More than Just a Rating discussion

I just read a book that I consider more of a fable than a straight novel: (The Storied Life of A.J. Fikry). The characters appealed to me (in part) because they have universal appeal, and because every reader can relate to at least some aspects/traits of most of them. They're identifiable archetypes. But another reviewer here says that the whole book is full of clichés.

So, I can almost see her point. But I disagree, because each character is an individual, too. When I see the world 'cliché' I think the reviewer is talking about predictability and about 'cardboard' or 'stock' characters. And I honestly did not see that in this book.

So anyway I googled a bit and found this essay, which I absolutely love, and you-all might enjoy it, too.

https://www.quora.com/Writing-Im-writ...

Thanks for sharing the interesting article from Jacqueline Lichtenberg.

Maybe the line between archetype and cliche is as much or more subjective than objective. If so, it will depend on the reader whether story and characters seem cliche.

A friend enjoys many of the same books I do. She thinks a particular book is one of author's best. To me it's full of both cliche plot devices and cliche character behavior. In my mind that book is SF rewrite of too many 20th century Harlequin Presents where the editorial guidelines were so strict too many of the books were too much alike.

That makes sense.

I suppose it also depends on the depth of experience a reader has. If one has never read a certain 'type' before, the first time it's encountered will seem special. Indeed, I see that in SF a lot.

Same for tropes, motifs, themes, etc. Those of us who read a lot can be harder to please because we've seen it done before... so this time it has to be done *better.*