Growing up, my family never talked about books. I'm guessing my first book discussions were with a librarian when I was eight or so, something along the lines of:
Me (pointing to some book with a juicy cover: swords, maybe, or half naked women, or--score!--both): I can't reach it!
Librarian (shaking head): There's a reason for that. Come back when you're older.
So I sighed and trudged to the history shelves and dragged out Gibbons' History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, and lugged it home, and spent a happy weekend reading the lurid gossip of the times about assassination and orgies and war. (At least that's how I remember it. Please leave me my illusions.)
When I got a little older, ten or eleven, it was lessons at school.
Teacher (to class): Why do you suppose Tolkien used 'dwarves' as the plural of dwarf?
Me (and rest of class, in chorus): Don't know. Don't care.
I find The Hobbit much more linguistically interesting now but at the time I found it rather boring. But when my friend Gillian pushed a copy of Lord of the Rings at me, along with the endorsement, "It's really good," (Yorkshire-in-1971 tween equivalent of ZOMG! You'll totally, absolutely, right-now *die* if you don't read this!), took her at her word and gave it a go. And spent the weekend in a daze; I gobbled that book down as though I were a starving mongrel. But afterwards I had no idea how to talk about this book that had rocked my world. When I gave it back to Gill I managed, "You were right, I liked it a lot," then just stood there, gaping. I didn't have the tools for discussion.
Even now, I'm not very good, comparatively speaking, at talking about books. More accurately, I'm not very good at boosting them. Perhaps it's a cultural thing. In England it's Not Done to be enthusiastic about anything. Oh, I can rant until the cows come home about what's wrong with a particular book, but I can't rave about it for longer than a sentence or two. As I hate to use this blog as a bully pulpit, I rarely discuss books here at length--unless it's big enough to take care of itself, like Twilight or The Lost Symbol or The Strain.
However, there's a new review journal in town (well, about to be--more on that another time) and they've asked me to contribute. I have a couple of ideas for left-field articles (one of which I'm sure will get me into a lot of trouble, and so makes me smile and rub my hands to contemplate) but it has occurred to me that you, Faithful Reader, might have some nifty notions about what would make for good written (and later audio and video) book chat.
What do you talk about when you talk about books?
What kind of book-related discussion (anything, anything at all) are you hungry for?
Posts
The past couple of years I've only had one rule about my book blurbs-- I must write a haiku to go along with it.
ReplyDeleteIn all honesty, my unofficial rule is to not over-think it. Since I'm blogging for myself, I content myself with rambling, non-sequitoriate, unedited goop.
Oh wow, interesting. I'm with you, I struggle to say nice things about a book but can pinpoint every flaw and weakness. I force myself to find the bits I like and explain why. It helps me understand not only the book, but also my writing and what makes a story good.
ReplyDeleteFor you with this new project, a lot depends on the audience--readers or writers? I tend to review a book with the eyes of a writer and may not mention things that would help a reader. I don't to say much about the story because I don't want to know much about a story going in. I want it to unfold, not be foretold.
As a writer, I like a review that tells me something about the craft and what the writer did well or badly and why. The usual suspects: character, plot, theme, is it a page turner. I've recently concluded that, for me, there's a line between a 4-star and a 5-star (if you must) book. And I can't define it in concrete terms. Simply, the 5-star book blows me away. Not always sure why (I'm trying to explore that).
I'd love to read overviews of genres--science fiction, lesbian fiction. What's happening that's good or bad. There are a lot of sites that talk about publishing and publishers and that's a doomsday scenario that's been playing out for decades. I'm interested in the stories themselves. What's new? What's different and well done? What sucks? ;)
I'm looking forward to the trouble you will cause!
mordicai, not overthinking it is a useful approach for a blog. But the review journal I'm referring to (or avoiding referring to, for now) will require Deep Thought.
ReplyDeleteElaineB, it sounds as though what you're after is a leisurely but specific discussion of particular books, rather than general conversation, yes?
I love to talk about character development. For me, if there is no growth in any of the characters; if they remain one type from beginning to end and only re/act based on that type, I grow dreadfully bored and ultimately close the book for good.
ReplyDeleteI love talking about all the details of how characters made surprising changes, how at *that* specific point, the character grew into a deeper human being and that could have effected the plot *this* way...
I admit, I'm not very good at talking about books either, but for me, character development is the best kind of gossip one could participate in!
Janine, okay, so for you it's 'people'. Got it.
ReplyDeleteAt the age of 10 I was blessed with a very understanding librarian, bless her soul, who let me checkout any book I wanted. This was after I had razed through all the YA novels available in record time. It also helped that both my parents were avid readers and we had a huge collection at home. If I could reach a book I was allowed to read it ;-)
ReplyDeleteWriting about books I try to point what I really like and when I don't like something try to tell why not and how it could be done better in my view. When I was a member of the jury of our national SF short story competition I had to read over 80 stories in two months. Sometimes I may have been harsh with some of the entries ;-)
In short, write what YOU want about the book. The readers will either pick it up or not. The SF audience are a varied bunch.
nicolas, this will be a general review journal, not genre-specific.
ReplyDeleteI have an awful time trying to come up with the right words to describe an author’s work. It just seems incredibly difficult to review writing with writing. For me, a positive experience is visceral and emotional. It would be like trying to describe a powerful painting... by painting, or a beautiful aria by trying to sing a response.
ReplyDeleteAs a writer, I appreciate compliments (of course), observations, concerns, and questions. Frankly, probative questions are really the most helpful thing to me.
With regard to your question, I wonder if there has been a poll done of authors to find what kind of information/ feed back its most helpful. Maybe the topic is to unique to each individual to draw any valid conclusions, but there has to be something more available than "I really liked your book."
And this is the reason, I seldom offer comments, because I avoid Deep thought.
jeanne
jeanne, so you're looking at it more as a for-writers thing, yes? How about as a reader?
ReplyDeleteFor me, the evolving idea is to equate criticism with love, if that makes sense. As an academic, my job was to really just find all of the flaws in a book or an argument and show that I could exceed them with my theories or evidence. The rhetoric of "building upon" others' work was often a cover for turning their ideas into mulch for my own academic garden. Criticism was a professional tool for advancement.
ReplyDeleteBut when I dropped out of academia and returned to my first love (fantastika), I found that approach to be dissatisfying, which made me ponder why I wanted to write criticism in the first place. The answer was love of the words and the images and the stimulation of my sense of wonder and imagination (which I actually wrote about some months ago: http://www.apexbookcompany.com/2010/05/speculative-fiction-criticism-is-love/ ). And I think that standpoint demands, hopefully encourages, that you look at what works and what does not in a given subject and how those elements affect your reading.
What I want to hear in a critical review is what grabbed you AND what turned you off. Be harsh when you must, but give us the totality of your response so that your critique is contextualized. Specifics are always good, and being able to situate a subject within a wider literary or historical context is appealing as well. The reviews I like the best establish an angle of inquiry and then get into the details of a work and show some of its connections to the world (literary, social, etc.)around it.
Growing up I never talked with anyone about books either. No one I knew was reading the same things I was. I don't think it was until I found this blog that I had any interaction with people who like to read some of the same things I do. So I've never thought much about what I'd say about books; it's a skill I've never learned. But I imagine what I would want to talk about is what things that interest me about the book. And above all, in books that are my favorites, I must like something about a main character -- who they are or how they deal with life.
ReplyDeleteAnd I certainly never studied any of Tolkien's books in school. Wow.
In a review of a book, I look first to see whether the book is well written, and what it's about. Lots of books are well written, but are about things that just don't interest me or have characters that don't interest me. For instance I am bored with period stories about lesbians back in the day who could not face the fact of their sexuality because of the culture of the times. True it may be, but it bores me.
Why i like a particular book turns out to be a very personal thing. And being a pretty private person, maybe that is part of my reluctance even now to dissect it.
But wow, what a difference it might've made in my life if I had been able to find like minded people at an early age. But I suppose I'm wandering off-topic again.
I agree with pervious commenter - what grabbed you and/or turned you off.
EruditeOgre, I think you've summed up my thoughts: criticism should be founded upon love, not competition. (Have I interpreted your comment correctly?) Many thanks for that reminder.
ReplyDeletejennifer, yes, I think good criticism/exploration is revealing and therefore a little frightening. Definitely risky. But I think it might be time for me to get back into the risk business.
okay. I suspected that I failed to express my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteAs a reader, I have difficulty explaining how a book may have affected me. It would help to know what writers were looking for when they read comments.
If I may use your work as an example, because it was one of the few times, I was able to pinpoint why I reacted. In that case, it was simply-- word choice. The plot was arresting, the characters vivid but it was my visceral reaction to it that was so compelling and made the book an experience rather than an academic ‘read’ and very difficult to talk about. Yes?
Am I anywhere near answering the question?
jeanne, yes, I think so. Over on Facebook one commenter has suggested 'musicality'--which, in my opinion, is partly rhythm and partly word choice.
ReplyDeleteAnd of course, writing *is* words. Good clean nouns and strong, apt verbs are key. In my opinion. I tell my students that brilliant writing is so good you don't see it--like brilliant shot composition in film. It's only when you pause the film or put in a bookmark to go make a cup of tea, then return to it, that you might notice the beautiful sentence/colour composition. Then when you hit Play or start reading again, you forget, and are lost in the unfurling moment.
That's the goal for me as a writer. It's my hope as a reader/viewer.
Yes!
ReplyDeleteI'm just going to let you write
Nicola:
ReplyDeleteThat is it! :-) And in academia, it was a race to see who could disprove whom. I think that is a poor way to conduct one's writing career. Reviews should be honest, but they don't need to be unrelentingly denigrating, and if you come from a standpoint of love for the literature (and for people!) you can discuss a work critically with more empathy and perception.
That has been a hard lesson for me to re-learn, but it's good to keep reminding ourselves of it.
Because you said it was a review journal, I was thinking reviews of specific books, but no, I'd be interested in general book topics--just more focused on what's inside the covers, not whether it has covers or is an ebook or publishing in general. It all seems so speculative. Once I have a book out, I'm sure I'll be more interested in that, but for now, as a reader, it's the content that interests me. But write about what you want. I'm sure you'll find an audience! ;)
ReplyDeleteI like to hear how people felt when they read a book e.g. "I puked after I finished Lord Of The Flies!" or "I couldn't believe it in Charlotte Bronte's Shirley when the girl secretly cauterizes her own wound after the mad dog bit her! My eyes bugged out of my head!"
ReplyDeleteIvanova, got it.
ReplyDelete