What's the Name of That Book??? discussion
Just to chat
>
Love Triangles: Things I hate that are in books.
Love triangles are high on my list. Instalove.
Really on the whole, not every single hero/heroine needs a love interest at all.
Authors making their characters do stupid things just so they will have plot issues to resolve. (I don't mind characters being stupid. Just when it's a transparent plot device.)
Authors making their characters fail to have important conversations for the sake of having plot issues to resolve. (Sometimes I read something and think that if the MC had just picked up the phone like a normal person would have done the entire book would never have happened. That ticks me off.)
That's all of the top of my head at the moment.
I hate stereotypes, instalove, unnecessary mid-book cliffhangers, and typos.
Amy (Other Amy) wrote: "Authors making their characters fail to have important conversations for the sake of having plot issues to resolve. (Sometimes I read something and think that if the MC had just picked up the phone like a normal person would have done the entire book would never have happened. That ticks me off.)"Yes!! I hate that too.
I also hate:
1. No chemistry or common qualities/ interests between the Main Character (MC) and their love interest. It has to be believable that they would work together!
2. Heroines who are complete pushovers. I hate it when they let the hero make all of their decisions or browbeat them into following their orders. This counts for the reverse situation i.e pushover heroes.
3. INSTA-LOVE. Under no circumstances should there be insta-love. It is highly unrealistic and lazy. It means the author doesn't have to spend time developing the relationship. Which is the best part!
4. Heroines who lose their common sense over the charm of the hero and vice a versa. I hate it when the heroine does something she knows she shouldn't (and she really shouldn't) because the hero demands it. eg: hero claims "you want me really. Go out with me", now the heroine, considering she has important stuff to do should say "No. I've got better things to do than eat dinner with a guy and his ego. I'd feel like a third wheel" then storm out. Okay, it doesn't have to be that dramatic, but along the lines of "no". But, no sometimes the heroine just looks into the hero's piercing, hot gaze and can't help herself. Ugh.
I hate it when teenagers have sex with some other character in the story, just so they can decide if they are gay or not.
I hate love triangles and insta-love, too. Personally, i don't think every book even needs a love interest. There are great stories where the characters are just friends or it's a single person.I also hate hate/love relationships where all they do is fight. To me, if you're constantly combative with each other then that's just draining, not sexy.
I'm also really disturbed by the new 'abusive love' trend. Or the "he raped me but I'll fall in love with him". To me that's just gross. Sorry to judge anyone's reading habits but it's definitely not my thing.
I also hate, in horror books, torture of children. I read for enjoyment, if i want to read that crap I'll watch the news
Gracie wrote: "I'm also really disturbed by the new 'abusive love' trend. Or the "he raped me but I'll fall in love with him". To me that's just gross. Sorry to judge anyone's reading habits but it's definitely not my thing.."I definitely agree with not liking this new ultra-controling borderline-abusive alpha hero trend. I love a good alpha, I like it when they are possessive, but not when it's controlling. A bossy hero can be fun, as long as the heroine isn't a pushover and doesn't take any B.S. E.g Curran and Kate from the Kate Daniels series.
But, guilty as charged, I do like a love/hate relationship (to begin with). You are right in the fact that it can get old if they are arguing all the time, but as long as it doesn't take over the book and as long as they have good reasons for their dislikes, then bicker on.
I believe a person can be in love with more than one person at a time. But I think it's very difficult to write about it believably. Imagine you're in love with someone who dies, lets say.... sailing. You grieve. Eventually you move on. At some point, you fall in love with someone else. But what if that person, kinda like in Castaway.... comes back? - I think you're going to be in love with both people. That love you originally had didn't die, you only thought you had to move on, and so you did.
So I don't think it's impossible. Just most of the time it's written about in an unrealistic way. They just want to create drama.
What do I hate that's common in romance novels?Quite a few have already been listed: Not communicating and Insta love are on my top.
But I have to say that the *most* common thing and the thing I hate the most is the Insta Lust. And even if the writer has chosen to not have "insta" lust, the uncontrollable lust is equally annoying. I'm finding that romance writers don't seem to know or understand (or at least not care about) the difference between finding someone amazingly sexy and having no self-control. Many also seem to confuse lust with love.
It's usually:
"Wow, he's such an ass, but like OMG, I want to lick him up and down like a lollipop!"
10 minutes later: "I can't believe I just gave that jerk my virginity!" 10 minutes later: "I'm so in love with this ass."
There is this thing called SELF CONTROL and everyone has it. Hormones and lust do not make this go away, it just makes you try to *reason* against it. But we all make decisions to do everything we do. So I get really tired of seeing these couples who *can't control* themselves with each other. That's not normal, it's not healthy, it's unrealistic and it's just plain stupid.
If, when we fell in love, lust was so powerful as they describe, we'd all be rapists.
The end.
Letters!Why do they have to put those in a book?
There are hundreds, nay thousands and thousands of them and they're not even put in alphabetical order - no! you have to hunt them down throughout the whole book to the very end to find out how many As and Bs etc.
Nah, seriously, I don't have a general dislike for most of the above, with the exception of rape fantasy, which just doesn't belong in mainstream writing.
I actually like love triangles :) but something I absolutely hate is the moving-into-a-new-house/ being-the-new-kid-in-town/mysterious-new-kid. Just cuz it's so common/over-done.
I don't get why YA authors think we like them so much. I get so annoyed by love triangles that I take a star off my rating
Love-triangles: I think they think it is an important thing that YA readers have to deal with.
LauraW wrote: "Love-triangles: I think they think it is an important thing that YA readers have to deal with."That would be an infatuation triangle.
Mrsbooks wrote: "I believe a person can be in love with more than one person at a time. But I think it's very difficult to write about it believably. Imagine you're in love with someone who dies, lets say.... sai..."
I agree that can happen, but I don't think you can love two people simultaneously.
I get annoyed with them because even though it is just fiction, not every single teenager gets stuck fighting between two people. Not every teenage mind is focused on relationships and finding love so they end up being ridiculous. The only one I like is that in the Infernal Devices.
I can't say I have encountered many of those mentioned. There was a love triangle in Anna Karenina but it was quite well done. What I don't like is the first-person narrative that seems to be more popular these days. There has to be a good reason for it to work properly. Maybe I have noticed it because more books seem to have multiple first-person narrators.
Tytti wrote: "I can't say I have encountered many of those mentioned. There was a love triangle in Anna Karenina but it was quite well done. What I don't like is the first-person narrative that seems to be mor..."
I don't mind a first person narrative but I'm not crazy about the present tense, stream of thought style. Especially in fantasy. Because usually the narrator is explaining the world to us and it makes no sense because if something is common in their world they wouldn't think about it in-depth. It would just be. "Oh, unicorn" and move on without giving a lengthy explanation of the why's and his of the unicorn.
What I don't hate? All of you. These are great!I'm with you on a lot of the hates:
*Love triangles — If it's mentioned in a book's description, it's almost ALWAYS an instant pass for me. And what's worse is when the love triangle is perpetuated over the course of say... Twenty-Two books... I'd MUCH rather read a series where the main characters fall in love and get married and we get to see the ups and downs and intricacies of their marriage...
*FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE! I mean, I get that in historical books, sometimes not having a timely form of communication causes issues (alas, no cell phones), but for characters not to talk about key things when they could have worked things out EASILY just drives me nutso.
*I could not have said this better: Mrsbooks wrote: "But I have to say that the *most* common thing and the thing I hate the most is the Insta Lust. And even if the writer has chosen to not have "insta" lust, the uncontrollable lust is equally annoying. I'm finding that romance writers don't seem to know or understand (or at least not care about) the difference between finding someone amazingly sexy and having no self-control. Many also seem to confuse lust with love. ... There is this thing called SELF CONTROL and everyone has it. Hormones and lust do not make this go away, it just makes you try to *reason* against it. But we all make decisions to do everything we do. So I get really tired of seeing these couples who *can't control* themselves with each other. That's not normal, it's not healthy, it's unrealistic and it's just plain stupid."
WHY don't authors/people understand that? You can find another person extremely attractive and NOT jump said person's bones. You are control of your own body and can choose to control yourself.
*And the thing that has been driving me crazy lately *coughnotnaminganynamescough* is characters who have TOO MANY ISSUES. I understand that people are flawed and have problems, but sometimes it crosses into the realm of the unbelievable. When every book you write has a heroine whose parents died and they blame themselves for it, was left at the alter, dog got ran over, has never had a faithful boyfriend, AND can't cross the street without someone trying to run them over, and then to top it off, she can't pull herself out of the black hole of her life without the man she had a tolerate/hate relationship with, but turns out she loves him....... it just starts feeling a bit unrealistic. And it's emotionally draining in a bad way. If it was ONE book—one heroine—then maybe. But EVERY BOOK THE AUTHOR WRITES? *blegh* No thank you.
*Badly edited (usually self-published) ebooks. I get that publishing in this way is the way of the future (and present), and that the costs to the author are much lower or whatever, but FIND AND PAY A GOOD EDITOR! It will help you in the long-run!!!
*Bad audiobook narrators or bad book/narrator pairings. With the number of audiobooks I listen to, having a bad narrator is one of the worst offenses to me. I mean, no narrator can save a terrible book, but how awful for a narrator to ruin a GOOD book!
Amen to the bad narrators. I wanted to listen to Anne of Green Gables as an audiobook. There are several versions available. None of them were fantastic, but two of the three that I bought were terrible, IMNSHO. I also hate that a lot of YA books have to have something drastic happen in them - a car crash, a divorce, a pregnancy, a deadly illness. And, yes, all of these in the same story makes it too much.
Gracie wrote: "I don't mind a first person narrative but I'm not crazy about the present tense, stream of thought style."I don't remember reading one book written in the present tense... I think I know of a couple I would like to read and at least in the other one there is no explaining at all even though it's hard sci-fi.
Tytti wrote: "Gracie wrote: "I don't mind a first person narrative but I'm not crazy about the present tense, stream of thought style."I don't remember reading one book written in the present tense... I think ..."
I might have the wrong name for it. I'm thinking like The Hunger Games, Twilight and such. Where is like this:
"I walk into the room and instantly fell embarrassed"
As though they're constantly narrating everything they do in their head. Is that present tense?
Yes. Hunger Games, I believe. Divergent?
"Hunger Games" for sure, and "before I die", "before i fall" too, there's been a large number of books written in present tense in the last couple years, especially in YA is has become a huge trend.
Triangles, insta-love, a hero that constantly thinks lustful thoughts about the heroine, so you believe he's only after sex. Lust is not love, and I believe idiots marrying while in the throes of 'lust' is the number one cause of divorces! If more held off having sex, before they even know each other's last names, or anything about each other, more would know what true love really is.A stupid and wearisome book-long misunderstanding, or threat hanging over the relationship.
I despise a H/h that is too messed up to ever be capable of trust to be worth the bother. No one is worth having to constantly prove your love over, and over, and over again! Such a person would drive you crazy.
Heroines that accept controlling /possessive, or abusive behavior from a guy that's a jerk, and rape is NEVER acceptable -D-U-H!
Would love to see authors write unworthy/unsuitable characters out of the story and have the H/h move on with a more worthy character. Why don't authors ever write this real-life scenario?
Sara ♥ wrote: "Yes. Hunger Games, I believe. Divergent?"Ok, i wasn't sure, lol. I don't care for it myself because during their 'thoughts' they always go into detail about stuff that, in real life if a person thought about it, they wouldn't go into detail about it because they would already knew. If that makes any sense.
I also hate lust= love. That really bothers me.
Gracie wrote: "I might have the wrong name for it. I'm thinking like The Hunger Games, Twilight and such."I knew what you meant, I just don't remember ever reading a book like that.
Sara ♥ wrote: "What I don't hate? All of you. These are great!I'm with you on a lot of the hates:
*Love triangles — If it's mentioned in a book's description, it's almost ALWAYS an instant pass for me. And wh..."
YES on the characters with too many issues!!
It used to be a person was a little messed up emotionally because their parent didn't give them enough attention and felt distant. Now it's everything under the sun. I actually find that when they do this, I can't relate to the character. Not because they've went through so much crap but because of how they deal with that crap. I actually find they aren't *messed* up enough because of all their crap.
If I had every single one of my family members die on me, had to make my way through foster homes, had an abusive boyfriend, been raped, had my best friend betray me, etc (the list just goes on) I'd be wayyyyyy more messed up. They deal with things better or at least much more differently, than I would.
But alas, most people haven't been through *that* much stuff. The general public is quite messed up with not half so much happening to them.
It's kinda like when Superman was cool cause he could lift cars and stuff and then they made him lift an island. No, just no. Too much dudes!
I hate it when a character decides to solve a murder themselves because they can't go to the police for some made-up reason. I mean, I know the police can make mistakes, but I can't help thinking - what is your plan once you find out who the killer is? Are you just going to take them on by yourself?Bonus points if the main character works out who the killer is and then goes off to confront them, alone. What could possibly go wrong?
Or when characters think they are in a Sherlock Holmes story where you have to gather all the suspects in the drawing room and go off on a long monologue about how you solved the mystery.
Rachel wrote Bonus points if the main character works out who the killer is and then goes off to confront them, alone. What could possibly go wrong? Absolutely nothing should go wrong...the character is smart, gorgeous and funny with amazing skills...and will get figure a way out...or the local law enforcement officer/FBI agent who has reluctantly seen that the protagonist has a point...will arrive with reinforcement...at the last second possible.
Carissa wrote LOVE TRIANGLES...Which brings me on to the next point, no matter what decision is made (except if a love threesome happens) someone always ends up miserable. Either way, the person in the middle should be upset, considering they claimed to “love” both. [...] Most of the time they make the readers feel better by creating an extra love interest for the rejected person so ...I totally agree. I've only read a few where I actually liked the love triangle. (The one that comes to mind is Libby's London Merchant) Otherwise, I agree - they either come up with some secondary love interest for rejected person. The protagonist is feeling :"vaguely guilty" about falling in love with a new person, but then - surprise surprise - their (usually original lover/fiance(e)/spouse) has secretly been in love with/having an affair with someone else all along. Or if not, that suddenly becomes an emotional/controlling/abusive jerk (though he/she was not in the beginning.) Just read one like that earlier tonight. It's not really a contest then.
And always seems to priotize "Love" over working things out...
Another thing in books that I really, really hate, is when a book is tagged "Romance" but there is no romance whatsoever in it! No development of a relationship, no Hero/heroine, no kisses.That is NOT romance.
I just finished reading a cute cozy mystery/contemporary fiction that does not even have these tags, but is tagged Contemporary Romance, which it most certainly is not!
Agnes wrote: And always seems to priotize "Love" over working things out..."THIS ^^^^^^^^
Especially so if the couple involved in the triangle have already made a commitment to each other and/or are married.
Sentences like "we just grew apart" and "the heart wants what it wants" make promises and vows moot. It makes me dislike all the characters involved because of this flawed and popular reasoning. If you are a person who's word means something and were in love with someone once, and you allowed that love to cool, you can get that back. If no words were said, no promises or vows made, then it doesn't have the same weight.
But sticking it out and working it out doesn't make you unhappy. Love can be reawakened.
I've enjoyed reading everyone's posts here. I guess I thought I was the only one who didn't like love triangles, instant lust, confusing lust with love, etc. It's nice to know I'm not alone.I don't like endings that imply that falling in love will solve all of a character's problems. Now I know an HEA requires everything to look rosy. But expecting love to overcome alcoholism or drug addiction or solve mental or financial problems, etc, is ridiculous. If an author has really set up some serious obstacles in their story, then I don't think "I love you" can be expected to solve them. At least give me a few lines that show the couple knows some issues don't go away because you're in love and they plan on working them out and getting help if needed. Then I can enjoy the HEA. :)
Then why do you read books like that if you hate so many things about them? As I've said I very rarely even encounter them. There are so many books to choose from.
Tytti wrote: "Then why do you read books like that if you hate so many things about them? As I've said I very rarely even encounter them. There are so many books to choose from."You really don't find these plots common? While I agree that there are plenty of books without these terrible plot flaws, I do feel they are small in quantity *compared* with how many novels have these - therefore making them harder to find. I'd say out of every 6 romance novels I read, I only enjoy 1 of them.
But alas, I'm a romance junky and I shall never give it up. I do though, sometimes change the characters actions or the things they say, when those things are so incredibly insanely stupid. I make up my own story in my head to *fix* the terrible writing.
Am I the only one that does this?
Teri-k wrote: "expecting love to overcome alcoholism or drug addiction or solve mental or financial problems, etc, is ridiculous..."^^^^^THIS again!^^^^^^^
Mrsbooks wrote: "You really don't find these plots common?"No, probably because I don't really read romance or YA novels.
Tytti wrote: "Mrsbooks wrote: "You really don't find these plots common?"No, probably because I don't really read romance or YA novels."
I don't either but i still run into them in books that are tagged 'horror' but are really paranormal romance. NOT the same thing.
Gracie wrote: "I don't either but i still run into them in books that are tagged 'horror' but are really paranormal romance."I might run into them in historical fiction but I think I have become quite good at "reading between the lines" what the book is really about. That's why I tend to skip all (modern) American female authors (unless I am convinced otherwise), there seems to be more sex than actual plot in their books. And it gets boring pretty soon.
It sounds like you gals need to start a list of the 'non-stupid' romance books, so when a good one is found it can be popularized, and the stupid ones can be shunned.The NSR seal of approval.
Mod
Meantime the female partner detective, if there is one, is not getting any sex. Which from a plot standpoint is much preferable because we don't have to cringe at her bad sex choices.
I just read Summer by Edith Wharton about a teen girl's first love, which became a triangle. So there was the lovely girl, the intelligent young man on the way up, and the girl's old guardian, whom she doesn't like, but he loves her and wants to marry her. Well, I won't tell you what happened, but the ending was a wrenching in my heart. A classic from the past to compare to the more modern ones you are all talking about. I don't think I like triangles either.
@Tytti: Because you can't usually tell which of these stereotypes will appear in a book before you read it. Or if you know what the plot is about, you won't know whether it is well-executed or not without reading it. Even if the cover makes it clear that the book is about (for example) a murder investigation, you don't know if it will end with the main character foolishly confronting a killer alone until you are almost at the end of the book. So it's hard to avoid coming across things that annoy you, and once I'm far enough into a book to realise that, I'm usually too stubborn to give up on it. I can also look at the bigger picture and say that I enjoyed a book overall except for the parts that annoyed me.
Also, as Gracie said, you can encounter these annoyances in almost any genre. The Age of Innocence is about a love triangle, but it's not most people's idea of a romance novel.
Justanotherbiblophile wrote: "It sounds like you gals need to start a list of the 'non-stupid' romance books, so when a good one is found it can be popularized, and the stupid ones can be shunned.The NSR seal of approval."
Good idea!
Rachel wrote: "@Tytti: Because you can't usually tell which of these stereotypes will appear in a book before you read it. Or if you know what the plot is about, you won't know whether it is well-executed or not ..."But that's why I don't read romance novels, I read novels that sometimes have romance in them but they are usually about other stuff. But I wouldn't mind reading The Age of Innocence because of that, I didn't mind the sort of love triangle in Anna Karenina, either.
Tytti wrote: "But that's why I don't read romance novels..."Me either, unless they get a seal of approval. I just need more sealers, to go through the books so they can get a yay/nay.
One of my greatest annoyances with historical romances: People disregarding historical travel times. Up and down (walking and floating) the Mississippi, and back and forth across the Atlantic in one year (before clipper ships). SMH.
Interestingly enough, many of my favorite books have hints of romance in them. But it's the ones that don't do it dumb.
Justanotherbiblophile wrote: "One of my greatest annoyances with historical romances: "This reminded me... I don't like when authors disrespect foreign cultures and their histories. If they are writing about a certain time and a country, they shouldn't change the history to suit their story.
I just read about a popular historical romance that doesn't have a clue about how a country involved in a total war operates. They don't just let enemy aliens into the country (it's kind of the whole point of a war, people trying to get into somewhere where they are not welcome, and others trying to stop them....) and let them drive around just like that. They would be interrogated and possible shot as spies. And then the readers believe all that and think they've learned something... They must think we are idiots.
And names... it would be preferable not to give female names to men and vice versa. It would be also nice if they really were names common in that county, and not, say in a neighbouring country with another language. And who names their son "Persecution"? I've seen that, too...
Justanotherbiblophile wrote: "It sounds like you gals need to start a list of the 'non-stupid' romance books, so when a good one is found it can be popularized, and the stupid ones can be shunned. The NSR seal of approval."That would be so amazingly handy and useful !!
Amy (Other Amy) wrote: "Authors making their characters do stupid things just so they will have plot issues to resolve. (I don't mind characters being stupid. Just when it's a transparent plot device.)."Yeah, characters being stupid on cue really annoys me.
Also that thing where one person has something important or intriguing to tell the other person, but the author keeps making them get interrupted by things that in real life you would NEVER allow to interrupt.
"Sorry, I would finish telling you this Very Important Thing but I have to go shampoo the cat."
"And then -- but wait, I will tell you the rest after my pedicure, which I have been waiting for so long that I cannot possibly reschedule it."
"After that, you'll never guess what happened, so please return after my tennis lesson which I cannot miss and I'll tell you."
What's the Name of That Book???
Books mentioned in this topic
The Big Over Easy (other topics)A Visit from the Goon Squad (other topics)
Dark Rooms (other topics)
The Little Friend (other topics)
Naked in Death (other topics)
More...
Now, I prepare you for a full-on rant. You have been warned.
When I say Love Triangle, I mean where the person in the middle has feelings for both of the love interests. Not someone with two or more admirers, but still only loves one of them.
The whole idea of the love triangle is fundamentally flawed to me. I don't believe you can be "in love" with two people simultaneously. And I know, you might be saying "but what if it's between love and duty?", and while that's marginally better, the person in the middle almost always chooses for love, making the whole thing so predictable. But even if they spruce things up a bit and the duty option is picked, both the person in the middle and the favoured love interest (because, come on, we all want the lovers together) end up being miserable.
Which brings me on to the next point, no matter what decision is made (except if a love threesome happens) someone always ends up miserable. Either way, the person in the middle should be upset, considering they claimed to “love” both. And, as one of the love interests doesn’t get the person in the middle, with all the fuss that’s been made, you would think that they would be depressed? Yes? No. Doesn’t happen that way. or not often. Most of the time they make the readers feel better by creating an extra love interest for the rejected person so that they and the readers don’t notice that the person in the middle has just lead on two people for the entire book, just to crush someone's heart after all that time. Nope. Nope nope nope. Anyone who did that in the real world would be called “selfish”, “insensitive to others feelings”, maybe a “tease” maybe even an “emotionally manipulative jerk”.
But. Even if you find a circumstance that just skirts all of these issues. Or even if the characters being miserable doesn't bother you. There is still one other major problem. They are so BORING!. So over-done. Often, they’re whiny. Often, they’re predictable. Often, they take over the book. And always, always always, they are boring.
-Rant over
Thank you for reading it.
Well done for making it to the end.
What things do you hate that are in books?