As anyone who has presided over a slush pile, passed on a megabestseller, or read their friend’s manuscript will tell you, reading is subjective. Many different people have their own opinions about the same book, and those opinions can vary so widely it’s almost impossible to believe they’ve read the same book. One person will think it’s the best book ever, another will think it’s the literary equivalent of Heidi Montag’s Spencer-directed music video.
Writing? Subjective.
But wait, is it really? I feel that I can fairly confidently judge whether a book has good or bad odds if I were to submit it to publishers, I can categorize a pile of manuscripts into “good” and “bad” writing, and I have to make judgment calls dozens and dozens of times a day. If I didn’t make reasonably accurate decisions I’d be out of a job.
So you tell me: how objective or subjective is good writing? How do you know what’s good? And who decides what is “good” anyway? Should it be the people who sell the most copies? Experts? Critics? The publishing industry?
Hmmm — There are objective criteria available for judging the use of the English language, at least for standard NA usage or standard British usage. However, what those really do is reject imperfect usage — they don’t establish good writing.
It is perfectly possible to do technically perfect writing without any redeeming characteristics. It is also possible to do evocative, effective writing that breaks many of the rules. A lot of the New Wave authors in SF back in the ’70’s “broke the rules”, but did so effectively.
I think that perhaps the question that might be better asked is “Can good writing be consistently recognized (discriminated from poor writing) by a number of readers.” I believe that the answer is “yes”, as long as we take into account the question of cultural biases and balance for taste. For instance, the question of Dickens’ abilities, as criticized by his contemporaries was brought up, and I mentioned the New Wave SF authors above. “The Worm Ourobouris” is not to everyone’s taste, nor is “Dhalgren”, or “Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.” (I picked those because by at least some criterion, they are all “well written.”)
Whether such examples of good writing will be more or less successful than “Buffy the Teenage Vampire Detective” is an entirely different question.
— rambling along…
well…it’s easier to see bad writing in other writers’ work. LOL
If grammar, capitalization and punctuation were that important then ee cummings wouldn’t have gotten too far.
Everything is situational.
*puts head down and keeps writing*
So you tell me: how objective or subjective is good writing? How do you know what’s good? And who decides what is “good” anyway? Should it be the people who sell the most copies? Experts? Critics? The publishing industry?
Whether or not a piece is well-written can be objectively judged.
As a journalist, I see a lot of really bad writing cross my desk. I even create some of it sometimes. :-0
It’s the style of writing, voice of the author and the content of a story that is subjective, and writers need to trust those in the publishing industry — agents, editors, publishers — when they say they believe something is or is not salable. They are the ones who best know the trends in the market.
Ultimately, it will be the reader deciding whether or not something published is “good.”
As far as critics, I don’t know anyone who has picked up a book at the bookstore and said, “I have to read this because (critic at national daily) said this is a great book.”
I have more faith in what my friends tell me is a good book.
Anonymous 3:24 pm said “If your judgment on books is typical of most successful agents and editors, how do you account for the fact that publishers lose money on most of the books they acquire?”
Hi Anon–
I felt compelled to answer your comment. If only the world worked that way. You write a good book and it sells like gangbusters. Unfortunately, it’s not that simple. A lot of great books with really quality writing just don’t find the right audience. And it’s not always about the way it’s marketed, or the publisher support…sometimes it’s just about luck.
Does that mean I think there aren’t any bad books published? Certainly not. There’s always the stinkers.
But I don’t think it’s fair to equate not-so-great sales to a bad book. It just doesn’t always work that way. Especially in today’s consumer market.
It’s not difficult to identify them both, I think. One makes you wnat to submerge yourself in it, the other has you running for cover. In the final analysis though, I would imagine that someone like yourself who does this for a living should have no problems blending objectivity with a little subjectivity
“Good” writing is that which engages you even if you don’t care about the subject. It’s writing that people will still want to be reading in 50 years. Anyone who has lived on a steady diet of good reading over a lifetime–a diet which must include the classics–is qualified to judge whether writing is good or bad.
Good writing rivets you, makes you want to keep reading. Good writing is beautifully written without being “overwritten.” It employs metaphor, and other poetic devices. It incorporates style. It imparts wisdom and knowledge even if it is fiction, without hitting you over the head. You know your own writing is good if someone says they felt like they were there, in the moment with the character.
“Marketable” is questionable. So many books are horridly written and agents and publishers think they are marketable. What is marketable? People write books and have so many people tell them they were enthralled and chapters have been nominated for a Pushcart Prize, the subject is unique, and yet agents say it is not marketable.
Marketable is seeming to be what will appeal to the lowest common denominator, to the masses and herein lies the rub. Books that people (the public) would be interested in, books that have authors who already have a fan base from other genres, poetry, for instance, will be ignored, because an agent can’t see the book would sell.
Agents and publishers say they want something new, but when it comes their way, they say it’s not marketable.
Anon 9:56PM, I agree with Anon 9:26PM who said Tolkien wasn’t the greatest writer. I think Tolkien’s prose was turgid but his world was amazing.
I also think people who sling insults around rather than presenting any kind of convincing case for their opinions aren’t worth listening to. You really expect to change anyone’s mind with an argument that can be summarized as: “U R STOOPID AN JELLUS BCUZ U DONT AGREE WITH ME”?
And then you had the gall to say, “Have a little humble pie with thine ego dinner.” Funny–I only see one out-of-control ego here, and it belongs to the person who apparently believes his opinions are correct simply because they’re his.
The final arbiters of whether a book is good or not are the reading public, and any subset of them may decide that a book is good or not for that particular subset.
with all due respect to Thomas, who wrote:
I’ve seen beautifully written manuscripts that bored me because the story didn’t grab me. There’s lots of good writers trying to get published with perfectly edited manuscripts, but their stories are weak, so they can’t make it beyond the slush pile, while those with not the best writing but with great stories, get published.
perhaps you’re missing the point. any story — one day in a man’s life, someone’s funeral, the lives of poor farmers, whatever — will become a good or even great story if well written.
the reverse is not true.
I’d say pretty much ever aspect of writing is subjective. The only things that aren’t are spelling and grammar. Word count? subjective. I know some agents who will feed a query to their dog simply because the novel in question is longer than they’d like, while others will give some that’s over 150k a fair shot.
As a student of writing and a writer myself, I’m very tempted to immediately pounce on authors who have crappy character development and pacing problems, but those aren’t things I can take into a lab and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt must be done a certain way.
There are several agents out there who have passed up on books that have gone on to become hugely successful. But even those big successes are still loathed by many.
Writing’s a strange beast. It’s nigh-impossible to find any one piece of writing that everybody can agree on as being good or bad.
Well yes, rules are set for what is good and boundaries, it doesn't take an enstien to know this but that's different than if the book is liked. You can have a good politican who isn't corrupt, smart and looks good but if sold to the people wrong and or have the wrong look, the wrong style, the wrong age, the wrong gender then no one will want that politican verus the person who has all the opposite.