IWSG: Pet Peeves

Purpose: To share and encourage. Writers can express doubts and concerns without fear of appearing foolish or weak. Those who have been through the fire can offer assistance and guidance. It’s a safe haven for insecure writers of all kinds!

Posting: The first Wednesday of every month is officially Insecure Writer’s Support Group day. Post your thoughts on your own blog. Talk about your doubts and the fears you have conquered. Discuss your struggles and triumphs. Offer a word of encouragement for others who are struggling. Visit others in the group (click on the badge above for the list) and connect with your fellow writers - aim for a dozen new people each time - and return comments. This group is all about connecting!

Be sure to stop by and visit other IWSG members and our wonderful hosts for the month,

Christine Rains, Dolarah @ Book Lover, Ellen @ The Cynical Sailor, Yvonne Ventresca, and LG Keltner!

The question this month is about your pet peeves when reading, writing or editing. Since I don't want to talk about my writing (what writing?) right now, I'm diving into this one!

As a reader, my pet peeves are poor editing and poor writing! Okay, that's a cop-out. But I will dump a book if the opening chapters have too many typos/errors, and I will dump a book faster than you can blink if it has anachronisms and problems with a consistent and believable tone. I am actually more likely to finish a book with a weak plot than one with errors of that sort--they just irritate and distract me too much, while I'm probably too good at the willing suspension of disbelief.

As a writer,  my biggest pet peeve is me. I mean, I'm bugged by the things that keep me from writing, and as Pogo Possum once said, I have met the enemy and she is me (okay, I paraphrased that). On a maybe more useful note, I have a problem with diving in without an adequate plan, and I hate it when I do that!

If we want to talk about my pet peeve as being what I struggle most with, that has to be editing, which is made all the worse when I dive in without an adequate plan (see above). Editing is hard under the best of circumstances, though the more I do it the more I have come to enjoy at least some elements at some times. This, of course, brings me to my favorite pet peeve about editing my own work (as for editing other people's work, I don't really have a peeve, because fixing those things are what I'm there for).

With my own books, I struggle with the step from seeing the big view of what needs fixing ("make this character more distinct" "provide more justification for this plot point") to actually implementing it. It's not that it annoys me, but that it's danged hard. I do dislike it when I'm supposed to be doing big-picture editing and I get all caught up in polishing sentences.

Over to you. What will make you put down a book and run, not walk, to the nearest exit? Or what will make you want to throw your MS out the window and take up a new career as a greeter at Walmart?

What I didn't finish, and why

Lately, I've found myself  not finishing some books, and while I don't like to write reviews of books I haven't finished, I thought it might be useful to talk about why I let them go. I'll say right here: it's not always because they are bad books. In fact, it's usually just because they aren't the right books and the right time. That said, here are a couple of books I let expire, and (to the best of my ability to suss out) the reasons why.

The Road to Little Dribbling, by Bill Bryson
Yup, that's right: I DNF'd a book by the famously witty Bill Bryson. As a matter of fact, this didn't totally surprise me. I had a love-hate relationship with A Walk in the Woods (yes, he made me laugh, but he also made me want to throw the book across the room with his lack of knowledge and planning, utter ignorance of good hiker etiquette and Leave No Trace principals, etc.). I enjoyed his book about Australia, but then when I read the one on the US, I found that when he wrote about places I know well his version was often shallow, misguided, or just plain wrong.


So I did start Little Dribbling with some trepidation, and it was justified. There was much less than usual of interesting history and stories and description of places, and much more griping about things that have changed in 20 years (I get that; I break my heart over some things that have changed, and not for the better. But as a theme for the book? Not good). But the final straw was that his humor seems to have become mean-spirited. I almost quit when he recounted tormenting a McDonald's employee for doing his job. I did quit after his excoriation of a shop owner who didn't seem to care if Bryson stayed or went. Really, Bryson? He ends up sounding not only like a grumpy old man, but a grumpy rich old man who is kind of annoyed by all the common people around him.

(Credit where it's due: I've enjoyed Bryson's historical work, At Home: A Short History of Private Life and The Mother Tongue: English and How it Got that Way. Regarding that latter, knowing he'd written it and done his research, I was surprised at his rant in this new book about...English spelling. You explained that to us, man).

The Inspector and Mrs. Jeffries, by Emily Brightwell
This is a completely different case. The book is fine, really. Well-written and a bit humorous, and all that. But...it's not grabbing me, and after a bit of thought, I think I know why. Actually, it's the same problem as Bryson has, in a way: the humor comes at the expense of someone. I've had issues with this in other books I've read, where a character is presented as just kind of a comic bungler. When it's the main character in a mystery, it kind of works--after all, they manage to solve the crime. It works even better when the bumbling character is the narrator, because that's just humorous self-deprecation and we can take it for what it's worth. But in this case, I feel like the Inspector is just a patsy to allow Mrs. Jeffries to be the smart one. I get the plot device. The author has found a way to avoid the biggest problem of the amateur detective, their difficult position vis-a-vis the police. But.

My take-away: snark is a dangerous weapon. Self-directed snark by a 1st-person narrator is pretty safe, but beyond that, things get risky.

Note: I hesitated about putting this one on here, because for all I know the Inspector will get the last laugh and prove not to be an idiot after all. But I kind of doubt it. For now, I'm leaving the book on my MP3 player and may finish at some point. In which case, if I am more satisfied, I'll write a real review.

Other books
There have been some other books I've not finished, books that I won't name. Those have been books with deeper flaws, often: historical inaccuracies, poor writing or editing, etc. I don't need to reflect much to know why I drop a book with those problems. But I had to think about why I might dump a book with good prose, a strong plot, and a professional proof-reader. I hope it gives me food for thought for my own writing.

How about you? Do you leave books unfinished? If so, do you ever analyze why?

©Rebecca M. Douglass, 2016
As always, please ask permission to use any photos or text. Link-backs appreciated!