I don't blame you for abandoning this one. There are few things that grate on me more than a first person voice that so thoroughly misses the mark. I'm still shaking my head over the "Goth nerds"!
Hi Kate. Oh, I hate to be so negative, but then again, it just wasn't good. It's rare for me to say, "Forget it." Oh, the Goth nerds. No no no no.
Priscilla, I am guessing that you are younger than I. (Almost everyone is LOL). But when I reached a certain birthday, I gave myself permission to abandon any book that was not engaging me within 25-50 pages. There is just so much out there to be read that I never regret doing this.
So maybe I miss a few good books along the way, but that's life. Nothing equals the agony of forcing myself to pick up and finish a book that is just plain unappealing to me....because that means I am not reading something else that could be great and memorable.
I would say that you made a good decision on this one. If you found all those "flaws" in just two chapters, why prolong the agony?
Despite the fact that Updike said this ""Try to understand what the author wished to do, and do not blame him for not achieving what he did not attempt" --- I would pay no attention to such a "rule". It really makes no sense. Why would it be the reader's responsibility to understand what the author wished to do? And if the writing is lousy, why should we not blame the author for not attempting to write well?
JoAnn, I guess I've been lucky, because I rarely find I have to abandon a book. With Goldengrove, I was more annoyed that an author I liked turned out a bad book than anything else. I am also incredibly picky, and in sticking with "literary fiction"--a term I dislike, because it implies that to write well is somehow elitist and apart from that which is "popular"--I rarely turn away from a book due to the quality of the writing. The other thing is, because I've tried to write and I know how difficult it is, I do try to be conscious of that fact as I read.
As for the rules, that was more for a conversation point than anything. I don't tend to march to anyone else's drum, and I've read enough literary criticism and written enough papers to trust myself.
While I do believe that authors are to blame for not writing well, I also believe that editors and publishers are largely responsible for pushing books out the door for the almighty dollar, and sadly, the bestseller lists show that people will buy anything.
I also tend to abandon books near the 50-page-mark if they don't seem to be holding my interest. I took this advise from Nancy Pearl in Book Lust. I'm not very critical with books either, and usually am very easily pleased, although probably because I tend to choose books I read more carefully now, sticking to what I know I'll like.
When I was younger I wouldn't hesitate reading about angst-ridden teens, but I seem to have a repulsion for that kind of books nowadays. Not because they're all bad, but because I can't relate to them any longer.
You did a great job in articulating the negative points of this book. I admit I felt a certain dislike towards the character, just basing on the passages you presented. I wouldn't be able to pinpoint exactly what it is that's wrong about those words, but that they're annoyingly indulgent.
"in sticking with "literary fiction"--a term I dislike, because it implies that to write well is somehow elitist and apart from that which is "popular"--I rarely turn away from a book due to the quality of the writing."
I only wish that I found this to be the case. I sometimes think that literary fiction writers believe that they have a license to do a lot of experimental type writing, and I have zero patience with that.
I could not agree with you more about editing and publishing. It is a disgrace. Did you know that the author of "Edgar Sawtelle" would not allow his book to be edited? How does a novice author have the temerity to make that kind of stipulation? And the book was easily 200 pages too long.....so overwritten.
I should have called Updike's words a "suggestion" and not used the term "rule". But whatever it was, I still think it makes no sense.
Hi Claire! I rarely get as indignant about a book as I did about this one. "Annoyingly indulgent" sums it up quite well.
I had to laugh over the bit you mentioned of the glamour couple revered more so than the jocks and cheerleaders. Yea, right.... I had some high hopes for this book but from everything you pointed out, it sounds like it missed the mark.
Iliana, if you read it and enjoy it and come back to correct me, I won't mind. But I am afraid it's just so stilted...I don't think it's possible!
Commenting by HaloScan
