# Say Something Positive About Your Least Favorite Author



## Steerpike (Dec 7, 2012)

We've had plenty of posts over the time I've been here that are directed to criticism of authors we don't like. Generally, these authors tend to range from the moderately successful to the wildly successful. I've criticized Paolini, and I've stuck up for Meyer because, while Twilight wasn't for me, on the whole the writing isn't nearly as bad as people make out. 

I thought it might be nice to pick out something positive about an author, even if you dislike their work a great deal. There are always good points to find. If you don't have a good thing to say about your least favorite author, please don't pollute the thread. There are others devoted to criticism 

I'll start with Paolini, and say two things:

1) he captured the imagination of a great number of people with his story and inspired some of them to pursue writing; and

2) he started, and then finished, four complete novels. I have not written four complete books.


----------



## Reaver (Dec 7, 2012)

Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series has great cover art.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 7, 2012)

Reaver said:


> Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series has great cover art.



Well, there you go 

As you can see from the posts in this thread (or more accurately, the lack thereof), it is easier to get people to pile on an author than to say nice things!


----------



## Mindfire (Dec 7, 2012)

I'll say something about Paolini as well. For all the harassment I give him, I think he really does have some talent in there somewhere and that the Eragon books had potential. (Whether they lived up to it is a different story.) In fact, I even enjoyed reading them once upon a time. I rolled my eyes, I facepalmed, I snickered and sneered, but I read them. Despite the awful prose, bad dialogue, and shameless copycatting, I stuck around for three books because, encrusted in the dross, there was a germ of potential. And my imagination could work with that. In fact, that's what annoys me most about the series. If it had more originality, less pretentiousness, and better editing, it could have earned a spot on my favorites list, and perhaps others as well. 

I'll say this, the books that earned the top spots on my favorites list (LOTR, Narnia, Earthsea), they inspired me to start writing. Eragon inspired me to keep writing, even if it did so by being awful enough to strengthen my resolve to do better.


----------



## saellys (Dec 7, 2012)

E. L. James knows how to market herself.


----------



## Ireth (Dec 7, 2012)

Stephenie Meyer knows how to put a very unique spin on an old literary monster.


----------



## Penpilot (Dec 7, 2012)

S.M Stirling has top notch concepts. His book jacket blurbs are outstanding. Every time I read one, it makes me want to read that book.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Dec 8, 2012)

In Stephany Meyer's defense: For as bland as she was, I actually found Bella Swan to be strangely endearing just from what I read of her.


----------



## shangrila (Dec 8, 2012)

The end of the first Twilight book was legitimately entertaining. If you're wondering, I'm talking about the whole being hunted by that stalker vampire.


----------



## Reaver (Dec 8, 2012)

Terry Goodkind is really good at punctuation and conjugating verbs.


----------



## Mindfire (Dec 8, 2012)

Reaver said:


> Terry Goodkind is really good at punctuation and conjugating verbs.



Wow, you're really reaching aren't you?


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Dec 9, 2012)

Meyer/Twilight did two things I admire:

1) Art Direction - while that may or may not have been Meyer's call, the consistent black background, white objects, plus one red object for cover art is eye catching. The first time I saw a Twilight book, it was just a glance, but the cover was captivating. I haven't seen anything that tops this pattern for cover art in a series, and it takes a lot less effort than it would to depict characters.

2) The MC Abstains Until Marriage - I'm sick of forbidden love/lust being toted as the only interesting kind of romance to write about. I have no idea where the MC's love life goes since I'm not part of the Twilight audience, but I do know that the MC held out until she was married. This is the sort of romance I'm happy to let my daughter's read. And it is interesting in part because it's different than most of the romance that is famous these days.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Dec 9, 2012)

Legendary Sidekick said:


> 2) The MC Abstains Until Marriage - I'm sick of forbidden love/lust being toted as the only interesting kind of romance to write about. I have no idea where the MC's love life goes since I'm not part of the Twilight audience, but I do know that the MC held out until she was married. This is the sort of romance I'm happy to let my daughter's read. And it is interesting in part because it's different than most of the romance that is famous these days.



Actually, I think _Edward _was the one who held out until they were married. I'm not part of the audience either but my impression is that he's the one fending off her advances, rather than the other way around.

Really, even though I just said I found her strangely likable, Bella is apparently kind of a horrible role model for girls in general.


----------



## Ireth (Dec 9, 2012)

Anders Ã„mting said:


> Actually, I think _Edward _was the one who held out until they were married. I'm not part of the audience either but my impression is that he's the one fending off her advances, rather than the other way around.



That is true. Bella only agreed to hold off until they were married so she could lose her virginity while human. Which really should have turned out worse than it did. But I digress.

For someone who apparently doesn't like horror movies, Stephenie Meyer can certainly write that kind of thing effectively. I refer, of course, to a rather infamous scene in Breaking Dawn.


----------



## Steerpike (Dec 9, 2012)

Anders Ã„mting said:


> Really, even though I just said I found her strangely likable, Bella is apparently kind of a horrible role model for girls in general.



Who says she's meant to be one?


----------



## Reaver (Dec 9, 2012)

Mindfire said:


> Wow, you're really reaching aren't you?



No.

/10 CHAR


----------



## Reaver (Dec 9, 2012)

Steerpike said:


> Who says she's meant to be one?



I agree. Just like any story, we project our own values and mores onto the characters.


----------



## Legendary Sidekick (Dec 9, 2012)

Just to clarify, I don't feel that an MC has to be a role model so much as it's a nice change of pace. Something that I admire when I see it, though it would take a lot more than an extramarital affair with a vampire for an MC to get on my unlikable list.

Meyers isn't necessarily my _least_ favorite famous author, but she's definitely high up on my not-for-me list, and what I mentioned above were two huge positives (in my opinion) that jumped into my head.


----------



## Shockley (Dec 19, 2012)

Ed Greenwood created what, in my head, is the perfect fantasy world, full of warring gods, broad landscapes, intriguing characters, etc.


----------



## SunnyE (Jan 11, 2013)

I have one that I just can't. I just can't no matter how hard I try. Kurt Vonnegut. *cringe* Please don't skewer me. I have for years heard his fans refer to him as one of the greatest writers of all time. I happened upon a copy of Galapagos many years ago. I did manage to get through it without clawing my eyes out for the distraction, so that was good. But it took real effort. I kept thinking, "Hmm, must be a fluke. I should try something else to give him (and his fans) the benefit of the doubt." I then read Slaughterhouse 5--a classic according to many. It was only slightly better. What did I miss? I really don't get it. Can anybody tell me specifically why people love him so much? I'm not a literary dolt, so I really should have been able to glean something out of it, but alas. I guess I do have one positive--the books were fairly short.


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Jan 11, 2013)

JK Rowling popularized a concept (boarding school story with wizards) that in hindsight seems so obvious it's amazing no one managed to popularize it before.  She captured the imaginations of millions of young children with her first book and successfully matured the series over time so those children kept eagerly awaiting the next book even as they got older.


----------



## JCFarnham (Jan 11, 2013)

I don't really want to bundle on Twilight, but I haven't read more than a chapter of Charlaine Harris books so I can't fairly comment (though I'm not at all sure about her skill...)

Meyers' Native American-flavoured shapeshifter take on the werewolf is nifty. 

I've always maintained that while Twilight isn't for me, I'm not the target audience and I'm not a fan of the writing, etc. the general ideas that went into the setting are actually fairly cool when you think about it out of context of the plot and questionable morals.


----------



## kayd_mon (Jan 11, 2013)

Terry Brooks is good at getting young, pre-Tolkien-exposed readers to like fantasy books.


----------



## Anders Ã„mting (Jan 11, 2013)

JCFarnham said:


> I don't really want to bundle on Twilight, but I haven't read more than a chapter of Charlaine Harris books so I can't fairly comment (though I'm not at all sure about her skill...)
> 
> Meyers' Native American-flavoured shapeshifter take on the werewolf is nifty.
> 
> I've always maintained that while Twilight isn't for me, I'm not the target audience and I'm not a fan of the writing, etc. the general ideas that went into the setting are actually fairly cool when you think about it out of context of the plot and questionable morals.



Honestly, the thing I didn't like about Twilight was the prose. I don't mind the plot or the characters that much, but I really thought it was terribly written in a technical way.

Anyway, having failed to read through the book and switching to the movies, I can say that New Moon seems to be easily the best installment. I actually found it genuinely enjoyable.



kayd_mon said:


> Terry Brooks is good at getting young, pre-Tolkien-exposed readers to like fantasy books.



He's also, from what I can understand, the guy who made fantasy mainstream.


----------



## Sadie (Feb 6, 2013)

Ha, it's like nowadays no bad book discussion can exist without paying tribute to Twilight and Fifty Shades...

I'll say this much: I will never understand why these books are as popular as they are, but they encouraged a lot of women to explore their sexuality and improve their sex lives.

Also, Patrick Rothfuss had what looked like a promising start to a potentially good series before the 2nd book...


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 6, 2013)

Anders Ã„mting said:


> Honestly, the thing I didn't like about Twilight was the prose. I don't mind the plot or the characters that much, but I really thought it was terribly written in a technical way.



It was competent, if mediocre, writing.


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 6, 2013)

Sadie said:


> I'll say this much: I will never understand why these books are as popular as they are, but they encouraged a lot of women to explore their sexuality and improve their sex lives.



It's good story-telling (as opposed to the technical quality of writing) that does a great job at engaging the target audience.


----------



## Mindfire (Feb 6, 2013)

*Sigh* Why Twilight? Why do you come up in discussion so often? Please, just go away. -_-


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 6, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> *Sigh* Why Twilight? Why do you come up in discussion so often? Please, just go away. -_-



You don't have to comment on it every time


----------



## Sadie (Feb 6, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> It's good story-telling (as opposed to the technical quality of writing) that does a great job at engaging the target audience.



Good storytelling involves 

1. A plot
2. A believable and engaging conflict within that plot
3. Well-developed, interesting characters 

These are what I would consider the main ingredients to good storytelling, of which Twilight has zero. The main conflict and intrigue here are whether Edward and Bella are going to get married and have sex and live forever as hot beautiful vampires, which you know from the start that they will. 

I wouldn't mind technical faults in a story (language or grammar-wise) as long as the plot is good. In this case, it isn't.

But if it made gazillions of teenage girls happy, then maybe it has a right to exist.


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 6, 2013)

Sadie said:


> Good storytelling involves
> 
> 1. A plot
> 2. A believable and engaging conflict within that plot
> ...



I disagree.

It has a plot, that seems obvious enough.

Believable conflict - well, I think that gets pretty subjective. It's believable enough within the world Meyer created, whether I like her world or treatment of the mythology or not. 

Characters - this is where I think most of Meyer's success is found. Whether you or I like it or not, millions of people (and not just teenage girls - I know lawyers, doctors, Ph.D. in their 40s, both male and female who loved the series) found these characters interesting and engaging and absolutely couldn't wait to find out what happened next.

So I suppose it gets back to the fact that #2 and #3 are highly subjective. When I say it is "good story-telling" what I mean is not that I liked it myself (not my type of story), but that she told the story in a way that resonated with millions of readers. That's about the closest thing to objective evidence of good story-telling as you can get.


----------



## Sadie (Feb 6, 2013)

Hmmm, seems like we are going off topic here.

You do make some valid points and I have not been very clear as to what I mean.  

In terms of plot, it does have the journey of Edward and Bella to being together. However, that is about it. The rest feels like a pile of sudden convenient accidents. When Edward leaves and Bella is depressed, there is no conflict in her just being depressed, so she conveniently starts hearing Edward whenever she puts herself in danger for no reason, and as far as I remember, it is never explained why she heard him, though I might be wrong, it's been a while. When she jumps off a cliff, Alice is suddenly conveniently unable to see anything concerning werewolves, conveniently bringing us on a journey to Italy where Edward is about to sparkle himself to death. Victoria is always conveniently somewhere out there hunting Bella but fails to actually do anything until Eclipse. This is just nitpicking the minor faults. I could go on. 

The characters never cross over from their cardboard existence into believability. The entire Cullen family, their friends and villains seem to have no agenda of their own other than to help Edward and Bella be together/destroy Edward and Bella. They do not exist outside of this relationship.

However, like you mentioned, the popularity of the books is undeniable. This is not because the characters are good - but because Twilight provides great escapism. A world where you are about to become immortal and forever beautiful together with your equally undead, beautiful sparkly husband, and where everything, including other people, revolves around you and your relationship. No matter how many degrees a person has, we all like to escape and feel like we are the most important being in the Universe. To give another example, Mills & Boon books have templates that the authors must abide by. The characters are as clichÃ© as they get and yet Mills & Boon publishes over 700 titles a year. Because the characters are so developed? Because the plot is so twisty and unpredictable? Nah, because it's great escapism. There is safety and shelter in predicability readers know the books strive to make them feel good about themselves.


I am not judging Twilight or Mills & Boon fans, we all need some sort of escape. I am just pointing out that it is a badly written book with a sloppy plot and unrealistic characters. Which people can still like if it makes them feel sexy, important or just better because they've read about somene going from a bad place like they might be in, to perfect happiness. 

I think we need to either continue somewhere else or agree to disagree, this is getting way too off topic


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 6, 2013)

Sadie said:


> I am not judging Twilight or Mills & Boon fans, we all need some sort of escape. I am just pointing out that it is a badly written book with a sloppy plot and unrealistic characters. Which people can still like if it makes them feel sexy, important or just better because they've read about somene going from a bad place like they might be in, to perfect happiness.
> 
> I think we need to either continue somewhere else or agree to disagree, this is getting way too off topic



Heh. Yeah, only a little off-topic. But since I started the thread I feel some liberty 

Last few things I'll say about Twilight -- you said yourself, Mills & Boon publish like 700 novels a year using this same escapist formula. But not one of those comes near the success of Twilight. There has to be some other factor that distinguishes Twilight, and I think it is because Meyer engaged readers in a way most authors can't or don't. People can say it is all marketing, but that's also too simple of an answer. If all you had to do what market your way to a success on that scale, every publisher would do it. And, as I've noted before, an editor shelled out 3/4 of a million dollars to Meyer, who was an unpublished, unknown author. You don't do that unless you see something there as well.  You and I don't have to like what that something is, however.


----------



## Jamber (Feb 7, 2013)

Going very much out on a limb (against its popularity): Outlander and Voyager, twin cures for mild insomnia.
The writer knows how to sustain characterisation. It must have been very tempting to add a few interesting traits to Claire, but Gabaldon was stoic. 
Apologies to the writer who clearly knows what she's doing, but it just wasn't my read.

Edited because it sounded like I was against popular fiction in general (which isn't even remotely the case).


----------



## Mindfire (Feb 7, 2013)

Jamber said:


> Going very much out on a limb (against its popularity): Outlander and Voyager, twin cures for mild insomnia.
> The writer knows how to sustain characterisation. It must have been very tempting to add a few interesting traits to Claire, but Gabaldon was stoic.
> Apologies to the writer who clearly knows what she's doing, but it just wasn't my read.
> 
> Edited because it sounded like I was against popular fiction in general (which isn't even remotely the case).



Popular? Never heard of 'em. What are they about?


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 7, 2013)

Mindfire said:


> Popular? Never heard of 'em. What are they about?



Outlander along has sold over 17 million copies. If you add up the sales for the entire series, it must dwarf even that. Apparently, someone is making or has made a musical of some sort out of it as well.


----------



## Sadie (Feb 8, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> Heh. Yeah, only a little off-topic. But since I started the thread I feel some liberty



Hehe. Then I will shamelessly take the liberty of replying before I move on to no longer clog the thread with replies not relevant to the topic 



Steerpike said:


> Last few things I'll say about Twilight -- you said yourself, Mills & Boon publish like 700 novels a year using this same escapist formula. But not one of those comes near the success of Twilight. There has to be some other factor that distinguishes Twilight, and I think it is because Meyer engaged readers in a way most authors can't or don't. People can say it is all marketing, but that's also too simple of an answer. If all you had to do what market your way to a success on that scale, every publisher would do it. And, as I've noted before, an editor shelled out 3/4 of a million dollars to Meyer, who was an unpublished, unknown author. You don't do that unless you see something there as well.  You and I don't have to like what that something is, however.



I think that "something" is exactly the same formula Mills & Boon uses, only with vampires and werewolves. A seemingly plain and seemingly flawed heroine but without any actual flaws, whom every male admires, on a quest towards sexual fulfillment and marriage to The Perfect Guy. It's still romance, only no one ever did it with vampires before. (Anne Rice is not romance, she is just plain creepy). I think this is why it got huge, appealing both to teenagers with its romance and supernatural bits, and to an older audience who were either into romance already, or who could only open up to romance when it had the supernatural bit in it. The vampire craze was huge but it died down now, quickly becoming a cliche. I think this is partly thanks to Fifty Shades, partly to the fact that supernatural fans hopefully moved on to better fantasy and the others just returned to their usual romance fix. 

To make somewhat of a transition back to the topic: Gene Wolfe. I absolutely hated The Shadow of the Torturer and read it to the end only because I am a completist with an OCD. If I start a book, I have to finish it no matter what, or the unread book will stay a constant bother in my mind until I read it to the end. While reading it, I greatly admired Wolfe's language, the way he crafted the story, how complicated the plot was, how it took me a while to realize that Severian is actually a very unreliable narrator. I still hated the book as a whole, but could not help admiring the writer's skill. 

This is a writer whose book did not agree with me but whom I still consider a great master of his skill. Meyer? Not so much.


----------



## Steerpike (Feb 8, 2013)

Sadie said:


> I think that "something" is exactly the same formula Mills & Boon uses, only with vampires and werewolves.



Thanks, Sadie. You've said a couple of times now that it is just plain, formulaic, and so on, but you sidestepped the question I posed above, which is that if it is so much like everything else and so plain and formulaic, how did Meyer's work achieve the enormous success it did and why didn't everyone elses? Meyer wasn't the first to do this with vampires.

I enjoyed The Shadow of the Torturer a great deal, though I can see where it wouldn't be for everyone. Gene Wolfe is a brilliant writer. He's a master of a variety of aspects of storytelling, as you said. Meyer certainly is not, in my view, but I believe she is quite skilled at telling a story to her target audience in a way that engages them, makes them read more than they would with another book, and keeps them clamoring for more. A lot of writers who are highly skilled from a technical standpoint can't pull that off.


----------



## Jamber (Feb 9, 2013)

Sadie said:


> I think that "something" is exactly the same formula Mills & Boon uses, only with vampires and werewolves. A seemingly plain and seemingly flawed heroine but without any actual flaws, whom every male admires, on a quest towards sexual fulfillment and marriage to The Perfect Guy. It's still romance, only no one ever did it with vampires before. (Anne Rice is not romance, she is just plain creepy).



Mills and Boon have fairly wide and diverse (though as you point out tightly controlled) formulas, as do all the romance publishers. It's an interesting project to dip in occasionally -- I've often been surprised by the diversity and (believe it or not, at least in some imprints), levels of realism. You might be too, Sadie.


----------

