Pet peeves in novels, novellas, short stories, and other literature

[P.J. Denyer]

At one point in the early 70s, over 50% of men in the UK smoked; and smoking wasn't something you did in designated areas, it was everywhere. In the early 80s, I worked in an open plan office where smokers smoked at their desks.

I'm asthmatic & one of my first jobs was in an 'office' which was a portacabin inside a warehouse. More than half the dozen of us in there smoked and there was no ventilation...

As a child I vividly remember how my mum would have a fortnightly night out at the bingo (yes, I grew up in an Alan Bates play) and when she got back the pervasive smell of tobacco smoke from her coat would make it from the downstairs hall all the way to my bedroom through the closed door.

While I was doing some Country Pub work a couple of years ago a lot of the wealthy retirees who'd normally vote Tory were talking about voting UKIP because they want to releal the smoking ban*. I'd bet none of them smoke in their cars or homes now and if pubs reintroduced smoking and became like they used to be they'd stop coming, or their wives would stop them coming.

*At least it was in their manifesto, UKIP is a mixture of gammon friendly policies they pay lip service to, working class friendly platitudes and the hard (economic) right libertarian policies their backers would assist on them passing if some kind of collective brain disease swept Britain & brought them into political significance.

 

[P.J. Denyer]

Zen, and the art of motorcycle maintenance, is another book that did that well.

It takes a long time for the reader to understand what has happened to the protagonist, and it is horrifying.

It was a really good read, but I've never been able to read it a second time.

I should give it another go.

I love that book. I've read it about a dozen times but it ***** with my head every time, while also making me better. Lila, and Lila's Diary are more of a slog.

When I read the notes to a later version & learned what happened to Chrus, Persig's son, I felt an almost personal sense of loss.

Oh, and the introduction is a great joke.

 

[Armitage72]

ETA: of course she was always a secretary which they had in space for some reason?

There has to be a woman to serve as a love interest for the hero, and she certainly can't be a scientist or pilot. She's a woman, after all. The only acceptable careers are teacher, nurse, secretary, and switchboard operator. Even the original Star Trek had three of the four (Nurse Chapel, Yeoman Rand, Lt. Uhura)


For the ubiquity of smoking, there was a short-lived 2007 time travel TV series called "Journeyman". In one episode the main character was on a modern commercial flight and suddenly shifted to a plane in the 1970s. Just about every adult on the plane was smoking during the flight, a small child in the seat in front of him was carrying a toy pistol, and he was served a full meal.

 

[Roboramma]

A run of the mill pee break adds a touch of slice of life to a narrative. What peeves me is that pee breaks rarely make it into narrative without a plot related reason. A character goes into the bathroom, and you can be pretty sure this is where the bully ambushes them, or the ghost ambushes them, or their memories ambush them, or the monster bites their dick off, or their butt weasel makes its big move.

+1

 

[ZirconBlue]

For the ubiquity of smoking, there was a short-lived 2007 time travel TV series called "Journeyman". In one episode the main character was on a modern commercial flight and suddenly shifted to a plane in the 1970s. Just about every adult on the plane was smoking during the flight, a small child in the seat in front of him was carrying a toy pistol, and he was served a full meal.

I really liked that show and was disappointed it wasn't renewed.

Further to the ubiquitous smoking topic, I have a friend who says he can't watch Mad Men because the constant smoking makes him crave taking it back up again.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Further to the ubiquitous smoking topic, I have a friend who says he can't watch Mad Men because the constant smoking makes him crave taking it back up again.

That and all the drinking they did made me wonder how on earth anybody from that generation even survived to old age.

 

[ahhell]

That and all the drinking they did made me wonder how on earth anybody from that generation even survived to old age.

If you go look at old tv and movies, the certainly looked a lot older than we generally do today. Go watch an episode of Love Boat. All the old guest stars were in there 50s and looked like they were in there 70s.

 

[theprestige]

<cough> Moby Dick.

Wholeheartedly disagree. A hundred and fifty years before Google and Wikipedia, a bit of reporting about a major industry and how it works was not amiss in a novel. See also the lists of fish in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

---

There's also the problem of authorial intent, especially as you head down the literary end of the spectrum. Is the digression really bad writing or poor editing? Or is it intentional by the author, who believes that the passage is essential to the experience they are trying to create for the reader?

 

[arthwollipot]

Further to the ubiquitous smoking topic, I have a friend who says he can't watch Mad Men because the constant smoking makes him crave taking it back up again.

I watched a particularly silly episode of Star Trek: Deep Space Nine in which Quark, Rom and Nog were transported back in time to 1947 and captured by the US military near Roswell. If you're not familiar with the show or the characters it doesn't matter. Every single one of the human characters in the show was constantly smoking. Literally every time one of the named humans (ie. not nameless extras) appeared on screen, they either had a cigarette hanging out of their mouth (or a cigar in the case of the general because of course), or they lit one up in that scene.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That and all the drinking they did made me wonder how on earth anybody from that generation even survived to old age.

Law of averages: lots of them didn't survive but the story is about the smokers that did and you don't see the ones that didn't.

 

[Pixel42]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias

 

[malbui]

I remain fascinated by archive footage of chat shows from the early 70s where it’s clouds of smoke and overflowing ashtrays everywhere. Nobody in my family ever smoked but it was everywhere else.

 

[alfaniner]

I remain fascinated by archive footage of chat shows from the early 70s where it’s clouds of smoke and overflowing ashtrays everywhere. Nobody in my family ever smoked but it was everywhere else.

Cigarette companies were major forces in media presentations, sponsoring many TV shows. (Ever seen the cartoon with Fred and Barney lighting up? From The Flintstones).

 

[catsmate]

Another Homes pastiche, Lovegrove's Sherlock Holmes and the Highgate Horrors, and many errors.

Seriously he's a reasonably good writer, and we live in the most information dense society in human history (so far), and the stories are still littered with simple to correct errors.

The idea of a peer "losing his seat" in the HoL, the "First Naval Lord"...... And the pound note reappears in London in 1892.

 

[TragicMonkey]

The idea of a peer "losing his seat" in the HoL

I've heard that quite a lot of people have had their seat pinched in the House of Lords when they weren't being sufficiently wary.

 

[theprestige]

In audiobooks: Readers who put emotion into the narration. When a character is speaking out loud? Sure, put some emotion into their words. But otherwise, maintain a dispassionate voice. Let the text speak for itself. Let the listener figure out for themselves what emotional weight to put into the scene. Just as they would do if they were reading the text instead of listening to it. The audiobook reader's job is to bridge the gap between author and listener. Not insert themselves into that relationship. Not to tell the listener what the author meant, or how the listener should feel about it.

 

[TragicMonkey]

In audiobooks: Readers who put emotion into the narration. When a character is speaking out loud? Sure, put some emotion into their words. But otherwise, maintain a dispassionate voice. Let the text speak for itself. Let the listener figure out for themselves what emotional weight to put into the scene. Just as they would do if they were reading the text instead of listening to it. The audiobook reader's job is to bridge the gap between author and listener. Not insert themselves into that relationship. Not to tell the listener what the author meant, or how the listener should feel about it.

Heh, that's why I can't watch television news. It pissed me off when the readers would use their up-and-down stupid intonation to let you know whether it was a good or bad news story. Kittens drowned in the big fire that killed fifty million? That was a sad thing, thanks Tom Brokaw! Adorable toddler finds six of the lost seven cities of Cibola during while looking for her stuffed animal? That was a good thing, thanks Dan Rather! I would never have guessed if not for your vast professional expertise, you Shakespearean actors, you. *sarcastic tone, raised eyebrows*

 

[alfaniner]

In audiobooks: Readers who put emotion into the narration. When a character is speaking out loud? Sure, put some emotion into their words. But otherwise, maintain a dispassionate voice. Let the text speak for itself. Let the listener figure out for themselves what emotional weight to put into the scene. Just as they would do if they were reading the text instead of listening to it. The audiobook reader's job is to bridge the gap between author and listener. Not insert themselves into that relationship. Not to tell the listener what the author meant, or how the listener should feel about it.

One of the very first audiobooks I downloaded from archive.org was Dracula. It was done by some young lady who was probably a horror fan and filk singer. She tried doing it in a Bela Lugosi voice. I only lasted a couple of minutes.

 

[TragicMonkey]

One of the very first audiobooks I downloaded from archive.org was Dracula. It was done by some young lady who was probably a horror fan and filk singer. She tried doing it in a Bela Lugosi voice. I only lasted a couple of minutes.

That's pretty funny, though. Particularly since it's an epistolary novel. Did she read letters from Dracula in a Dracula voice, or letters to Dracula in a Dracula voice? Because I would think the voice used should be the person reading the letters they got aloud, to maintain the format. If the voice were the sender then it would be more like you're listening to answering machine messages, which would have been anachronistic both for the time of the novel's writing and now, really.

 

[Spektator]

About fifteen years ago, I inherited a set of audiotapes, including almost all of the John D. MacDonald Travis McGee series, narrated by Darren McGavin. Had to buy an old Walkman to have something to play them on. I'd typically listen to the tapes in one-hour sessions while walking on the nature trail. He did OK as the male characters, but every dang woman spoke with an exaggerated, fakey Plantation Southern dialect--"Why, Trayuvis, whatevvuh can you mean, dahlin'?" Still have the old Walkman, but I tossed the MacDonald tapes after one listen.

 

[Beelzebuddy]

The plot of Book 1 is driven by some clever secret twist about the world or the bad guy that the protagonists and readers learn near the end. Maybe it's the evil wizard's True Name, maybe the bad guy is really the good guy's childhood friend, maybe the instruction manual is a cookbook.

From Book 2 onwards the secret is no secret and is known to everyone, even people who had no contact with the events in Book 1 or should have had every reason to spill the beans back then but chose not to do so because then they wouldn't have a story. The evil wizard's evil rivals refer to them by their True Name in casual conversation, the good guy becomes wanted himself because of his association, next moves are plotted over a hearty meal of soylent green.

 

[Orphia Nay]

In a book I’m reading, a character will ask a question to another character, and instead of an answer, we get a long paragraph of backstory or character-building - so long a paragraph you forget the original question.

Once in a while is OK, but it’s happened often enough to peeve me.

 

[alfaniner]

The one I'm reading (The Mad Scientists' Club) has a definite overuse of the word "clambered". OK it's a collection of short stories and they're all active tween boys, but using it three times in one story alone, and at least once in every other one so far? Too much.

 

[gnome]

In audiobooks: Readers who put emotion into the narration. When a character is speaking out loud? Sure, put some emotion into their words. But otherwise, maintain a dispassionate voice. Let the text speak for itself. Let the listener figure out for themselves what emotional weight to put into the scene. Just as they would do if they were reading the text instead of listening to it. The audiobook reader's job is to bridge the gap between author and listener. Not insert themselves into that relationship. Not to tell the listener what the author meant, or how the listener should feel about it.

Is there an exception for when the narration is from a character's point of view? I'm thinking of the Harry Dresden novels, for example. Come to think of it, Marsters is almost always relatively mellow on the inner monologue, more snark than emotive. With one exception, that I thought worked very well.

 

[catsmate]

The one I'm reading (The Mad Scientists' Club) has a definite overuse of the word "clambered". OK it's a collection of short stories and they're all active tween boys, but using it three times in one story alone, and at least once in every other one so far? Too much.

There's a doctoral thesis in there, word analysis.

 

[Darat]

Is there an exception for when the narration is from a character's point of view? I'm thinking of the Harry Dresden novels, for example. Come to think of it, Marsters is almost always relatively mellow on the inner monologue, more snark than emotive. With one exception, that I thought worked very well.

One suspects that suicide rates would increase significantly if every audio book was dispassionately read by Andy Murray.

Ever so slightly more serious, I think it depends on what viewpoint is used, and how the book overall has been written. It is standard for an author to be involved in deciding who and how an audio adaptation of their novel is delivered so most of the time an audiobook adaptation is as the author wants it. Some people seem to forget or perhaps do not understand that an audiobook is an adaptation of a novel, not the novel itself.

 

[novaphile]

One suspects that suicide rates would increase significantly if every audio book was dispassionately read by Andy Murray.

Ever so slightly more serious, I think it depends on what viewpoint is used, and how the book overall has been written. It is standard for an author to be involved in deciding who and how an audio adaptation of their novel is delivered so most of the time an audiobook adaptation is as the author wants it. Some people seem to forget or perhaps do not understand that an audiobook is an adaptation of a novel, not the novel itself.

Hmm...

I'm not sure if it has already been reported here, but I'm hearing that AI audiobooks are flooding the usual sources and users are not happy.

I'm not a fan generally, but love the occasional one, where the roles are narrated by different actors. It probably doesn't count, because it was originally written as a radio play, but there are some brilliant versions of 'Under Milkwood' out there.

 

[SpitfireIX]

The one I'm reading (The Mad Scientists' Club) has a definite overuse of the word "clambered". OK it's a collection of short stories and they're all active tween boys, but using it three times in one story alone, and at least once in every other one so far? Too much.

I read that at least 10 times when I was a kid, and I read the sequel, The New Adventures of the Mad Scientists' Club, at least 20 times, because I acquired it first. I bought the latter from Scholastic Book Club, I think when I was in 4th grade, because the title and cover art looked intriguing. Then, my 5th grade teacher had a copy of it as one of the books we could do book reports on, which I naturally did. But I couldn't find a copy of the first volume anywhere, and apparently it was out of print, because I never saw it in a book club brochure. (I should have tried the public library, but it didn't occur to me.)

Then, when I started 6th grade we moved, and my teacher had a copy. I of course borrowed and read it several times, and then, at the end of the year, he picked out several books from his collection that were worn out, and offered them to anyone who wanted to take one. The Mad Scientists' Club was one of them, so naturally I took it.

BTW, those stories all originally appeared in Boys' Life magazine back in the 1960s. I should reread them one of these days and see if I find the language jarring after all this time. Maybe I'll also read the two novels the author wrote, The Big Kerplop! and The Big Chunk of Ice, although I understand they're not as good as the short stories.

 

[gnome]

Hmm...

I'm not sure if it has already been reported here, but I'm hearing that AI audiobooks are flooding the usual sources and users are not happy.

I'm not a fan generally, but love the occasional one, where the roles are narrated by different actors. It probably doesn't count, because it was originally written as a radio play, but there are some brilliant versions of 'Under Milkwood' out there.

My favorite example is the extended version of the audiobook for "World War Z." I think it still might be just a little bit abridged, but with the extended version very close to the whole book is included (possibly all) and read by a cast of excellent voice actors, many of them familiar names like Mark Hamill, Jürgen Prochnow, and Alan Alda. What you want is from Random House Audio, "World War Z: The Complete Edition"

I just wish someone would, as a fan project, get a couple of military friends and rewrite the Battle of Yonkers. It's a weak point in an otherwise excellent book. I'm convinced a clever writer under competent advisement could achieve a chapter that served the same narrative purpose and didn't lose suspension of disbelief so badly.

 

[alfaniner]

I read that at least 10 times when I was a kid, and I read the sequel, The New Adventures of the Mad Scientists' Club, at least 20 times, because I acquired it first. I bought the latter from Scholastic Book Club, I think when I was in 4th grade, because the title and cover art looked intriguing. Then, my 5th grade teacher had a copy of it as one of the books we could do book reports on, which I naturally did. But I couldn't find a copy of the first volume anywhere, and apparently it was out of print, because I never saw it in a book club brochure. (I should have tried the public library, but it didn't occur to me.)

Then, when I started 6th grade we moved, and my teacher had a copy. I of course borrowed and read it several times, and then, at the end of the year, he picked out several books from his collection that were worn out, and offered them to anyone who wanted to take one. The Mad Scientists' Club was one of them, so naturally I took it.

BTW, those stories all originally appeared in Boys' Life magazine back in the 1960s. I should reread them one of these days and see if I find the language jarring after all this time. Maybe I'll also read the two novels the author wrote, The Big Kerplop! and The Big Chunk of Ice, although I understand they're not as good as the short stories.

Everything's in the giant collection I'm reading now. With the original drawings. Still quite accessible even at this age (meaning myself, not the age of the stories.)

 

[theprestige]

Is there an exception for when the narration is from a character's point of view? I'm thinking of the Harry Dresden novels, for example. Come to think of it, Marsters is almost always relatively mellow on the inner monologue, more snark than emotive. With one exception, that I thought worked very well.

Sure.

But there's another problem with an emoting narrator: Variances in volume. I listen to audiobooks during my commute. A narrator that emotes overmuch has me constantly fiddling with the volume. One minute I'm turning it up so I can understand the character's muted affect. The next minute I'm turning it down as the character's rising excitement blows out my speakers.

 

[theprestige]

I love author's notes in short story collections.

I hate it when the author's notes come in front of the story. It's like introductions and prefaces. I really prefer to read a story on my own terms, the first time. Then I like to get other viewpoints. Getting other viewpoints first just colors my own interpretations. I don't like it.

I also don't like it when the story notes are all gathered at the end of the book. Sometimes it's hard to remember exactly what story they're talking about.

Where story notes should go - and nobody ever does - is each note right after the story it refers to.

 

[Wudang]

I love author's notes in short story collections.

I hate it when the author's notes come in front of the story. It's like introductions and prefaces. I really prefer to read a story on my own terms, the first time. Then I like to get other viewpoints. Getting other viewpoints first just colors my own interpretations. I don't like it.

I also don't like it when the story notes are all gathered at the end of the book. Sometimes it's hard to remember exactly what story they're talking about.

Where story notes should go - and nobody ever does - is each note right after the story it refers to.

Yes. First read the story, build your own view of it, read the notes and maybe read the story again enriched by the author's view of what he meant. I skipped one short story recently as the author prefaced the story with a rambling statement on .... I forget, something like: this is usually a happy trope but I wanted to see how it would work if this time <twist at end>. Why would I now want to read that story?

 

[theprestige]

Yes. First read the story, build your own view of it, read the notes and maybe read the story again enriched by the author's view of what he meant. I skipped one short story recently as the author prefaced the story with a rambling statement on .... I forget, something like: this is usually a happy trope but I wanted to see how it would work if this time <twist at end>. Why would I now want to read that story?

OMG exactly.

 

[alfaniner]

On my first read of Lord of the Flies, the person giving the Foreword casually mentioned a specific, surprising, major plot turn in the book, mentioning its "symbolism" and all that. I was pissed before I even read the first page. That incident made me save any intros or Forwards for longstanding classic books until I'm done with them.

 

[Carlotta]

I listen to audio books while driving. Nearly wrecked when one with few sound-effects suddenly had a loud explosion!

 

[Roboramma]

In the introduction to my copy of The Magician[/b] by W. Somerset Maugham, the person who writes the introduction spends half of it telling us that this book sucks, Maugham himself didn't like it, it's one of his lesser works, the characters are one dimension, etc. etc.. The first time I picked it up I read the introduction then found myself so put off that I didn't read the book. A few years later I wanted to read some Maugham and remembered I hadn't read this one. It's not his best book but it's still pretty cool and has some great moments. I can't figure out why that person even wrote the introduction to the book if he hated it so much.

 

[JoeMorgue]

The first Kindle edition of The Omen somehow screwed up the chapter selection so you go this super weird book where the first chapter of the actual story happened, then the author's preface happened, and then the rest of the book happened.

 

[ZirconBlue]

In the introduction to my copy of The Magician[/b] by W. Somerset Maugham, the person who writes the introduction spends half of it telling us that this book sucks, Maugham himself didn't like it, it's one of his lesser works, the characters are one dimension, etc. etc.. The first time I picked it up I read the introduction then found myself so put off that I didn't read the book. A few years later I wanted to read some Maugham and remembered I hadn't read this one. It's not his best book but it's still pretty cool and has some great moments. I can't figure out why that person even wrote the introduction to the book if he hated it so much.

I seem to remember that in his Forward/Author's Note/whatever to A Clockwork Orange, Anthony Burgess didn't seem to think too highly of his own book.

 

[SpitfireIX]

The one I'm reading (The Mad Scientists' Club) has a definite overuse of the word "clambered". OK it's a collection of short stories and they're all active tween boys, but using it three times in one story alone, and at least once in every other one so far? Too much.

I discovered that archive.org has The Big Kerplop! (which they just digitized last year), so I started reading it. In the first four chapters, the word "clambered" appears one time each, but then it doesn't appear at all in the next couple chapters, even though there's one place where the author could have used it. I doubt I would have noticed it if you hadn't mentioned it; in fact, in the third chapter, I actually missed it at first, but the boys had been climbing on something to get a better view of activities in the town square, so I decided to reread that section.

When I get a chance, I'll write something about it (with any spoilers hidden, of course) in "What book is everyone reading . . ."

ETA: I forgot to mention that I have found a few uses of language a bit awkward; I should have written them down. I'll probably reread it at some point, as it's not very long; I'll try to remember to make notes.