Second Wind Publishing discussion

I read a great many historical novels. My number one peeve is characters who think and act exactly like their 21st Century counterparts. (No amount of "forsoothly" will fix this!) It quickly destroys my belief in the world the author is attempting to create, and is just as bad as any other anachronism.

What sends books flying at your house?

Good call, Juliet, but my big peeve haunts Harlequin's monoverse. It's the hero who looks and acts like a real man, but thinks like a girl. No amount of hunting, fishing, bulging muscles, commanding presence, or strong chins can make this guy believable when he thinks like a love-sick teenage girl.

Kendall wrote: "Good call, Juliet, but my big peeve haunts Harlequin's monoverse. It's the hero who looks and acts like a real man, but thinks like a girl. No amount of hunting, fishing, bulging muscles, command..."

Ahahahaha! Yes, somehow a lot of romance writers don't really get into the male psyche--at least, not in a believable way. Either that, or the guy is a two-dimensional Arnold, with few thoughts of any kind.

It's hard to effectively cross gender, at least for me, but I'm kind of proud of my masculine characters. They're smart, but they are still MEN.

I just have to respond to this one...

I really have problems with calling a book a literary achievement just because the book is well written, most times using $100 words instead of those $9.99 ones we all understand...

Case in point: I was soooo disgusted when I read a very clinical, precisely worded scene of a small boy being sexually abused that not only did I want to throw the book away, I wanted to stop reading it.

It took me awhile and I later continued...only because I had committed to reviewing it!

Literary? Disgusting is disgusting, no matter what words are used to write it!

Great question!!!!!!
Bad endings. If I am going to invest the time in a book give me a good ending, why do publishers print books with endings that either 1. dont end 2. have an ending that is 2 pages long when it should be at least a few chapters 3. have an ending that doesnt flow with the story and brings in themes right at the end that have nothing to do with the novel itself.

What makes me throw books across the room...when the author starts off really strong and leaves you wanting with an ending that is so rushed and rediculous that I wonder why I read the dang thing in the first place. To be honest that is how the Historian left me. It was so good and the ending was rank!

Only once did I throw a book across the room. It was a Helen MacInnis book, and though I enjoyed the book, I absolutely hated the ending. I needed to see the lovers get together after all they had been through, and she killed off the heroine. I still feel bad about throwing the book, and I never threw another one.

My biggest peeve is internal inconsistencies. If an author sets up a world (even if it is a replica of the everyday world we all know) the story must be consistent. If a villain is so smart that he can always keep one step ahead of the hero, why isn't he smart enough to just kill off the hero instead of everyone else?

Characters who explain things to each other that they really ought to understand, as a writer's excuse to explain them to the reader.

Or books where the writer's so determined to get a message across that he forgets I might disagree and lets his message take me out of his story.

I really dislike books that distort historical fact. Case in point, The Boy in Stripped Pajamas. Completely distorted the geography of Auschwitz. Plus the ending of the story was entirely unbelievable. Would never have happened and IT didn't happen.

My biggest pet peeve is the "historical" novel that gets things wrong. I mean really wrong. There is a huge difference between Elizabethan and Victorian England... The only place these things happen at the same time is in a badly written "historical" novel.

I read many types of books and some I have thrown across the room. The one that stands out the most was an apocalyptic story where people (many people) were being hit by a baseball bat and decapitated (sorry that doesn't happen). The POTUS was cracking jokes in the middle of a crisis (get real). Every conversation was "in your face" (come on bad boys, I'll take you on). I say all of this to tell you that the story was so unrealistic that I couldn't even finish it. If you are going to write science fiction - do your homework.

Those NYT bestsellers that are poorly written. Hate paying money for something the publisher assures the world is the best book ever written.

Poor editing.

Any book where an animal or child is abused or killed. I stop reading at that point. I simply can't stand it.

Books where none of the characters are likable - and that seems to be a trend now for some reason.

Books that manipulate the reader - where things are set up, even blatantly implausible things, to wreak the greatest havoc with the emotions, as if the author hopes you'll be too emotional to realize it's impossible.

The only book I threw across the room was a Higher Math book. I was so frustrated with the way the author had explained the equation that I threw the book across the room. (The Professor wasn't any better). My daughter picked the book up and shook her head when she read the explanation. As a Physics student she explained the problem in question and how to solve it, so that I could easily breeze through it and others thereafter. (Following her reasoning not the Professor's). Yes I passed with one of the top grades in the class.

I like reading contemporary literature, but a lot of what passes as literature is really well-written, drawn-out character sketches.

Give me a plot, please! Make something, anything, happen!!!!!

I find myself getting annoyed with novels written in present tense. To me, present tense feels okay for a travelogue, but not a novel.

Rhonda wrote: "What makes me throw books across the room...when the author starts off really strong and leaves you wanting with an ending that is so rushed and rediculous that I wonder why I read the dang thing i..."
That is EXACTLY how I felt!!!!!!!!

Glenda wrote: "I just have to respond to this one...

I really have problems with calling a book a literary achievement just because the book is well written, most times using $100 words instead of those $9.99 ..."

Hi,
Sorry, that I messed this up before, Glenda & hope I don't do it again. I also review books & like you I was committed. Not long ago I reviewed a VERY BAD book. It was supposed to be a murder mystery set in the 21st century. It was so slow! If it was a historical type mystery, I could've understood the slowness. This was ridiculous. You never found a dead body until page 100! This is just one kind of book that makes me want to throw it across the room.

Juliet wrote: "I read a great many historical novels. My number one peeve is characters who think and act exactly like their 21st Century counterparts. (No amount of "forsoothly" will fix this!) It quickly destro..."

Same here, Juliet. That drives me up the wall. Especially when the well-bred virgin upper class young lady is acting like a girl off Sex and the City. That is so unrealistic.

Another thing that makes me want to quit reading a book is when the author talks down to the reader making you feel like a complete idiot. I have read a few books like these. Something else that gets my goat is when the author keeps repeating the same thing several different places in the story. I tuck this last one away in my brain (hopefully it stays there) as what not to do when I'm writing a story.

Also I dislike books in which horrifying, gruesome, or disturbing elements are put into the book just for shock value, and they really don't belong there.

I don't like to see children harmed or abused, and I dislike adultery.

On the other hand, Deb, I found when I first started to review professionally that I had to look in the mirror at myself...I was placing my own preference for fast-paced adventure and suspense over nearly every book I was reading. I have had to force myself to stop and evaluate each book so that I look at it as the author intended it to be...It might not be my preference, but I found if I looked at it more objectively that I could find it a great book as well. I even enjoy what is normally called a cozy, a slower-paced mystery...and have lots of collections of my favorite cat mysteries!

Caitlin wrote: That is EXACTLY how I felt!!!!!!!! ..."

I believe the Historian would have been great as two books. She could have taken her time to finish it, not give that sad excuse for an ending. I really like a book that makes me want to visit that world - real or not - and The Historian did until that ending. I felt so let down.

I hate badly researched novels. I can overlook a goof or two or a little dramatic license, but I hate it when a writer is just plain sloppy with the facts. It's especially annoying in historical fiction.

I also dislike inconsistency, in characters or plot lines. If a character changes their behavior suddenly, they'd better have a good reason and for me, a plot needs to make linear sense.

I’m currently collecting data about “pet peeves in books” and I’m receiving a lot of interesting pet peeves from people. My pet peeves are largely related to the technicalities of writing.

If the book is not interesting that is a fatal problem. I won’t finish reading it and I won’t donate it to a library. If it could be a good book if not for careless errors, I’m peeved. It is the book that has promise, the book that could be wonderful if it wasn't crippled by errors that I throw across the room.

My #1 pet peeve is centered around. It should be centered on. It should not be centered around. I hear media people, sports people, entertainers, and numerous other people say (or they write) centered around all the time. It is incorrect. Don’t say it. Don't write it. (Revolve around is correct.)

A few of my other pet peeves, in no particular order:

Using “at” at the end of a sentence.
Incorrect: I don’t know where my coat is at.
Correct: I don’t know where my coat is.

Writing irregardless instead of regardless.

Excessive profanity in writing, I think it is unimaginative and can quickly become boring.

Clichés usually bore me.

Of instead of have.
Incorrect: You should of called when you realized you’d be late.
Correct: You should have called when you realized you’d be late.

I think writers should use exclamation points sparingly.

I don’t like it when a writer repeatedly uses the same word. Use a thesaurus, don’t overuse the same words.

Writing different than instead of different from.

Writing lightening (as in dying your hair) instead of lightning (as in thunder and lightning).

Look up the definitions for inferring and implying. Don’t use inferring when you mean implying. Don’t use implying when you mean inferring.

When authors like Henry James who wrote The Turn of the Screw end their books the way he did with that infamous last sentence. I was so angry I wanted to rip the last page out with my teeth! Fortunately, that doesn't happen very often. I was so angry, I actually rewrote the ending in my mind and completely discarded his stupid version.

As a romance fan who is not an erotica fan, I really dislike extremely erotic elements being snuck into mainstream romances (extreme BDSM, alternative sex acts, menage, multiple partners, etc). That is a major pet peeve of mine, since you are doing research. I hope the powers that be will stop labeling erotica as romance, or at least make it clear that it is erotic in content, and not mainstream romance. I went to the bookstore and I checked the bindings, and I have seen books with non-mainstream sex being labeled as romance.

Very interesting question. I guess I can answer this in many ways but mostly what makes me want to throw a book across the room is when Im reading a book that is just way too freaking slow. I mean going on and on about the backdrop of the city really doesn't interest me, I want to know about the characters. What also makes me want to throw a book across the room is when the author writes in a different language in the middle of the book, I mean come on, strat in english, finished in english. Also I hate when the book ends with an open ending and your wondering, what the heck happened?

Danielle "The Book Huntress" wrote: "As a romance fan who is not an erotica fan, I really dislike extremely erotic elements being snuck into mainstream romances (extreme BDSM, alternative sex acts, menage, multiple partners, etc). Th..."

Along those lines, are the books that I know include sex (which doesn't bother me) but don't include plot (which does bother me). There are a few authors of paranormal romance type books who seem to have foregone any attempt at a plot and just have a new sex scene every couple of pages. I'm not a prude, but gimme some plot!

For me its when I read the back of the book and first get intrigued about the story then later on as I read the book I find out the little description of the book was WAY better than the actual story. "My Heart Belongs To You" by Dean Koontz comes to mind. I prefer his earlier stuff.

Other that that if as you're reading the book and its in a contemporary/slice of life kind of theme and things that would NEVER happen in real life start happening to the main character. "The F*ck Up" by Arthur Nersesian comes to mind on that note.

Another thing that sends books flying for me is when you know a book is apart of a series but nothing major happens in whatever book your reading to really move the story along.

When a character doesn't act "true to form" -- That is, when a character is introduced and presented in a certain way, any changes in his/her characterization should be shown or at least explained. Major changes, that is, and especially at the ending.

My most memorable book toss was Nicholas Sparks, Message in a Bottle. I know he's a popular guy...but damn, what a painful ending. I bought it because I was interested in querying his agent. (His agent rejected me, I was kinda glad, it really wasn't a right fit.)

Bridges of Madison County...another squirmer that I forced myself to finish because everyone told me how great it was...argh...I returned it to the library...so glad I didn't pay good money for it.

I've become very annoyed when I find glaring errors in books put out by big publishing houses, all that money that they spend making a book happen, they should at least do a good job editing them, it's shameful and worth a toss to the nearest wall. (When it's one of my own books, I hit myself in the head with 'em...good thing they're paperbacks!)

Yeah...I slam my head into the wall when I find out I misspelled words like envelop as envelope. Maybe next time, I might take a running start because that's how mad at myself I get when it comes to screwing up my novel.

Shirley wrote: "I read many types of books and some I have thrown across the room. The one that stands out the most was an apocalyptic story where people (many people) were being hit by a baseball bat and decapit..."

Technically, a dome decapitation could happen (which is not a complete decapitation). That's what happens when you're a forensic anthro major; you learn some truly bizarre modes by which people have been killed.

As for the POTUS making jokes in the midst of a crisis ... perhaps yes, perhaps no. It's been my experience that dark humor is often used as a way of managing stress during some truly dreadful situations.

YMMV.

As for throwing a book across the room: I did it in the literal sense only once.
The Phantom of Manhattan was so dreadful that Frederick Forsythe should be ashamed of himself for writing it. Forsythe has the audacity, in his prologue, to state that Leroux *Got his own story wrong.* Yeah, the original novelist had no insight whatsoever. @@ As the author of a POTO sequel, I can understand saying "this also happened," but Forsythe argues more than once that "this never happened" when he takes exception to Leroux's characterizations.

1. Clearly unedited work--which i would not be surprised that even though my first book dead on arrival was edited but horribly--didn't get tossed out of frustration.
2.Plot holes large enough to drive a transport through.
3. redundant and tedious narration.
4. discusting or heinous subject matter--I wonder what people are thinking when they come up with plots that make a person want to be sick.

You guys described a lot of pet peeves of mine. Historicals that have false facts or feel like wallpaper historicals where the setting is just for show.

I love my sci-fi, fantasy and paranormals but when the world building is flimsy and raises a lot of questions not akin to the story, that bugs me to no end.

Romances where it feels contrived that the two leads are being shoved together. Or if it's a paranormal that the world building is also wallpaper just so the romance can seem extraordinary and "different" (same thing with sci-fi romances).

TMI sex scenes especially two seconds into the story.

Bad editing can make it hard for me to get into a book because I'll be mentally editing the story instead of getting into it.

Also, a book series that go on and on and on with no real end destination. Or if they do have a destination, it keeps getting pushed back because the publisher wants to extend the series for cash flow. Awesome and rockin' for the author (woo hoo!) but kinda bad for the reader because they feel strung along. :-(

Excessive profanity is another thing that'll turn me off a book.

Oh, and cliches also (which I try to avoid myself but sometimes fall into)!

Danielle "The Book Huntress" wrote: "As a romance fan who is not an erotica fan, I really dislike extremely erotic elements being snuck into mainstream romances (extreme BDSM, alternative sex acts, menage, multiple partners, etc). Th..."

That's another good one. Mislabeling to widen the audience when it'll only end up making the audience mad because they didn't get what they paid for.

Novels that get praised simply because they are "edgy". I've come across a few that were highly touted and even won awards but were just rambling and self-indulgent. I couldn't fathom how they even got published let alone snagged major awards.

Authors who take themselves too seriously. Vapid heroines. Conflict that would be resolved if the main characters actually had a conversation rather than "make stuff up" about what the other is thinking, feeling or doing. Poorly written books that somehow make it to the best-sellers list.

I can't bring myself to read any book of Glen Beck's, Limbaugh or others who follow their philosophies. So I guess that doesn't count because I wouldn't pick it so I could throw it across the room.

Dawn wrote Along those lines, are the books that I know include sex (which doesn't bother me) but don't include plot (which does bother me). There are a few authors of paranormal romance type books who seem to have foregone any attempt at a plot and just have a new sex scene every couple of pages. I'm not a prude, but gimme some plot!

I have to agree with Dawn on this - and this is what I call "all *cough, cough* action, no plot". My first encounter with this was a novella I was reviewing and I kept thinking "must not throw book across room, must not throw book across room." Thing was that if there was more plot, it would have been - for me - a better novella. And I do understand there are fans of this genre. That's fine, I'm just not one of them.

Another peeve of mine which has been mentioned here is bad editing. I picked up a book by an author whose books I have read before and liked and it read more like an ARC in the first stages of being prepared for final product rather than something I would have parted with money for. As much as I liked the stories presented in the book, and the worldbuilding, the editorial misses distracted me enough that I haven't read another of this author's books since I parted with that one two years ago.

Things that stop me from continuing to read a book and pitch it are detailed disgusting scenes, poor research of the times and setting, inaccurate technical information and an unbelievable action between characters. Also, if it takes more than 20 pages to really get into the story I won't continue reading.

Glenda wrote: "On the other hand, Deb, I found when I first started to review professionally that I had to look in the mirror at myself...I was placing my own preference for fast-paced adventure and suspense over..."

Hi Glenda,
I totally agree with you on that! Even if the story isn't my cup of tea, I almost have to force myself sometimes to read the complete book because there's always a decent story somewhere in there. I've been getting some pretty good books coming my way lately. There was no way I could do an good review of the book I mentioned previously. It was pages & pages of description & no plot at all. I advertize honest reviews & don't really like to give bad ones but thank heaven that's the only bad one I've had to do so far. Oh, I'm not a professional reviewer. I really wish I could be. I'm just an independent reviewer. Deb :-)

Thankfully I haven't had to toss too many books but there are so many on my TBR list I can't handle reading a book I just cant get through for what ever reason. I usually put them back on the shelf and try again later but sometimes I just move them out without a lot of fanfare.

Historical inaccuracy. I don't care if it is fiction or not, when an author places a story in a well-known era, with actually people known from that era, the factual information needs to be correct.

Showing off the author's language, or the book is a merely personal ‎love experience with no more than events and facts known to any ‎teenager read 3 or 4 books, where the author is just mourning over a ‎failed relationship with a man or woman, or even with the whole ‎world, crying for his/her loss, how much he/she was faithful and ‎sincere and how much unjust they faced, with no more. Some ‎take writing as a therapy, or a revenge technique, it feels as if you ‎are caught in a room with a drunk stranger talking about love and ‎life and you need to take some sleep.‎

I have never yet thrown a book across the room, but I have closed them with a snap and vowed never to read more of that particular author.

My big beef was describing cruelty to animals. I did not enjoy The Horse Whisperer, (the book was worse than the film) though I did try another by that particular author -- The Loop and vowed I'd never read another of his!

Amy wrote: "Historical inaccuracy. I don't care if it is fiction or not, when an author places a story in a well-known era, with actually people known from that era, the factual information needs to be correct."

Amy, please don't be offended, but I read a lot of people having a beef with inaccuracy in Historical books. I read Historical books, not like I use to. I don't read the book for accuracy.

So, if you don't mind me asking, what accuracy are you looking for in a Historical book? Because, I know that if an author stay true to Historical times. A lot of the heroes wouldn't be desirable. A lot of them would stink.

I know that a lot of people think that the heroine if she's unmarried, she should be a virgin, but fornication was going on back then too. I'm sure a lot of young women have gotten pregnant as well.

A person may wonder why I am saying this and it's because there's nothing new under the sun.

In our time, we might be use to something being called this, but in other people's time, they were use of that same thing being called that.

For example. Wide leg pants for women today are called wide legs, but back in the day, it was called bell bottoms.

Another thing about Historical books. The hero tends to not be a virgin. Back in the day, not every man was having sex, just like today. Not every man is having sex. No matter what people want people to believe.

Even in Contemporary books today. Some people think it's strange that a woman is in her late 20's and still a virgin. What's so strange about that?

Sharon wrote: "Shirley wrote: "I read many types of books and some I have thrown across the room. The one that stands out the most was an apocalyptic story where people (many people) were being hit by a baseball..."

Hi Sharon,

I am a scientist and agree with the partial decapitation or internal decapitation. However, it isn't going to happen over and over and over to multiple people.

WIth regards to the POTUS, you would have to read the book to see what I mean. The writer did no research into what the POTUS would do in a crisis situation. It was totally unrealistic.