What kind of writing do you prefer?

A place to discuss your favorite authors and poets, Christian and secular

What kind of writing do you prefer?

Postby bigsleepj » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:19 pm

We all have our prefered writing and reading styles - some like a quick & easy read while others like to work through a book and have it challenge you. Which do you prefer?
User avatar
bigsleepj
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: South Africa - Oh yes, better believe it!

Postby The-Case » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:37 pm

I voted for "other", because there was no way to click more than one answer. Yes, I think that great literature is wonderful, and that you should be challenged by what you read and have it convery different levels of meaning. But that's like eating only one kind of food you're whole life. I like a light book sometimes as well as one the greats: I like watching The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption, but I also like to watch Spongebob Squarepants.

Having said that, let me also add that there is NO place for a book with bad plot or horrible diction, save in editing practice. These books are unoriginl, not fun, and unclear. If the author cannot get across their meaning, then they have misused their medium. Remember, if a book is neither educational nor entertaining, it is worthless.
Hey it's me,
----Chase the Case
User avatar
The-Case
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Buies Creek, NC

Postby bigsleepj » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:52 pm

The-Case wrote: I like watching The Green Mile and The Shawshank Redemption, but I also like to watch Spongebob Squarepants.


Oddly enough, me too. :grin:

The-Case wrote:Having said that, let me also add that there is NO place for a book with bad plot or horrible diction, save in editing practice. These books are unoriginl, not fun, and unclear. If the author cannot get across their meaning, then they have misused their medium. Remember, if a book is neither educational nor entertaining, it is worthless.


Off course a book can have a horrible plot of the plot is only a clothesline for action, adventure and the enjoyable characters being themselves exchanging great dialogue and such. But that would make the book entertaining, off course. CS Lewis and JRR Tolkien both adored certain pulp-authors (Lewis like HR Haggard who wrote "King Solomons Mines" while Tolkien admitted he liked Robert E Howard, the guy who created "Conan the Barbarian") despite being deep literate types who wrote some very complex fiction.

But I agree 100% with you with what you said in about books being neither educational (I would use the word intriguing or literate though) nor entertaining as being worthless worthless. That sums up what reading books is all about...
User avatar
bigsleepj
 
Posts: 3432
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: South Africa - Oh yes, better believe it!

Postby Sparrowhawk » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:54 pm

I also clicked "other" because you could not click on more than one. In order for me to enjoy a book, it must at least have a decent plot and written well enough that it's not causing confusion because of lack of skill (I do enjoy writings that are confusing, but only if it is because of how deep it is or the author is just trying to make you think). After all, what good is a plot if no one can follow it? If the author can add many levels of depth and cause me to think, all the better, but that is not my main concern. The first thing I look for is a good plot, but the deeper it is (and longer, who wants a great story to end?) and more challenging it is, the better. Well, that's my opinion, not like it matters or anyone cares, but hey that's what this question was about.
User avatar
Sparrowhawk
 
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:04 pm
Location: College

Postby Cap'n Nick » Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:54 pm

Does "challenging" refer to books like Ulysses that can be tedious to read yet are generally acknowledged to contain deeper meaning that warrants their esoteric style, or can it also refer to books like Einstein's Dreams that read easily but also have unusual structure and more food for thought?
User avatar
Cap'n Nick
 
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2004 10:00 am
Location: Kojima, Japan

Postby The-Case » Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:39 pm

Perhaps I should have written: "Bad plot and horrible diction." Though I don't think even THAT hits it exactly either. Things like plot device are left out compleatly.

And I agree that the aesthetics of word choice can overcome some poor elements of plot on certain levels, but not enough for me, personally. Really, a story needs both.

I chose the word "educational" there to account for all things learned by reading. I think "intreaging" and "literate"are a bit too confining. Think about a newspaper article or a textbook (I've had my fill of those lately >_< ). For information's sake, a piece doesn't have to be interesting to be worth reading. If anything, I would add literate to the list, not replace anything with it. It goes hand-in-hand with diction.

Also, "educational" and "entertaining" are relitive terms in this case. It's obvious that what I might think is fun, someone else might think is rubish; or something that I think is educational, someone else might think is redundant or unclear. I think this is also where literacy comes in. If I can't understand something because the author didn't make it clear in his or her language, then whatever value was there is lost in the shuffle.
Hey it's me,
----Chase the Case
User avatar
The-Case
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Buies Creek, NC

Postby ShiroiHikari » Tue Jan 25, 2005 2:46 pm

books have to meet a few requirements for me to enjoy them.

1. the characters HAVE to be good. if I can't identify with the character in some way, shape, or form, forget it. if they're flat, shallow or unrealistic characters, forget it.

2. the plot has to be somewhat engaging. this can often be made up for with good characters. even if the plot kind of sucks, I'll read it to see what happens to a favorite character if I liked them enough.

3. if the writing gets too caught up in description, I get bored. example being Fellowship of the Ring. we know there were trees and forests and stuff. they all look the same. so get on with it.
fightin' in the eighties
User avatar
ShiroiHikari
 
Posts: 7564
Joined: Wed May 28, 2003 12:00 pm
Location: Somewhere between 1983 and 1989


Return to Book Corner

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 76 guests