Favorite Enemies
- A Little Sisterly Advice
- Cheeky Reads
- DRD aka Donna's Blog
- Gunner Marnee's Blog
- J.K. Coi: Living with Immortals
- Just Janga
- Killer Fiction
- Kimberly Killion
- Maggie Robinson
- Maureen O. Betita
- Megan Kelly
- Pam Clare
- Renee Lynn Scott
- Romance Bandits
- Romance Dish
- Scapegoat's Blogspot
- Smartass Romance
- Terri Osburn Writes Romance
- Tessa Dare
- Vauxhall Vixens
Blog Archive
Powered by Blogger.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Wait, That Can't Be Right
Some readers are such sticklers for accuracy they will stop reading, or even throw a book against the wall, if information isn't presented properly.
And when I say, "throw a book against the wall", I am of course talking about print books. I'm not sure how one expresses disgust with an e-book. I would guess the book would be deleted, but how is the vehemence expressed? Holding the delete key longer than necessary? Scowling while doing so? Making a pretend throwing movement and THEN hitting the delete key?
Reading is obviously a subjective activity, which is why I frequently love a book that everyone else ignores, and why I'm puzzled when everyone loves something I find less interesting than the owners' manual of my curling iron.
So I'm intrigued by what will make a reader respond a certain way when it comes to inaccuracies.
For instance, I read a book that said the heroine used finely-ground coffee in her French press coffee maker. This is wrong. Majorly wrong. I know because I make French press coffee almost daily, and have done so for years. If you use finely-ground coffee, it's going to be tough—nearly impossible--to press the plunger down. And how do I know this? Because once I was forced to use the only coffee I had on hand—finely-ground coffee—in the only coffee maker I had on hand—a French press. It beefed up my biceps, but I nearly wept when it seemed I might not get to drink coffee that particular day.
However, this faux pas did not make me foam at the mouth and declare I would never read this author again. It could have, because the heroine was a foodie, and her career was in the food business, so this little piece was presented as a "fact" of how French press coffee is made.
To me it was an annoyance, and it pulled me out of the story for just a moment--but not any more than if my phone rang and I glanced at the caller ID hoping to see "Christine" listed, or if somebody at Starbucks interrupted my writing to ask if I was a writer and then started yakking about the book they were going to write someday.
For someone else, though, that little factual boo-boo with the coffee might have been the inciting incident for a permanent mental meltdown, or a scathing letter to the author, or even a blast on a public forum.
I watch the TV show, Psych, which is supposedly set in Santa Barbara. While I have never been there, I have been to several other cities and regions of California. I might be convinced Santa Barbara is actually being depicted in this show. . .except there are a majority of scenes where it is raining AND the characters' breath is visibly frosty AND there is not a palm tree in sight. I actually know they are filming in Vancouver, BC (where there is an abundance of rain, it is definitely cooler, and they have a ton of evergreen trees).
Still, it doesn't take away from my enjoyment of the show, nor do I feel like they're pulling a fast one on me, even though they are, because I know it has more to do with production budgets and tax incentives rather than carelessness or sloppy research.
The same with the TV show Leverage. It's supposedly set in Boston, and they mention the city constantly, and show overheard shots of Beantown, but it's Portland, Oregon. I've been to both places many times, and Portland looks nothing like Boston.
Yet if this were being done in a book – saying it's set in Boston, while the author describes Portland – there would be a lot less indulgence by the reader. Is it because we know there is smoke and mirrors involved with TV and film, and we're willing to buy into that? If so, why the higher standard for books, which involves creating out of thin air just like TV and film?
So I'm curious what you think. Tell me what kinds of things you can forgive when it comes to reading, and what is impossible to forgive. What makes something an annoyance and something else a wallbanger? How anxious are you about this happening to your books?
And when I say, "throw a book against the wall", I am of course talking about print books. I'm not sure how one expresses disgust with an e-book. I would guess the book would be deleted, but how is the vehemence expressed? Holding the delete key longer than necessary? Scowling while doing so? Making a pretend throwing movement and THEN hitting the delete key?
Reading is obviously a subjective activity, which is why I frequently love a book that everyone else ignores, and why I'm puzzled when everyone loves something I find less interesting than the owners' manual of my curling iron.
So I'm intrigued by what will make a reader respond a certain way when it comes to inaccuracies.
For instance, I read a book that said the heroine used finely-ground coffee in her French press coffee maker. This is wrong. Majorly wrong. I know because I make French press coffee almost daily, and have done so for years. If you use finely-ground coffee, it's going to be tough—nearly impossible--to press the plunger down. And how do I know this? Because once I was forced to use the only coffee I had on hand—finely-ground coffee—in the only coffee maker I had on hand—a French press. It beefed up my biceps, but I nearly wept when it seemed I might not get to drink coffee that particular day.
However, this faux pas did not make me foam at the mouth and declare I would never read this author again. It could have, because the heroine was a foodie, and her career was in the food business, so this little piece was presented as a "fact" of how French press coffee is made.
To me it was an annoyance, and it pulled me out of the story for just a moment--but not any more than if my phone rang and I glanced at the caller ID hoping to see "Christine" listed, or if somebody at Starbucks interrupted my writing to ask if I was a writer and then started yakking about the book they were going to write someday.
For someone else, though, that little factual boo-boo with the coffee might have been the inciting incident for a permanent mental meltdown, or a scathing letter to the author, or even a blast on a public forum.
I watch the TV show, Psych, which is supposedly set in Santa Barbara. While I have never been there, I have been to several other cities and regions of California. I might be convinced Santa Barbara is actually being depicted in this show. . .except there are a majority of scenes where it is raining AND the characters' breath is visibly frosty AND there is not a palm tree in sight. I actually know they are filming in Vancouver, BC (where there is an abundance of rain, it is definitely cooler, and they have a ton of evergreen trees).
Still, it doesn't take away from my enjoyment of the show, nor do I feel like they're pulling a fast one on me, even though they are, because I know it has more to do with production budgets and tax incentives rather than carelessness or sloppy research.
The same with the TV show Leverage. It's supposedly set in Boston, and they mention the city constantly, and show overheard shots of Beantown, but it's Portland, Oregon. I've been to both places many times, and Portland looks nothing like Boston.
Yet if this were being done in a book – saying it's set in Boston, while the author describes Portland – there would be a lot less indulgence by the reader. Is it because we know there is smoke and mirrors involved with TV and film, and we're willing to buy into that? If so, why the higher standard for books, which involves creating out of thin air just like TV and film?
So I'm curious what you think. Tell me what kinds of things you can forgive when it comes to reading, and what is impossible to forgive. What makes something an annoyance and something else a wallbanger? How anxious are you about this happening to your books?
Labels:
DRD Dealings (Donna)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Books by the Crew
74 comments:
I read a book with my e-reader that, at the end...oh, I wish it had been a print book so I could burn it. I wanted to throw it, stomp on it...bury it, revive it as a zombie and have it walk off a thousand foot cliff.
Deep breath. I don't read her anymore...
Little things don't really bother me. I think the reason book readers have low tolerance for things wrong...well, readers have to conjure the picture in their head...if they know it's wrong they can't get that picture to work. Television shows get away with it because we aren't really looking at all that stuff. We're watching the characters!
The Mentalist is supposedly set in Sacramento...and I love when they have characters drive to LA and back in one afternoon... Yup. In what universe?
I can forgive most anything, but a really sh*tty ending. Author betrayal! ARGH!
I have a folder on my computer entitled 'e-book garbage'.
Rubbish goes in there where there is also a black list for authors that I never want to read again.
I haven't shredded any books as yet, except some porn that somehow passed through my filters.
I hate condemning an author for ever cus I know that they are doing their best.
AND its always possible that I might give them a second chance ... perhaps at Christmas! :lol:
Can't say that factual inaccuracy bothers me too much when reading fiction unless I'm in a picky mood.
I seem to recall that there was a Western series on TV that I enjoyed as a youngster. Pretty sure the 'ranch' was located in Essex (Southern England) though they might have ventured into Wales for the more rugged scenery. It was the characters that mattered. The showdown, The fast draw, The saloon bar brawl .... etc.
Though blatant historical errors might irritate me more. An author committing lots of those will probably end up in e-book garbage, and never be read again!
Chance, too bad about the book you mentioned. And too bad there wasn't a better way to express your displeasure. LOL
A lot of things get by on the screen that doesn't work in books -- like the short travel distances, or when they fall into the water and in the next scene they're completely dry again. LOL
I think I'm with you on the ending. If I've made it that far, and invested emotionally, I want a decent payoff for that. So that would make me crazy if I didn't get that.
I've been reading nothing but ebooks for the last few months and fortunately, have not had a wall-banger one. Since I have no desire to break my eReader, I'll have to find an alternative tantrum should this problem arise.
I wouldn't have known the French Press thing. In fact, I probably couldn't pick a French Press out of a lineup. It's the blatant mis-steps that tick me off. Read a book once set in Atlanta and the heroine walked out of a bar into the "South Caroline heat". In the same book, character names got switched during the big fight scene. I decided that author was not for me.
I wasn't too worried about this in my own book, until you just asked. LOL! Actually, my heroine is a HS English teacher and I've already been told by one friend, who was also a teacher for many years, that my premise is implausible. *sigh* Can't win them all.
Q, how big is that folder of e-book garbage? Just wondering, especially since you also have an author black list there!
I'm like you--I hate to condemn an author since I know they're doing their best. And sometimes there just isn't an answer to something after hours of research. I suppose somebody somewhere will know the answer, but it's probably not likely they'll be reading MY book. LOL
You reminded me of something I saw when I lived on Long Island. I was driving out to Montauk and it's definitely dunes and sand and beach on both sides of the road, and then it dipped down into this valley - and there was this big RANCH, with horses and corrals and barns. On both sides of the road. LOL And they said it was the first ranch in North America or something. But if I'd read that I would have definitely thought they were pulling my leg. It's not the spot you'd expect to see a real live working ranch. LOL
Terri, glad to hear you haven't had any wallbanger ones. LOL
And the French press is just something I happen to know. We all have something we know from dealing with it on a daily basis, which makes us "experts" on things like that I guess.
It's too bad about missteps, because that means they've been missed during the editorial process too.
I always get a little irked by the "this couldn't happen" thing in stories. If it's plausible, I'll bite. I'm not reading for 100% real-life accuracy. LOL If I was, these stories would have a lot of bickering and general unhappiness and no HEA!
Forgot to answer the TV stuff. I think writers are held more accountable because we don't have to actually created it. Make it a real thing. A little research, some detailed descriptions on paper, and we can take the reader there. It's a lot less physical and financially complicated to create it on paper than create it on screen.
I wonder if it also has to do with the intensity of the reader experience. Everyone always says, "Oh the book was SO much better than the movie." And it's because we're in the characters' heads, and while we can get emotionally involved in a TV/movie situation, we are WATCHING it. Reading involves our brain in a different fashion.
That's my current theory. LOL As of this particular moment.
When I read, I'm reading for the romance, I'm so wrapped up in the chemistry of the characters that the scenery falls away in my mind. I sometimes skip neverending passages about the landscape. However, there are things that can make a book a wallbanger for me. I'm a very tolerable reader, unless a) the heroine is so whiney someone needs to bitch slap her, b) the hero is a rapist in disguise, or c) the story becomes too crazy or creepy. (I can't be the only reader that thinks Edward and Bella's baby gives Rosemary's baby a good run in the creepy department. *shudder*) With books, I'm more into the charaters, and with tv or movies, I'm the opposite. I'll tear a movie to shreds dissecting it.
Most of my wallbangers--with two notable exceptions--have to do with characters vs historical plausibility. It doesn't have to do with the character who in 1850 does her laundry in half an hour before hanging it out to dry. Or that she seems to have a lot of free time to spy on her loved ones when she'd be doing a lot of menial tasks just to survive. That's not the crap that bothers me so much.
It's the character mentality of "I want to have sex with him and I just met him" from someone set more than a 100 years ago. Or sometimes even 70 years ago. I'm not saying people didn't want to have sex--but modern characters in books aren't as hung up about wanting to have the sex as I would think the average person from that era would be. WHERE ARE THE HANGUPS? That's what I want to know. This was the era of bible-thumpers and "sinners in the hands of an angry God" and no birth control. Where pregnant unmarried women were shunned or thrown into an asylum. Where women were "hysterical" and went to the doctor to get their orgasms.
I'm not saying the stories have to be THAT realistic. I don't want them THAT realistic. I just don't want the damned characters to be that damned well-adjusted when I can't imagine they would be. There were no therapists; you didn't talk about your problems--you prayed to God at best. Maybe there was less mental ill-health because people were too busy trying to do the everyday stuff--great, but if they're that busy, I sincerely doubt they're planning to throw their virginity away on the first guy they can find so they don't have to marry an old man.
I just don't like modern sensibilities given to my historic characters.
Now that said, it also depends on author voice. I just read a book called The Hawk by Monica McCarty. The hero is yummy personified in my opinion. The hero and heroine finally start having sex mid-through the book, which is fine, and at one point they are in a tiny boat, inches from DEATH in a storm, and they have sex. I thought it was incredibly hot. He then (after recovering I assume) swam off in the stormy water while she was rescued by the English. Did I freak out? No. I thought, "Sure, that's plausible. If I thought I was going to die, I'd have sex in the cold rain in a rickety boat with Mr. Yummy." and "Yeah, he could make that swim, he's done it numerous time. He's a Special Ops guy."
However, another review on Amazon revealed to me that I was probably in the minority about that scene. That made the book a total wallbanger for her.
Now the two exceptions: one was a medieval book (set 1305) where I was annoyed that the heroine was basically living alone without any male interference--and she wasn't a widow. She was single, unmarried virgin. Okay, no, but continuing on... Then she was raising the son of a friend, but she claimed the boy as her own. Saying it was her bastard child. RIGHT--and she wasn't locked away or shunned? YOU MUST BE KIDDING. Strike three was when she had the boy eating chocolate. CHOCOLATE, which wasn't introduced to Europe until the 1600s. Complete wallbanger. Did not finish. Still pissed to this day.
The other wallbanger. The author had "set up" two characters to get together, but when it came time for their book, set up the heroine with someone else entirely. Someone we'd never met. Acted like all that "set up stuff" was in our heads... I've been told the book was very good and very romantic. I don't care.
MistyJo, I think that's where I am with romances -- if I'm wrapped up in the characters and their romance, I don't really care too much about other stuff. I might think, "that would never happen", but it wouldn't probably stop me from finishing if I like the hero and heroine.
Although you are right about whiny heroines. Or the ones who do dumb things because the plot requires it in order to move forward. LOL I haven't seen the rapist in disguise thing, but that would be awful.
I didn't finish reading the last Edward and Bella book, because I could sense where it was going, and it felt totally creepy. I decided to leave with good memories of the books rather than having it spoiled for me.
Hellion, I had to cover my eyes while you were discussing THE HAWK. LOL I just finished THE CHIEF, and I'm getting ready to read THE HAWK next (I think it's the one I recently won too.)
But you're right -- what works for one person is totally wrong for someone else.
I also agree about the historical plausability aspect. It seems that what you are describing is considered "fresh" for romance nowadays, unfortunately.
The only "up" side to that may be that we've progressed so far that we can't imagine it being different than what we experience today. :) Of course, it's always good to be reminded what things were like, so we appreciate what we have now.
I don't like the "bait and switch" thing with characters either. Let me know who I'm supposed to lust after, and I'm good. LOL
Great blog, Donna! :)
I can usually tolerate a lot as long as it's well explained and it doesn't seem like the author's getting too involved.
For instance, I can't stand when the hero and heroine aren't getting along and it gets to the black moment and you think nothing's going to work out and then some random, completely out of the blue plot device is thrown in there and is used to explain everything. Or some random external event happens and gets them to make up. SOoo annoying.
But I'm not a stickler for historical detail as long as it's not completely blatant. A character calling someone on their cell phone in a traditional Victorian? Um, sorry. Now in a Neo-Victorian steampunk? That's a different story. I probably wouldn't have gotten the French press reference, Donna. But if someone had been drinking a mochalatte in WWII? Probably would have set off my internal alarm.
Marn, I think we all have little areas of expertise that would make us sit up and take notice and that would sail by everyone else.
I remember years ago someone talking about a story they were writing that involved a mall Santa not being available for whatever reason, and they needed an immediate substitute, and they used the hero. Sounds cute. But somebody who had WORKED for a mall said that would never happen, because they always had two or three people on call to hire as backup Santas. LOL
So there are experts everywhere, on every topic. Which is why I get nervous about my own crazy stories sometimes.
What did you mean about "the author not getting too involved"? You mean being an obvious puppetmaster?
Yes, an author being an obvious puppetmaster. When the characters are manipulated by either external conflicts/plot devices, especially when it seems completely out of the blue or when they have some unexplained epiphany, like divine intervention. Random natural disasters, psychotic exes showing up in the last quarter of the book, stuff like that. I can buy the craziest stuff as long as it's set up in the story and as long as the h/h are acting like they should and not completely out of character.
But when it feels like the author got to the black moment and went, "Holy sh*t, they really DO hate each other" and then they scramble to tie things up, that's when I get frustrated.
*steps off soap box*
Maybe that's my problem. *LOL* I mean, I agree we're humans and our wants and desires and sins haven't changed much in thousands of years. I think what annoys me is not so much the characters--but that SOCIETY, which is a character in and of itself and a setting, is treated like wallpaper a lot of the time. Society has changed--at least on a surface level. As a society, we do punish people who do not fit our level of acceptability; however we do think we're more evolved because we're a lot more open about sex. But the fact is we're just as hung up now about sex as we were then, we just treat it differently.
People were DIFFERENT then. You know what amuses me is that we go off about the kids today, about how rude they are...how they're so entitled and take stuff for granted, can't communicate because they're always on their phones, et al. Yet if you ask the generation before us and they'd say the same. And the generation before them would say the same before them.
I believe 100 years ago, we were a lot less cynical, a lot more spiritually open, less sex oriented as the be all for living (I'm not saying we weren't interested), more polite and hospitable, more likely to look after our neighbors after more than just a tragedy...and yet those things are not conveyed as often in novels nowadays because those are not experiences I believe the average writer is experienced with. We write what we know. Some writers DO write with less cynicism and less sex be-all...and those writers get shunted to mid-lists because the stories aren't hot enough. And then we all get lectured this is all fantasy anyway. Yes, but it has to be a fantasy I believe in.
However, reading a lot of Amazon reviews with readers who are annoyed with virgin heroines--apparently it's been so long they've forgotten what it was like to be one--they go off if their historical virgin is a nincompoop. I want to know of what virgin ISN'T a nincompoop?
My biggest hangups right now with books are the characters used as puppets to serve the author's plot, and stupid characters. Like, really stupid. I can handle stubborn, or even heavy denial, but not stupid.
I read at least two books last year where it was clear the author simply made a list of what all she wanted to happen in the story. Didn't matter who the characters were, in what time period she was writing. These things were going to happen.
So a heroine burned before determined not to be burned again acted the complete opposite of woman hell bent on self-preservation. And not AFTER she'd fallen for the hero, but very early on.
Then there was the heroine who changed completely from one scene to the next. DRASTIC shifts from cold to hot to cold to red hot. Totally TSTL. That book made me want to stab people.
I got distracted in the middle of typing my comment and Marn beat me to it. LOL! I could have just said "Ditto Marn". She said it better than I did anyway.
Oh this is fun! I watch The Office "set in Scranton, PA" but really shot at a studio where there are palm trees. I was delighted when they went to the effort to spray salt on the cars from crazy weather conditions, and also plug in things from the local grocery stores and radio stations... so fun!
I also love it when I find a book like this, where, they have everything so completely right... but if I am reading about a land in a far off place I've never been to... I bet I wouldn't catch a thing, or maybe even miss out on some of the great research someone did to make it accurate.
Things that throw me out of a story are when the characters hit a wall, and are nothing like the character that was fleshed out for hundereds of pages. One time a hero said something so bad, so icky, and so un hero like, I threw the book in the garbage, and just stopped reading. It didn't have anything to do with the plot, story, the situation... almost like a political view just hunkered down and took hold of the whole page... very odd. But that only happened to me one time.
Look at this... hahah Yes... what Marnee & Bo'sun said!
I'm going to take this moment to plug Pamela Clare. I just read my third Pamela Clare I-team book and I am humbled and amazed by how she constructs her plots. All three times I didn't pick the "bad guy," at least not until close to the end. That rarely happens, usually I can see whodunit a mile away. These I couldn't. And her characters and black moments were so well constructed that I got that little rush each time, that wave of emotion that I love in the dark moment when things look so sad and I'm so heartbroken for them... you know, that thing that makes the HEA just that much better.
There are some wild things that happen in those books but it all ties together so well that I bought all of it, swallowed them whole.
And I'm sorry! I didn't mean to ruin The Hawk! I thought it was very good. I very much enjoyed the hero and hope you're enjoying The Chief.
Hellie, you didn't ruin anything! It was more of a "I don't want to see what happens before I read it" kind of a thing. LOL Of course, with my memory I'll forget about it before I get the book!
Marn, I see what you're saying. Fictional life requires more logic to it, so as a writer it requires going back to make sure it's set up properly, even though it may not have been there originally.
And maybe it's hard to see, when you're all mired in the story creation. Mmm. I might be freaking myself out now. LOL
BTW - Donna - are you under a giant blanket of snow? On the way to work, I heard you guys were hit hard with snow and Chance had an earthquake. Our crew is practically under attack!
Hellie, you're right that each generation considers themselves "modern", but there's always something that needs changing, so that the next generation can feel "modern". LOL
I worry about my "virgin heroines" not finding a market nowadays, but I'm hoping that the trends come back around on this. I mean, I can only imagine how it must have been to pitch a "seasoned" heroine at one point in time. LOL That must have been taboo and now it's the norm. :)
Terri, that IS maddening -- if you're going to stage a play, at least make the characters fit the plot! And they have to match the characteristics you SAY they have.
I think that's why I like to get through a first draft with my characters before I revise--it gives me a chance to really see how they act in certain situations.
Kinda like being stuck on a cross-country trip with somebody. LOL
Laura, I think that hero would have thrown me out of the story too--and I would have thrown him under the bus for disguising his true identity and/or intentions! Yikes.
And it's fun when you get to see the local flavor depicted on TV. I remember seeing "Royal Pains" which is set in the Hamptons, and they had a scene where the cars are at a standstill on Route 27 trying to get in from the city. Perfect. BUT, they didn't have the right scenery--they'd actually filmed that in a different part of Long Island, BUT I think it looked like what people would EXPECT.
So I guess they took care of both camps that way. LOL
Terri, I haven't seen this kind of snow in a wicked long time. At midnight, there was nothing. I looked outside at 2 a.m. and it was coming down like white rain, just pouring snow. When I got up around 8:30, there was close to a foot of snow. I'm not sure I can open my front door! And the evergreen tree outside. . .the branches are touching the ground cuz the snow is so heavy.
And it's not supposed to stop snowing for several hours! I think they're guesstimating 2 feet for us.
I hadn't heard of the earthquake! I better check that out. Anyone heard from Chance?
I love virgin heroines, Donna. You'll always have a market for me. Now virgin heroes...not so much. Surely everything old will become new again, right?
Marn, I think I steered away from a previous recommendation regarding Pamela C -- her topics were too intense for me. But I like what you described about her plots, so I'll see if I can give it a try, for research purposes. LOL
Aw, thanks, Hellie. Glad to hear it. Because I'm pretty sure my stories will drive you crazy in a different way. LOL
You could just send her one and let her judge for herself. I mean, they're done, right? :)
I emailed Chance earlier, but haven't heard back. I'm staying optimistic and assuming she's just sleeping in.
Yawn! Yup, just got up. Earthquake woke me around midnight, got Bonnie all riled up. Bit of a roller, but no damage...no biggie. ;-)
Fascinating discussion! I get what Hellie is saying about how historical characters, act, etc...though I'm not sure I agree that society hasn't changed on how it feels about things. Nowadays, depending on where one lives, you're more likely to be shunned for rejecting the gay couple next door than by accepting them!
You could just send her one and let her judge for herself. I mean, they’re done, right?
Aw, well, I know how busy everyone is, and I don't want anyone to HAVE to be nice about something I wrote if they don't like it, and. . .oh look. The snow plows.
*runs to the window*
Glad the earthquake didn't cause you any damage, Chance. I hate them though. I've been through a couple and it's hard to not keep waiting for the aftershocks.
Which SOUNDS like I'm talking about something else, but I'm not. LOL
I also agree that things change, and sometimes it feels like it doesn't change fast enough, but I'm amazed at all the societal taboos I've seen knocked down in my lifetime.
No, I agree, Chance, we shun just as much now as we used to. We just find different people to shun. Now it's in vogue to shun people of faith, especially if their beliefs put a crimp in our lives in any way. I can't say I don't run the other way if I see a Holy One headed in my direction, but admittedly, shunning them isn't any nicer than shunning the homosexual couples 30 years ago.
Perhaps we've always got to shun somebody. We always have to believe there is someone we're better than. *LOL*
Which is why I shun Republicans.
Oh, and how about in the 1500s, it was acceptable and the NORM for a 20-30+ year old man to marry a 13 year old bride. Nowadays that would be child porn. Talk about a guy who'd be shunned and reviled now. But in those days, she'd be shunned and reviled if she didn't give him an heir--because you know, it'd be HER fault. *LOL*
Though I'm guessing not every 13 year old bride was married to some lech in his 20s and 30s. I would imagine there were a lot of 13 year olds married to similar aged grooms. Which is a bunch of child marriages...and also seems weird to me.
I was in bed, heard my closet doors creak, felt the roll...thought it was going to be worse but was waiting to see...and it was done. Poor Bonnie got all barky...her first quake!
I get more nervous when we've gone a long while without one! We had a small one on Sunday, I think. Or was it Saturday? Might have been Friday... I was driving and didn't feel it, heard about it later.
I agree, it's amazing to realize how much has changed with society, not how much stays the same.
I have one other book I stopped reading and never finished. Some supposedly award winning bit of scifi... It meandered, and it was huge and I had other things to do with my life!
Good point, Hellie, about the 13 year old brides. LOL Or how moms nowadays are usually MUCH older, which was weird back in the day when my mom had me at age 17 -- now THAT seems unusual, but it was the norm then. LOL
My husband was looking at a family record a relative posted... His grandfather was 13 when his first son was born! Granted this was the Phillipines, but wow! My grandmother was 15 when my mother was born...almost 16.
Didn't men keep marrying because the wives died in chldbirth, so they kept trying?
That child birthing thing is still different today depending on where you live. I had kiddo when I was 27 back in AR, and I was like the oldest mother at daycare. I felt ancient. Here, I'm the average mom age of an 11 yr old.
Chance, I'm glad it wasn't too rough. I can see where you would get nervous without an earthquake every so often to shake things back into place. :)
I'm trying to work on my WIP today -- hope I don't second guess every word after our discussion here. LOL
Chance, I do a lot of family tree research, and it always amazes me how MANY kids they had, whether it was with one wife or three or four. LOL So a lot of kids made it through!
Which just goes to show you a LOT of sex was goin' on back in the day. LOL
I don't think Arkansas realizes we're living in the 21st century instead of the 19th.
I don’t think Arkansas realizes we’re living in the 21st century instead of the 19th.
This is true.
Which just goes to show you a LOT of sex was goin’ on back in the day.
No reality TV back in the day! *LOL* What else were you going to do at bedtime?
Oh, and I assume there is just as much married sex then as there is now (or perhaps more--since again, they didn't have TVs...), we just have more available birth control and less need for ready made slave labor.
;-) Yeah, kids...the ready made slave!
Having kids now is way less cost effective.
Not mine. I'd sell her cheap though, if anyone is interested. Marn, she'd make a good babysitter, if you can tolerate the huffing and eye rolling.
Sorry I disappeared for a bit. The neighbor guys wanted to move my car so they could plow, and asked if I could come out and move it. LOL Uh, NO! Anyway, they did it and they are having SO much fun, it cracks me up.
It's still snowing too.
Of course it's way less cost effective. In the old days, their idea of an after school extra curricular activity would be farm chores or harvesting. Nowadays these activities are about 2 or 3 "physical group activities" and 1 "social development" or "well-rounded activity"--ha, ha, in the old days that would have been chores and church.
Marn, she’d make a good babysitter, if you can tolerate the huffing and eye rolling.
hmmmm.... this is tempting. I already tune out all manner of erroneous noise--whining, pleading, general four-year-old-ness etc. If I just reprogram to include tween-ness, we could have a deal....
It occured to me, I do know that I love it when an author really gets things right. There was a mystery I used to read, set in Sacramento, and it sorta tickled me pink when I'd drive by places the author used in the book. The coffee shop, the cafe, the park...and used them where they were, as they were!
Moving to Santa Cruz I read Laura Crum, with her mystery series set here first. And it made me smile when I saw the places her characters had lunch at, etc.
So, just as getting it wrong can jar a reader out of the book, getting it right can sell it!
Marn - I should warn you, it's so bad, I'd be willing to trade your two for mine.
Chance - Good point!
*bowing
Thank you, thank you very much!
I do have minor flashes of brilliance very now and then!
Damn, why do I smell pizza in a Starbucks? I hate dieting, the nose plays tricks on me...and my tummy. Which was fine and is now growling..
Chance, I know exactly what you mean. I loved all the Boston references in Robert Parker and Dennis Lehane's books -- I read them before I moved out here, and when I did move, it felt a lot more familiar.
Mmm, pizza sounds good. Hoping we don't lose power here today. Yeesh.
Oh, Marn, this made me laugh -- the other day an online friend said she asked her four-year-old son, with a great deal of exasperation, "Can't you be good today?" And he answered, "I don't know. I'll try." LOL
Like talking to a man... "Can you quit looking at other women's boobs?"
"I don't now. I'll try."
“Can’t you be good today?” And he answered, “I don’t know. I’ll try.” LOL
Maybe they're looking in on my life....
They know they're being difficult but it's like they can't help themselves.
Ter, wow, both for yours? It must be bad.
I'll say this. Relish these days when they seem to like you.
LOL!!
I think most readers are bothered wheh an author appears to know less about a subject or a setting she/he is writing about than the reader knows. Frankly, I'm seldom even aware of errors concerning minor points of law or the correct flowers blooming in a particular place and season because I don't know much about those things. On the other hand, I abandoned an autobuy author several years ago because she did such a dreadful job capturing a Southern accent. She had the hero using "y'all" in every other sentence, including frequent references to the heroine, and it made me ill. I sometimes want to weep over dangling modifiers and pronoun case errors. I'm sure that many readers are unaware of the wrongness in the unnamed authors use of Southern language and pay little attention to grammatical errors. The "implausibility" Terri mentioned in her work probably won't be noticed by her readers who know little about the process of book selection and purchase.
Sometimes the complaining readers are wrong too. More than once I've seen a readers berate an author for an "error" and seen the author respond that according to sources x, y, and z, such and such happened exactly this way. just this week I read a review that mocked an author for the absence of cell phones and the internet in her book. The reader seemed unaware that the book was a reissue of a 1980s book.
Ter, do you think there's a hormone that controls the huffing and eyerolling? It's driving me crazy too, and Grand #1's mother is threatening to send her to live with us if it gets worse. She'd better be kidding.
Still snowing! LOL
Janga, I swear my "still snowing" comment was up there before your posts. LOL I wasn't ignoring you!
That's a great description -- the reader knowing more than the writer. Which of course is what terrifies me as a writer, because I'm sure that I will not achieve 100% accuracy each time. :) The instance you mention seems as if it's more important for the reader to demonstrate their supposed knowledge rather than focus on whether or not it was a good read. :(
Janga - I don't know but if there is, then I went to send Kiddo's out for hormone therapy. Or perhaps I'll need therapy before this phase is over.
The worst part is that is seems to switch overnight!
Does sounds like hormones. They haunt us. I've wanted to slap kittens the last few days...
Yeah, Janga...I worry a bit about nautical specialists or pirate specialists or Caribbean specialists calling me out... You know, I can't do anything about it. Save ignore or explain that not only is none of it historically real, but it's also not real/real.
*snort
Things that drive Me crazy? If you are writing a Historical then make sure that you get the History right. If you’re writing a Contemporary make sure that you’re not trying to be so modern & cutting edge that you end up sounding Outdated by the time the story gets published. If you’re writing a series or you have characters that show up in more than one book?
Please.
Make sure that the Physical description of those characters is consistent . Otherwise you’re going to drive your readers crazy! And away… To search for another writer who is more consistent.
Most readers see a lack of consistency as a lack of craftsmanship. And control. When an author loses control of the story, they also lose control of the reader’s interest. Because the reader is not thinking about your story, they’re thinking about your mistake.
Really? It comes down to this: Writers who don’t show consistency in their work will have a hard time convincing a reader to pick up their books a second time.
I’ve wanted to slap kittens the last few days…
Oooh? And here I thought of all that shaking was being caused by earthquakes! ;)
Just pushing it, Julie... Though maybe mama earth is feeling like slapping kittens...
Poor Chance, poor Mama Earth! You both need some hugs & a lil' TLC.
Post a Comment