Jennifer Crusie's Blog: Argh Ink

I read a book where the “hero” pulls the heroine (a grown woman, not a kid) off her horse and spanks her because she took off on the horse and rode recklessly or some such . . . I’ve never read anything by that author again.

The first thing that comes to mind is the N. Sparks novel, The Choice, where the TSTL heroine accuses the hero’s dog of raping her precious little virginal dog. Well, I exaggerate, but basically the stupid twit didn’t bother to spay her dog (or keep it in the yard), and when Fluffy turns up preggers, she blames the hero’s dog. (The hero’s dog is neutered, BTW, and incapable of teh sex.) Idiot heroine spends a lot of time opining her dog’s lost innocence; describes her dog as being “soiled.” Book meet wall. Thud.

I’m getting awfully tired of the Big Misunderstanding. I suspect it’s because I went through a phase a couple summers ago where I read virtually everything a particular romance novelist had ever written in about 3 weeks (my mom had a lot of her books on the shelf and I was bored). I then noticed that every single one of her plots was either based on a misunderstanding or a lie, or one occurred later in the book to drive the characters apart. Also, they got progressively less believable with her later novels. Another one is heroes that rape the heroine. No exceptions. Oh, and has anyone else encountered obnoxious metaphors in sex scenes? Stuff like “her body wept feminine tears of desire”? I can never decide if I want to laugh or throw the book across the room.

For mysteries, I don’t like the incredibly complex murder plans, especially when there is no evidence to speak of and yet the detective figures it out anyway. This may just be an Agatha Christie overdose on my part.

My deal breakers are:
1. The heroine or hero staying away for the other person’s own good. Unless it is done really well, all that whining can get annoying.

2. When smart women do stupid things. Maybe the author is trying show the character’s vulnerability, but often it makes the character ridiculous.

3. The perfect hero and heroine. Who the heck cares if a beautiful, thin, rich, smart, confident, successful, woman falls in love with a gorgeous, smart, confident, successful, (but edgy), well-endowed guy. I recently read a book like this and it was like the author was scrambling for a plot for these perfect people. Ugh.

If an author abuses children or animals, I will stop reading immediately and go cleanse my soul by re-reading a good, healthy, happy book. And I will never, ever touch another book by that author.

First-person is almost always a deal-breaker for me. Far too many still have the authors voice in the story. It feels forced. I live in first-person, I don’t need to read it. Its only recently that there have been one or two authors who do first person in such a way that it flows. Lavender worried me, thinking “I’m gonna hate it” but then I loved what you posted.

Infodump makes me skip huge parts of a novel.

Also too much focus on the “bad guys” that doesn’t seem to move the plot forward. That is, I skip almost everything that JR Ward writes about the lessers.

I don’t like authors trying too hard to make a voice – they want a gangster character but the speech s/he is given is stilted/over the top.

What works? Good characters, good plots, development and some fun.

Factual errors — geographical, historical or just everyday things — errors of language (though I sometimes have to check whether something that is wrong un British English is standard in American English, like the definition of careen), sexual scenes as mere space-fillers and word-count-increasers.
I also strongly dislike too much action, too much dialogue, and too little authorial description and exposition, and this is where we get into the rather difficult territory covered by Jenny’s rules, namely, the fact that tastes vary. I dislike stories that start by flinging the reader into the middle of a maelstrom of action. If the first couple of pages are full of dramatic things happening to people I haven’t even met yet, I get bored. I want to be led in gently, for example, by means of a prologue. I’m not joking, and I’m not being deliberately contrary. The whole ‘show, don’t tell’ thing seems to me to have given rise to some books that read more like screenplays than novels.

There are things that will stop me starting, like awful prose, but once I have started a book the thing I cannot take is character violation. I will put up with idiot plots without noticing until afterwards, I’ll overlook scientific howlers, I’ll slide right by characters with stupid names, as long as the prose carries me along and I care about the characters. I have noticed that if I am complaining while reading about anything else, it’s a sign that I have already lost interest.

It takes a great deal to make me stop reading a book, and it’s usually that I get bored. Typically, this happens when I try to move out of my fiction realm and start reading either a memoir, biography, or other non-fiction piece.

That being said, I have dropped a series that has been mentioned here before – you know, the one where the girl can’t decide between two guys and keeps having bad luck, getting almost blown up, getting saved by one of the two guys she can’t decide on, etc…. Come on, woman, make a decision! I stopped reading that series about 12 books in, and can’t seem to get excited about any others that are either out or coming. And when I heard that there might be a TV series on it, all I could do was roll my eyes. The grandmother was the best part of that series.

1 Pet hate, when the world the writer is building starts wobbling like a Dr Who c. 1975 set. Anything that yanks me out of the place/time, e.g. language issues (English people don’t say gotten and haven’t said it since Chaucerian times, I’ll run a check through Shakespeare, but it sounds painfully wrong to English ears when it is meant to be some nob speaking), geography, stupid names, history. One of the most egregious errors was someone calling Keats a ‘pantywaist’ for not stepping up and fighting in the Napoleonic Wars when at the time the story was set, he was 5. Or it could have been 10. But not the kind of age he should be out fighting wars.

2 All those flaming bloody noble spies. Spying was a dirty job, no aristocrat would have done it in a million years, it would have been dishonourable sneaking about pretending to be someone else. First of all, joining the navy was the preferred aristo/upper middle class service, second of all, first sons were too busy learning how to run their estates and working out how to make money out of the coal under their land or gambling or maybe doing some political stuff to mess with dirty business like spying. So all these gangs of earls and marquises (of whom there are wayyyyy too many in historical romance, most with really stupidly unbelievable titles) hanging out and being all spy-y…total dealbreaker.

3 Embittered heroes/heroines festering over misdeeds committed by their mothers/fathers/brothers/wives etc in the past. Give me a break, get over it, get over yourself.

4 Goody two shoes heroines whose flaws are oops, they just have to take in that stray dog/child/vampire and maybe do a little weeping because someone spoke sharply to them. And they are all alone in a cruel world until the hero comes and rescues them from their terrible plight because they cannot do their own rescuing o no no.

Basically, it all gets down to characterisation and worldbuilding. Plots matter in so far as they need to be consistent and arise out of the actions and emotions of the characters (e.g. Middlemarch, Dorothea marries Casaubon because she believes he is the right man for her, even when everyone around her is saying NOoooooooooooo, he’s so wroooooooongggggg, don’t do it!!!!”). But really, what matters is Dorothea, generous, stubborn, wilful, longing to do good, massively wounded by her husband’s careless treatment and cold accusatory behaviour. And the world around her, with all the gossips and the petty and major scandals and unfolding of trivial and signficant events is rich and utterly true. Same with Naomi Novik’s Temeraire series.

I hate (!) happily ever after baby-filled epilogues. Or even look-at-us-we’-re-so-happy epilogues. I want to finish a book and wish there was more to read. Usually, an epilogue gives me more than I wanted to read.

I have a book I’m really conflicted over. I like the author. She writes very well and is funny but she tears her heroines down to the ground before she “rebuilds” them. Or “redeems” them. It is not my point of view but I can handle that if I don’t read more than one of hers in a row.

I’m having a hard time articulating the issue here. What really bothers me is her last book where the heroine is seriously sexually threatened by someone almost to the point of assault. I was already a little queasy about this since the bad guy had been harassing the heroine throughout the book but she handled the situations. And then the heroine sacrifices herself for her love interest and the “village” by saying she lied about the attempted assault. I actually had to put the book down and walk away. I was so upset that I almost wrote to the author and asked her why she would write such a thing. Sexual harassment, assault and rape are such a serious matter that to have it used as a plot contrivance really bothered me.

I won’t lend the book to anyone, I won’t donate it to my library and I am tempted to recycle it in the paper bin. And I am mournful because I feel this author really let me down and if I stand by my personal decisions, I cannot buy her books again.

I’m not trying to stand on a soap box and I am not trying to be holier than thou. I may be explaining myself badly but I felt betrayed by the author. The fact that it is still bothering me several months later indicates how conflicted I am. This book is my deal breaker.

Don’t kill off characters that deserve to live.

***SPOILER ALERT***

I loved Jennifer Weiner’s “Good in Bed.” It was harrowing in places and sad but it ended well and the writing is very good. But at the end of “Certain Girls” she kills off Canny’s husband (I’m not sure how to spell Canny because I listened to these books, didn’t actually read them) I was devastated. Hadn’t she already gone through enough? She had to loose the love of her life? I won’t read any more of that Jennifer’s work because I don’t trust her to give me an ending I can stomach. And I loved her writing, but there is only so much pain I can deal with. Not at the end of a story.

That’s why I still read the stories where the woman blows up cars and can’t decide on the man. (Although I hear there is a third man entering the story in her next one.) I know there is no character development. I know she’s going to choose the guy I think she shouldn’t. But I always laugh. I can always enjoy the fact that these two guys are crazy for her. I’m never left feeling as if the floor has dropped.

I get enough crap in my own life. Don’t give me it in a book I’m reading for pleasure. I guess it’s good we all have different taste in books, isn’t it!

Angst… I really, really don’t like much angst. I want to jump into the book, start kicking ass, get the h/h off their collective butts and moving forward (or at least doing something). A person can only beat themselves up for just so long before it gets really boring.

Characters I can’t like or can’t relate to at all – definite deal breaker.

Vampires – I mean really people, who in their right mind would find the undead who slaughter people and drink their blood sexy? (With the possible exceptions of Spike and Angel.) Also, the never get old while the other person ages then dies…

Animal abuse – No killing animals, period. That’s why I hate Dances with Wolves, althought it’s one of the very best westerns made and quite true to the times – dead beloved horse, dead friendly wolf – not my cuppa.

Incorrectly described (real) physical locations – Also a deal breaker.