OK, what better way to get to know people than to find out what annoys you in the pages of a book that you are reading? (Hope this is an OK topic, I will let the moderators decide).

I just had this experience again so it was fresh in my mind and I wonder if I am the only one that finds the following things off-putting:

Incorrect use of a word.
For example, I am currently reading The Story of Edgar Sawtelle and early in the book there is a lengthy section about making a "casket" then putting the body in the "casket" and then how upsetting it is to nail closed the "casket". By this point I was so surprised because you don't nail a casket closed you nail a coffin closed and so I had totally painted the wrong image in my mind. I lsot the flow of the story and now I find as I read I wonder what else the author/editor has gotten wrong. I will eventually get back in the flow but it sure throws me. (Another pet peeve is using careening instead of careering)

Presenting fiction as truth: Case in point,

Modoc The True Story of the Greatest Elephant That Ever Lived even his introduction comments on how he has tried to keep everything as true as possible but it is a complete work of fiction. I would have enjoyed this book if I hadn't felt hoodwinked because in fact the best bits of writing are the most fictitious (the first 2/3s of the book).

And this is the only example coming from a Canadian author, but, when an author either thinks we are too dim to get anything subtle or doesn't know how to foreshadow so tells us straight up. Here is my example and perhaps it is the best way to express myself. (And I apologize but I do not have the book in front of me so I am going from memory). From Late Nights on Air, if they had only known that (incident that just happened) meant that three terrible things were going to happen. The incident was enough to let readers know something was probably going to happen (and then it would have been foreshadowing) but by continuing on it felt insulting.

Do any of you, readers or authors, get annoyed by these things or others? Am I alone in this? Do I sound just peevish and petty? I am not an author becuase I do not write particularly well so I understand that I expect authors to write at a good standard higher than I do. Is that unfair?

Look forward to your comments (I suspect Andrew will have something to say and I am very curious).

I hate it when an author dangles the answer right in front of me. My particular grievance was with 'Murder On The Orient Express.' "They couldn't all be guilty..."

Great idea Shannon.

I get irritated with the 'easy ending'. Rather than think about it the author goes for the neat and tidy happy ending. Why? Because it's easy. Everything wrapped up in a nice little package. I hate that. Sometimes the better ending is not the happy one or the easy one, it's more complex than that.
That will ruin a book for me.

I also hate crappy dialogue. It really bothers me.

I'd expect I'd have something to say, too. ;)

But I'm actually very tolerant, as a reader. Usually. The only thing that really bugs me, drives me nuts, is just plain bad writing.

Clichés, especially those of young writers who think their generation is all that, with no apparent understanding that people have been coming of age since Thag first tired of his family and left the cave to take his first McJob in the smoke signal call center. It's been said before.

Badly structured stories that demonstrate the author's inability to dramatize his themes.

Poorly motivated or tone-deaf dialogue.

Writing that relies on abstract, pseudo-literary lyricism rather than the concrete and specific.

Pop psychology in characters.

Fortunately, all this is rare (except abstract, pseudo-literary lyricism), so I rarely get annoyed, except by the biggest crime of all:

The rampant use of magic realism or structural games to create instant, just-add-water interest in a short story, in place of earning your pay through narrative.

This is everywhere these days, and it drives me nuts.

So, tell us more about this Thag character... He already sounds more interesting than a lot of current pop culture. ;-)

"The rampant use of magic realism or structural games to create instant, just-add-water interest in a short story, in place of earning your pay through narrative."

better known as deus-ex machina

DAY-uhs-eks-MAH-kuh-nuh; -nah; -MAK-uh-nuh\ , noun:
1.In ancient Greek and Roman drama, a god introduced by means of a crane to unravel and resolve the plot.
2.Any active agent who appears unexpectedly to solve an apparently insoluble difficulty

The quick fix, or the easy way out. Yes, that is annoying.

No, not the same thing as deus ex machina. That's merely a plot device of sloppy writers.

What I'm referring to is the use of magic realism -- including fantastical or illogical events in an otherwise realistic narrative -- or unconventional structures to make a story seem original, while covering up the fact that under the flash, there's really not much there.

okay i can't really say this bugs me exactly, cause i usually find it amusing rather than annoying, but it always surprises me that after who knows how many edits and proofreads, things like this slip through. it's when sentences aren't structured properly. the reader knows what is meant, but literally the meaning is something else. here is a sentence, from a novel that illustrates what i mean:

'i was five years old the first time i saw my mother cry; she was standing by the kitchen window pretending she wasn't.' the reader knows the mom was pretending not to cry, but the way the sentence is structured, it reads as if she's pretending not to stand by the kitchen window.

definitely more amusing than annoying.