Things in books that annoy you

[Penforhire]

Prose that draws attention to itself. I want to be immersed in your story not stumble over your made up words, broken punctuation, or way-impressive-than-me vocabulary.

[Cinisajoy]

Oh yes, to all of yours.

I guess my biggest peeve was authors that miscategorized their books on purpose.
The reason given was Amazon hides the adult books.
I promptly said oh I can find the adult books easily.
When I showed how: these authors all said oh we hadn't thought to use the e word. Needless to say: since they didn't know the word, I didn't figure they knew much about writing that genre either.
Last time I looked, that particular bunch had given up trying to get rich quick.

[GlenBarrington]

I hate it when a character does something out of character. If you are going to have character do something 'out of character' support it so it can make sense to the reader!

I just tried to finish one book last night and simply gave up! The characters simply weren't behaving in a way that was supported by prior text, or by subsequent text, for that matter. It was just dumb!

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by MikeB1972

Unreadable gibberish.

Just taking this opportunity to bring up Finnegans Wake again

Dhalgren by Samuel R. Delany is also unreadable nonsense.

[Apache]

Originally Posted by pwalker8

Happens in the movies as well. In the Bridge over the River Kwai, most of the extras cast as Japanese didn't speak Japanese so they said the phrase "I tie you shoe, you tie my tie. you tie my shoe, I tie you tie" to simulate Japanese. (or at least that's one of the behind the scenes stories. One of these days I need to get my copy and listen to it closely).

And television. I happened to come into a room where people were watching Matlock. Matlock made the comment that he had to drive north to Valdosta, Georgia. It is kind of hard to drive north to Valdosta from Atlanta. Valdosta is 15 miles north of the Florida Line.
Apache

[Catlady]

My preferred genre is mystery/suspense/thrillers. I hate loose ends. I also hate extensive information dumps at the conclusion to tie up all the loose ends--especially when they come from the villain confessing all to the protagonist he or she is about to kill. The author shouldn't need to resort to that hoary device.

I also hate discovering that multiple villainous people, working independently, were involved in plaguing the protagonist. Seriously? All these folks suddenly decide at the same time to make someone's life miserable? It's weak plotting that lets the author create confusion for the reader, but confusion is not suspense.

I hate when surprises fall flat, when I as a reader can see that the author is deliberately engaging in misdirection, or when I can spot a dropped clue eons before the protagonist does.

Most of all, I hate any description or mention of animal abuse or neglect. At this point, I'm beginning to hate having any animals at all in a book, because as soon as the animal is introduced, I begin to feel sick with worry that the author is going to have poor Rover or Fluffy killed off.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Most of all, I hate any description or mention of animal abuse or neglect. At this point, I'm beginning to hate having any animals at all in a book, because as soon as the animal is introduced, I begin to feel sick with worry that the author is going to have poor Rover or Fluffy killed off.

Do you also have issues with humans being abused or neglected? I always find the dichotomy shown by people who have no problems with a fictional human dying horribly to advance a storyline but blanch at the thought of an equally fictional animal being abused a bit strange.

[ZodWallop]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Do you also have issues with humans being abused or neglected? I always find the dichotomy shown by people who have no problems with a fictional human dying horribly to advance a storyline but blanch at the thought of an equally fictional animal being abused a bit strange.

I suspect it's because humans can at least understand what is going on.

[ekbell]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Do you also have issues with humans being abused or neglected? I always find the dichotomy shown by people who have no problems with a fictional human dying horribly to advance a storyline but blanch at the thought of an equally fictional animal being abused a bit strange.

I've seen the results of nasty accidents with animals but not with humans. In my case it's left me a bit squeamish about certain types of injuries regardless of victim (in particular about those caused by strong bases such as lye) but I can see how this could lead to stories with animal abuse hitting harder.

The fact that there is no way for an animal to understand and cultural concepts of animals as helpless beings in the face of humans likely don't help.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Do you also have issues with humans being abused or neglected? I always find the dichotomy shown by people who have no problems with a fictional human dying horribly to advance a storyline but blanch at the thought of an equally fictional animal being abused a bit strange.

Why do you assume I don't?

The problem is that a book will obviously have a variety of human characters, some good, some bad; some victims, some perpetrators, some heroes. And often the reader doesn't know which is which until the end--that seeming good guy killed off in chapter one might turn out in chapter twenty to be a serial killer who deserves his fate.

But when animals appear, too often their main function is to be killed or abused as, say, a "warning" to the protagonist, and that makes me angry because that animal is ALWAYS an innocent victim.

And anyway, why does it matter to you where my greater emotional attachment lies?

[4691mls]

I gave up reading thriller-type mysteries after reading one too many where it seemed like the author was just trying to come up with the most gruesome way possible for a serial killer to kill.
That also brings to mind another thing I don't like - having every other chapter of a book told from the perspective of the demented serial killer. I figured by the time I skipped past all the crime scene descriptions and serial killer thoughts, I was reading only about half a book.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by DNSB

Do you also have issues with humans being abused or neglected? I always find the dichotomy shown by people who have no problems with a fictional human dying horribly to advance a storyline but blanch at the thought of an equally fictional animal being abused a bit strange.

The question is not directed at me, but I feel the same way. I have less problems with adult humans being abused in fiction, because they stand at least some chance of defending themselves, no matter how small, or they have possibly even caused their suffering themselves by their behaviour. Animals are almost always innocent victims (well, except in rare cases, e.g. someone killing a man-eating lion in self-defense). I do have equal problems with small children and elderly or disabled people being abused, people who are unable to defend themselves in any way. And I have problems with extreme violence, e.g. graphic torture scenes, no matter who is being abused.

In real life, I cannot stand violence in any form. I don't even like to watch the news.

[sjfan]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I know one thing that irritates me, is poor formatting.

The book club read Whose Body? by Dorothy L. Sayers and the anti-semitism in the book rather bothered me. There were ways to say things without being so rude.

I mentioned it in the dedicated thread, but the moment magazine article on the topic is worth a read.

Just how did the celebrated detective novelist actually feel about her Jewish characters—and why, in these books, can’t she seem to shut up about them? Why are there so many? Something is going on, something more complicated and personal than casual anti-Semitism and a good deal more interesting.

[barryem]

I dislike mysteries or thrillers that are mostly preparation for a big shootout or fight at the end. Actually I don't read many thrillers anymore except legal thrillers and even then only if they're more legal than thriller.

I'm not particularly bothered by violence in a book but it's not nearly enough to interest me and if it takes too much time I lose interest.

I'm also bothered by stories that require me to intimately understand physical locations and settings. I never really do understand them that well and I get confused. I have a very poor sense of direction. I wish I could figure out where I'm going with this.

Barry

[bgalbrecht]

Originally Posted by Cinisajoy

I could write a book on irritating things but my big irritation in romance is getting back together with an ex. I usually quit reading at that point because to me the author is being lazy and doesn't want to come up with a new character.

It happens, sometimes. My father-in-law and mother-in-law got back together again after being divorced for 25-30 years.