{"id":10274,"date":"2023-02-15T08:35:36","date_gmt":"2023-02-15T13:35:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/?p=10274"},"modified":"2023-02-15T08:38:04","modified_gmt":"2023-02-15T13:38:04","slug":"more-ways-to-annoy-your-reader","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/?p=10274","title":{"rendered":"More Ways to Annoy Your Reader"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

In the litany of authorial sins that readers object to, are quirks that require readers to reread or rereread a passage to figure it out. So said the hundreds of readers who responded to a recent Washington Post<\/em> query, written up here<\/a> (paywall).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

One cause for having to reread a passage can be the abandonment of quotation marks\u2014Cormac McCarthy is an author who omits them (though, I admit, I don\u2019t mind rereading him).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hilary Mantel had the opposite quirk. She kept the quotation marks but eliminated everything like \u201cCromwell said\u201d or \u201csaid the Cardinal.\u201d Some dialog passages needed several readings to be sure I had the words coming from the correct character\u2019s mouth. Most confusing in Wolf Hall<\/em>, but better in the later books.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another annoying source of confusion are gratuitously complicated timelines. The structure of a book should make it easier, not harder, to follow. Even Sulari Gentil\u2019s clever The Woman in the Library<\/em> (my review<\/a>) baffled me at times. In a plot like nesting dolls, you have to stay alert to a change in point of view. Is it the author writing or the author she\u2019s writing about or . . . . ???<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On to the complaints about characters, starting with \u201cunrealistically clever children or talking animals.\u201d No, please.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A big one we should have evolved past by now is sexy descriptions of women in non-sexy situations. I read a lot of cringy stuff focusing on a woman\u2019s appearance, especially her figure, top and bottom. Need I mention such descriptions are almost always written by men? Turn the tables and write about male characters in such a salacious way, you see how awful it is. (See this column by Alexandra Petri<\/a>, \u201cIf male authors described men in literature the way they describe women.\u201d Or this essay by Prasanna Sawant<\/a>, \u201cThe Bizarre Ways Some Male Authors Describe Women.\u201d) I don\u2019t believe the male authors are even aware they\u2019re doing it. Appearance is what they notice about women in real life, so that\u2019s what they put on paper, whereas the male characters just show up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Readers also object to \u201cdisabled characters who exist only to provide treacly inspiration.\u201d That holds for any character who is meant to demonstrate a point, like the protagonist\u2019s open-mindedness: \u201cLook, he has a Black friend, a gay friend, a loyal dog!\u201d Authors need to give those friends and mutts something to do.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then the readers got down to nitpicking. Somebody will object to almost anything, it seems: overused phrases like \u201chis smile didn\u2019t reach his eyes,\u201d \u201cshe exhaled the breath she didn\u2019t realize she was holding\u201d (I encounter that one a lot). Even individual words would prompt readers\u2019 to get out their blue pencils: burgeoning, preternatural, inevitable, lugubrious. In the comments on the article, one reader objected to \u201cspelling based on sound, not a dictionary. Just read one novel that referred to riggers (not rigors) and emmersed (instead of immersed). I was stunned to read the author\u2019s note in which she complimented her editor.\u201d I, on the other hand, was pleased and surprised to see that such creatures still exist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Post<\/em> writer Ron Charles, who compiled these complaints, predicts that \u201csomewhere some cynical, market-driven AI scientist is working on a novel-writing program that can accommodate all these complaints.\u201d I hope not. Words written by a real person\u2014blind spots and annoying habits and grammar lapses and all\u2014are preferable to a formula any day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Read Part 1 of this article here.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Good writing deserves good readers. My quarterly newsletter contains tips for reading, writing, and viewing. Sign up here<\/a> and receive three prize-winning short stories!<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the litany of authorial sins that readers object to, are quirks that require readers to reread or rereread a passage to figure it out. So said the hundreds of readers who responded to a recent Washington Post query, written … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Part 2 of reports from readers about their pet peeves in the books they read.","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[174,185,51,29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10274","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-first-draft-blog","category-language","category-words","category-writing"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2NkiT-2FI","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10274","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=10274"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10274\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":10277,"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10274\/revisions\/10277"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=10274"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=10274"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vweisfeld.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=10274"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}