"was I supposed to feel something here?"

[intertribal]

Reading Abigail Nussbaum's set of critical reviews of the 2009 Hugo Award-nominated novels (Part 1, Part 2) - and the comments that follow - is both hilarious and deeply, deeply frightening, and usually at the same moments.  She makes some of her nominated books seem downright wretched, and while part of me (as a reader) is going, damn, that's what's on the Hugo ballot?, another part of me (the writer) is going, what if I write like that?  FML!!

Examples:

• Saturn's Children is littered with moments like these, in which you stare at the text and wonder 'was I supposed to feel something here?'
• Stross's tendency to simply fling Stuff at the readers--sociology, physics, fashion, eroticism, philosophy, architecture, a couple of daring escapes and fight scenes--all viewed through Freya's undiscerning, unfiltered gaze, leaves the novel all but shapeless.
• Scalzi's inability to write any character voice that doesn't sound exactly like his own is a chronic problem with his writing- it's not just Zoe, it's John Perry and every other character in the books. They all sound exactly alike and they all sound like Scalzi. This is especially vexing when several of them have a conversation and any of the comments could be made by any of the six people in the room.
• The worldbuilding of the OMW universe shows its seams more and more as the series wears on, which is a definite minus for me.
• Little Brother is as tone deaf a portrait of social activism as I've ever encountered, and I'm quite baffled by the commonly voiced argument that it is a worthwhile novel because of the lessons it teaches children about liberty and civil rights. Is this really what kids ought to be learning? That it is more important to look cool than to help people, and that real heroes put their own hurt feelings ahead of the well-being of others?
• Kingdom wasn't bad so much as it was dripping all over with Slashdot-generation self-righteousness.
• I think the case for Marcus being Cory Sue is not that he sounds like Doctorow in his blog (which I never read), but that he reads like an ridiculously idealized version of a teen who has most of the same interests as Doctorow and who would one day grow up to write a blog just like Boing Boing -- I felt like I could hear Doctorow whispering in my ear "Isn't he awesome?"
• Anathem is a puzzle book, but once the puzzle has been put together there's nothing to stop us noticing just how flimsy its plot and characters are. Ultimately, Anathem really is a more humane, more intelligent, more interesting, significantly less preachy version of Little Brother, but that's not exactly high praise.
• By and large, good prose seems to live in the mainstream section of the bookstore rather than the sci-fi section.

I do like reading negative book reviews - not only because I am a hateful bitch (just kidding), but because I feel like I can learn more from them than I can from positive book reviews.  And I often find that speculative fiction novel reviews tend to be unabashedly glowing like 85-95% of the time, which I find sort of unbelievable - but maybe I'm just jaded by all the good reviews that the horrible The Descent (Jeff Long) got on Amazon.  So it's refreshing to hear people give constructive criticism and really pick at what the writer is bad at, even if it scares me - those are all very real problems.  Especially the first one.  That may actually be my worst nightmare.

Comments

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

Oftentimes I hate critics, not only because it's 'subjective', but because they often seem to miss the point (my suspicion is that the people who become critics just ARE the sort of people who miss the point--I mean, really, what is the point of being a critic?). However, those seem like some, uh, good things to notice are bad.

My responses to your examples:

Scalzi's inability to write any character voice that doesn't sound exactly like his own is a chronic problem with his writing- it's not just Zoe, it's John Perry and every other character in the books. They all sound exactly alike and they all sound like Scalzi. This is especially vexing when several of them have a conversation and any of the comments could be made by any of the six people in the room.

This may actually be a pet peeve of mine. But I might forgive it if it's complemented by some other virtue. Nobody's perfect.

Little Brother is as tone deaf a portrait of social activism as I've ever encountered, and I'm quite baffled by the commonly voiced argument that it is a worthwhile novel because of the lessons it teaches children about liberty and civil rights. Is this really what kids ought to be learning? That it is more important to look cool than to help people, and that real heroes put their own hurt feelings ahead of the well-being of others?

Well, at least it's realistic. Also, that's pretty much the definition of a hipster: being underground/leftist (with a dash of faux environmentalism and concern for 'fair trade' products) is important because it's cool! It's gay to care about people! Fuckin' emo fags.

Kingdom wasn't bad so much as it was dripping all over with Slashdot-generation self-righteousness.

What is the slashdot-generation?

Ditto for Little Brother

By and large, good prose seems to live in the mainstream section of the bookstore rather than the sci-fi section.

There's definitely a sci-fi 'tone', and it's most apparent in dialogue to me. I mean, even Ursula Le Guin annoys me on this count, but perhaps I should have different standards of judging sci-fi, as different in style as in subject matter? HM.

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

However, those seem like some, uh, good things to notice are bad.


Yeah, exactly.

The all-sounding-the-same thing annoys the hell out of me, actually. It's like, write an essay? However, I don't think I have this problem, because I understand what a CHARACTER is. Like I seriously have trouble understanding how people would get to this point in writing. Serious trouble. Unless they started off basically writing just their own opinions, which apparently is what Scalzi did, he's famous because of his blog.

Oh yeah, the character in question is definitely a hipster. I think what concerned the reviewer was that it seemed like a polemic, like it's written by a hipster about a hipster. Not that that's, you know, illegal or anything, just not what the reviewer liked (and I think this is one of those subjective things). This book is the one by the writer whose other book is called self-righteous. I think slashdot generation is a reference to the internet/digital/hacking generation? And possibly the web site slashdot.

perhaps I should have different standards of judging sci-fi, as different in style as in subject matter?

I don't really think so, although I guess that may be because I don't like that tone, if it's the tone I think you're talking about. Then again I don't write sci-fi so maybe I shouldn't judge/complain?

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

wtf did LJ do to my quote html? grar.

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

it hates you.

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

for a while it would NOT SHOW my default userpics if I used them to comment. So yes, yes it does.

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

I mention it (characters all sounding the same) as a pet peeve because I tend to see it as more a problem w/ writing than 'was I supposed to feel something here?' Not that I like passionless writing, but I think the latter is much more subjective, so I don't necessarily blame the writer if I don't 'feel something'. And I certainly don't expect to at every turn, which can be sensationalistic/overdramatized.

Wait, a polemic about hipsters? So it's anti-hipster? I'm confused.

Yeah, I don't know. You can probably write a good novel either way, but I think it does make a difference (at least in terms of realism or something).

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's true. I guess as a writer I do try to make the reading experience passionate, or emotive, or something, but I see what you're saying, it can't "move" everyone. And I think I feel partly that way because a lot of times I feel so deeply for my characters that I want everyone else to, too. Heh. And yeah, I wouldn't want to err on the overdramatized side either.

Uh, no. A polemic written by hipsters. Against "the Man."

Realism? Yeah, maybe.

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

8pm?

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

Ah, I was confused why polemic = hipster on hipster action, but I follow now.

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

porn movie i do not want to see.

[royinpink.livejournal.com]

lol, yeah, it wouldn't even be remotely hot. :(

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

nope.

[asakiyume.livejournal.com]

the all-sounding-the-same thing is one I worry about. I keep telling myself: this character is not YOU. And this character is different from that one over there. So they should sound that way.

So you worry about the first one?

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

I must confess that I used to have a problem with author stand-ins... and if I was writing about political things, it could look bad. Lately I've taken a really big step back from my characters and it seems to have helped, ha.

Yeah, I worry about the first one. I end up getting so emotionally invested, and if people don't react the same way I almost feel like I've let my characters down. Or maybe the stories I remember are the ones I have an emotional response to?

[imago1.livejournal.com]

"...another part of me (the writer) is going, what if I write like that?"

In that event, people with blogs will gnash their teeth as you collect money and awards. Fringe benefit of literary success.

PS: Intertropical Convergence Zone is a powerful story.

[intertribal.livejournal.com]

Ha, yeah, apparently. Although Gaiman didn't receive much (if any) criticism in these posts, so maybe I would just reap nominations, not awards.

Thank you.