Terminalcoffee discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
Feeling Nostalgic? The archives
>
Overused Plot Twists
Mod
I agree with a lot of what she said. One, don't use a dream, except to advance the plot. I used it once to put an idea in the character's head. But don't start a book with a dream (sure sign of an amateur) and don't pull a "Who Shot J.R." by making the whole thing a dream.
Two, Dan Brown's writing sucks. Yeah, yeah, yeah, he's sold billions of books and they made movies out of them. But I swear to God, I wanted to put Tom Hanks in a gym and send him to a good barber. Anyway, his writing is horrible. I thought "The da Vinci Code" was a wall banger. For example (slightly off topic) he never looked at anything, or examined anything, he always "eyed" it. He eyed this, he eyed that, like it was written by a newspaper headline writer. Why did it sell? Because nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people.
In defense of authors, there is a lot of pressure to come up with plot twists and surprises, and not to make the book predictable. Sometimes it gets whacky.
Michael E. Henderson
Michael wrote: "Two, Dan Brown's writing sucks. Yeah, yeah, yeah, he's sold billions of books and they made movies out of them. But I swear to God, I wanted to put Tom Hanks in a gym and send him to a good barber. Anyway, his writing is horrible. I thought "The da Vinci Code" was a wall banger. For example (slightly off topic) he never looked at anything, or examined anything, he always "eyed" it. He eyed this, he eyed that, like it was written by a newspaper headline writer. Why did it sell? Because nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."Did you ever notice how unrealistic some of it is too? Such as when Silas, the monk with albinism (who in a more realistic novel would have vision problems) is driving a car, chasing Langdon at top speed, shooting a gun...?
No, didn't catch that, but he was probably hoping that most people are like me and don't know it. As a writer, though, it's a good idea to at least address it in the story. A Google search tells you about the vision problems, but there is enough variation in the severity to allow a plausible explanation. I was looking at a book yesterday on the subject of why an agent might reject a book. This was one of the reasons. You leave out details of something because you don't know the subject. You've got to do your homework. And with the internet, it's easy. I spend hours researching things.
Why did Brown get away with it? Don't know. I also wonder to what extent the editor had anything to do with it. I could see an editor saying, "take this part out about poor vision, it might offend someone," or something like that.
Cheers
Michael E. Henderson
We never suggested that his drivel did not appeal to the unwashed masses. It clearly does. We were discussing it from the point of decent writing.I disagree with the rest of your analogies. For one thing, Tom and Jerry is realistic, and don't say it's not. And bad-mouthing Mission: Impossible? That goes beyond the pale. Next you will criticize The Munsters, or The Beverly Hillbillies. Is there no depths to which you will not stoop?
(For the less subtle of you, this is what's known as verbal irony. Google it. If you like Dan Brown you won't understand it.)
Michael wrote: "Is there no depths to which you will not stoop?"Hey, if we're going to criticize writing...
Michael wrote: "We never suggested that his drivel did not appeal to the unwashed masses. It clearly does. We were discussing it from the point of decent writing.I disagree with the rest of your analogies. For o..."
No, Phil, we are not criticizing writing. We are criticizing Dan Brown, although that was a digression from the topic, really.
If you want to criticize my work, for example, that's easy. You buy the book, your're free to rate it.
Ambrose Bierce defined Painting, n. The art of protecting flat surfaces from the weather and exposing them to the critic.
Critic, n. A person who boasts himself hard to please because nobody tries to please him.
The Devils Dictionary
Michael wrote: "You buy the book, your're free to rate it...."The contraction of "you are" is you're, not your're.
Thanks for the instruction in English, but it seems to me that you correcting my English is like the monkey teaching the organ grinder to turn the wheel. These were typos, as I am perfectly aware how to construct a contraction or "you are," and know the rule of regarding when to put an "s" on the end of a word.Trust me, you don't want me checking your discussion board postings. This is not writing, it's discussing, and as such is subject to typos and mistakes of grammar. I mean Bun, where do I begin with your last post. The grammar and punctuation (or lack of it) was like fingernails on a chalk board to me. But I forgive it because of the context. LOL Have a nice day.
I don't care for pomposity and pretentiousness. Heck, there are probably many other multisyllabic personality traits that rub me wrong as well.And I liked "Angels and Demons."
Heck! I've read a lot worse than Dan Brown. Most readers are not ambivalent about either the writing or the subject matter and that makes for lively discussions. I don't like the 'found letters, found diary, found manuscript' device. It feels dishonest from the start and then I can't trust the author.
I agree, Cheri. And I really don't like those predictable romance novel plot twists where the female and male protagonists who hate each other are placed in a contrived situation and end up romantically involved.
Bun, That's just one sticking point. I got others. We have local author that has mixed up the feminine honorific with a masculine name for a California town. It's such a simple thing but if she can't get that right, how could I buy into the rest of the story? I'm not sure the *characters are imaginary, the plot didn't really happen...*. I read for real. A good character will rattle inside of me for years. Some I never get rid of.
That is why I like non-fiction - less complicated.
I just get really tired, when I read a fantasy novel - and the protagonist is the long lost daughter/prince etc of another world/realm etc that is now on the brink of destruction - if they don't come back and save it. It's especially silly, because they are usually non-descript teenagers with no special abilities what so ever (unless they are "dormant" and suddenly awakened) - so there's no legitimate or logical reason except "destiny" YAWN.
Although the writing can still be ok, I wish a lot of fantasy authors would bother to make their story premise a little more interesting and original.
Louise wrote: "I just get really tired, when I read a fantasy novel - and the protagonist is the long lost daughter/prince etc of another world/realm etc that is now on the brink of destruction - if they don't co..."I'm with you on that one, Louise. It's definitely a trope heavily relied on in fantasy and sci-fi, and it's rarely handled with much originality, or at least not so much now.
I understand that great work derives from other works, and to see something happen again and again is to be expected. It really just comes down to execution and how well the author can make the "twist" feel like an important part of the story and not just some pointless shock or obvious plot machinery.
I don't trust any writer that constructs an argument to disprove the merits of another right out of the gate. Anyone that feels the need to go on a tirade against a popular, if not necessarily great, writer immediately after claiming to be a writer themselves, suggests they suffer from a combination of pomposity and insecurity that is insufferable.
BunWat wrote: "Michael, Phil was pointing out that you made a grammatical error. Either say; is there no depth (singular) or are there no depths (plural). Do not say IS (singular) there no depthS (plural).
And..."
Not to mention one usually sinks to depths and stoops to levels...
Phil, I didn't like Angels and Demons, but I am not going to get on a snobbyhorse because you did!
I can see that wit, irony, humor and subtlety are lost on some of my less . . . I don't know, intelligent is not the right word . . . maybe subtle and able to understand nuance and verbal irony. This shows in them insecurity and insufferability. And I recognize the insufferable when I see one.By the way, I did not make a grammatical error. I do not make grammatical errors. I sometimes make typos when typing on this little notebook in little boxes. But I have a better understanding of grammar than 99.9% of the population.
Now I am putting my hands over my ears and saying "la, la, la" to any more of this discussion.
Oh yeah, Angels and Demons sucked, too. Oh wait, I didn't read it because The da Vinci Code sucked so bad. Never mind.
Michael wrote: "I can see that wit, irony, humor and subtlety are lost on some of my less . . . I don't know, intelligent is not the right word . . . maybe subtle and able to understand nuance and verbal irony. This shows in them insecurity and insufferability. And I recognize the insufferable when I see one.By the way, I did not make a grammatical error. I do not make grammatical errors. I sometimes make typos when typing on this little notebook in little boxes. But I have a better understanding of grammar than 99.9% of the population."
Modest, too.
The fact that you so blatantly believe yourself superior to 99.9% of the population is not helping your case one bit. Everyone makes grammatical errors from time to time, I don't care how perfect you are, and the strident separation of typo and grammar is unnecessary to the rest of us here in the 99.9%.I don't think any of us care whether you like Dan Brown or not, but your pompous assertions that we don't understand your subtle wit, or that we shouldn't be able to, is insulting and you shouldn't be very surprised that people don't like it. But then again, if we're not really in on the joke, I suppose that is a nice little ego boost for you.
And it is not witty to refer to any of my friends as dancing monkeys when they are Philtastic and Brilliant Bunnies. No, we don't want you checking our posts for errors in any real way, but in case you haven't read the group rules, correcting "typos" and "errors" (which we generally do for fun, not for edification) is a right TC has reserved, in writing. The question is, can you take the lighthearted ribbing or is it going to throw a monkey wrench in your grammar organ?
I don't like talking like this, so I'm done. If we can start over and be friends, great. If not, that's great too.
I'm not sure, but from what I hear, the .1% are revolting.
Amber said it all so well. I love that cover, Jonathan.
Me too, Larry. My wife got me a framed print of it for Christmas. Just need to clear away some of the baseball paraphernalia so I can hang it on the wall in the office...
Michael wrote: "I do not make grammatical errors. I sometimes make typos when typing on this little notebook in little boxes."I do not make mistakes, sometimes I am just not the most correct I've ever been.
Jim wrote: "Michael wrote: "I do not make grammatical errors. I sometimes make typos when typing on this little notebook in little boxes."I do not make mistakes, sometimes I am just not the most correct I've..."
Exactly.
Amber is 99.9% fantabulous!!Oooooh, lookie there. An error.
If you're undecided about Amber it makes you amberguous?When your opinion of her bends a little it's a cAmber?
Mod
Heheheh.
Phil wrote: "If you're undecided about Amber it makes you amberguous?When your opinion of her bends a little it's a cAmber?"
If you smell like her, you're using ambergis?
Mod
Enuf?
tropes?
Does Murakami count as contemporary fiction? Can we begin with that term please?
Mod
Jammies wrote: "Phil wrote: "If you're undecided about Amber it makes you amberguous?When your opinion of her bends a little it's a cAmber?"
If you smell like her, you're using ambergis?"
Oh god, I hope not. That stuff smells like whale barf.
Sally wrote: "At a glance the only thing I've read in that link is The Historian, a book which pissed me off to no end. Stupid trendy garbage."I liked it the first time I read it, but I re-read it and was rather disappointed in myself for having liked it so much the first time around. I think listening to it on audiobook made it better than it actually was, if that makes any sense.
I listened to it on audiobook as well. The narrator was awesome which I'm sure added to the enjoyment.
Amber ~Geektastic~ wrote: "Jammies wrote: "Phil wrote: "If you're undecided about Amber it makes you amberguous?When your opinion of her bends a little it's a cAmber?"
If you smell like her, you're using ambergis?"
Oh god, I hope not. That stuff smells like whale barf."
Whale barf, whale snot, potayto, potahto...
"Amber ~Geektastic~ wrote: Whale barf, whale snot, potayto, potahto"Does this mean you're getting tired of all the dextrous Amber puns?
Has anyone mentioned that she's Amberdextrous?
Is Mr. Fancypants Writer Micheal gone? Jesus, what an ass.
He's over there in the corner with his hands over his ears saying "la la la la la" really loudly.
WHAT AN ASS! CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW, Micheal? Twat!
I'm not usually this negative. I'm going to start scaring off all of the TC newbies. Really, he just screams pompous nimrod somehow. Maybe I'm getting my period or something.
Cynthia love, I can't decide whether to put you in remedial greeter training with Jim, or just fire him and give you his job.
I don't need no damned remedial greeter training, I am a nice person. What people like Michael need to learn that the sexiest sound is NOT the sound of his/her own voice/opinions, but the gentle phrase, "What do you think?"I have never been so slayed back in my dating days as when a man said to me, "Wow--I love the way you think."
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Terminalcoffee
Books mentioned in this topic
The Poisonwood Bible (other topics)The Devils Dictionary (other topics)
The Ghost of Caroline Wald (other topics)
Authors mentioned in this topic
Terry Goodkind (other topics)Ambrose Bierce (other topics)
Michael E. Henderson (other topics)
Michael E. Henderson (other topics)
http://bookriot.com/2011/12/14/7-surp...
Any examples where the cliche twist actually worked? Or other twists and tropes you're sick of seeing appear again and again?