Reading a book by a successful H'wood sit-com-scribe, and it's pretty funny etc, but at about a dozen pages in, it leaps out (to me at least) that the writing style is a complete rip-off of PG Wodehouse (Jeeves etc).
Now, it's not one thing, it's like the author has studied a Wodehouse template. 'Retrospect' thing, where he stops mid-scene and muses, 'Looking back, I can see that where I made my mistake was in mentioning the cat to the vicar' - Check. Long-winded simile - Check. Apologizing to the readers who don't need a background-filling-in, while filling in the ones who do - Check. He even uses some near-identical phrases, and even the rhythm is similar.
Isn't this a no-no? I know screenwriters have 'pastiched' Spillane, for instance, but that's different, surely. I mean, sure, all us Wodehouse fans wish he hadn't been so selfish as to shuffle off aged 100, and was still writing books, but sheesh. Or, not-sheesh? Acceptible?
I find it pretty cheeky and annoying, myself.
Now, it's not one thing, it's like the author has studied a Wodehouse template. 'Retrospect' thing, where he stops mid-scene and muses, 'Looking back, I can see that where I made my mistake was in mentioning the cat to the vicar' - Check. Long-winded simile - Check. Apologizing to the readers who don't need a background-filling-in, while filling in the ones who do - Check. He even uses some near-identical phrases, and even the rhythm is similar.
Isn't this a no-no? I know screenwriters have 'pastiched' Spillane, for instance, but that's different, surely. I mean, sure, all us Wodehouse fans wish he hadn't been so selfish as to shuffle off aged 100, and was still writing books, but sheesh. Or, not-sheesh? Acceptible?
I find it pretty cheeky and annoying, myself.