Anonymous
Post 11/09/2022 11:16     Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
This is more of a sadness and frustration than a quirk or an ick but books in a series that just Stop. I used to see this a lot with mysteries. The first one or two would be published in inexpensive paperbacks, then a hardcover book would come out, the book might not get the sales that were hoped for, then the series just Stops. I realize that there are other reasons to end a series — including lots of personal factors for the authors. It’s hard, though, to get invested in a series — and then….nothing.

Similarly though, it’s hard to get invested in a series and have the quality of the writing and the editing precipitously decline — with the push to publish annually. I’d rather wait another year or two for something good than read books that are obviously put together hastily. Yeah, this might sell one or two more books, but it also loses many longtime readers and likely gains few new ones.

These all ended way too soon for me:

The Ivy League series by Pamela Thomas Graham.
The horoscope themed series by Martha Lawrence
The NYC based series by Marissa Piesman
The Booklovers series by Julie Kaewert
The truly wonderful Alex Powell books by Karen Grigsby Bates

Anonymous
Post 11/09/2022 09:56     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
From another thread: people who put down certain kinds of books or who think they are superior for their chosen reading material.

People who look down on other genres (or genre fiction or fiction, in general) don't look smart. They look close minded and rude.

Don't yuck someone else's yum!
Anonymous
Post 11/09/2022 07:54     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
This is super specific, but when an ebook file doesn’t have page numbers. Kindle will show “location 4524” as if that helps?
Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 23:51     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Publishers who squeeze a book into ~350 pages with tiny font. Just make it 400 pages, darn it. We need to be able to see the words!

Berkley is a habitual offender in my mind.


Thanks for reminding me of another thing that irks me — the opposite of yours. Publishers who stretch a novella or an essay into a book. The type is a little larger, the margins are huge, and there are blank pages at the end of each chapter. The overall size of the book might be smaller, and a different size and/or shape compared to the author’s previously published books. It’s as though they stretched it — so they could price it like a traditionally sized book, but with half the content.


Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 21:44     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Sentences that use quirked as a verb, which I guess is a sly smile? His mouth quirked? WTH?
Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 20:31     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Publishers who squeeze a book into ~350 pages with tiny font. Just make it 400 pages, darn it. We need to be able to see the words!

Berkley is a habitual offender in my mind.
Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 14:49     Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.

Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.

Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.

Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.



Can we name names? I’d love to discuss specific examples or characters.


Maybe start another thread for that? I tried to limit my response here to general quirks and icks.
Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 14:24     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I found it disconcerting after Gone Girl that every single book had Girl in the title

Girl on a Train
Girl in the window

etc etc


That’s nothing compared to the truly astounding number of insipid books with titles like “The So-and-so’s Wife”

…..’s Daughter


Oh my gosh, yes. Also, the new trend of “The ____’s Guide to _____.”

I’ve seen authors mention that they don’t control the titles of their books, so is there some publisher thinking they’re mailing it with these titles? Maybe they’re trying to capitalize on the success of a certain book by making people think that others are that book?


It's that, plus it's hard to come up with good titles.
Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 14:24     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I found it disconcerting after Gone Girl that every single book had Girl in the title

Girl on a Train
Girl in the window

etc etc


That’s nothing compared to the truly astounding number of insipid books with titles like “The So-and-so’s Wife”

…..’s Daughter


I don't understand why we don't ever have the male version of that. The Law Partner's Husband, The Real Estate Agent's Son, whatever. Why is it always wives and daughters?!
Anonymous
Post 11/07/2022 14:18     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
I'm very over unreliable narrators.
Anonymous
Post 11/06/2022 21:59     Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.

Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.

Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.

Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.



Can we name names? I’d love to discuss specific examples or characters.
Anonymous
Post 11/06/2022 18:07     Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.

Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.

Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.

Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.



I'm actually more of a peach color...

Kidding. I fully see this and it's so annoying. Also, did you know "whiskey" eyes means brown? Just learned that today.


Thank you for my first full-on snort laugh of the day. Lol. PP

Anonymous
Post 11/06/2022 17:44     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.


Ugh yes.


Examples ?


There’s a whole Reddit forum called Menwritingwomen with hilarious examples: https://www.reddit.com/r/menwritingwomen/


Confession: I haven’t read a book written by a man in three years. Amazingly, descriptions of women’s appearance can be about height and hair/eye color. You don’t have to include any references to the size of their breasts. Imagine that!
Anonymous
Post 11/06/2022 17:26     Subject: Re:Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Authors that describe a character as “Black” or as a POC — when they don’t directly mention the race of any of the other characters. It’s like they assume that everyone assumes that the default for a human being is white. White characters are described by detailed characteristics. POC characters are often described primarily or even only by their race or color. (An elderly man, with the severe dignity of a priest, paused near the doorway, watching as a black woman walked down the steps.) — This is the sort of thing I mean. Once I started noticing this, I can’t not see it.

Related is the propensity for white writers to describe POC as food. Skin tones are: chocolate, caramel, honey, almond, coffee….. Which stands out to me because non-POC characters are rarely described that way …. Pale, sallow, rosy ….are more typical.

Then there are the stereotypes, but that’s a much more complex issue. I’ll simply say that I’ve given up on one otherwise favorite author’s ability to move beyond comfortable tropes with the one Black repeating character. She did try — but her inadequacies with this character are particularly evident when neither the author’s descriptions of the character nor her sexless ability to continually comfort the more complexly written and varied white characters ever changes — over the course of almost 20 books.

Vent, vent, vent. Rant, rant, rant. Exhale.



I'm actually more of a peach color...

Kidding. I fully see this and it's so annoying. Also, did you know "whiskey" eyes means brown? Just learned that today.
Anonymous
Post 11/06/2022 17:22     Subject: Bookish Quirks & Icks
Anonymous wrote:Men writing women badly. Like sexualizing things in weird ways.


Hello Phillip Roth