she who is - critical reading and how not to judge a book

About critical reading and how not to judge a book

Previous Entry critical reading and how not to judge a book Nov. 6th, 2006 @ 10:08 am Next Entry
I'm reading over the 120+ comments over at NM's about the advance chapters she got of CC's book (which I've seen the cover of and it's not that bad looking) ... and I'm kind of bemused. My first thought was "well of course you think it sucks, you hate her!" So I clicked onward, and what I'm seeing is actually kind of terrifying.

I mean, yeah, okay, some of the things they're hitting (this is without me having read any of it, just looking at these comments) some of those things are pretty amateurish. Which for a first pro-published, own-universe book, really isn't that bad. Basically the gripes seem to boil down to "I don't like her style it sux" generally referring to the descriptives (and I can't touch on that since I like descriptives myself quite a lot), or "zomg she's ripping off various popular television shows" which, you know, after the plagiarism debacle of course people are going to be looking for, and seeing, that sort of thing.

There's also the thing which a lot of writers will tell you, which is that ambient books/tv/music, like onions, will spread into your work -- so if you happen to love a certain show, and watch it a lot, its mood, theme, and style is undoubtedly going to be reflected in whatever you do. Something it seems like the fan-reader community either doesn't get or ignores is that, while there may be more than 3 stories to tell, as a general rule certain tropes get repeated a lot because they are /easy/. Because they are socially common. No, being raped doesn't automatically make you a victim person, but general society thinks so, and thus that as a trope shows up a lot in young writing.

It takes a lot of writing, a lot of work, and a lot of time to develop adult, informed, and unique writing. CC's what, young 20s? Yeah. And this is her first work. It's not likely to take off, but then again it's probably not the most awful thing ever written in the history of ever. Most YA books are pretty cliched, pretty inaccurate, and generally dumbed down.

The only thing I've seen in those comments so far which /I/ consider a valid criticism, and not born out of the air of dislike for CC that's around here, is someone's comment that it read like it should have been a tv show. Which if you're one of those writers who tends to see scenes play out in their head, that's both a valid style and a valid criticism. I don't know what CC's ratio of tv-to-books is as far as daily intake goes, but I'm betting that part of that style is directly derived from her watching a lot of tv. That goes back to that whole onion thing.

I probably won't buy the book. I might check it out at the library when it comes out, just to see, the same way I did Eragon, which I think suffers a lot of the same problems.

But at least I don't hate CC, and might therefore be able to be a little objective.
(Leave a comment)
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]ashenmote
Date: November 6th, 2006 05:21 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Just to make sure, you know that you're refering to a locked post?

I'm not saying you would get into trouble or anything, you're perfectly vague enough to make it okay, just want to make sure it's intentional.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]naienko
Date: November 6th, 2006 05:26 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I know. I don't lock my posts, though. She can have hers locked, and people can be all "wtf" but I know hers is locked.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]ashenmote
Date: November 6th, 2006 05:32 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Okay then. [/busybody]
Me, I lock a lot of stuff, but I still haven't figured out my own locking policy completely.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]naienko
Date: November 6th, 2006 05:39 pm (UTC)
(Link)
And now it doesn't matter, because right after she made and deleted a fairly accusatory comment to me, she either deleted or more deeply locked that post. Which, you know, whatever, but CC was handing advance copies of that thing out like candy at Dragon*con so I'm not really surprised that NM got ahold of one.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]ashenmote
Date: November 6th, 2006 05:44 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Well, I guess that's her perogative...prerogative...whatever thingie. The deleting/deeply locking part at least.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]naienko
Date: November 6th, 2006 05:52 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Interesting that the post disappears as soon as there's criticism of it. (Though there may be others and I don't know about it.)
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]herongale
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:03 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Maybe it disappeared because you were no longer deemed trustworthy to have access to it?

It might be your personal policy to never lock anything, but that doesn't mean that it's ever been considered couth to gab publicly about what other people are talking about in locked posts, without asking permission first.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]ashenmote
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:10 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Thanks for helping me out. I had problems here to find a nice way of saying it.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]naienko
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:21 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Please to be noting a few things, and then I'm out of this brewing problem.

1) I provided no link to said post at all.
2) As I told 'mote above, CC was handing advance copies of that book out like candy at Dragon*con. Several people I know have them. NM could easily have gotten her hands on one of them.
3) The only person I mentioned by name was NM. Aside from the fact that I've now mentioned her several times in the comments, if someone were to ask nicely, I could easily remove that direct reference and leave it as "this post I found that talks about the book".

As far as an unlocked discussion of other people's comments on that book, my policy is that I only lock opinions I'm ashamed of.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]ashenmote
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:28 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Duly noted.
The defriending thing is just a measure of protecting my locking policy against your locking policy. I trust you understand that I like mine better.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]herongale
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:32 pm (UTC)
(Link)
However you justify your post is up to you. I won't argue with it. The only reason I replied was because you said this:

Interesting that the post disappears as soon as there's criticism of it.

I don't know what's so interesting about that. NM's restricting your access to her friends-locked post is pretty much the routine response that many people would have. It doesn't matter whether your actions were right or wrong. What matters is that you seemed surprised by a predictable response. You certainly can't be surprised by what she did, are you? Because it makes perfect, logical sense.

If she doesn't want you talking about her friends-locked content, she doesn't have to let you see it. Simple. It's a bit disingenuous to suggest that NM might have some ulterior motive when it is plainly evident to see that she needed no motive deeper than one of trust v. distrust in YOU to remove your access to her posting.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]waltraute
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:04 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I guess you don't agree, but I generally expect people who have access to my f-locked posts not to go around yapping about them in public. It's not quite the same as reposting f-locked material verbatim (which even f_w frowns upon), but it's close enough.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]rotten_fish
Date: November 6th, 2006 06:50 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Dude, what is the point of this post? If you wanted to discuss the book, or gripe about their opinions, you could have just easily have done so in the post itself. So... why? Really?

In any case, I'm glad I never friended you back. While I keep the majority of my cattiness public (and everyone knows I hate Aja at this point, anyway) I would rather not have my opinions on incest or any other things I didn't feel like discussing with the rest of the internet, or what my friendslist has said to each other in confidence, leaked out to others, even only in implication. Do you get me? This is bullshit.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]gun
Date: November 6th, 2006 09:06 pm (UTC)
(Link)
You are so classy by reposting friendslocked material that I could just about poop my pants. Thanks for ruining a perfectly good set of tighty-whiteys.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]shoiryu
Date: November 6th, 2006 09:08 pm (UTC)
(Link)
But at least I don't hate CC, and might therefore be able to be a little objective.

Well if you want objective, I dislike NM and CC, and I think this post of yours is a big jerky thing to do. Flocked material, man. Come on.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]eljuno
Date: November 7th, 2006 02:27 am (UTC)
(Link)
Everyone else has jumped on you over the whole Flock thing (which is shitty) so.

CC's what, young 20s?

Try late 20's-early 30's.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]mrbimble
Date: November 7th, 2006 05:10 am (UTC)
(Link)
*at least* early 30s. she's no baby just out of high school or college.
[User Picture Icon]
From:[info]shoiryu
Date: November 7th, 2006 04:14 am (UTC)
(Link)
Defriending is not generally how I react to people on my flist voicing an opinion, but okay, sure. Whatever you want.
(Leave a comment)
Top of Page Powered by JournalFen