What do modern-day readers want from books? (and other thought-provoking questions)

[j. d. worthington]

Andrew: very good. Da Vinci Code by way of (an especially terse) J. G. Ballard and Dashiell Hammett. Now all you need is a publisher....

[Teresa Edgerton]

I think that's a very interesting point that GrownUp makes about people buying books and not reading them. Which would make book buyers and book readers two different groups.

[HardScienceFan]

Originally Posted by GrownUp

Perhaps the modern day reader in question here isn't represented by the average, the mean average I mean, because that blended average doesn't represent so much with such variety of readership.

Perhaps the modern day reader of this question is one of the mode. The vast chunk of readers that do fill the middle of the range and their tastes which move like a shoal of fish does, have swum... ...where?

That's the question here, I'm thinking.

SOUNDS LKE U KNOW YOUR STATISTICS.

[HardScienceFan]

I suppose it's also a question of what is meant by "the modern-day reader".
the modern reader has several media at his/her disposal,which all have their influence,and all influence public taste.Ideas about what is politically correct are changing,society is changing(often with the people not changing with it).Yesterday I heard about pension funds investing in companies which manufacture cluster bombs and landmines,so I suppose
every war in Afica is worth its weight in gold.......
U know what: just poll the readers,multiple choice,marketing like
Some examples of what I don't want:
-garish cover art
-give aways(the Bad Guy in "Murder on Anagram Planet" being called Dohomilac Namaic)
-using a contemporary social or scientific hype to give the story a semblance of believability,a cold fusion story looks mighty silly now
-stereotypes,standard good and bad guys:the world doesn't work that way.
-a military slant(I'm a pacifist at heart)
-hackneyed prose("he landed on Aldebaran IV,tailjets blazing")
-aliens which are just like contemporary Americans,only they have blue skin and pointy ears("Gee whiz,G'larg,don'cha get all uppity with me,y'hear) .
-stories written as if the future is just like the present,only with interstellar travel,androids washing the dishes,and slightly higher prices for goods and services,and less chords to popular music
-horrific downbeat endings
-internal inconsistency
Geez,it's that late???
Gotta go now
AytchEsEf

[Teresa Edgerton]

Returning to the matter of people who buy books without ever actually reading them.

My first reaction was to think of people who don't read much at all: buy the book while it's hot, but once the hype dies down never get around to reading it. But just today I thought about this topic in regard to some of our members here -- unquestionably voracious readers -- who have towering TBR piles.

Now, I've known readers on other forums who, when they buy a new book, instead of putting it at either the top or the bottom of the pile, often insert it somewhere in the middle depending on how interested they are in that particular book. According to this system, it seems like there might be some books that never do work their way into a position to be read.

So I'm wondering, for those of you who buy books with no idea of reading them in the near future: for what reason(s) -- other than the obvious one that you want to get it while it's still available -- do you generally purchase one of these books?

Because it was written by an author whose books you have enjoyed in the past?

Because you are trying to assemble an excellent personal library and it seems like a good book to have?

Because a friend has recommended the book?

On the basis of the author's reputation, or because a lot of people are talking about the book -- and you're vaguely curious?

For other reasons entirely?

And two other questions:

Are there books that have been near the bottom of your TBR pile (or whichever end you don't intend to read immediately) for several years now?

Are books sometimes removed from your TBR pile without being read at all, because your desire to read them has passed?

[Connavar]

Originally Posted by Nicole

A few years ago, my English class was having a discussion on books. Our teacher had asked us what are favourite books were, and who we thought were the best writers. Most of my class answered JK Rowling and Harry Potter. My teacher than asked:
"What does it mean when JK Rowling is considered one of the greatest authors of our time?"
(Note- I am not saying JK Rowling is a terrible writer, this is merely a question to get you to think)

So, here are my questions:
First, what makes an author "great"?
JK Rowling hasn't won the most prestigious awards, but she is certainly the most famous author alive today. And so who do we say is "greater"? The author who everyone knows about, or the little-known and soon forgotten author who wins the awards?



Second: Is our trend towards instant gratification moving towards book as well?

Instant gratification is inescapable in the world today. Fast food was created, because people wanted food instantly, rather than waiting to cook. My peers in school memorize answers rather than learning concepts, so that they can do well on the test without putting in the effort. Is this happening in books as well? Are moving towards the books that provide the simple, easy entertainment, rather than the more meaningful and thought-provoking books which require effort to understand?




Third: Are we moving away from writing in which the writing itself is as important as the plot?

In many books, the writing itself is a work of art. Are we, in the present day world of "IM speak" and slang, moving away from that?




Here are my thoughts on the second two questions

One of my favourite authors is Guy Gavriel Kay, in large part because of his beautiful writing style. His books are as much a work of art as they are a story. However, I recently read a review (sorry, I forget where) in which the reader complained that he dislike Kay's books because the style of writing was too artistic, and the plot was too complicated.

I recognize that not everyone may enjoy Kay's style of writing, I only used him as an example because he is one of my favourite authors. However, there are many other authors out there who are also beautiful writers. They write the books that make you feel like crying- not because of a tragic ending, but because the book was so beautifully written. And yet, there are many people who avoid those books for that same reason; they don't want to go through trouble of reading writing that is not straight-forward and easy to understand.

If you look at the daily top ten bestseller list in the paper, the books described above are not the books that remain on the list week after week. Of course, if they win an award, any book will be on there for at least a week, but it is the books like Harry Potter, or the legal/crime dramas and romance novels, which stay on for week after week. They are not badly written, but the writing itself is secondary to plot. Harry Potter could just as easily be a movie as it could be a book. However (to use Kay as an example again), it would be extremely difficult to put the Fionavor Tapestry into movie form- concerns such as special effects aside. The book would not be the same without the little asides and comments ("Hated by the dark for their name was light"), but there would be no way to include these comments into a movie, as no character acctually says them outloud.

It would seem to me that people no longer want books that make them think. They want books to be like TV- entertaining, easy to follow (not necessarily simple) etc. Many people I haved talked to have told me they don't want to read "deep" books; they use reading as a break, when they can turn their brains off and relax. They don't want a book which asks difficult questions. They want it to "get to the point" as quickly as possible; instant gratification.



So, those are my thoughts, anyone else thoughts would be greatly appreciated (don't be afraid to disgaree with me- that's the whole point of the discussion)

I dont think so cause there are enough people that the writing are very imporant if not the most important thing in a book.
Me i choose my books by how good a writer writes. It doesnt matter if its direct,smooth or beutiful it has to be good. When i hear a writer writes very good or beutiful as you say about Guy, i add him to my check out list cause thats what i want a writer that can entertain me with his writing and not only with his plot twist.

All my fav writers are writers that i like alot mostly cause how they write . For example David Gemmell is my fav fantasy writer mostly cause of his direct prose thats very impressing. You never stop and wonder about his language.


Another example Da Vince Code was decent at best thanks to the semi decent plot. But the writing was not good to me and it made me decide Brown isnt something for me and that i will probaly not read him again.

[daisybee]

In regard to the thread title, as a reader I just want to read something that for the length of the book I believe. That said, I don't actually believe that these people or places exist, but as a reader i want to be plunged into a world that is new and exciting. I'll admit my standards vary, I read a lot of non fantasy because I'm greedy.
There are some things that bug me about fantasy (I don't read much sci-fi), in that some (not all) do have a very stark idea of good and bad, and hammer the idea home with a heavy hand. TG is a good example of this, although I loved WFR, as the series wore on, I was a bit like okay I get it He's evil and He's great.
As I have gotten older and my opinions have changed, I find that I am looking for more rounded characters, which I think GRRM is best at from what I've read.I still want a bad guy and a good guy, but I want them to surprise me. I also want characters that don't do stupid things just because, I want characters that think, make mistakes, have their own ideas rather than the band of goodies agreeing all the time, people are people whether in fantasy or not.

[Finnien]

First of all, I'd be very interested in more facts about that survey. From reading the article, it seems to vary wildly - 35% of the people polled didn't finish a certain book. The name of the poll is 'top unfinished books'. I think the subject pool, the format of the poll, and the options people actually chose from would be *very* interesting to find. A yes/no question like "Do you consider a book's popular/aesthetic/decorative appeal?" might well be answered yes, then construed into the statement "Fifty-five per cent of those polled for the survey, commissioned by Teletext, said they buy books for decoration, and have no intention of actually reading them." I don't believe that statement is an accurate representation, based on the rest of the article, and is more said for quotability and sensation, and not for real accuracy.

Second, back about the original question, 'great' is a subjective term. "What is your favorite book" and "Who do you think is the best writer" isn't the same question, in my mind. J.K. Rowling has done something very few authors can claim - she's converted thousands of non-readers into readers... both young and old. A couple years ago I had a roommate - a blonde twenty-three year old club-going girl who, if she read in her free time, I never saw in the ten years I knew her. A friend convinced her to read Harry Potter, and she loved it, read other books like it, and just finished writing her own children's book inspired by it. As for kids, I'm sure there are legions who are reading much more complex and thought-provoking books who may have gotten into it because a relative gave them Harry Potter for their birthday, and everyone was talking about it. In short, it helps make reading more common and more socially acceptable. Hell, my mom's read the Harry Potter books, and she's in her fifties. She gets me to read authors like John Irving, and normally detests fantasy, but she found it to be good fun.

So if we're going to debate who's a great author, let's first define what it means to be great. Give us a quality that great authors must have, or great books must contain. I think the ability to make somebody want to read, to reach out and convert audiences and draw them into books, to make them seek out new and more complex books as time goes on, should be a quality not to be ignored. For me, those authors were Anne McCaffrey and Robert Heinlein. For our next generation, they could be J.K. Rowling. She may not be read three generations from now, but her impact on this generation's readers, and thereby on future generations readers, may be more substantial than we realize.

[Connavar]

I dont think you can define what greatness is. Some people think somethings are great and others not.

I think what should count is only who is your fav writer and your favorit book.

Cause that says something about you and what you like.

Saying who the best writer is pointless cause no one will agree on that.

[Nikitta]

Originally Posted by Teresa Edgerton

But just today I thought about this topic in regard to some of our members here -- unquestionably voracious readers -- who have towering TBR piles.

I'm one of those. My To-read pile contains 30 books, which is enough for a few years going in my tempo. All of them are books that I really want to read, so whenever I buy a book, I know it might take a few years before I read it, because it will be "competing" with other books that I also really want to read to be the next book I pick up, but I still buy it - because it appeals to me and I really want to read it.

I just don't read very fast and my "appetite" for reading goes up and down, so there might be weeks where I barely touch a book and there might be weeks where I read for hours every day. It depends on mood and energy.

Last Sunday, I bought Ash, A Secret History by Mary Gentle. I had looked at it before and not bought it because my to-read pile is so big already, but it kept drawing me, so I gave in and bought it. Why it draws me, I can't really tell, but it does and I really want to read it.

However, it sits in a pile with 29 other books which I also really want to read, so the probability of it being the next one I pick up is not too high. Which mood I'm in when picking my next book to read does tilt the probability a good deal and whatever book I pick, I'll be glad that I bought it, so I could pick it right then.

When I look at that pile, a part of me despairs that I can't read them all at once while another part of me is happily looking forward to the countless hours of reading pleasure, which these books are bound to bring me.

Does that make sense to you?

Edit: Top and bottom of my to-read pile? I put the biggest books at the bottom because otherwise the pile will tilt and fall off my computer Other than that, there's no system to it.

More edit: I also want RA. Salvatore's Dark Elf trilogy and I'm waiting for John Scalzi's The Last Colony to come out this month, as it's the last book in the trilogy and I seriously enjoyed the first two books. I want to know what happens to these characters next and I think that the ideas he describes are very insteresting.

[HardScienceFan]

I want the author to go for my jugular.
I hate authors who consider plot development synonymous with shootout,life- threatening situations('Hollywood syndrome')
Prose should be unobtrusive,effective,subordinate,and generate the mood
A bit of restraint in the cover art
I hate authors resorting to the old 'deus ex machina'
I hate authors repeating/stealing ingredients from other author's novels(bestseller syndrome).
I will love any author who can create a believable,consistent universe/suspend disbelief(which is an art all by itself)
I love authors who show they have their characters well woked out,with no funny lapses into out-of-character thoughts or actions.

[pyan]

Sadly, HSF, you must have a pretty restricted reading list these days then!
I'd agree with all those criteria, though, except for the cover art one - some of the best books I've read have had lurid covers, and some of the worst have had elegant, restrained ones. The old saying really is true, you know!

[HardScienceFan]

Originally Posted by pyan

Sadly, HSF, you must have a pretty restricted reading list these days then!
I'd agree with all those criteria, though, except for the cover art one - some of the best books I've read have had lurid covers, and some of the worst have had elegant, restrained ones. The old saying really is true, you know!

Pyan,you don't know the half of it.My strict Amish upbringing,my substance abuse,my low IQ,my bad English,my baboon George,the voices in my head,the axe murderer next door,the ill-fitting T-shirts,all a conspiracy to let me read less than I want.
Do you mean to say that SF/Fantasy/ Horror literature is ridden with sloppy writing,plagiarism,lack of inventiveness,authors cresting a wave,purple prose,needless verbosity,and general ignorance of what constitutes good writing?
Surely not!

[Connavar]

Man i wish i were like those people that have alot of books waiting to be read cause sometimes i get an monsterous strong urge to read a good book.

I had ordered several books from the library and was about just to pick them a but they closed earlier than i thought today thanks to bloody easter so i cant have my books before TUESDAY, thats FIVE LONG DAYS

[daisybee]

I am amazed at how many piles of books are mounting up in living rooms accross the world! I feel a bit cheap now, I get them from the library, and only buy a book if it's a keeper. Plus, you tend to read more when you know they'll be going back soon, or else you have to pay a fine Although, money doesn't seem an issue for some, I would be pawning the books for baked bean money if it wasn't read within six months. Or keep the new stuff and clear out the old. Recycle your read!