blogs_blog_28

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

 

When I pick up a book, I'll admit that I'm more tempted by a good quality hardback cover with a clean design than I really should be. However, when making decisions, I make my choices based on good reviews, the author or by shutting my eyes, swinging my arm and seeing what I end up pointing at.

My first and greatest dislike would be stories that strictly follow a genre. Is real life composed of genres? No - so why must stories? Fantasy, horror, drama, mystery, romance - nothing beats a story that mixes it all up into a big multi-genre soup. I also prefer stories that focus on the one protagonist throughout - it makes the story more personal and allows you to discover the events, mysteries and revelations exactly as the protagonist does.

Originality is a tricky issue. Whilst nothing beats a very unique story that is unlike anything ever written, the portrayal and depth of the story is far superior. For example, the Lord of the Rings is a very famous story that has been completely squeezed dry, but if it were to be rewritten using a less wordy style with extra attention taken to the characters, it would be worth reading again on its own.

 

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

 

1) I mainly look for interesting characters, detailed backstories, and mysteries, particularly ones that make you want to keep reading to figure out what's going to happen next. I also look for twist endings, but that is optional.

 

2) My favorite genres probably are science-fantasy, adventure, mystery, and comedy.

 

In terms of writing styles, well, my favorite kind of style is the kind that, while it isn't an idealistic setting and the characters aren't perfect, they usually do solve their conflicts (though not in a Deus Ex Machine way, because that's boring). I also like to make sure I can make it clear who the protagonist is and who the antagonist is.

 

3) I don't particularly like cynical stories unless they have a good ending. That is the reason I don't like the horror genre much because they rarely have a happy ending where the monster/serial killer/whatever gets killed or stopped for good.

 

I also don't like it when you can't tell who we're supposed to be rooting for unless it is supposed to be teaching some sort of lesson, like a parable. Why don't I like that? Because then I am not sure if I should be happy when Character A gets that job he has been wanting since chapter one or if I should root for Character B attempting to get Character A fired for some reason. It can get confusing quickly if you don't know what you are doing IMO.

 

4) Well, I don't want to read a bland, generic "kill the baddie and save the day" story with no depth or orignality whatsoever. I prefer it when people put some effort into their stories, make the characters stand out, make you care about the characters and their conflicts (whether inner or outer), and also when the setting or plot seems like it was well-thoughtout before being written.

 

Really, as long as the characters are interesting, believable people who we can actually care about, the plot or setting detailed with lot's of depth, I don't really care about the originality of the story, because if you can achieve those things then I do think you have succeeded in making your story original (unless you plagarized whatever it is you're writing, but most good writers don't do that).

 

-TNTOS-

1) It depends on my mood; when I look for a book, it's normally for something specific...but usually when I'm hanging around the bookstore looking for nothing in particular, I pick up the book that has a cover that catches my eye; maybe a loverly picture on the front, maybe a unique title, maybe an author I recognize. It has to pop out, look different than everything else. I'll look at it, look at the back to see what it's about (or the inside, if applicable. It bugs me soo much when there's no synopsis at all.) If the story sounds similar to one I've enjoyed (but not too similar), or the concept is new and exciting to me, I'll curl up and read the first few pages to see if it's a worthwhile read.

 

2) Fantasy, hands-down. But you know Raia, she eats up that imaginative nonsense.^.^ I'll read realistic fiction too, but in either genre, I don't like to go for the cliche stuff. Genuinely new material (at least, different that what I personally have read, not necessarily new to the genre), or a new twist on the old, gets my attention. I enjoy books that invoke a mental picture of what's going on, but not too much-- I've been hesitant to go back to reading LotR, for example, because it simply is difficult to read with all that detailed description going on.

 

3) Hm...that's hard to say, I can generally tell whether I'll like a book pretty quickly and either devour it or cast it aside accordingly, so I don't usually read a book that doesn't have a style I like. I lose interest quickly in stories that are too repetitive, or where there isn't really any action. The book either needs to have a deep meaning, or an entertaining plot/characters, or I'll get bored and move on. Like this one book I got recently, it was called Books: A Memoir, and it seemed interesting at first...it talked about the author's childhood growing up on a ranch cut off from civilization, but after the first chapter, it was only about how the guy sold books. No funny stories or new characters or anything. Booooring.

 

4) Heh, I already brought this up, ohhh irony. But anyway, as long as the world (assuming it's made up. if the story takes place in a real setting, then well...you can't really 'make up' New York, for example, unless it's alter-New York 8D) and characters are meaningful and have strong, defining traits that are unique to them, it's okay if the book reminds me of something that's been done before. I love new, original stories, but sometimes a new way of telling an old story is just as great. I think there's a quote about that, something like "There are no new stories, only new ways to tell them"...or something like that.

 

Hm...am I contradicting myself? It sure sounds like it.xDD Oh well. Hopefully I haven't confused you too badly. If I need to go back and try to explain something, poke me on IM.=P

 

-Raia-

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

 

+In terms of design of a book, mostly when the cover looks great, I'll give the summary on the back a read (this goes for the library, or the bookstore, but still), for example I once saw a book with the cover illustrated by somebody on DA, so I definately checked it out. More important though, as far as epics here go, the title should tell me something about the story. When I first saw GitS, I wasn't paying much attention to what it was. I knew the writing itself would be good since I knew you wrote it, but the title, or subtitle should tell me a little about what'll be in it for me. Then again, if the title is extremely mysterious, or a paradox, or something like that it might capture my attenion as well.

Once the piece of writing has my attention I look for something that draws me in. And since I gave you a piece of my writing work, which just reflects what I myself like in a story, is some mystery, plus some action. Just in general. That doesn't mean I won't read romance even if it is good.

 

+Like I mentioned above, action with a bit of mystery. Or mystery with a bit of action. Romance, if done tastefully is good too.

 

+Descriptions that are too long. I love the book, but here, I must mention LotR. It is an amazing story with great images. But unfortunately, interest decreases once JRR looses himself in overly long description. Espescially when it comes to objects that do not play much of a role in the book itself, but have a history of three generations and at the end of the page I know the pipe Frodo has was handed down through various ways in those 3 generations (Not that that is actually in the book, but as an exaggerated example). So, too long descriptions will be boring.

Another thing that I do not like is the description of emotions. Not in general, but the specific kind where there is a giant metaphor constructed to make it absolutely clear how and in which way a character feels at that moment.

Sometimes a metaphor is needed, just don't overdo it.

 

+It's 50/50 here. Like with movies. A bit of bad acting can be balanced out or outweighed by a brilliant plot. A bad plot can be made into a great movie by good acting. If your story follows an old good vs. bad struggle storyline, no problem, it's a great concept and every story works that way. If your charies are well-written and the world they are in sounds credible (in the context) then that's good too.

I can mention Eragon here. All the elements used in there (the book, not the movie. The movie is the worst fantsy movie I saw so far) are used many times in other books, but he gave them all an original twist. For example that a family member is a long-lost relative who turns out as the main antagonist is not new, but the way Paolini wrote it made it interesting.

You pulled that of nicely in GitS btw. I mean there were many stories with cities and airships and rogue Toa, but you made them in a way that they felt absolutely new.

 

I hope this...probably a little incoherent reply helps ^^ Don't see as criticism towards you and your work, but in general, for everybody.

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

Something gripping and cool. Some well-thought out plot.

 

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

I like fiction/fantasy. I mean, I like BONICLE, so. =P

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

Well, if I had to pick something, it'd be a play. Those are definitely my least favorite.

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

Not too bad. Unless it exactly copies something else...

 

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

If it's by an author I like, or has been recommended to me, I'll at least try it, most of the time.

 

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

Fantasy, mostly, but science-fiction and mystery are good, too.

 

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

The cliched, overdone idea of someone from earth entering into a different world. I'm REALLY sick of those stories. ><

 

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

Both, about equally... but it depends. I highly enjoy the depth of the world of Lord of the Rings, but the hooking, cliffhanger plot of Angels and Demons is what made me fall in love with the book.

 

-Nuju Metru

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

 

Books that are interesting in concept, or are recommended to me. Preferably something in accordance to the genres I like.

 

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

 

Fantasy, Science Fiction, Science Fantasy.

 

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

 

Easy: "The big, bad, evil vampires were going to kill us... but Edward is soooooo handsome."

 

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

 

Not incredibly picky. I realize how Eragon has totally ripped of of many different things, but I still enjoy the series. Originality is good, but if the story sucks, that won't really matter.

 

 

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention? I'm not quite sure. It has to be something I've never seen before, or a spin on something old.

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles? Reverse-Whodunnit and Mystery. (Think Death Note, Code Geass, ETC.)

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles? Shallow characters, shallow plots, and characters acting against their established nature.

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness? Very picky. Very very very picky.

Also, I wouldn't choose between the two. I expect the author have done their utmost on both counts.

 

1) When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

2) What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

3) What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

4) How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

1) Generally I look for books that will make me think that will literally put me into reading from start to finish. And what attracts my attention to it in the first place tends to depend on certain type of variables in the situation as with some books, its title or summary on the back of the book that attracts me to it in the first place. While for others, it could be possibly because a friend of mines told me the book was good, so I check it out for myself to be sure.

2) Out of all the genres out there nowadays, my favorites got to be Science Fiction and Science Fantasy. And for the most part, I am fine with reading most writing styles, expect for first person really.

 

However when I am writing, I tend to used a third person narrative for my stories as I find that type of narrator to be the best for describing a story's surroundings without trouble and it makes it easier to develop character growths for other characters, beside the protagonist. It is also common for the narrators of my story to have a generally negative view on the characters of the stories, its talking about, considering they don't expect much to come out of the characters' conflicts in the end.

 

For example in a certain Non-Bionicle story (I been working on), the main character of story does not at all start out to be a likely character, so the narrator will act accordingly to its distaste in the character's beliefs and life style by making certain comments during descriptions or scenes in which the character's poor traits are shown. Gradually though, more is reveal about this main character's past and how what happened then seemly made him into the man, he is today. So, the character grows on people a little over the course of story.

 

Of course, later on in the story, the main character is killed by his younger brother, who did it to get on the good side of a local gang in the story in order for them to accept him into the gang (Notable to mention he didn't even know that his brother was even in the room with him, since he was hallucinating at the time and had thought that being, who had enter his house, was physical form of Death, when it was his brother.). His brother would then become the new main character and story would go into whole new direction than it was previously due to his brother's guilt from murder pushing to try to right his 'wrong' in a way. But I think I am getting off topic here, so I'll stop.

3) I personally don't like First Person Narrative stories, beside that I can't think of much else to say here at the moment.

4) I am not really picky about such things. As long as the story portrays its world, characters, and settings in an interesting way with a good plot to back it up, I am going to like it.

 

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

 

1.A snappy title! Seriously, the cover of the book usually has to have an interesting cover that gives a little bit of insight into the story, but not too much.

2.Fantasy, Historical fiction (in times of war), and some sci-fi.

3.Random romance or rushed romance. I.E. One second main characters resent eachother, next second they're all over eachother. It's gross.

4. There needs to be at least a small amount of originality to it. If the main setting and circumstances are overused, there needs to be a different take on things that really makes you see things from a different angle.

 

Hope my answers helped out!

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

I'm mainly looking for a cover jacket that interests me enough that I will be likely to check it out.

• What are your favorite genres or writing styles?

Sci-fi, humor, adventure, and writing that is fresh and witty and doesn't make me want to put the book down or take a break or anything.

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

Plodding diction, forgettable names/characters...perhaps some other stuff which escapes me.

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

I think plot and freshness...and originality. Yes.

Well, I might only be a visual artist, but I'd be glad to add my opinions- (this is gunna be long. My notes about writing have stacked up quite considerably in my head.)

 

01. Well, I honestly don't read a lot. It's usually small mentions or indirect things (like an art contest) or having something thrust onto my lap that gets me to read it. So on to what gets me to keep with a story.

Small nuances and identifiable characters. And I don't mean identifiable as in "I can imagine myself as this character" so much as small quirks that make them recognizable. It could be the way they talk or the way they dress, or some accessory like a weapon or style of weapon they always have, or just something special about their personality, and the way they act overall. And make sure to mention it or refer to it in some way more than once*. The reason I say this is that I'm reading a book where I've memorized the main characters name and that he's part of a group of two males and two females. And because they all have rather vague fuzzy personalities and their appearance isn't mentioned often, I find myself recognizing them more by when the book says "he" or "she" rather than when it says their names. "There's the main character's name" "It's saying he now so it's the other guy" "oh, one of the females is doing something". And also one of the girls has a scar on her face but it's never mentioned more than once so I've forgotten who it was. It never says anything like "her scar looked especially red in the sunset under which they were now riding" which could have handily helped me remember who it was. Also, all of that isn't to say you shouldn't have more complex, subtle personalities, features and secrets as well, just as long as there's something upfront, maybe just a hinting at that character's deeper feelings and secrets.

 

As for nuances, well, let me pull up a quote from one of Nix's books, where the main character has received a letter letting him know he's been drafted into "the Glorious Army of the Architect". "Ah, yes, here we are. Most interesting. If you do not go willingly, then you will be transformed into a shape, generally a small package of brown paper tied up with string, able to pass through the postal system..." It's small things like that which can make a story entertaining and add so much to the world.

 

Also I find myself on the lookout for well developed worlds and places that the characters move through... or don't. Just well developed, well elaborated on locations, which is something I unfortunately don't see nearly enough of. It's why I like Garth Nix's books. He gives a real good sense of place, making it easy to imagine actually being there, instead of feeling overly distanced from everything. And interesting words as well. A wide vocabulary and trying to not use the same word too many times in a row is good too. Also a little metaphor or comparison is never a bad thing.

 

So to summarize it's like the difference between saying "they walked up the rocky dune and looked at the desert" or "they trudged up the flat rocks scattered like lost stepping stones lining the low, wide dune. At the crest they gazed upon the vast plain, the sand seemingly trying to stretch itself over everything it could reach."

 

 

02. Erm, fantasy, I guess... I'm not exactly a connoisseur of this stuff.

 

 

03. Monotonous storylines. I mean, I can take them (and they're pretty widespread anyways, see next answer), but it still drives me up the wall when a story is just "chosen/special hero and small group go out and save the whole world/universe/some people from pure black and white bad guys and return to be celebrated by everyone as the true savior(s)".

 

Also, while this doesn't really fit with any question, a character's knowledge can do a lot too. I find I like stories where I figure out something at the same time the characters do. Sometimes a character has a reason for already knowing something, or their personality makes it so they don't come the proper conclusion right away, or maybe the writer is creating tension by letting the reader know something the characters don't. But say the characters figure something out way before the reader does. "Well, we have some vague hints here so the bad guy's base is obviously right there and is definitely that one person" or some character conveniently knows just how to get here. It's artificial seeming, obviously just moving the plot along and makes the characters seem totally not real. Also irksome is when a character drags behind long after you've realized something, or if they cling to a notion you know is false, leaving you saying "hurry up and get going, you fool!" It's like the writer thinks s/he's keeping it mysterious by trying to make you believe something plainly untrue.

 

 

04. Oh, personally I think it's very much about depth. You could have the most original and interesting plot in the world but if it was pitched in a plain sterile environment I don't think I'd find it very interesting, whereas you could have a same-ol' plot but if it was set in fantastical worlds with quirky interesting characters it could be very enjoyable to read.

I mean really, what it comes down to is concepts. The more original concepts you have, whether it's large grand plots or just small one mention details, the more engaging I find a book or story to be.

 

This is of course all personal opinion.

 

*You've done a rather good job at this with Glitch characters. Their personalities weren't mold shatteringly remarkable, but things like Tachi's yellow visor and buster sword and Komas's grey colour and goggles made it easy to tell who was who, and I memorized their names quite quickly anyway.

Oh thanks guys! This is exactly what I was looking for, and this has helped me a bunch.

 

-- I've been hesitant to go back to reading LotR, for example, because it simply is difficult to read with all that detailed description going on.

 

Descriptions that are too long. I love the book, but here, I must mention LotR. It is an amazing story with great images. But unfortunately, interest decreases once JRR looses himself in overly long description. Espescially when it comes to objects that do not play much of a role in the book itself, but have a history of three generations and at the end of the page I know the pipe Frodo has was handed down through various ways in those 3 generations (Not that that is actually in the book, but as an exaggerated example). So, too long descriptions will be boring.

I very much relate, too much detail on pointless stuff can be terrible. But of course, we have to remember what we're reading. I remember reading a Star Wars book (Labyrinth of Evil, I believe) that was really good, but the style sort of reminded me of J.R.R Tolkien (but not as good). There was too much description for it's own good, and didn't suit the genre--which was a story about Star Wars, which in my opinion is a genre in itself and really needs to focus on the characters, and not get so dragged out with pointless description. But if we have the right mind set and are aware and open-minded that the author intended to write like that, then it isn't as bad--J.R.R Tolkien did drag things out sometimes, but that is what the story needed. He was telling a story about a world with a complicated past and setting, not so much on characters or emotion.

 

Another thing that I do not like is the description of emotions. Not in general, but the specific kind where there is a giant metaphor constructed to make it absolutely clear how and in which way a character feels at that moment.

Sometimes a metaphor is needed, just don't overdo it.

Glad you pointed that out, because I was wondering about that. Sometimes it's better just state that the character is frustrated, rather than drag out a paragraph of his frustration?

 

Not incredibly picky. I realize how Eragon has totally ripped of of many different things, but I still enjoy the series. Originality is good, but if the story sucks, that won't really matter.

I'm over my Eragon phase because of how I noticed how much it reminded me of other stuff a tad too much (Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars...), but it was true, he mixed stuff that was already done, but added his own quirks and depth that made it stand out.

 

Very picky. Very very very picky.

Also, I wouldn't choose between the two. I expect the author have done their utmost on both counts.

Of course. If I caught a writer being good in one area, but looking slopping on the other account, that's not good. But if I sense the writer was attempting to keep things as original as he could concerning whatever story s/he was writing, then it's enjoyable. Sometimes I actually like some things to be a bit unoriginal, because it's just easier to relate to. Personally, I agree completely with what Raia stated above: "There are no new stories, only new ways to tell them".

 

Random romance or rushed romance. I.E. One second main characters resent eachother, next second they're all over eachother. It's gross.

I experienced that The Bourne Identity book. It seems it's just thrown at us to apparently appease the fans and is totally unnecessary; they do that all the time in movies. Blah.

 

Also I find myself on the lookout for well developed worlds and places that the characters move through... or don't. Just well developed, well elaborated on locations, which is something I unfortunately don't see nearly enough of. It's why I like Garth Nix's books. He gives a real good sense of place, making it easy to imagine actually being there, instead of feeling overly distanced from everything.

That's something I've been working on. Not that their just 'in that place' but they are really a part of that world. That it's just as important as the characters or plot. They're not just walking down the street, but they're interacting with it, helping setting a mood and even assisting in the plot--whether it be a original world, or just somewhere in New Orleans.

 

It's artificial seeming, obviously just moving the plot along and makes the characters seem totally not real. Also irksome is when a character drags behind long after you've realized something, or if they cling to a notion you know is false, leaving you saying "hurry up and get going, you fool!" It's like the writer thinks s/he's keeping it mysterious by trying to make you believe something plainly untrue.

I guess that's where you need to clearly state your style. If you, at the very first part of the book state that this is a story where it will be narrated in a sense, rather than us learning alongside the characters, then we know how to react. But if it's kept vague, confusing, or just feeling like Dues Ex Machina, then it's terrible. I have a feeling I've done that in Glitch, and other stories, so I've been working on giving enough information to the reader that they won't be confused, but they will learn the main and important facts usually the same time the characters do. It's pretty hard to pull off, actually, because sometimes you need to narrate a certain thing, but you never want to write just for the convenience of the reader.

 

Oh, personally I think it's very much about depth. You could have the most original and interesting plot in the world but if it was pitched in a plain sterile environment I don't think I'd find it very interesting, whereas you could have a same-ol' plot but if it was set in fantastical worlds with quirky interesting characters it could be very enjoyable to read.

I mean really, what it comes down to is concepts. The more original concepts you have, whether it's large grand plots or just small one mention details, the more engaging I find a book or story to be.

It's hard to explain but bringing the story to life is much more important (IMO). I've read many stories where the plot was great, but I didn't get that connection to the world or characters around me, so it wasn't interesting. It honestly didn’t give me a reason to care about what was going on. But with stories where it had the usual plot, but outstanding characters or depth to the world, I was immediately dragged into that said place. Once again, it's really hard to find the right balance--it all matters on what you're writing, the style, what you're trying to express and so much more, I think. I think one of the best ways to say it is it's a lot like colouring--you start with base colours right? It's all the basic colours, nothing is standing out just yet, like a possible unoriginal story. Everybody has to start out with those base colours to progress. Now, when you actually start adding the shading, the details, and other important quirks in that said drawing, that's when it comes to life. You stamp your unique style on there; it stands out, regardless of how it was started. Not saying you have to start writing unoriginality, but almost all stories, if you strip away the depth, quirks and details, has a base plot like every other story. Same can go with characters and other things, too.

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention?

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

 

• Basically, an interesting plot. I'll read the synopsis on the back and sometimes the opening lines to get a feel as to what's going on.
• I've been experimenting with pretty much everything: action, adventure, fantasy, mystery, thriller, horror, etc. The only thing I really stray away from is anything chick flick-y.
• WAY overdone detail. I'll be the first to tell how important details are, but when you spend like five pages describing a tree, you've gone overboard.
• Both, actually. Stuff like plot is integral to keep my interest, but without character development and such, I can't feel for anything in the book and quickly forget about it.

I like a lot of books, so it's hard for me to pin down what I like about a good book or book series. The cast of characters has to be interesting, though, which is usually what decides whether or not I follow an epic or not on the rare occasion that I start reading one just on a whim.

 

I can tell you I definitely don't like a book if it has a message that is totally at odds with my view of reality. This is not necessarily on a religious or scientific note so much as a philosophical one-- certain books have been able to drive me into deep depression, moreso if they seem true but depict a reality I don't want to be a part of. The strongest example of a book of this sort in my recent memory is Of Mice and Men. Terrible, terrible book-- have you noticed that an author touted as a "realist" usually writes depressing books with little to no universal optimism? Gives me a strong loathing for whoever spawned that sick term.

 

This is not to say that a book should not be sad, just that it must have a message that's optimistic in some way. You can't justify a person's death by saying their life wasn't worth living-- to imply that there are good people who would be better off dead is a terrible thing. But people can die in the ways they normally do-- as a consequence for a mistake or crime, as the death of an innocent at the hands of the guilty, or as a random blow of fate-- rather than because we live in a world where life is worse than death for any person.

 

Originality in a story is usually beneficial, and it's something I suffer with in my writing. But it is not shameful to adopt an archetype for certain characters-- it is part of a long-standing tradition among writers. Just don't reduce the heroes and villains to predictable, easily-defined stock characters-- that's really the only way I can think of that the characters can bring suffering to the story. Defining a real person is hard, and defining a good character is never quite as hard-- but it's a dreadful fault if any character should be easy to define completely.

• When you pick up a book, what are you mainly looking for? What gains your attention? Usually it’s the cover at first, but a make a point of reading a synopsis before actually checking it out. (Or buying it.) Lately, I find that I look for specific books instead of browsing. I think that this is mainly because I have less reading time.

• What are you favorite genres or writing styles?

-When I was younger, I was obsessed with fantasy and Sci-fi. Now, not so much. I still like to read them both, but I find now that I stick to what I know instead of picking up whatever looks interesting. I have also lost my voracious appetite for High Fantasy, mostly because a lot of it seems the same now. (I still am a sucker for shape-shifters, however.)

-I like psychological horror, like Coraline. Anyone can chop of limbs and make me want to vomit, but only a good writer can truly scare me.

-I like books that make me uncomfortable and cause me to think. 1984 and The Grapes of Wrath still had interesting and genuine characters, but they manage to make powerful statements without forcing them in your face. (This was one problem I had with The Jungle, though I like it in general.)

• What types of things don’t you like in certain writings or styles?

-“The Nikila effect.” My reading life has not been active lately, sadly, but I see this all too much on these forums. The main character’s love interest (usually female) is killed off so the main character can have an angst fest and blame himself and all that jazz.

-Characters that are obviously stand ins for the writer or reader. *coughbellaswananderagoncough*

-Characters that are obviously the writer’s idea of a perfect romantic interest. *coughedwardcullencough*

-Ridiculously straight lines between good and evil. (I can ignore this in Bionicle, most of the time…)

-Really predictable plots bug me, because they have no reason for me to read any further.

• How picky are you concerning the originality of a certain story? Is it more about the portrayal and depth of the world/characters/setting that makes it interesting, or the overall plot and freshness?

-I am currently reading Watership Down, which might be a questing heroes sort of epic except the main characters are all rabbits. That’s right, rabbits. While this might seem like a gimmick, it was carried off in a way that made it seem fresh and original.

-Generally, I believe that individual quirks in characters are far more important that plot and setting, though changes in those are nice too.