28Kviews
40 Annoying Literary Moments That Drive Readers Up The Wall: As Shared By The Bored Panda Community
Most of us enjoy cuddling up with our favorite book in the evening and immersing ourselves in the author's imaginative or actual world with a goal to learn, entertain and relax.
However, from time to time, when reading a book, we notice things that seem to spoil our entire appetite for reading! This is where our community members share the biggest literary pet peeves they've noticed!
This post may include affiliate links.
Where did putting the number of the series on the spine go? Huh??? SOMEBODY TELL ME!!!
To add to this, changing the style, writing direction/size, size and or picture style of a series of books so people can never have a pleasing set. Looking at you discworld. Slowly buying my way through the editions specifically made to stop this issue that people had to scream for years for.
Women characters written by men. Especially when everything they do has to do with their breasts. Or when it’s an adventure/action novel and the woman has to be portrayed as emotionless, fully badass, and completely misogynistic to other women because god forbid a girl with stereotypically feminine qualities is also tough and powerful.
Oh, yes, yes, yes. I tried a few novels with women as the central characters written by men. Now I don't care what the book is. If it's about a woman and written by a man, I will not read it!
Typos, misspellings, inaccurate changes in later scenes (in the first, he ordered a burger, but later in the same meal he cuts his steak), using the wrong name. Where the hell are the editors?
How every single book that exists is a New York Times Bestseller or is written by a New York Times Bestselling Author... That's like the participation award for writers at this point.
When you're reading a really good book/series, but its quality starts to go down slowly.
Something that drives me crazy is those fantasy series in which there's a little magical person who has to save everyone. We're almost at the end and none of her magic powers are working. Suddenly, she remembers an old power that she hasn't used in years and everyone is saved!
If you're kidnapped, but fall 'in love' with your kidnapper, it's not love. It's Stockholm syndrome.
Lending a book to someone and it coming back dogeared, or otherwise messed up.
A series that revolves around a "Chosen One" who is often a whiny impetuous brat.
There have been a lot of those lately, a lot of them "young adult" series (or is the phrase 'new adult' now?). I love Urban Fantasy and can't just pick up a new book, I have to research the author and make sure it's not another paranormal romance. Can't I just have modern era supernatural beings interacting with humans?
Incorrectness. Just they are straight-up wrong somewhere in the book. I also can't stand authors that like to sound smart (or just are smart....) and they use way too many words.
For example:
The quick brown fox jumped over the log.
The expeditious mahogany Vulpes vulpes (the scientific name for fox, had to look it up) ascended into the amalgamation of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide, water, etc. Thereupon, the creature plunged to the earth on the far periphery of the length of the limb of a deceased large plant enclosed in the bark.
I'm all for describing things and using details, but there is indeed such a thing as 'too many words'.
This goes back to Highschool. Having a book you loved as subject matter in English, and after the teacher and class have analysed it thoroughly, you can't even look at anymore.
I hate it when I think I'm being a good little reader by reading the introduction to a novel before reading the novel and then they tell me the ending of the story in the introduction. I don't care if the book was first published a hundred years ago!!!
In books when the "villain's" problems could have been solved by rational thinking, and the main characters are the actual jerks.
Female "characters" with zero personality that are simply a love interest or damsel in distress.
When an author is great at building suspense and creating a creepy atmosphere, and then, the silly and disappointing climax comes. (Looking at you, Stephen King!)
Literally. He can write a good general story but cannot finish a book to save his life.
When you fall in love with a series, and it has some form of impact on your life - but the author turns out to be a douchebag. Separating art from the artist can be difficult.
Why does the fate of the whole world usually lie on a hormonal 16-year-old who can duel, hack and invent at level par to a 30-year-old sucked-of-life adult? Oh, and they usually are portrayed as social outcasts who will eventually marry their crush happily ever after.
I mean, that happens a lot in YA because those books are written for teenagers
When a story starts off as a mystery, but suddenly gets a big portion of romance right in the middle of the investigation. With many pages spent wondering if the feelings are mutual. Ugh... I want to know who the killer is and how they did it, not if the main character gets a mate.
We (my family) have the same problem with movies. We'll search and search for a long time, finally find something that seems to be interesting, start watching it, then it'll slowly turn into a cheesy romance to the point where it isn't worth watching any more.
Generic villains. Let's make them dark, menacing, sinister, pointed, and ugly, and they must always be dressed in black and alternating between a sneer and a maniacal cackle. The kind where you can just take one glance at them and know with all certainty that "that's the bad guy."
The actual biggest threats in life are undetectable - take notes!
Well according to hollywood, you can tell who the villain is by whether or not they are using an apple product. If they are using one, they're not the villain.
When writing a series, authors often do a bit of recap to tie in the new book to the previous book. I become annoyed when the author does this by having one character monologue the back story to a second character who already knows said back story.
I also dislike discontinuity. If a character has black hair and brown eyes, she shouldn't suddenly become auburn with green eyes in the next chapter.
Books for teenagers and young adults that romanticize violent behavior.
This wouldn't be so bad if it was occasional, but I feel it's very common in books targeting those age groups. Sometimes, perhaps even often, that character is eventually ousted by a "better" character and the reader is supposed to see how terrible the abusive character's behaviour was. Unfortunately, it mostly serves to normalise that behaviour.
I came across a book in a family member of my wife's which was part of a of a 20 volume series on projectile vomiting. Why romanticise that?
Reading the first book of a series, then waiting for ages for the second one because the author has decided to start a completely different one... I want to know how the story will end!
It gets to me when I'm reading a novel with a character smokes three packs of cigarettes a day and never coughs once in the whole book.
And then there are the scenes in which three or four people have a serious discussion which lasts for four or five pages, and everybody's coffee stays hot until the last line.
I get most of my books from an online website, Quotev. You can write and publish books there. I sure have my fair share of books on there. I hate it when I find a book I'm interested in, but the grammar is terrible! Run-on sentences, the paragraphs aren't separated, incorrect spelling, and no punctuation! It's physically painful to read.
I don't like when any novel starts to be focused on romance more than the actual story. Romance is an okay aspect, but that doesn't mean it should take over the plot of book that isn't under the category of romance.
When a famous writer has a book published only because they are a famous writer, not because the book is good or worth reading. Far too many examples to mention.
In a multi-book series, taking up most of a chapter catching readers up on the last 20 or so books. You can't get to the new story for having to reread the old one. Again.
When stories just stop. There’s no proper ending to the book, it’s like the author just got bored and gave up. The amount of times I’ve read a book that I’ve been really enjoying and at the end, the writer has just thrown anything together to end it. It’s incredibly unfulfilling and frustrating.
One of my beloved writers is Samuel Clemens. His book "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn". It was written as a perennial. He set it aside for some time and was forced by publishers to finish it. So he did, and I am sure it was not at his literary mindful leisure. But he did finish it, and the ending does seem forced, but it does not negate the pure joy it ensues. Sometimes it is not the authors fault, I just enjoy the entirety if it merits enjoyment.
When the author changes something that was kind of major. For example, say the main character was in a fight, and it mentions that he/she gets a bad cut in the side, yet three paragraphs later, the author goes on describing a nasty cut on his leg - never even mentioning his/her side cut.
I work at a library, and if a book's author's name is larger than or above the title on the spine, know that I personally want to hunt down and punch whoever at the publishing house made that decision
When the author uses the character's name a lot instead of using pronouns. I just read a book that used the name at least 7 times in a 5 line paragraph instead of using pronouns.
I read a book where the author mentioned two male names in the start of the chapter and from that moment on, the names were no longer used. I had lost track of which guy did what after half a page. It was almost as if the editor had objected to slight too many names and the author was like, "Then I will get rid of ALL THE NAMES! Happy now?"
When the "hero" refuses to kill the villain or wait too long and they escape. Like, really!?
I hate it when I read a story and the author writes: "this is relevant later." Yeah, no way, duh! If it's irrelevant to the story, it should be edited out.
I think what the author conveys when they include that is: 'I am the only smart person, and everyone else is an idiot that I have to tediously explain everything to'.
When characters all have similar names and descriptions, I keep getting confused. Or when they have a male hero whose personality is about being buff, female characters who are just there to look pretty.
I always have thought this about "Sauron" vs "Saruman" in LOTR. So confusing the first time I read it.
Not giving a reader all the clues needed to solve a mystery. Don't cheat, you can write a good mystery or you can't.
I had to stop reading P. D. James because of this, holding back information from the reader, in a Mystery Novel. Specifically, "The Lighthouse", when they find the criminal, who they had never suspected, threatening a hostage, at the top of the lighthouse, screaming psychotic, misogynistic profanities out across the ocean. There had not been a single hint that this character was so overwhelming mentally ill anywhere in the book. I was done with the writer, at this point.
When the author loses track of where what is. This is usually hands, arms, feet, background items, anything really, etc. It happens a lot, more than it should, and I know things get edited, but you need to keep track of continuity. I've read a book where they lost a whole dang character between two paragraphs.
They were sitting on the far left couch laughing silently at so-and-so, then two paragraphs later, they're climbing in the window with people welcoming them like they just got there and no mention of the person on the couch because it was the same person.
It is also a big issue in steamy books I've found. You lose track of what is where, and some things just aren't possible. I've checked the Kama Sutra - it agreed with me.
Yep lol, steamy books especially. One minute person #1 is on the back of person #2, and the next, person #2 has their neck twisted like an owl's to kiss person #1, or person #1's lips are stretching half a foot to reach person #2's.
Changing the look, style, size, colouring, text direction, font size part way through a series.
One of the first books I read was from a series called 'ranger's apprentice'. I hated when the cover art in book 4 featured the characters. The first 3 books had nothing but the title on the cover. So when I saw the designs in book 4, they looked nothing like what I invisioned them in my brain. I hated that!
Unnecessary details. Imagery and figurative language adds depth to the whole novel, but when it’s goes on and on and doesn’t end up contributing to the plot, that’s when I start getting bored of the book.
I've ended a few series over that. And given up on a few books and authors who do that, seemingly because they're trying to turn a 120 page book into 200
Using glasses as props. I hate it in books, movies, and real life because people have enough problems without a necessity being treated like a piece of decoration.
The glasses thing that really annoys me is how a character who wears them will at some point lose them for some reason. Yet said character just continues to function as normal. Like, they wear glasses for a reason and that reason is they NEED them. I wear glasses/ contacts and without them I certainly couldn't take part in some frenetic fight or drive a car in a high speed chase. Just because the sh*t has hit the fan doesn't then mean your eyes suddenly go "don't worry, here's some 20/20 vision to see you through to the end I've been holding back on".
I don’t like when authors of fantasy novels feel the need to describe the qualities of a certain race every time that character appears. Like, you don’t have to mention that the elf is “fleet of foot” every time they do something.
I was forced to read Ann Rice's "Interview with the Vampire" because my niece had to do a book report on it and was so sick with the measles she couldn't eat, let alone do her school work so I'm the nice Aunt. :) I was ready to claw my face off at the number of times Rice used the word "Preternatural" to describe anything the Vampire did. Like, 4.298 times. At least. It got cloying and boring. You get it - he's a vampire. It was as if she'd just read that word on the "Learn-A-Word-A-Day" calendar and was determined to use it in a sentence.
Novels written in the present tense. So annoying. First thing I check for when browsing books in the library or bookshop.
What happened to actual chapters? Current fiction seems to have chapters of 2-3 pages. I grew up reading Dickens, Dumas and other classic writers. The chapters were dense and long but worth the read. I feel this is pandering to the "short attention span" of the current generations, maybe it makes people feel good about themselves that they read 5 chapters ???? I just feel like the current best-selling authors are phoning it in, some writers have series where the sex scenes between the hero/heroine are exactly the same from one book to the next (I'm talking about you, J D Robb) If you can't come up with something interesting and different, just skip it. That's what I do.
Loving a whole world series [Disc world] .... And the author dies in real life ¦(
When an author doesn't do their research. For example, say a character is in labor, and the author clearly has no experience in the matter. I'm like, did no women have a hand in editing this? Did you not SPEAK to any women, or know any?? That's not how it happens!
It might be tedious, but when writing I have several tabs open, such as street view of where they are, menus of the restaurants they eat at, local events and information. That's just to "set the scene". I hate exposition, so everything has to be in the description.
I can deal with some misspellings, but, when the punctuation is a mess, such as commas where they don't belong, I will stop reading and return it, no matter how good the story.
Too much explanation and not enough dialogue. Gets tedious.
Explaining things in detail again and again and again.
Killing off important characters for no reason. MR Forbes did this in book 17 of an 18 book series. I have yet to read #18, nor any of his works since.
Absolutely agree, with additions: Dialogue that doesn’t sound like anyone speaks. I quit reading a popular forensic scientist because (s)he won’t allow her characters to use abbreviations. And if you’re killing off one of the characters, somewhere down the line both the protagonist and the author need to deal with it. Closure is important, even if the loved-one is imaginary.
People in novels would sometimes finish a cigarette in the time it took to speak two sentences. More likely, it took one cigarette to write them.
Also, nobody ever seems to need to use the bathroom, except maybe to hide out.
Or when there's an investigation or chasing/hunting down a bad guy. No one seems to sleep.
When the author spoils something that will happen later on in the book (i.e. a death, relationship, betrayal, etc.), or even just heavy foreshadowing.
Lemony Snicket did that in ASOUE. Bothered me so much when I was younger.
Stories that are tediously stretched over multiple volumes just so the author and publisher can have a "series".
It's tough going to the Sci Fi/Fantasy section and finding a book that doesn't say "Book Two of the Blahblah Trilogy" or "The first in an exciting new series...."
Stereotypes and clichés. When you're able to finish the sentence before you read it.
Even in a thriller, where the literary level is not as demanding as for a deeper novel, I'm not against a certain amount of surprise in the writing, some clever words arrangements.
Or, the opposite : when a detective novel pretends to be the next Nobel prize and, in the middle of the action, trie to go deep in the human condition analysis.
Cliches are rubbish. if you are writing a book that has a character have a tag-line... invent something. Maybe it sticks, maybe it doesn't... Or as a writer.. veil it behind something
I just really miss fun chapter titles or, you know, tables of contents in fiction at all
Specific one:
In the Harry Potter series, the character 'Remus Lupin' is a werewolf. Now 'Remus' & 'Lupin' both refer to wolves so his name is 'Wolf Wolf'.
But, he wasn't a werewolf at birth was he ? Did his parents know what was going to happen ??! Did they arrange for him to be bitten !!!?
Fantasy books without a comprehensive map of the world. It really does help one orient themselves to this new world you are creating. It shows committment of thought in the execution of the plot.
Fantasy/Science-Fiction books with no glossary or pronunciation section if your going to use bits of languages and/or names that are not frequently heard or created for the purpose of the story.
If the story has an extensive cast of characters or family then either a tree or a short bio section on who's who (examples can be found in Agatha Christie's books such as Murder in the Calais Coach; The A.B.C. Murders; etc.)
Reviews on jackets or inside covers. I want the author description to make me want to read the book some some critic. If I wanted their opinion I would read their column.
When what could be the character's first kiss is interrupted. Like COME ON!!
When a book uses an unnecessary amount of detail that has barely anything to do with the actual plot, and the story doesn't start until you get to the middle of the book.
I read a lot of books by different authors, and these peeves are in most books I read. I'm so tired of the word 'padded' to describe walking somewhere: ex. "She padded into the bathroom." Secondly, authors using names that start with the same letter for most of their characters; this happens with both first and last names. I just read a book where both female and male characters had names that started with C; six characters were introduced in the first chapter. Thirdly, I don't understand why authors feel it necessary to spend two paragraphs describing what someone is wearing, and using brand names to impress us. I'm reading a fiction crime novel; I don't care about every little thing the character is wearing. Lastly, many different characters in a book using a specific idiom; I just read two books by an author where "sharpest knife in the dishwasher" was used many times by different, unrelated characters.
Using the character's name over and over again instead of using pronouns. I swear I read a book that had the character's name at least 7 times in a 5 line paragraph instead of using a pronoun.
Maybe they're trying to avoid pronouns so that the gender is ambivalent? I dunno, just trying to be charitable here.
When a book is described as ‘unputdownable’
In the blurb. Nothing more guaranteed to make me not buy a book than describing it as that. So irritating it’s not even a real word !!!
When a book changes between past and present or between character POVs and the only way to differentiate them is the font changes or is italicized
I do like books that change point of view each chapter, though. It gives a third person level of explanation without revealing things too quickly.
Books that pretend to be completely original but are highly derivative and refuse to acknowledge it. We are all inspired by our heroes and become a synergy of all we've read so I have no problem with someone taking an idea and running. However, don't pretend you invented the wheel and expect me to be surprised when the story's climax is IT ROTATES!. This is quite prevalent in young adult fiction that is pushed on adults as well (Twilight, Harry Potter, etc). The worst is when someone straight up jacks a character, put them through the same story arc, and just changes the name.
But sometimes we think of something without being aware that it was covered already. I've had the opposite problem. A literary critic once wrote that I was influenced by five authors, without knowing that I had never read any of them and I had never even heard of one of them.
This applies to all writing (so films and games as well as books) but I really don't like stories that have a sort of 'chosen one' theme where the whole situation relies on one person to solve it and only they have the ability. I don't find it motivating at all. I like to imagine what I would do in the situations I read/watch and if that person is naturally superior or was born with a gift that is made for this I can't get into it 'cause I'm not that person. I prefer it when all characters work together and bring their own strengths, where it could have been any group of people. I find those more motivating and fun to read.
A good antagonist who is wasted. When introduced this person (or organization) is a smart, capable, dangerous, opponent who needs to be taken very seriously and who may even win occasionally. But later they just become a punching bag who only shows up to get knocked down by the hero.
Also MAPS, dammit, especially when writing fantasy or science fiction. Show me good detailed maps of where your adventures are taking place.
Investing my time reading a novel, only to get to the end and the ending is just so cheesey that it made me throw the book across the room. Yes I did!
The "strong woman" who is written by someone who has a rather skewed idea of both 'strength' and 'women'. Example: Lois Lane is supposed to be a "strong woman" - in reality, she is someone I would love to shove into a swamp. Being *unreasonably rude*, placing your own wants (not even needs) above others and shoving self-aggrandizing quips into every comment is not 'strong'. It's like there's this anathema to having a solid female character having the same heroic qualities as a male character. The 'strong woman' is constantly doing stupid, rude, and arrogant things for **no reason** (is it part of a plan? Nope. Is it part of her cover? Nope. Is there even a backstory that covers why this behaviour is the only choice available? NOPE.) - she is just 'like that' to show she's 'strong'. Eejits.
When people forget the second comma. It's "books, cheese, and more!" not "books, cheese and more!"
At least that's how I think of it.
The Oxford comma has ended as many relationships as cheating spouses. People are willing to die for an inkspot's presence or absence.
Follow through on world-building. This is especially true in fantasy and sci-fi when the author has the MacGuffin in the story but only focuses on it for the main plot. But if you have magic or tech or some object or whatever, show how it affects the rest of the world if you are adding detail about that world! Otherwise the book just seems lazy to me and pulls me right out of the story.
I'm currently reading a comic version of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? because I've recently gotten into sci-fi, but like- it got confusing fairly quickly because the POV keeps switching and they keep talking about things that haven't been introduced to the story yet. I'm trying to push through and hoping that it'll become more interesting after some drama, but I'm starting to think it's just a lost cause.
When characters should die but in the end everyone is saved/brought back to life.
Disney...
Infodumps. It's called 'backstory' for a reason: it informs the text, without being a part of it. I don't want to be fed all the author's research, world building, and character sheets in enormous indigestible lumps, I just need to know what's important to the story as it progresses.
I could also do without pointless interpersonal conflict. Or at least, if the story hinges on everyone in it behaving like enraged geese over some Big Misunderstanding or another, lean into it and make it a comedy.
Bad editing!! The improper use of 'lie' and 'lay'. FFS people, you lie down. You lay something down. You do NOT lay down.
Yep. Horrid. "I am going to lay down here". No, "lay" is past tense of "lie." E.g. I will lie on the floor, I lay on the floor, I have lain on the floor. Present tense is "lie". You can tell the difference between this and "untruth" by context. No one is going to untruth on the floor. The only use of "lay" in present-tense is when you are placing something on a surface, e.g. "lay the bricks" or "lay the book on the table". To "lay" something implies two items of relevance: the person doing the laying (the bricklayer, or myself carrying a book in my hand), and the object being laid, e.g. a book, a brick.
Trying to set an ambience by describing the protagonist listening to a very particular song:
"She sat near the window, listening to 'How Deep is Your Love' by the Bee Gees. I know the author wants to set a mood, but not all songs do that! What if the reader hates the song? or does not know it?
It doesn't matter if the reader hates the song. What matters is if the character likes it. And if I'm unfamiliar with the song I Google it.
literary ads/blurbs that tell you nothing about the book. often they say, "for fans of x books or y authors" and leave it at that.
At least there is a blurb. I hate it when the back of the book is nothing but rave reviews but I have no idea what the book is about. With some luck the inside flaps of the dust cover actually has a blurb, but sometimes that space is just an author biography. Instant non-sale.
When the child-aged main character of a novel set in the past somehow has the fully-formed values and life view of a 21st century urban liberal and goes about pluckily defying social norms left and right. Not saying characters can’t have subversive views but authors take it way too far.
When you get to the end of the novel and the author has made the "murderer" the person who showed up once , in passing at the very beginning of the novel... like the guy named Ted who lives three doors down and passed the protagonist on the street and said 'hi".
Humourless writing. I don't care what you're writing. Essay? Add humour. History book? Add humor. Story? Add Humour. Unless you're talking about something really serious (like slavery or hate crimes etc.), humour will engage, interest and entertain your reader. It doesn't have to be complicated, just some simple sarcasm or witty comment.
in English class,everything has to symbolise something
Flowers can't just be flowers anymore
When an author comes out with information in an interview or on the internet that changes big things but has nothing to do with the story (Dumbledore is gay for example) it feels like they are just pandering.
Actually, I have to disagree with this. I always thought it was kind of fun to learn extra details and miniature stories that weren't mentioned in the original book(s). As long as it's not a detail that would end up changing the whole course of/how you feel about the actual story, then it's just some bonus info.
Overuse of context-irrelevant descriptors instead of pronouns or names (ex. "said the blonde").
I'm reading 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, and Verne keeps referring to Ned Land as "the Canadian." It isn't even important to the story, it just means he speaks French, just like all the other characters.
When the recap for a book in a series isn’t well written, and it is very obvious that the author is being lazy and doesn’t have the time to delicately weave the information into the opening chapters, but just blurts it out. I’d almost rather have a paragraph that summarizes the previous books before the story starts.
There was one series I read in high school where the author had word-for-word copied exposition from book to book.
1. My biggest one is when books that are otherwise very good shove a romance in. Not everything needs a romance!
2. Romances that always start and end at the same stage of the relationship, (meeting, developing feelings, getting together) or always have a happy ending, or turn from a crush into love too fast.
3. ALWAYS refusing to kill, even in self-defense. The character could prevent mass murder, if they just shot the villain.
4. Talking forever at unwise times during combat.
5. That "strong female characters" can't like feminine things, not even just a little bit. It's ok for characters to not be feminine at all but the trope is so overused that it can be harmful.
6. All-or-nothing labels. Old or young. Feminine or masculine. Good or bad. Gay or straight. Poor or rich. One race or the other with no mixing ever.
7. SPELLING EVERYTHING OUT IMMEDIATELY. Whether it's characters or plot I enjoy a few things either left to the imagination, unlabeled, ambiguous, etc.
I agree with all of what you just wrote. I know a lot of strong, feminine women in real life, but the ones in books always have to be masculine, because feminism is "wEaK aNd BoRiNg," or whatever the hell male authors think.
The "puppet master" trope with titles like "Master" or "Director": all-knowing, all wise and always in control. It really bugs me how authors like Dan Brown, Stephenie Meyer or Susan Collins portay these master-manipulators with infinite resources, infinite connection and nfinite power that, however, are defeated by the rag-tag group of heroes with simple strategies.
I love the character of Cardinal Richelieu in The Three Musketeers, exactly because the fact of the three heroes "winning" does not affect him, it is just a minor inconvinient, as it would be in real life.
Are you saying that you do not accept that any character is invincible? Or is portrayed such? Or is infinitely wise? I agree with you. I prefer the hero or anti hero to be flawed and only to persevere based on their individual assets, and maybe luck, but mostly because of us, the readers will for them to succeed.
when literary snobs try to read too much into everything as if every everything is metaphor!
I think what Ashley is trying to say here is that time itself can be a cage as those memories that she's most attached to are out of her grasp although play significant roles in her own internal identity, whilst her peers are viewing her through the lens of the era(s) they have seen and experienced her within. This then forces her to reconstruct those relationships internally, which leads her to creating the mirrored characterizations of herself. When she uses the phrase "too much," this is alluding to her childhood during which her mother would use the same term when scolding her. This hints at the lasting impact of this disappointment (which she expands upon further in her future posts). The reader is initially led to believe that "every everything" is a typo, but as her frustration is unfolded towards the denouement of the post, it serves to depict her self-reflection as layered and convoluted as her own perspective is forced upon her through her experiences.
I hate it when authors write the hero as an absolute idiot, e.g. DBS Goku. In Z, Goku wasn’t as stupid but the writers then wrote him as an idiot. You don’t need a character to be funny from stupidity, also, Majin Buu, stupid character. Like, when he separates from himself, then combines again, he’s somehow smarter?
Goku was always "stupid", the English dub made him sound smarter than he actually was. He was both the protagonist and a massive part of the comic relief in the original versions. It's part of the whole saiyan thing, they value a good fight over the good of society. As an example, in the English dub of Z Goku lets Vegeta live so he can repent, become a better person and blah blah blah....in the original version he lets Vegeta live because he wants him to get stronger so they can fight again. As a sidenote, him getting stupider would actually make canonical sense given the sheer amount of head trauma he's endured, the dude is literally brain damaged from the start of Dragon Ball so seeing an escalation would make sense.
Anne of Green Gables is an amazing book, but the plot felt all over the place. Whenever a book is doing this, and I already feel like it’s lacking I will spank the book (yes im aware how weird I am and how this hurts paperbacks, but honestly they deserve it)
I once read a novel based on history. The author just ignored facts that made her characters look bad. It made me very angry. The author's picture was on the cover so I drew a mustache on her.
Writers who assume you are intimately familiar with the real-world settings and temporal culture references. When stories are set in a real world location that the author has grown up in, you need to dig out dictionaries, atlases, and newspapers from the applicable era to even have a remote clue what they are talking about. Just 2 decades out is bad enough, but when you cannot properly grasp a story without a bachelor's degree in the societal structure and political details in the relevant setting, the author HAS FAILED. Just about every 'classic' suffers this, yet we are force-fed the content (Looking at you Shakespeare, whoever you might be, and Dostoevsky". Yet this can be overcome - Most of Hemmingway and works such as "A Clockwork Orange" can be read & understood without requiring expertise in the backdrops.
With Dostoevsky the fault usually lies on the translator. The most popular translation was done by an Englishwoman in the 19th century and is like reading mud. It makes much more sense in Russian and if you live in Russian culture ( which is who Dostoevsky wrote it for). What you want is a better translation with explanatory notes.
Switching to italics for long periods.
My vision is sadly, not what it once was, and italics are a royal pain in the bum. I find myself having to hold the book up to my face and even then I have to angle it just right. I know I need glasses but I'm vain.
Agree. And don't be vain. There are some very cool reading glasses out there. Even the dollar store or card/stationary shops have very fashionable ones. I know people who wear 1.0 magnification reading glasses because they're so artistic or different. Statement glasses. No one will judge! Get one of those gold beaded chains and hang them from your neck and dare people to say somthing :)
Where the protagonist is an author going through some type of turmoil…. Seriously, a writer writing about being a writer?! What type of laziness is this???
The past tense of smell is smelled. Smelt is a fish. Drives me crazy when I see that.
My peeve is "lay" versus "lie". As in "I am going to lay down here". No, "lay" is past tense of "lie." E.g. I will lie on the floor, I lay on the floor, I have lain on the floor. Present tense is "lie". You can tell the difference between this and "untruth" by context. No one is going to untruth on the floor. The only use of "lay" in present-tense is when you are placing something on a surface, e.g. "lay the bricks" or "lay the book on the table". To "lay" something implies two items of relevance: the person doing the laying (the bricklayer, or myself carrying a book in my hand), and the object being laid, e.g. a book, a brick.
Romance books: The word “moist.”
Eww.
Seriously though people make fun of others for not liking the word moist when it just sounds weird!
"And then" choppy writing. "Marco grabbed his sword, and swung wildly. He landed one hit and dodged a second. His opponent dodged and faced him. "
This is kind of a corollary to the ones about continuity within a book, but...continuity within a larger series (Raymond Feist was pretty awful about this in his Riftwar novels). I realize that it becomes harder and harder to keep track of all of your characters' details the more books you write, but...at least MAKE AN EFFORT, FFS.
When there are key-components in the plot that are missing and only revealed at a later time. For example, The Princess and Pauper by Kate Brian. Ok, sure, don't tell me Princess Carina takes on an American accent until she spills her real identity to some random dude from Arizona.
I’m almost afraid to let this be published, but ….
Jane Austen.
Shame on you! Jane Austen is one of my favorite writers. But I'm just teasing because I can see your point. Her writing's not always so great. In the first chapter of Pride and Prejudice, she doesn't even take the trouble to tell us where Mr. and Mrs. Bennet are. It reads more like the dialogue of a play.
My pet peeve is when I start reading something and realise it's a straight-up repost of an article a year old.
Introducing a pet or other animal to the story for the sole purpose of killing it later on for a big emotional affect. One of the things I loved about "Corelli's Mandolin" was that the adorable pine marten survived the whole ordeal.
Pandas, if you’re reading this and you don’t know what a Pine Martin is (Like I didn’t until just now), look it up. Your mind will thank you for being graced with their existence.
Load More Replies...
My pet peeve is when I start reading something and realise it's a straight-up repost of an article a year old.
Introducing a pet or other animal to the story for the sole purpose of killing it later on for a big emotional affect. One of the things I loved about "Corelli's Mandolin" was that the adorable pine marten survived the whole ordeal.
Pandas, if you’re reading this and you don’t know what a Pine Martin is (Like I didn’t until just now), look it up. Your mind will thank you for being graced with their existence.
Load More Replies...