World, Writing, Wealth discussion

Some people read for escape, others enjoy hardcore realism. Some expect distinct heroes and villains, while others dismiss impeccable characters, since those rarely exist in real life. In reality, happy endings are probably as likely as the unhappy ones, however in literature we can choose.
What kind of lit do you prefer: realistic or fictionalized? And what are your favorite books to either end?

I prefer realistic stories, ones where 'normal' people can identify with the characters in the books they read. When I was young, I was a fan of an adventure series in French by author Henri Vernes, which told the adventures of Bob Morane, a French ex-fighter pilot working as a traveling reporter. One example of an unrealistic, impeccable character that eventually gratted enough on my nerves to cause me to abandon the series in disgust is Honor Harrington, written by David Weber.

Literary realism began in America in the 1800s with authors like Twain and Stephen Crane. They wrote fiction based on real life, not on a romanticized version of it. I choose realism as opposed to romanticism because it's more easily applied to the conditions and choices with which we're faced. I have to say, though, that I prefer, if not a happy ending, at least a satisfactory resolution to the story. None of this unresolved, leaving-you-hanging stuff that we face in real life. That just pisses me off after I've invested my time in reading a book.

I prefer "sort of realism" as opposed to idealism, but I also like to see (a) some imagination, and (b) some point to the story, so I am quite happy with stories that cannot really be expected to have happened. I actually dislike stories of "real life" in which nothing of substance happens.

Ian wrote: "I prefer "sort of realism" as opposed to idealism, but I also like to see (a) some imagination, and (b) some point to the story, so I am quite happy with stories that cannot really be expected to h..."

I'm not a huge fan of literary realism. I do like it on occasion, when the story to be told is one of great hope, or great sadness, but with overtones of redemption or looking to the future. I'm not fond of horribly gritty. It's probably a trait of my personality - I tend to look on the positive side of things.

I don't mind a certain amount of grit, but I suppose I've been traumatised by the literature of the seventies for teens (I was a teen then) and everything was despair, and menstruation, and disaster and sex. I suspect that's what led me into speculative fiction :-)

Leonie wrote: "I suppose I've been traumatised by the literature of the seventies for teens..."

Which books were more traumatizing, if you recall? -:)

Puberty Blues!

Which I know many people loved, but.....not me.

Leonie wrote: "Puberty Blues!"

Haven't heard of, but looks like it was kinda sensational in Australia when it came out

Nik wrote: "Leonie wrote: "Puberty Blues!"

Haven't heard of, but looks like it was kinda sensational in Australia when it came out"

It was. And very much a love/hate kind of book. There were heaps of that type of book in the 70s and 80s.

I like gritty, but in scenarios that aren't everyday. Gun fights. War scenes. Escape from a burning building. Things that get the blood pumping even if you're simply reading a book.

I also like gritty fantasy, to be frank. Death magic and vile monsters--the hard edge of "could everyone die here?" keeps me turning pages like nothing else. :3

I don't mind the 'could everybody die here' scenarios, with a fair bit of grit, it's the drudgery of constant ick that gets me.

Another point about detailed violence for me is why is it there? If it adds to some emotional or plot aspect, good, but if it is just gratuitous, I see little point in it. Another point I think is that it is far more effective if there is not too much of it. If it is continual, as Leonie pointed out, it becomes drudgery.

Yes, there really does have to be a point to things, not just gratuitousness.

And what do you prefer: escape or realism?

Nik wrote: "And what do you prefer: escape or realism?"

Escape. (Well, normally escape). When I want realism I tend to just walk out my front door. There's plenty of realism (wanted and unwanted) out there right now. Yikes. But that's just me.

I read both fiction and non-fiction. I like both escape and realism.

I like realism but you can go too far. If a movie or novel is too realistic it becomes a documentary. The movie Saving Private Ryan got the balance right.
The first 40 minutes depicting the Normandy landings were as accurate as Spielberg could make them.
Even after that the battle scenes were not particularly sugar-coated and showed the horrors of war.
But he also weaved a fictional story of selfless heroes, guys under extreme pressure and heroes.
If he had made the whole movie as close to the truth as possible it would not have been anywhere near as successful and he would have failed to fully honor the heroes of that time.

As some have also said, I like both. It absolutely depends on my mood but I will usually know enough about a book before I start to read it so that I generally won't be disappointed.

Since I mostly (80%) read SF&F, if I want gritty I'll pick up GRRM or Abercrombie. If I want more lighthearted I'll go with Jordan. I'm currently reading the Mistborn series by Sanderson which so far follows the traditional fantasy norms.

I would say I lean toward realistic but one thing I can't stand in any book is when characters make blatantly dumb decisions. That seems to occur less often in the more realistic "gritty" novels but it does still happen.

I want a great story, how it is told is not the be all and end all to me as long as it is good. Even non-fiction books have a story and I want them to be good to tell. There is little worse than a non-fiction books that is boring and bad. As for gritty or idealized, it is up to personal choice.

Agree. I prefer fiction, but it has to be well written or I'm not going to waste my time. I can take gritty if it's warranted, but I don't read books with pedophiles as main characters.

I read to escape. I want a Star Trek world in the end even though I don't believe it will actually happen. I want different worlds and different cultures and I like if there is a social and political comment within, just like Star Trek (before Discovery).

I am ok with some magic. Glynn Stewart's Starship Mage comes to mind. I don't like fantasy except for a few that impressed me that I read either because my daughter told me to - such as Name of the Wind - or because an author I liked in sci-fi also had a fantasy series - Joseph Lallo and his Deacon series.

I have always loved the Dragonriders of Pern because I never perceived it as fantasy. The original Dune books blew me away when I was 17 and first read them. The past year I have been wrapped up in the Aeon 14 Universe by M.D. Cooper. I read the Honor series (but really get tired of space battles for pages). I don't want strong military type books be they the past, present or science fiction. Most recently, I really like Jucha's Ship series and the connected Pyreans books.

I will read some post-apocalypse fiction because the political and social aspects of the new society interest me. I won't read vampires, werewolves, walking dead, zombies and the like.

I used to read a lot of legal mysteries, but now I limit that to just when an author catches my attention. Even then, I am looking at whether the legal and courtroom stuff is done correctly. If not, I don't read any others. I also used to read a lot of medical mystery, serial killer and thriller type stories, but find that I can't anymore.

I appreciated Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn when I was a kid. They don't interest me to read as an adult. I don't want realism. Even when I had to read them, I didn't like reading Steinbeck, Miller, Melville, Hemmingway, and so on. I preferred reading Charles Dickens at the time I had to read those types of books during my education.

What do you prefer: realistic or profoundly fictional?

I honestly like both realistic and profoundly fictional. However, either must be technically well-written, narrated well, and entertaining.

A sample of my favorites*:

The 6-book Earth's Children Series by Jean M. Auel
The 3-book Hunger Games Series by Suzanne Collins
The Stolen Child by Keith Donohue
Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro
The 7-book Dark Tower Series by Stephen King
The 5-book Game of Thrones Series by George R.R. Martin
The 7-book Harry Potter Series by J.K. Rowling
The 3-book Fellowship of the Ring Series by J.R.R. Tolkien

*Listed alphabetically by author, not preference.

Half of those are amongst my all-time favourites too, Jim.

I'm reading Bulldog Drummond books at mo, which aren't fantasy but are centred around quite idealised characters from 1920s England. They're good fun.

That said, love gritty ones too. Chandler and Rankin are obviously v good. I have read most of Ted Lewis's books in last year too. Jack's Return Home (Get Carter) is the famous one but I enjoyed them all. Highly recommended if anybody wants to get a taste of British noir.

Jim, I think you are the first here to mention Auel, whom I also like, as well as many of your favorites.

Beau, are you a fan of John D. MacDonald? I've read all of the Travis McGee books, but they're really hard to find these days. I think they only came out in paperback. I still have a few.

Scout, I hadn't heard of John D MacDonald until I just looked him up.

I've seen a film version of Cape Fear and really enjoyed it, so will try the book and others by him.

Looking at his works, I'm excited at having just discovered this author. His books look great. Thanks for the recommendation. I'll let you know what I think in due course👍

William McIlvaney is another I intend to try.

Beau wrote: "Scout, I hadn't heard of John D MacDonald until I just looked him up.

I've seen a film version of Cape Fear and really enjoyed it, so will try the book and others by him.

Looking at his works, I'..."

You have to try The Girl, the Gold Watch & Everything. It is a classic.

Thanks, Papaphilly. Once I've finished the Bulldog Drummond mega pack, I'll buy it for the kindle. Will let you know what I think 👍

I find myself considering two very different books, The Outsiders and The Hobbit. The Outsiders is a "realistic" book about a teenager and his friends dealing with gangs. The Hobbit is high fantasy about a grown halfling going on a quest with a wizard and his dwarven friends. On a philosophical level both follow our protagonists as they come face to face with desire, anger, and the costs thereof before returning to their beginnings as changed men.

We could parse and deconstruct them into monuments of self loathing as if we were high school English teachers, but would that find some virtue which must elevate one above the other in our esteem? Or is the measure of greatness not its parts, but the degree to which it more than its parts? Perhaps that is why "Nature's first green is gold" and "What have I got in my pocket?" have stuck with me.

But I'm overthinking it. The simplest answer to the original question is that I prefer books that aren't boring. Spare me your structurally perfect odes to drying paint and your ingeniously worded tales of crafting ingeniously worded prose. I don't care if your hero is a paragon or a scoundrel. Just don't bore me.

Hope you enjoy MacDonald, Beau, if you can find copies. They're hard to come by.

I'm with you, J. Just don't bore me . . . or I'll stop reading. I don't have that many reading hours left in me, and I'll put down a book after two chapters if it's not interesting.

I also agree with J but have a feeling the MacDonald books will be page turners. Genuinely looking forward to starting them.

Btw, I read The Hobbit aged 11. It was the book that started my love of reading.

38 years later, it remains in my top 2. Count of Monte Cristo is the other. A highbrow literary classic but still a genuine page turner.

Scout, I've read my first John D MacDonald book and would like to thank you for recommending this author.

I tried to get hold of the one Papaphilly recommended but couldn't, so settled for The Deep Blue Good-by instead - the 1st in the Travis McGee series.

It was superb. A real page turner. V gritty, exciting storyline, strong characters (some likeable + a very bad baddie), and an interesting glimpse into the less glamorous side of early 60s Florida.

I'm going to try the 2nd one in the series now. Thanks again.

I'm happy that you enjoy MacDonald. I read most of his novels many years ago and still remember them as good reading. They are definitely gritty at times -- some torture episodes that wouldn't make him popular in these woke times. But it's fiction, right? I think his novels only were published in paperback. I wish some publishing company would re-release them so more people could read them. Happy reading to you, Beau.

Thanks, Scout. I'm on the 2nd one in the series now. Enjoying that too. I like McGee as a character.

If you have a Kindle, you can get most of them on there (but seemingly not the one Papaphilly recommended).

I still prefer physical books but Kindle is useful because I can buy new books without being under any pressure to get rid of old ones. Don't need my glasses for it either:)

Beau wrote: "Thanks, Scout. I'm on the 2nd one in the series now. Enjoying that too. I like McGee as a character.

If you have a Kindle, you can get most of them on there (but seemingly not the one Papaphilly ..."

I am surprised you are having such a tough time getting that one. It is one his most famous. Condominium is another great read.

Papaphilly, I've found it at the 3rd time of asking! It's in paperback but seemingly not on Kindle. Once I've finished the Kindle pack I bought, I'll give it a go. Will let you know what I think.

Thanks for the 2nd recommendation too. I'll make a note of it and (as long as I continue to enjoy them) try that too.

Beau wrote: "Papaphilly, I've found it at the 3rd time of asking! It's in paperback but seemingly not on Kindle. Once I've finished the Kindle pack I bought, I'll give it a go. Will let you know what I think.
..."

sounds good. I hope you enjoy both of them.

No Kindle for me. I like the simplicity of flipping to the back and seeing the author's photo and bio, then flipping to the front and seeing the copyright date and publishing info and blurbs from other authors, looking at the cover photo and title, and just holding it in my hand and flipping pages and using an actual bookmark. And, strangely enough, I like the smell of a book. I tried Kindle and missed all of these things. Too old to change at this point,

Some of us like to read it too :-)

Scout, I thought you were going to say you like flipping to the back to see what happens ;)

I prefer physical books too but Kindle is handy for me.

I do draw the line at music downloads though. Only cds and vinyl for me.

Paper for me only on books. It is the experience of reading as much as reading.

I read only traditional hard-cover and paperback books, most borrowed from the local public library.

I only purchase a book if I wish to read it more than once. The bookcase shelves in my den hold 134 books (36 non-fiction & 98 fiction).

I have posted ratings with reviews of 150 books on my Goodreads profile page.

I've read John MacDonald's 1st 3 Travis McGee books. They were excellent - minimum 8/10s, maybe better. I'll definitely read more of them soon.

I'm now reading Laidlaw, by William McIlvanney. It is breathtakingly good. Absolutely compelling. And talk about gritty. Mind you, as it's set in 1970s Glasgow, that's no surprise. If Arnie visited some of the local villains, he'd think twice before saying 'I'll be back'. And one of them, called John Rhodes, would eat Rambo for breakfast :)

Anyway, highly recommended if you like page-turning, very well written, atmospheric, gritty fiction.

Just put Laidlaw on hold at the library. Will let you know what I think as compared to MacDonald. Thanks for the recommendation.

Look forward to hearing what you think, Scout.

I'm just about to start the 2nd in the Laidlaw trilogy. Will unquestionably come back to John D MacDonald soon tho cause I loved them, and intend to read Adrian's new one too.

Toying with idea of reading Shogun, by James Clavell, first. Saw TV version in 1980s and really enjoyed it. Someone recently told me the book is an absolute classic.

Beau wrote: "Look forward to hearing what you think, Scout.

I'm just about to start the 2nd in the Laidlaw trilogy. Will unquestionably come back to John D MacDonald soon tho cause I loved them, and intend to ..."

It is truly the classic they say, but it is a long read and very intense.

Thanks for your thoughts, Papaphilly. I've heard it's a bit of a doorstopper but I've decided to give it a go.

I'm also going to ask Father Christmas for The Girl, the Gold Watch & Everything. Looking forward to that one.

Beau wrote: "Thanks for your thoughts, Papaphilly. I've heard it's a bit of a doorstopper but I've decided to give it a go.

I'm also going to ask Father Christmas for The Girl, the Gold Watch & Everything. Loo..."

That one is fun.