it's a bit of a shame that one of the most popular comic books of all time, with an equal female/male readership, didn't have much in the way of both a strong and sympathetic female character. But I think I should end my fan rant now and channel it towards writing fanfic >_>

[wyndslash]

speaking of hetalia, i've been meaning to watch that for the lulz, anyway. i think it plays on stereotypes?

[speakingtohe]

Cut and paste. The exact same paragraph repeated throughout a book or a series. In some cases, especially non fiction, I feel that the whole idea is to make the book thicker and therefore justify a higher price.

[DMB]

Originally Posted by Aladyleyna

I
Sometimes, I stop reading because it gets too emotionally painful to carry on. I did that for Stephen King's Under the Dome, because what happened to the characters was so painful I couldn't go on.

If the book is well written, I usually come back and finish it. Hardy's Jude the Obscure is a book I think is amazingly good but so pessimistic and nervewracking that it's hard for me to get to the end, even though I've read it before. Orwell's 1984 is another great book that I find terribly painful and difficult to read.

I'm like this with music. I adore Schubert's Winterreise, but get more and more emotional as it progresses and often have to stop it before the end.

I suppose the underlying difficulty is that I read or listen to music to be taken out of myself and these works display unhappy truths that I'd rather avoid.

[Aladyleyna]

I haven't read Axis Powers, but I think bad research is okay as long as the author knows it's bad research and is doing stuff for the lulz. It really depends on the tone. Bringing up one of my guilty-but-public pleasures, a mangaka like Kouta Hirano knew that Hellsing was 99% divorced from reality, and it's what makes it so fun.

If it's for the lulz, I won't mind it so much, especially if it was a satire. But seriously, using World War 2 for the lulz? The thought of it pisses me off. For me, there are just some things you don't joke about, and wars in general are some of them.

speaking of hetalia, i've been meaning to watch that for the lulz, anyway. i think it plays on stereotypes?

Well... it's actually based on personified nations during World War 2, so I guess you could try Hetalia if you're interested in history. But it may rub you off the wrong way though, like it did me. Though I have to admit, the characters were what redeemed the show for me. They actually helped me remember key historical points, after I did my own research, of course. But still, everything else about the show just rubbed me the wrong way. Especially the fandom.

If the book is well written, I usually come back and finish it. Hardy's Jude the Obscure is a book I think is amazingly good but so pessimistic and nervewracking that it's hard for me to get to the end, even though I've read it before.

You're really brave, I can't bring myself to go back to books that I've been unable to finish. I just recently gave Under the Dome to my brother, since he's a huge Stephen King fan, so hopefully he'll make better use of it than I could.

[DrLaurenceBrown]

I'm not a big fan of first person narrative. I can tolerate it when it's done well, but before committing to a purchase I have to flip through and see if it is.

Sometimes one bad/off book in a series can kill the entire series for me.

[benham]

A lot of people seem to feel that way but 1st person narrative never made a difference to me.

[VydorScope]

I much prefer (and hence write..) first person. 3rd person is often, IME, hokey and jumps around ppls emotions to much. Pushes you out of the the story, IME.

[TenaciousBadger]

Just bought a book in a series by an author I like. Now the first books were engaging, some spice but also a good chunk of story. Things started tapering off around ugh... book 7? When the spice started taking front seat and now.... now... I can't believe I'm writing this but it's turned me off. As in completely.

So, too much bedroom gymnastics + 3rd person monologues on how the character feels, and explaining why the character is acting and reacting like this. I mean, isn't the whole point of writing to let the readers figure some stuff out by themselves? It's not quantum physics or phenomenology. I hate it when I am unnecessarily spoonfed easily inferred information and psychology. I hate it even more when it spans 4 pages!!!

I mean, come on! One concise paragraph is enough especially when the explanation repeats itself.

These are two things designed to make me biliously skip pages, muttering to myself and shaking my head.

Ah! And one more: needlessly prolonging suspense, especially in a multi-pov novel when the writer knows which pov the readers are more interested in so he/she leads the readership on by insisting on subplots and characters. Hello! There's a "next page" button on my Kindle. And it's even easier on pbooks.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by DrLaurenceBrown

I'm not a big fan of first person narrative. I can tolerate it when it's done well, but before committing to a purchase I have to flip through and see if it is.

Sometimes one bad/off book in a series can kill the entire series for me.

I'm not super thrilled with first-person either. Though some books pull it off -- I loved Hunger Games.

+! to Diap on the unicorns. I like that Mercedes Lackey's 500 Kingdoms series makes them out to be stupid nuisances that ruin your garden and cause social embarrassment.

[rdfry]

Implausible scenarios and repetition of facts.

[Todd Young]

Too many changes in point of view. I like to follow one character through the entire novel.

[Frida Fantastic]

Originally Posted by Todd Young

Too many changes in point of view. I like to follow one character through the entire novel.

Actually, for me, any number of POVs can be done well, as long as each scene is important and not redundant. I still remember what each character was last doing in George R. R. Martin's Song and Ice and Fire series books. What *I* don't like are switching POVs between characters that are together in many of the same scenes, especially if they have romantic tension. Talk about cheese. Complete unnecessary cheese.

The worst kind? POVs that change during sex scenes. Oh god.

[DMB]

This is an example of a book that needs the different POV of four different characters.

One of the advantages of first-person narrative is that the narrators don't have to tell the truth. Rather like real life. But with the predominance of third-person narrative, we have become accustomed to the omniscient view of the impersonal narrator.

And then you have another type where the narrator is a character in the story, but a relatively minor one, so that the narration switches between first-person and third-person. Think of Sherlock Holmes or The Great Gatsby.