Things in books that annoy you

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by 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.

Not sure what you mean there. There's a difference between a strong character (of either gender) and a Mary Sue.

And hildea wasn't the first to complain that Caesar became too perfect by the end of the Masters of Rome series.

[JSWolf]

I just find that the term Mary Sue is not nice.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I just find that the term Mary Sue is not nice.

What's wrong with it? There's a historical reason for using it. And why defend poor writing?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

What's wrong with it? There's a historical reason for using it. And why defend poor writing?

As you are using Mary Sue, you are calling it poor writing and that's an insult.

[JSWolf]

What rather annoys me is romance that's disguised as a different type of book. There's way too many times searching online to see way too many romance books where they don't belong.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

As you are using Mary Sue, you are calling it poor writing and that's an insult.

I don't think you know what a Mary Sue is. It is poor writing. Did you read the Wikipedia article I linked to?

Mary Sue (a term coined by a female writer) relates back to Star Trek fan fiction.

Mary Sue stories—the adventures of the youngest and smartest ever person to graduate from the academy and ever get a commission at such a tender age. Usually characterized by unprecedented skill in everything from art to zoology, including karate and arm-wrestling. This character can also be found burrowing her way into the good graces/heart/mind of one of the Big Three [Kirk, Spock, and McCoy], if not all three at once. She saves the day by her wit and ability, and, if we are lucky, has the good grace to die at the end, being grieved by the entire ship.

Some people say that Wesley Crusher in The Next Generation was a Mary Sue/Gary Stu by Gene himself (his middle name was Wesley).

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

What rather annoys me is romance that's disguised as a different type of book. There's way too many times searching online to see way too many romance books where they don't belong.

I find quite a few books cross genres. For instance, Lois McMaster Bujold's Komarr and A Civil Campaign: A Comedy of Biology and Manners which I read and enjoyed as SF while my wife read and enjoyed them as romance -- she was the one who pointed out to me the similarity between A Civil Campaign and A Civil Contract and that the dedication for A Civil Campaign was to "Jane, Charlotte, Georgette, and Dorothy" which she thought were Jane Austen, Charlotte Brontë, Georgette Heyer. The Dorothy she wasn't sure of.

If the book is well enough written with characters that I can find believable or, at least, allow me to suspend disbelief while I'm reading, who really cares what genre it is classified into.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by DNSB

I find quite a few books cross genres. For instance, Lois McMaster Bujold's Komarr and A Civil Campaign: A Comedy of Biology and Manners which I read and enjoyed as SF while my wife read and enjoyed them as romance -- she was the one who pointed out to me the similarity between A Civil Campaign and A Civil Contract and that the dedication for A Civil Campaign was to "Jane, Charlotte, Georgette, and Dorothy" which she thought were Jane Austen, Charlotte Brontë, Georgette Heyer. The Dorothy she wasn't sure of.

If the book is well enough written with characters that I can find believable or, at least, allow me to suspend disbelief while I'm reading, who really cares what genre it is classified into.

This is where I rely heavily on covers. I'm okay with some romantic elements in a book, but if the cover shows heaving bosoms and rippling muscles, I'll pass.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by DNSB

I find quite a few books cross genres. For instance, Lois McMaster Bujold's Komarr and A Civil Campaign: A Comedy of Biology and Manners which I read and enjoyed as SF while my wife read and enjoyed them as romance -- she was the one who pointed out to me the similarity between A Civil Campaign and A Civil Contract and that the dedication for A Civil Campaign was to "Jane, Charlotte, Georgette, and Dorothy" which she thought were Jane Austen, Charlotte Brontë, Georgette Heyer. The Dorothy she wasn't sure of.

If the book is well enough written with characters that I can find believable or, at least, allow me to suspend disbelief while I'm reading, who really cares what genre it is classified into.

But there are too many books where the author tried to make it seem like it's not romance, but under the cover is a true romance. The books that have a half-naked man looking at some woman heaving her breasts at him. And you search for fantasy and these sorts of books pop up because the half-naked man is a wizard or some other fanatical elements. No thanks.

I've read books that aren't romance with romantic elements and that's OK. But it's the romance books trying to hide as a different type of book that I really can't stand.

Oh and another thing that annoys me is when I go to the library to look at what new books are at Overdrive and find more than half are romance books. That's more than annoying.

[Witty Username]

Originally Posted by Catlady

This is where I rely heavily on covers. I'm okay with some romantic elements in a book, but if the cover shows heaving bosoms and rippling muscles, I'll pass.

Especially if the picture is only one person...

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Oh and another thing that annoys me is when I go to the library to look at what new books are at Overdrive and find more than half are romance books. That's more than annoying.

For whatever reason, romance is a popular genre though the last list I looked at showed it at #6 for the Big 5 (which may help to explain some of their financial issues ). OTOH, indie publishing is ~2/3 romance. So having more romance books show up at your library is pretty much to be expected. Are you being forced to read a bodice ripper? If not, who really cares?

[issybird]

Originally Posted by DNSB

So having more romance books show up at your library is pretty much to be expected. Are you being forced to read a bodice ripper? If not, who really cares?

I care, because I think libraries spend too much of their resources on their romance customers while not servicing other customers nearly as well.

[Little.Egret]

Originally Posted by DNSB

I find quite a few books cross genres. For instance, Lois McMaster Bujold's Komarr and A Civil Campaign: A Comedy of Biology and Manners which I read and enjoyed as SF while my wife read and enjoyed them as romance -- she was the one who pointed out to me the similarity between A Civil Campaign and A Civil Contract and that the dedication for A Civil Campaign was to "Jane, Charlotte, Georgette, and Dorothy" which she thought were Jane Austen, Charlotte Brontë, Georgette Heyer. The Dorothy she wasn't sure of.

If the book is well enough written with characters that I can find believable or, at least, allow me to suspend disbelief while I'm reading, who really cares what genre it is classified into.

Dorothy Sayers apparently (though Dorothy Dunnett is also plausible).

Download A Reader's Companion to A Civil Campaign from
http://dendarii.com/accc.html

Note that Lois McMaster Bujold's Komarr is also a police procedural and that the author and her friend Patricia C Wrede had a good giggle about achieving a book where the hero is a member of the secret police.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Little.Egret

Dorothy Sayers apparently (though Dorothy Dunnett is also plausible).

Of Lord Peter Wimsey fame? I read a couple of them years back.

Originally Posted by Little.Egret

Download A Reader's Companion to A Civil Campaign from
http://dendarii.com/accc.html

Downloaded. Thanks!

Originally Posted by Little.Egret

Note that Lois McMaster Bujold's Komarr is also a police procedural and that the author and her friend Patricia C Wrede had a good giggle about achieving a book where the hero is a member of the secret police.

Secret police? I can't quite see a Barrayaran Imperial Auditor aka Emperor's Voice as being secret police. It's hard to be secretive when to quote from Diplomatic Immunity: "if an Emperor's Voice so ordered it, they'd shoot themselves." Now if we discussing his earlier career in Imperial Security, I could accept secret police.

[Richwood]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

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).

I did not know that there was such a category here. All I was trying to say was that I find books expressing belief in any, in my view, fantasy character to be annoying unless it is clearly presented as a fantasy book. Trying to present King Arthur as a historic character considering that the first stories of him were written hundreds of years after his supposed death is another example. Good as fantasy but ridiculous as history. The same for Atlantis IMO. ONE Greek writer mentioned Atlantis in a book on philosophy and hundreds have tried to convert it in to a real place. He also dated it so far back in the past that it was prior to writing per my understanding.