Is it Really That Bad?

brainstorm77 · Jan 27, 2009

Throughout the site I've notice many authors being panned as hacks and terrible writers. Are they really that bad or is it just another style of writing and their individual voice? Examples I'm talking about are Danielle Steele, Stephanie Meyer, Stephen King and anymore you may think to add to the list.
Point being just because you or I may not like their books, does that make them bad writers? Or are we just too critical?

Elwolf · Jan 27, 2009

You're right. Just because they have a different style of writing, that does not make them a bad writer!

Oops, got to go! And I had a good answer all prepared! Darn!!!

scarletpeaches · Jan 27, 2009

I think there are two separate questions here.

Are they successful? Oh hell yeah.

Are they good writers? Well...they break all the rules (although of the three you've mentioned I have more time for Stephen King's novels).

Depends on what you're looking for in a read. Bad English pulls me out of the story. I've noticed for instance, with Steele, a tendency to tell, tell, tell, rather than show. You turn to the next chapter and she tells you the same thing again. This irritates the hell out of me, but then - I'm a writer. I notice these things.

She's a writer, so you'd think she would notice this too, but...oh well.

It's often said that story trumps all. And yes, it does. But...I've also noticed some authors (lookin' at you, BTB) have a mega-successful novel initially, then build the rest of their career on it. Some readers buy the name, not the novel, so the author is guaranteed to sell their shopping list if they publish it.

Mystery to me. There's no accounting for taste, I guess.

brainstorm77 · Jan 27, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
I think there are two separate questions here.

Are they successful? Oh hell yeah.

Are they good writers? Well...they break all the rules (although of the three you've mentioned I have more time for Stephen King's novels).

Depends on what you're looking for in a read. Bad English pulls me out of the story. I've noticed for instance, with Steele, a tendency to tell, tell, tell, rather than show. You turn to the next chapter and she tells you the same thing again. This irritates the hell out of me, but then - I'm a writer. I notice these things.

She's a writer, so you'd think she would notice this too, but...oh well.

It's often said that story trumps all. And yes, it does. But...I've also noticed some authors (lookin' at you, BTB) have a mega-successful novel initially, then build the rest of their career on it. Some readers buy the name, not the novel, so the author is guaranteed to sell their shopping list if they publish it.

Mystery to me. There's no accounting for taste, I guess.

I'm guilty of liking Danielle Steele .... There I admit it!!! Hahahaha! Some of her novels I've liked better than others, the same with Stephen King. Many people at my work place are into the Twilight Series and at some point I will also take a look at it to see what all that hype is about

Sometime I think we strive for perfection, yet there is no such thing in life. Another thing brought up in a thread was typos in published works by major publishers... Crap happens right?

Saying all this I was rather taken aback at the spelling mistakes in one paranormal romance I recently read by a very well known author. But I still enjoyed the book

Mythical Tiger · Jan 27, 2009

I guess it depends on the person.

firedrake · Jan 27, 2009

I've got no problem with Stephen King or Stephanie Meyer, their writing isn't bad, but there are writers out there who have done very well, commercially, whose style just flagrantly flouts everything I was ever taught about good writing, as Scarletpeaches pointed out, the whole "show don't tell" approach. Jeffrey Archer was another one, he told a great story but his style just made me cringe.

Deb Kinnard · Jan 27, 2009

Two separate questions, IMO. Can a mediocre writer tell a good story? Obviously, yes. Can a good story trump style, mechanics, etc.? Obviously yes. Do some multi-published writers never get better at the latter? I think yes, though I tend not to read authors whose books are splashed all over the bookshop's "You've Got to Read This!" displays. Usually I've found the hype is more than the novel merits. But they continue to write as they're used to doing, and they continue to sell. My hunch is, it's basically a good story, and that's why they sell.

Why haven't mine? I don't know <G>.

Claudia Gray · Jan 27, 2009

The story matters more than the style. It's best if you have both, but plenty of writers succeed with story rather than style.

NOBODY succeeds with style rather than story.

So the next time you're nitpicking through a best-seller and pointing out everything they did wrong -- stop and ask yourself what they got right.

Kathleen42 · Jan 27, 2009

ClaudiaGray said:
So the next time you're nitpicking through a best-seller and pointing out everything they did wrong -- stop and ask yourself what they got right.

Agreed. I'm not saying model yourself after them, but realize that there is a reason that people are buying the books (and not all people buying them are sheep).

DeleyanLee · Jan 27, 2009

ClaudiaGray said:
The story matters more than the style. It's best if you have both, but plenty of writers succeed with story rather than style.

NOBODY succeeds with style rather than story.

So the next time you're nitpicking through a best-seller and pointing out everything they did wrong -- stop and ask yourself what they got right.

QFT

My honest opinion is that a lot of writers (especially the unpublished) will bash successful writers for "not following the rules" and using barely competent grammar and any number of other slights. Authors get popular because they write stories readers want to read. The level of competence for grammar, etc, is actually fairly minimal and the vast majority of readers don't give a spit about it. (I mean, honestly, these are the people who are pluralizing with 's and they don't even notice or care.)

That kind of success is why I maintain there are no "rules" to writing, at least if you're shooting for commercial success, outside of "Tell a damned good story."

And popular authors do just that.

scarletpeaches · Jan 27, 2009

Then why - and this is a serious question, not a nitpick - why are there so many rules? Why not just forget them all, and concentrate on story? Why this emphasis on 'good' English?

Samantha's_Song · Jan 27, 2009

Stephen King a hack? Oh well, he kept me highly entertained from the mid 1970's until the 1990's. The dead zone, Christine, The stand etc., and I loved the Shawshank story many years before it was ever made into a film.

I bet the ones who call Stephen King a hack won't make one tenth of the money he ever has for their stories

Bubastes · Jan 27, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
Then why - and this is a serious question, not a nitpick - why are there so many rules? Why not just forget them all, and concentrate on story? Why this emphasis on 'good' English?

JMO, but I think there's a point where bad English gets in the way of telling the story. Following the rules of good English tips the scales in your favor re: getting the story across to the reader, but if the story itself is compelling enough, less-than-perfect English is less likely to interfere with it. Does that make any sense?

DeleyanLee · Jan 27, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
Then why - and this is a serious question, not a nitpick - why are there so many rules? Why not just forget them all, and concentrate on story? Why this emphasis on 'good' English?

General observations:

1) It's something that can easily be taught and learning them isn't a hindrance to good story.

2) Trying to talk about story is difficult because it deals with abstract concepts and no two people see it or the process to put it into words exactly the same.

3) Dealing with story and base ideas can easily get very un-PC/judgmental because not all ideas deserve to be written and no one wants to hear that.

4) Not all writers have enough talent(s) to craft a story well. Techniques will cover for that basic lack.

veinglory · Jan 27, 2009

If someone doesn't like a writer's work, what they hey. Not everyone has to like everything. And it is in the nature of an site for authors to consider shortfalls to avoid at least as much as models to aspire to.

As for perfection, we look to the stars but keep our feet on the ground.

My question is: why not criticise and debate? If it develops out awareness of fiction, styles, tastes and errors to avoid--why is it a problem? Just liking what we like and accepting everything else as a matter of taste is all very well, but does it help one develop as a writer? (It also makes for very short discussion threads.)

scarletpeaches · Jan 27, 2009

Exactly, veinglory. One has to expect strong opinions on a writers' site. It's the nature of the beast.

I don't know why some authors are as successful as they are and perhaps I'll never find an answer to my questions, but...really, their success doesn't diminish my chances any. I'm just curious.

Claudia Gray · Jan 27, 2009

Bubastes said:
JMO, but I think there's a point where bad English gets in the way of telling the story. Following the rules of good English tips the scales in your favor re: getting the story across to the reader, but if the story itself is compelling enough, less-than-perfect English is less likely to interfere with it. Does that make any sense?

I agree. Also, there's a difference between good grammar (which is important in terms of making yourself understood) and the kinds of rules I see people nitpicking to death sometimes. Is it better if you go for active rather than passive? Yes. Does that mean every single sentence in passive is "bad"? No. Is it better to show rather than tell? Usually, yes. Are there authors who tell so beautifully that they get away with it? Absolutely. Do we hear 1,000 agents clamoring that we absolutely should not start our books with characters awakening from a dream? Yes. Does that mean that no books beginning that way can ever, ever get published? No.

Basically, I think we're better off obeying those rules -- but we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that obeying those rules is not the same as writing well, and sometimes, ignoring those rules is not the same as writing badly.

Claudia Gray · Jan 27, 2009

veinglory said:
My question is: why not criticise and debate? If it develops out awareness of fiction, styles, tastes and errors to avoid--why is it a problem? Just liking what we like and accepting everything else as a matter of taste is all very well, but does it help one develop as a writer? (It also makes for very short discussion threads.)

I think it's good to criticize and debate. But I honestly believe looking for what's done well in a work does more to help us develop as writers than talking about what's done badly. It's easy to define what's bad. It's hard to define what's good. And what every single person on this board wants -- regardless of our individual career goals -- is to create something good.

Bubastes · Jan 27, 2009

ClaudiaGray said:
I think it's good to criticize and debate. But I honestly believe looking for what's done well in a work does more to help us develop as writers than talking about what's done badly. It's easy to define what's bad. It's hard to define what's good. And what every single person on this board wants -- regardless of our individual career goals -- is to create something good.

Bingo. I've said it before: I learn more from the books I don't like. Figuring out why a poorly-written book is popular is very instructive to me. For example, I can't stand Dan Brown's writing style, but I still study why his books are page-turners for so many readers. Something is working in his stories, and my job is to figure out what it is so I can add it to my writer's toolbox.

Deb Kinnard · Jan 27, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
Exactly, veinglory. One has to expect strong opinions on a writers' site. It's the nature of the beast.

This fits quite nicely with the paradigm that doctors make the worst patients. Of COURSE we're nitpicky with other writers--we're striving for better ourselves.

My take.

veinglory · Jan 27, 2009

(Also I rather doubt Stephen King and JKR are crying themselves to sleep at night as a result)

scarletpeaches · Jan 27, 2009

They mop their tears with hunner dolla billz, yo.

brainstorm77 · Jan 27, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
They mop their tears with hunner dolla billz, yo.

Haha, yeah really!

scarletpeaches · Jan 27, 2009

Fo' shizzle.

brainstorm77 · Jan 27, 2009

scarletpeaches said:
Fo' shizzle.

I often wonder do any of the ' Supers' out there lurk on the forums?

Is it Really That Bad?

practical experience, FTW

Rabbit! Hunting Mode.

practical experience, FTW

I RUN WITH THE TIGERS

practical experience, FTW

crushing on fictional characters

Writing Anarchist

At least I don't need backing-up

bananaed

Writing Anarchist

volitare nequeo

bananaed

volitare nequeo

practical experience, FTW

practical experience, FTW