The author... or his work

[Thekherham]

I was just reading the thread about the worst book you ever read, and I thought I'd ask this question: If you read a really bad book by a certain author, do you not read whatever other books the author wrote ("If this book is so bad, I'm sure his other work must be pretty crappy, too."), or do you try other works by the same author. ("This book was really bad, but maybe one of his other books will be better.") In other words do you think authors are consistently good, or consistently bad (for the most part)?

[Perks]

Good question. In my case with 'Where or When' by Anita Shreve, I waited for a while for the bad taste to fade and then tried another of her books. I know that she's very successful and well-received, but I was right the first time. I find her writing manipulative and irritating.

But that's why they make all flavors...

[Richard]

Nope. I've read shockingly bad books from authors I liked, and had nice surprises from ones I thought were truly dire.

[veinglory]

I would rather try a new author than give a second chance to someone who wrote a previous book that was a total waste of my time and money. Typically I find authors books either hold steady or get worse, very rarely better.

[PattiTheWicked]

I've found that when I encounter an author I like, I'll read pretty much everything they've done. When I run across a book that I hate, I don't bother getting another one by the same author. I've occasionally found books I didn't like by authors I normally like, but for the most part, all I ask for is consistency.

[azbikergirl]

Typically I find authors books either hold steady or get worse, very rarely better.
In my experience, many writers get better with experience. If I read an earlier work and find it disappointing, maybe I'll peek at a more recent book to see if he/she has improved.

[veinglory]

I am mainly reading mainstream publishers and by the time and author gets to that level they have generally hit their stride. But if I heard a writer had improved I might try them again. I can't think of a case where I found a bad writer (versus good but not great) had become worth reading with later efforts--but given my habits I guess I wouldn't.

[SRHowen]

I used to read Patricia Cornwell--all of her books, loved them. Then she switched to a very annoying third person present tense, in a book in the series I was reading. I really tried to wade through the book, but couldn't, it was that bad.

When the next book came out, I got it at the library rather than buy it and when I discovered she was using the same POV--I didn't even read past the first pages. Another book in the series has come out--I picked it up at the book store, read page one --same POV, passed it by.

Next book out, I doubt I will even bother to check and see if it is in that POV, I have skipped three books now in the series---

Why she switched POV's and of all things decided to do present tense--I don't know, but I hate it.

Shawn

[brinkett]

In my experience, many writers get better with experience. If I read an earlier work and find it disappointing, maybe I'll peek at a more recent book to see if he/she has improved.
I've had the opposite experience. I find that later books are generally worse than earlier ones, though there are exceptions.

[GPatten]

The only thing I have to compare a previously good author in the beginning, who began to write chit is Tom Clancy. Once he acquired a ghost, writer partner his works have disappointed me. His novels jumped all over the place where I had to book mark everything so I could refer back. As I am a man, and as I once was in the Navy, I liked his stories.

I read many other authors, but not lately.

[Jamesaritchie]

The only thing I have to compare a previously good author in the beginning, who began to write chit is Tom Clancy. Once he acquired a ghost, writer partner his works have disappointed me. His novels jumped all over the place where I had to book mark everything so I could refer back. As I am a man, and as I once was in the Navy, I liked his stories.

I read many other authors, but not lately.

Clancy has had a writing partner since Red Storm Rising, and I think most of his best books were written that way. As I understand it, Clany writes all his own novels. It's only the sideline novels, the ones that say "Tom Clancy's" on them, that are written by other writers. They aren't really ghostwritten, they're sideline books where many different writers have a chance to get into the act. This is pretty common in publishing.

But Clancy's own novels are his, even though not all are of equal value. But I thought "Red October," "Red Storm Rising," Patriot Games," "Clear and Present Danger," "Without Remorse," "The Bear and the Dragon," and "Red Rabbit" were extremely good novels.

It's all those sideline novels that Clancy and his publisher have authorized that drive me batty.

[Jamesaritchie]

I used to read Patricia Cornwell--all of her books, loved them. Then she switched to a very annoying third person present tense, in a book in the series I was reading. I really tried to wade through the book, but couldn't, it was that bad.

When the next book came out, I got it at the library rather than buy it and when I discovered she was using the same POV--I didn't even read past the first pages. Another book in the series has come out--I picked it up at the book store, read page one --same POV, passed it by.

Next book out, I doubt I will even bother to check and see if it is in that POV, I have skipped three books now in the series---

Why she switched POV's and of all things decided to do present tense--I don't know, but I hate it.

Shawn

I had the same experience with Cornwell. I haven't been able to read any of her books since that switch.

[Jamesaritchie]

I was just reading the thread about the worst book you ever read, and I thought I'd ask this question: If you read a really bad book by a certain author, do you not read whatever other books the author wrote ("If this book is so bad, I'm sure his other work must be pretty crappy, too."), or do you try other works by the same author. ("This book was really bad, but maybe one of his other books will be better.") In other words do you think authors are consistently good, or consistently bad (for the most part)?

Most often, if I hate the writing, then, no, I don't give that writer another chance. If I like teh writing but hate the story, then I do try that writer again.

[scfirenice]

I've done it both ways. Take Dan Brown, I loved A&D and TDC but hated digital fortress. Loved The Red Tent, didn't like anything else she ever wrote. If Brown came out with a new book? I'd get it.

[Garpy]

I read the first half of Da Vinci...and I'll probably never, ever read any Dan Brown again :-)

[MystiAnne]

Depends on why I didn't like it. If there were skill issues, I'm unlikely to go back unless someone recommends a particular book to me. If the writing is strong but just not my style, I will go back, as my tastes change over time and writers do too. Someone who has seen print with serious skill deficiencies is unlikely to get better, in my experience...

I go mostly on recommendations aobut an author or book from trusted fellow readers, as my To Read list is very long. As soon as I finish this current writing task I am taking a few weeks off to read the new Don Quixote translation as a reward :)

[aadams73]

I had the same experience with Cornwell. I haven't been able to read any of her books since that switch.

Makes three of us, and it's a crying shame.

[Vomaxx]

"A precondition for reading good books is not reading bad ones. For life is short." (Schopenhauer)

An author gets one shot with me.

[Summonere]

Whether or not I abandon an author depends on when, in reading his work, I encounter a bad book. I read a lot of Italo Calvino's work and loved all of it until I ran across Difficult Loves, which was a collection of fragments as opposed to real stories. Still haven't finished that one. Oh but I liked his stuff so much I kept reading his other books, then I encountered The Castle Of Crossed Destinies, the idea of which I liked immensely. Except the book, well ... haven't finished that one, either. Turns out it's boring. I've since bought two more of his books and look forward to reading them soon. When that's done, it seems I'll have read all of his stuff, and the majority of it is good enough to erase the two that didn't quite work for me.

Don DeLillo's The Body Artist, a quiet little exercise in literary stuttering, so repelled me that I haven't tried White Noise or Libra, though I have copies of both.

David Foster Wallace's Oblivion interested me briefly when someone told me that his writing was a lot like Thomas Pynchon's. Then I read a couple of stories in the collection and thought, egad, have the bestowers of literary merit all gone mad? I was so turned off by the little stories that I've not ventured into Infinite Jest, the first of his titles, and a very big one at that, that I thought I'd read. Turns out I've lost all interest in that one, too.

Then there are authors whose work I like a lot but who get dumped, for a time, because I get tired of their particular formula (when they have one) or approach (when they don't seem to have one -- a formula, that is). Raymond Chandler and Philip K Dick come to mind. I read a dozen of Dick's books, then quit because I started noticing variations of the same sorts of characters appearing in different sorts of plots. The effect was somewhat like seing your favorite actors in back-to-back-to-back movies, and though their costumes, circumstances, and indeed characters, changed from movie to movie, well, the same people were still behind it all. [If someone knows what I'm talking about, maybe they can explain it to me. That's the explanation I'm stuck with for now.] Raymond Chandler, on the other hand, started boring me for a different kind of sameness in his novels, a more structural kind. I still like what these guys wrote, but find it more refreshing to visit their worlds after vacationing in a few others, first.

So it goes.

[BlueTexas]

If I didn't like one, I'll try another by that same author. But I try new authors at the library most of the time, so I'm not out anything.

If I'd have ruled out Kingsolver on The Bean Trees, I'd have missed The Poisonwood Bible, which I loved. Some of my favorite authors had books I didn't care for, like Anne Rice's Cry to Heaven or King's The Tommyknockers. Same with Margaret Atwood. I hated Surfacing, but have enjoyed all of her other books.

My mood won't always match an author's, but that doesn't mean we won't synch up later.

[Saanen]

If it's an author whose books I ordinarily like and they serve up a clinker, I'll still try the next book. If it isn't good, I'll just reread the older books I did like and pretty much ignore new stuff. On the other hand, if it's an author I've never read before and I don't like the book, odds are not good I'll ever read anything else by that author.

[Jamesaritchie]

If I gave writers only one shot to get it right, at least half my most loved writers wouldn't be on my list. If there's a writer out there who gets it right every time, I haven't found him.

[scribbler1382]

I'd like to say I'd give the author another chance, but on reflection I realize that when it's happened in the past, I've dumped them faster than Kerry dumped his medals. I remember one in particular, mostly because the author is actually responsible for what I consider the best short story I've ever read (or am likely to read). David Morrell. I was a huge fan, and when "Double Image" came out, I snapped it up without a thought. The first half of the book didn't disappoint. It was all I expected from Morrell and more. But I got the weird feeling that the book was ending and I was only halfway through. All of a sudden, the plot shifted -- hell, the whole book shifted, and now I was reading some kind of weird romance/relationship book using the characters from the first half of the book. I gave up and I've never bought another Morrell book since. I do still enjoy his short stories when they show up, but I doubt I'll ever buy another one of his books.

[maestrowork]

Usually I try the author's best-selling, most "critically acclaimed" book. And if it sucks, I won't give the author another chance.

[SRHowen]

I had the same experience with Cornwell. I haven't been able to read any of her books since that switch.

Anyone have any idea why the F she did that???? Or why she has stuck to it? It really sucks poopy water.

Shawn

[scarletpeaches]

I give a writer a second chance and sometimes a reluctant third. I know, it seems harsh, but there are so many books out there, so little time and one must write as well as read. Only twenty-four hours in the day and all that. Besides, that's why there are libraries. So you don't have to actually PAY for crap books.

[maestrowork]

To be honest, I am a little put off by this attitude: "I won't buy a new author" or "I'd just take the book out of the library so I don't have to pay for it." I understand the reasoning as a reader/consumer. Still, I think we writers should support new writers, and have a more open mind accepting new works from new authors. Everytime I hear someone say, "I've read your sample chapter, and I want to buy your book," I feel very good, and I try to do the same thing for other writers. Granted, I can't buy all the new books out there, so I do have to choose. But I always give a new writer a chance, if the book interests me.

[KTC]

I take it on a book by book basis. I saw the big broohaha over Grishom, for instance, and thought I should give this guy a look. My wife was raving about his books, reading every one, saying how much I would like them. I tried, and I tried, and I tried. I hated everything he ever did...not because of his writing, mind you, but because of the genre. I just don't like what he writes about. But I kept trying. I kept opening his books and reading the first few pages...and then putting them down. I reluctantly watched the movies when my wife brought them home...hated every one. Then she brought home this small book called, A Painted House. I picked it up, thought, "What could I lose." I loved it! Now, whenever people are talking about this guy I mention that I liked A Painted House and they turn up their noses and say it's the worst book he's ever written, etc. If I didn't give him a new chance with every book, I never would have come across this one that I thought of as a gem. I don't think you can read a book by an author and think that that author has nothing to give you. You have to take it book by book. Otherwise, you could miss a personal gem.

[BlueTexas]

To be honest, I am a little put off by this attitude: "I won't buy a new author" or "I'd just take the book out of the library so I don't have to pay for it." I understand the reasoning as a reader/consumer. Still, I think we writers should support new writers, and have a more open mind accepting new works from new authors. Everytime I hear someone say, "I've read your sample chapter, and I want to buy your book," I feel very good, and I try to do the same thing for other writers. Granted, I can't buy all the new books out there, so I do have to choose. But I always give a new writer a chance, if the book interests me.

I don't think using the library precludes buying books by new authors. It doesn't for me, anyway. If the story sounds like something interesting when I pick it up in the bookstore, I'll buy it.

Most of the books on my TBR shelf are by writers I've never read...more than half, and my shelf is actually three shelves, double stacked.

[Greer]

Don DeLillo's The Body Artist, a quiet little exercise in literary stuttering, so repelled me that I haven't tried White Noise or Libra, though I have copies of both.

David Foster Wallace's Oblivion interested me briefly when someone told me that his writing was a lot like Thomas Pynchon's. Then I read a couple of stories in the collection and thought, egad, have the bestowers of literary merit all gone mad? I was so turned off by the little stories that I've not ventured into Infinite Jest, the first of his titles, and a very big one at that, that I thought I'd read. Turns out I've lost all interest in that one, too.


The Body Artist is completely unrepresentative of DeLillo's work. Most fans of DeLillo revile that book. Try Underworld.

As for the the Pynchon comparison to David Foster Wallace, it is unfortunate. Their styles are related, but they are very different writers (is it fair to anybody to compare them to Pynchon?). Wallace was obviously influenced a great deal by Pynchon but I think the comparison stems from a real lack of vocabulary for this kind of writing. His style, like Pynchon's, is much better suited to the novel form. I really recommend giving Infinite Jest (which, incidentally, is his fourth book -- though one of the previous was a non-fiction book about rap)a try. Like Gravity's Rainbow, it is well worth the time and effort.

Of course, I certainly can understand not wanting to read more books by an author who disappointed you. For me, Bret Easton Ellis is that author. After reading Less Than Zero -- an infantile, amateurishly written book -- I will never read another of his books, no matter how many movies they are turned into.

[Summonere]

Greer:

Yeah, I keep reading that about DeLillo's The Body Artist, but that one still so sticks in my craw that I think, as someone else mentioned earlier in the thread, there's lots more out there to choose from. I also hear good things about Underworld, but I still get hives thinking about The Body Artist, a book I repeatedly dashed against the earth until I finally gave up. Maybe time will warp my perception enough to try him again.

Agree utterly about Pynchon's and DFW's styles, at least as DFW's style may be said to be represented by the short work in Oblivion versus Pynchon's in Slow Learner. Comparing Pynchon's work in Gravity's Rainbow to anyone else's work probably isn't fair, and in lots of ways. For instance, Neil Stephenson's Cryptonomicon was compared to Gravity's Rainbow by at least one critic who didn't know what he was talking about (sorry about that, Neil, and critic), probably because they're both "WWII novels", though GR is clearly the superior undertaking. Unless you despise Pynchon's style. In which case Stephenson's rocks. The larger point, though, is that GR may be Pynchon's greatest work, while Neil Stephenson probably has his own better work ahead of him.

So maybe you've talked me into trying Infinite Jest, after all. Time (many, many months of it) may tell.

[Danger Jane]

Not usually, maybe because I love reading things that are wildly different from one another. Sometimes when people get really attached to associating X kind of character to Y author, they get turned off when the next book's MC is, well, a different kind of person, especially if the two books take place in the same setting, but about someone else. I find the differences refreshing.