Seanan McGuire (seanan_mcguire) wrote,
Seanan McGuire
seanan_mcguire

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Do not want...but why not?

Recently, I picked up a book that looked interesting. It hit many of my "sweet spots" for plot, description, and cover blurbs from people I trust. The cover didn't do it any favors, featuring, as it did, a generic Urban Fantasy Hot Girl standing in a Playboy circa-1984 pose, but I've enjoyed books with way worse covers. I entered the text in good faith.

By page two, I was ready to fling the book across the room. Why? Because the author had chosen to scramble the spelling of a common-to-the-genre word in a way that made it look not only pretentious, but difficult to read. This is a personal bug-a-boo of mine, since I really do feel that spelling was standardized for a reason, and while I managed to soldier through, it colored my ability to sink into the text for several chapters.

(As an aside, seriously: not all words become more interesting and mysterious when spelled with a vestigial "y." The worst example I've ever seen was in a YA series full of "mermyds," and the fact that I made it through all three volumes is a testament to the power of raw stubborn.)

One reader of Rosemary and Rue posted a lengthy, positive review, more than half of which was taken up by complaints about the pronunciation guide. Specifically, I didn't write down the correct pronunciation of "Kitsune." It's a fair cop—if you pronounce the word as written in the pronunciation guide, you'll be saying it wrong—and it's been corrected for A Local Habitation, but it was, for this person, as bad as if I'd spelled Toby's name "Aughtcober" and then claimed it was pronounced just like the month. Bug-a-boos for all!

Kate recently delivered a long and eloquent diatribe on "back cover buzz-word bingo," which I really wish I'd had a video camera running for, because it was awesome. The summation is that she watches the back covers of books for certain "buzz-words," and, if the book works up to a magical bingo score, she doesn't read it. I do something similar with bad horror movies, since there are specific buzz-words that mean "soft core porn" and "gratuitous torture," and those really aren't what I'm watching the movie to see.

So what are your bug-a-boos? Terribly twisted spelling? Pronunciations that you don't agree with? Buzz-words oozing off the back cover and getting all over your shoes? How about heroines with ruby hair and emerald eyes who aren't appearing in an Amethyst, Princess of Gemworld fanfic epic? Inquiring blondes want to know!
Tags: contemplation, cranky blonde is cranky, don't be dumb, kate, oh the humanity, reading things
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 181 comments
Ill-chosen character names are a bear for me, though this can take several forms. I've seen books in which characters have been named via spelling significant words backwards ("Nilrem" for a magician, "Krej" for a villain -- for a wonder, not in the same book). There was a book I had to check out of the library when I saw the review, just to confirm that the author really had stacked the Kryptonian Science Council with badly Tuckerized friends-and-editors. [I have no innate objection to Tuckerizations, not at all. Well done: David Weber's insertion of "Dr. Jordin Kare" into the Honorverse as a high-powered physicist. Badly done: see above.]

Inconsistent use of real-world settings: if you put the legendary Powell's Books into a novel set in Portland, and call it Powell's, excellent. If you put a bookstore that is clearly Powell's into a novel set in Portland, and call it something else, I will be tempted to throw things. (I have no problem whatsoever with inserting imaginary businesses and locations into real-world settings; that's often necessary for plot purposes. But using a real-world setting and then renaming key landmarks? Defeats the purpose and undercuts the suspension of disbelief. This is one thing that Rosemary and Rue did exceptionally well, at least for me.)

Willfully stupid characters: given a first-person narrative in which the reader can figure out what's going on by chapter five, the fact that the first-person narrator doesn't figure it out until chapter thirteen is likely to be a capital-P Problem. I am thinking of one new/current urban-fantasy series in particular, in which the author tries to deal with this by introducing a really clever twist to the way magic works...except that the twist is never applied sufficiently or thoughtfully enough to actually make the conceit work.
Willful stupidity is the absolute deal-killer for me. I put up with one recently where (first-person narration) I'd figured the shape of the story and most of the important plot points about a third of the book in, and it took Our Heroine until alllllmost the end. I put up with it, however, because Our Heroine was a realistically-portrayed fifteen, and it's not her fault she didn't know she was in a fairy tale, with all the logical plot constraints that implied.
Yeah, I'm willing to grant a lot of leeway for "I know that, but I'm in a meta-universe from your perspective, so go ahead and be dumb, little flower."