First we have the persistent “I” narrative. If the story needs the “I” POV, I’m all for it, but, mostly, it’s just sadly rendered, poorly masked author angst and auto-biographical fantasizing. Next comes the too obvious podium/pulpit pounding. Then there’s the “I love elves,” the “I love guns and heroes/heroines” and the “I wanna be loved” lot. Predictably, all these grand and glorious tales are laden with telling me their story instead of showing me by making me live it. Predictably, the leading characters are the usual archetypes and phenotypes (skinny and weedy; lithe and lissome; overly buxom; ripped and shredded…as in body builder — you get the picture). Predictably, the narratives are saturated with really sucky writing, filled to the rim with badly constructed sentences, misplaced modifiers, and adverbial flatulence. (And, by the way, I’m not one of those “kill all adverbs” readers. Adverbs are effective when judiciously placed and properly used.) But.
The word that most arises when I start scanning the critique slush is: insipid, sadly insipid. Oddly, most children’s story authors do not qualify for my despair. I’m finding, more and more, that children’s authors know their stuff, even if the stories aren’t quite my cup of recreational tea. The rest? Well, maybe one offering a month is worth my efforts to read and offer up opinion. Otherwise, I just silently bow out. No sense puncturing anyone’s balloon, especially since so many others can and do blithely offer the writer sodden, even artfully succulent praise for work I consider just litter.
Recently:
- They Work Very Hard
- Treading the Dangers of Fiction
- Infighting About Grammar & Punctuation
- Scary Writers
- New Novel, Chapter Two
- To the Book Store
- New Novel Amid Chaos
- Raw Gore, Explicit Cruelty, Debased Sex in Novels
- Back from Summer Hiatus
- Self-Publishing IS Better
