Today I’m being roasted by the good people over at BookRoast (medium rare, I’m told), so please stop on by! Find out my strategy for escaping awkward lunches, the super-secret “First Word” contest, and how you can win a Thai statue (or at least $25 in cold hard gift card).
Transition.
So why DID I ask the question yesterday about whether you think you’re a better writer than the average reader of my blog? Some found it divisive, some found it provocative, some found it a no-brainer, and some found it an excellent opportunity to leave horrendously written SPAM (now deleted). So… why?
Well, there’s one word floating around out there that really got me started on the path to asking this question. And that word is: “trash.”
No, not your writing. Your writing is fine. But I’ve been seeing the word “trash” so much in the writing Internetosphere lately, even in the comments section of this blog. Not in reference to one’s own writing, but rather in reference to other people’s writing.
As in: “My book is so much better than the trash I find on the bookshelves.”
As in: “The publishing industry only publishes trash.”
One Oregon parent recently complained that National Book Award winner and seriously incredible book THE ABSOLUTELY TRUE DIARY OF A PART-TIME INDIAN was “trash” and had it removed (thankfully temporarily) from classrooms.
I. Loathe. This. Word.
A few months back, JA Konrath addressed this very topic. The Internet has made everyone a critic empowered with the ability to leave scathing Amazon reviews, and some wield their power to ill effect, leaving 1 star reviews and tossing around some extreme language. As Konrath writes, “The reality is, most movies and books don’t suck.”
And they don’t! The vast majority are quite good, actually. Setting aside the occasional celebrity book that sails through the publishing process, which, hey, if you don’t like them don’t read them, books have to get through an insanely challenging gauntlet to make it to publication. Not just one person has to believe in a book: literally hundreds have to think it’s worth publication before it winds up on your shelves.
Konrath attributes the rise of “this book is trash” reviews to “haters.”
That may be so, but I was thinking… maybe there’s psychology at play. Hence my experiment.
The vote now stands at 65%/35% who think they’re a better writer than the average reader of this blog. That’s obviously a statistical impossibility. I think.
Naturally people feel that they can write better than others. It’s just human nature. People want to feel that they’re good at something they spend so much time on, even when that might not be the case, and, as scientific studies have shown, particularly in the absence of accurate feedback (thanks to reader JohnO for the link). Ergo scathing reviews since an author thinks “I can do that” when, actually, not many people can?
Or maybe there’s subjectivity involved. You know the saying: one man’s trash is another man’s treasure? Maybe they’re just forgetting that what you might call “trash” might be my favorite book in the world.
Or maybe it’s a mix of both. Reading is subjective. But there’s also a part of writing that is definitely objective. When I have my contests and include publishing professionals in the judging, we always end up with roughly the exact same list of finalists. Does that mean that we’re right and there are people who just can’t recognize good writing? Or does it mean that we’re just reflecting a certain taste that happens to be what the publishing industry collectively decides is “good,” but which the reading public might not agree with?
I don’t know why people reach the point of calling books “trash,” but thought asking yesterday’s question might help shed some light.
What do you think?
Anonymous says
I don’t want to ruffle any feathers, but I probably will. Could it be that maybe the publishing industry in whole has gotten stuck in a rut, and everyone has forgotten the originality that could come from our authors without the influence of agents and publishers. Maybe it is time for a contest that is judged by a group of the target audience (i.e. MG judged by actual Middle Graders, YA judged by actual teens, SF judged by its normal….well you get the picture) Let the publishers and agents just be there for obvious mistakes, and keep their personal preferences out of it. I have a feeling you will see some different results then. Being critiqued by your peers, really doesn’t give you a sense of whether or not you have hit the mark, if your peers are NOT target audience.
Doug says
The anonymity of the Internet gives people power to write whatever “trash” comments they like with no consequence. It’s the same effect while driving on the highway. If the person that cut you off, nearly running you off the road, were walking an arm’s length away. Do you think they would they behave the same. I think not. They do it because they can.
Does this mean that all the trash comments are in error? No. There are projects that have very little artistic merit that are done to simply make a buck.
twitter.com/thenextwriter
Nathan Bransford says
anon re: “roughly the exact same”
Articulate, ain’t I?
Anonymous says
Oh and I should have added, you can’t please everybody with just one style. Someone will always disagree with your opinion. Variety is the spice of life, and whoever screams the loudest is the one that gets heard! (How cliche! but true!)
Megoblocks says
“People want to feel that they’re good at something they spend so much time on, even when that might not be the case”
American Idol has been making money off this for years now.
dan radke says
In reference to the TV sucks comment-
TV is incredible right now. Besides the aforementioned Mad Men and The Wire, there’s:
Battlestar Galactic
The Office
Lost (though slipping slightly)
30 Rock
House
Weeds
Not to mention series that have ended recently:
Six Feet Under
Deadwood
Arrested Development
Sopranos
Sex and the City
Television has evolved, quite recently, into the full length novels of visual art, making two hour movies the short story. Now stories are told over 12 hours, giving plot so much detail and character arcs so much depth it’s F’ING STUNNING. And that’s just in one season!
Ugh. Sorry. I like TV.
Authoress says
No offense, but your comment made me ill. Setting aside your objections to particular books, you don’t watch TV. How could you know it sucks? This is a golden age of television that you’re missing out on (and I don’t mean The Bachelor). The Wire and Mad Men, among others, are some of the great works of art of our era
I can say “it sucks” because I spent years watching it. Years and years. I know there are gems to cull, as there are in just about every medium. I know there are “educational” channels with higher quality offerings than normal, mainstream channels.
Been there, surfed that.
And when I said “it sucks” I meant it the way I then explained…namely, “it sucks your brain out.” Which anything passive, used too often, too heavily, tends to do.
(Reading is not passive. So ultimately, it’s better for our brains.)
But the vast majority of TV offings? Trash, and you and I both know it. Or whatever word you’d rather use, since “trash” obviously strikes a discord. 🙂
It’s only in the last few years that I have become “TV Free.” And I can’t tell you how truly freeing it is.
Mind you, we own a nice, big plasma screen. That’s for viewing our favorite movies…and collections of old British sit-coms. Carefully chosen, commercial free. And definitely not twaddle.
So you see, I HAVE watched TV — lots of it. And I do watch movies and mini-series and Planet Earth, which is so incredible that we own it.
I’m not television ignorant. Just television free, by choice.
It’s had an amazing effect on my marriage, too. We look at each other and talk. 😉
lotusgirl says
I think it is true that most books out there are not as bad as some readers make them out to be. It floors me sometimes when I read reviews and see how polarized many of them are. I have read only a handful of books that I would score a 1, and I read on average 80-100 books a year (I’ll grant you I do research out the better books to read), and yet when I read reviews on Amazon, there are tons of 1s being thrown about.
e.g. There was a certain 4th book in a series that came out last summer. Now I’ll grant you It was, IMO, not a 5, but neither was it a 1 or the worst piece of “trash” ever written. I was appalled at some of the vitriolic attitudes and commentaries. I would place it at a good solid 3 (of course that would be IMO) which is where a lot of books sit for me.
I’m wondering if it is because we feel we have to scream from the extremes to be heard over the myriad voices out there. Or maybe the voices of hate and anger get bandied about more than the voices of reason. (The voice of reason is mine! Of Course! LOL!)
Samuel says
Trash, amazing. Other phrases I hear people use a lot in describing books: ‘It was really thought-provoking.’ Well, good, but which thoughts did it actually provoke? And, ‘I thought the writer was being really self-indulgent.’ Self-indulg…! My girlfriend described Roberto Bolano thus; I was… shocked.
Anonymous says
I think we are forgetting one scratch two very important things when we hear strong words to describe something.
1. few people actually mean the words they print on the internet. Yes they hurt sometimes, but you aren’t going to get them to substitute 3 paragraphs of description on why they dislike something, when it is so much easier to say “IT’S TRASH!” We as writer’s are very sensitive to strong words, but we should be the first to realize the emotion they bring, and it is the best way to get the attention brought to your statement. Which leads me to my second point (I think)
2. Non-writers don’t realize how bad that hurts us. We are not people to them. They are judging our book not us personally. Sure I wouldn’t call someone trash to their face, and they may not realize we are paying attention, but I wouldn’t hesitate to say it to the world in general. I didn’t like that book it was trash. Get the difference. They can’t see our faces, I can’t see your’s. I am talking to a computer.
Point 3 we need to chill, call off the witch burnings, without facial expressions or voice to go along with that trash, it doesn’t mean the same thing.
macaronipants says
I’m not sure hating comes from ignorance (as was asserted in the competence article you linked). I remember reading a short story by Updike in a reading group once. They all loved every bit of it. I thought it was dull and pointless and remember being shocked that no one else felt this way. At the time, I remember feeling a great hatred toward the story itself and I’m sure my reaction came from a strong need to be validated. So maybe add immaturity to insecurity.
I still feel an overwhelming disgust from time to time when I see certain movies or read certain books, although I try not to blurt (except to my husband, bless him). I don’t think this makes me ignorant, just insecure. Smart people put this out. That must mean I’m not smart.
I think calling it ignorance is easy and a bit hateful in itself.
Pants
CC says
I only truly love one book for every ten I read. I don’t think the other nine are “trash,” though, I just think they weren’t for me.
I think when I see super low ratings on Amazon or (Amazon) customer reviewers saying books “suck” and are “trash” it’s usually because the book has been heavily hyped. Someone felt pressure to buy a book they wouldn’t have normally — because it was an Oprah pick, or a NYT bestseller, or is the “big” book of the summer — and because it didn’t instantly become the best book they’ve ever read, they feel duped.
When you browse through a bookstore and pick out your own books, you blame yourself if you don’t like it, you don’t get on Amazon and send the fire down on it.
Nathan Bransford says
“Television has evolved, quite recently, into the full length novels of visual art, making two hour movies the short story.” – dan radke
Nicely put!
Honestly, if you haven’t watched TV in the past five years you haven’t watched TV.
Cam says
Good point, Dara, about not giving weight to reviews written with lazy language.
While good writing is subjective (consider a bestseller I began reading last year and stopped after page 121), “trash” (or “twaddle”?) relates to that which ends up in the waste basket. Of course, that was exactly the fate of the book I started to read last year. I wouldn’t however, call it “trash.” Although it was droll, overly-narrative and had a depressing plot line, who am I to call it “trash?”
Its esteemed author worked too hard on the book – and made a lot of $ on it – for a lowly wannabe to call it trash. Landfill by example, maybe, but not trash.
That said, life’s too short; reading should be enjoyable. Again, however, opinions are subjective and varying with regard to “good” vs. “trash.”
Harris says
Re: The Bachelor
I would start a drinking game involving that word, but I’d be during by the third commercial break.
I wish one of two things…
1 – My wife didn’t love the show, or
2 – We had two TV’s
harris
Anonymous says
How can someone who doesn’t watch TV feel up on current issues? Issues of culture? Issues of the changing values and attitudes of the world at large? The undercurrents of these issues shape fiction a great deal, I think.
Unless you write historical fiction, I’m thinking your writing could suffer a great deal by not watching ANY TV.
Michael says
I agree that art is subjective. One man’s trash is another’s treasure. I think that has to do with our expectations going into the work of art at hand, whether it be a book or a movie. I have a lot of friends that I can’t take book or movie recommendations from because I know that we are looking for completely different things from them. And of course I think that my taste is better, because if I didn’t I would adopt their taste.
That said, I also think that in writing there is a level of quality that makes something publishable. That quality has to do with clarity, flow, word choice, and a lot of other factors, so someone can produce publishable writing, without constructing a plot or character that an individual reader will like. The editor is looking at the quality of the writing, and he probably likes the plot and characters and everything else, too.
Finally, I must say that I have read books and seen movies that I have absolutely hated. Some of that is because of plot and character. I just don’t like them. But others I don’t feel meet the quality level of publishable work. That’s my opinion. Someone with the money disagrees with me. But I have well thought out reasons for my opinions. I don’t just call whatever I don’t like “trash.”
Robena Grant says
I have used the word “rubbish” to myself, after attempting to read poorly written books, which um…I suppose is the same as using the “T” word.
It irks me though, and it makes me question how the poorly written story made it through editing.
Marilyn Peake says
Your Book Roast is hilarious! I’m going to work on a caption later today.
I love what you did with your survey yesterday. You make some really good points. There are so many amazing books published every year, just as there are so many amazing movies made every year, it’s easy enough to skip over the ones that don’t match our personal tastes and reach for the ones we like. Rather than dwelling on the published books we don’t like, isn’t it better to try to read the huge numbers of books that do match our tastes? And when we come across a book we think we could have written better, then isn’t it just time to sit down, write our own book and go through the very hard work of trying to get it published?
Another generalization I see over and over again on the Internet is the statement that schools no longer teach kids to read. Actually, more schools than ever have instituted college curriculums in high schools to the point where high school students often earn one to one-and-a-half years of college credit while still in high school. This is a huge trend, and colleges have started reporting that the applicants they’re seeing today far surpass previous generations in terms of their accomplishments.
Narrow generalizations seem to most often be based on very limited sampling of entire populations.
Sarah Jensen says
“Is writing totally or even mainly subjective though? I mean, if that were the case why shouldn’t I pack up and go home?”
I think the story is subjective. The writing shouldn’t be. If it’s well written, it’s well written. You don’t have to like the subject matter, but IMO writing itself isn’t subjective.
I’ve read books I really enjoyed, story wise, that weren’t very well written. I’ve read well written books that I didn’t really enjoy the story.
But I agree, I don’t think I’ve read any “trash”. And yeah, I’ve read some “trashy” books, but like ikmar said, big difference.
Nathan Bransford says
Sarah-
That’s an interesting distinction.
Jaenelle says
I’m quite fond of the word trash and I think it is the perfect term for describing a lot of books (and movies and music and etc.)
And precisely why does this make me frustrated or angry or any of the numerous other over-simplifications that people have thrown around in these comments? If a book is badly written and edited in every way it could be, why *should* I shrug and surmise it’s simply not “being to my taste.”
Is horrible grammar, flat characterization, bad research, a nonsensical/illogical plot really a matter of personal taste or the things that define this word trash to the people who use it?
Yes I am a writer. A young one. I have never faced rejection or the agent game. I have my own issues with my writing, but if I have those and other issues with bad novels, how does that automatically reflect on the state of my own career? What a completely, utterly, illogical fallacy.
I read a few books every week. Most of them I enjoy. Some I adore and have or will reread numerous times. But quite a few have also been utter dreck; so much so, that yes, I do wonder if the agent who represents the author in question and the people who actually turned into a salable book were smoking crack when they made their decisions.
Want an a example? Look at the author Sunny, — yes, just one name — last week I trudged through her crime-against-literature “Mona Lisa Awakening” and shell-shocked upon its conclusion, raced to Amazon to leave a scathing review only to discover that she has FOUR more novels out!
But oh no, let’s not say anything bad or mean or ill-tempered. Let’s surmise that this TRASH is simply a matter of “subjective” or “personal” taste and shut the hell up so as not offend some precious little darlings feelings.
Never mind the book buyer who listened to the rave professional reviews under the mistaken impression that they weren’t bought-out. Never mind the money spent on something undeserving.
Please.
Literature is not just subjective. That’s why it’s analyzed and criticized. If it were all just a matter of taste, it would lose any value it had to society. Calling something “trash” may not be the height of a mature, critical review, but… I guess it’s just another one of those things that is subjective — you know, a matter of personal taste!
Anonymous says
YOU GUYS SUCK!!!!
See how I got your attention! Everything else I just wrote you completely ignored. (I would never say you suck to your face, and I didn’t mean it I love you guys LOL.) Now we know why they use the word trash, because no one pays attention to mildy used words.
Take a chill pill, who wants to read boring polite words. It is the way of the world. Something we can do on the computer without getting decked. That is why we read, to see the exciting stuff in an imaginary place. (or that is why I do anyway.)
Hilary says
I’d like to be divisive and defend use of the word “trash.” I myself use it in the sense of “throwaway,” to describe the time I spend reading Janet Evanovich and Robert Jordan. I use that word not because the writing is bad, but because the works don’t say anything of major substance. They’re fun, and I can relate to the characters, and I enjoy the stories and the good/guy bad guy ideas, but that’s all.
Nathan’s right that it doesn’t do any good to go around indiscriminately calling things “trash” or “sucky” without giving reasons (and not to mention it’s insulting), but I do think the fact that so many people use this word is indicative of a larger problem: Hemingway’s death left a big fat hole in literature. To be fair, there have always been more people published than remain cherished through the years, but it is so difficult to find what is going to resonate, what is going to speak about human nature, what is going to take you by the shoulders and shake you out of your slump, that it’s disheartening. I myself read classics more than new literature because I can depend on the fact that they’re good; and I listen to classic rock for the same reason. I think overuse of the word “trash” says a lot more about holes in our souls (and general inability to construct an argument) than it does about our inherent envy. It reminds me of an article I read on anorexia: a former anorexic claims that the disease is a symbolic spiritual hunger rather than simply a reaction to mainstream ideals about the female body. And the name-calling epidemic—well, maybe it’s a cry for help. Yes, everything that goes through the publishing process is well-written and quality story-telling, but neither is it revolutionary or comforting in your life trials.
That said, if you’re disheartened by a lack of fine literature, go out and write it. To quote Thomas Berger, “Why do writers write? Because it isn’t there.”
Anonymous says
I do call some books trash. And I mean it. Wholeheartedly. I read almost everything I can get my hands on (I don’t to true crime or gore), and I have to say … some books that come out in the Romance genre? ZOMG TRASH. And I don’t even mean it from an “I don’tlike these characters” viewpoint. I mean THE BOOK IS TRASH. Trash writing, trash editing, trash printing, trash binding! The characters’ names *CHANGE* during the course of the book. Their parental situation changes. The writing is TRASH. Not just “not what I like”, but actually physically hurtfully headache-y BAD. The author (and editor) mixes up “your”, “you’re”, “there”, “their” and others. Etc. The printing is smudged, slanted on the page, poorly typeset, etc. The paper used is worse than phone book paper. There are HOLES in the paper. The binding falls apart before you even finish the 200 page book.
And they want $8.95 for it.
That, my fellow commenters, is TRASH.
Natalie says
First off, I’m shocked that anyone could call Alexie’s work “trash.” That makes my stomach hurt.
I don’t think it’s fair to call anything trash. People put their time into writing. Okay, it may not be my taste or it may need work, but we as writers need to have respect for each others’ work.
Dan says
Nathan,
I applaud your handling of Authoress’s comments.
And I agree that ‘one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.’ I don’t watch reality TV, but I understand it’s appeal. Likewise, I watch some programs (such as 24, Prison Break, etc.) where the main appeal is more or less the continuing suspense. The plots have become ludicrous, but the shows are still entertaining. I know plenty of people who’d disagree with me.
The same goes for any type of art, whether it’s a book, a piece of artwork, movies, etc.
Likewise, people are still fans of the Sacramento Kings (wink) or the Cleveland Browns (oh how they’ve tortured my soul), but that doesn’t mean just because a team has a terrible season (or many, many, many consecutive terrible seasons) that they can’t be enjoyed by a group of fans.
At least high definition makes the suffering more bearable.
other lisa says
I agree with everyone who points to the anonymity of internet culture as being largely responsible for the increase in sh** slinging in what passes for critical discourse. It’s easy to sit at your keyboard and type really mean things because you aren’t face to face with the object of your scorn.
I also agree that the avalanche of hype is related to this increase in reader/viewer anger.
Annnd…I like television! There’s a lot of good stuff on TV, and it’s a writers medium, way more than film tends to be.
As someone who worked in the entertainment industry for many years though, I have to part ways on film – I think a majority of Hollywood movies are not very good nowadays. They are usually good on a technical level, but the writing is often formulaic, simplistic and boring. It’s a case where there is so much money involved in making and marketing a film that there are too many people involved in the process – the decision-making isn’t a quality check so much as a constant second-guessing that results in mediocre films.
However, I am really excited about “Slumdog Millionaire” – really looking forward to seeing it!
bleeb says
I agree with one of the commenters on getting the readers to judge.
How about doing a contest where you pick a panel of judges who are average people who like to read, not agents, editors or writers. Ask them beforehand what genre(s) they prefer (just so you can later see if it makes a difference in what they select) then hold a contest.
Just an idea… 🙂
AmyB says
I am astounded that anyone could call PART-TIME INDIAN “trash.” It’s one of the best books I’ve ever read. My son loved it too.
Madison says
“Trash” should only be used when refering to the trash can. 🙂
Anyway, like you said, Mr. Bransford, a lot of writing isn’t trash. It’s just that people have different tastes. Honestly, I’ve read some stuff where I’ve seriously wondered why they published it, but that’s because it didn’t appeal to ME. The fact that it’s a NYT Bestseller proves that I am not in the majority of liking that book.
Not because it’s trash.
Marilyn Peake says
From dan radke:
“Television has evolved, quite recently, into the full length novels of visual art, making two hour movies the short story. Now stories are told over 12 hours, giving plot so much detail and character arcs so much depth it’s F’ING STUNNING. And that’s just in one season!”
Have you seen Joss Whedon’s prematurely cancelled Firefly series? The writing and visuals in that series are incredible. Firefly blows me away every time I see it. The writing in the early seasons of Lost is also amazing, even switching genres at times from one season to the next. Both Firefly and Lost never fail to motivate me to try to write better.
Alexa says
Maybe it’s just easier to call books trash than actually working out what other people might like about them or what you could learn from them. It’s a lazy way of reviewing to dismiss something because it does nothing for you. Different books have different aims and different audiences in mind.
My husband and I often argue over books. He couldn’t finish one of my favourite books of last year but didn’t call it trash (divorce might have happened if he had1) just not his cup of tea.
Oh and Dan Radke I completely agree all those shows are amazing.
Ulysses says
My thoughts are here
Reader’s Digest Condensed version: like agents, the most I feel qualified to do is pronounce a book “not for me.”
Anonymous says
Authoress-
I have read the Terry Brooks HOOK, and I actually thought it was better than the movie.
No offense, but your comment made me ill. Setting aside your objections to particular books, you don’t watch TV. How could you know it sucks? This is a golden age of television that you’re missing out on (and I don’t mean The Bachelor). The Wire and Mad Men, among others, are some of the great works of art of our era.
But hey, guess it’s easier to just say things “suck.”
I’d have to agree with you Nathan, not about the TV part, I don’t watch very often at all, so I can’t comment, but to blow off everything on the shelves because it doesn’t meet your standard Authoress. I’d like to know where I can find your published books?
I want to read your obvious brilliance.
I have 4 kids and we read a lot of books. Some aren’t brilliant, but they help me teach my children to read and love books, so I’d say that they accomplish something I couldn’t do on my own. My kids wouldn’t want to read what I write, and I honestly wouldn’t let them for years.
To say something sucks because you don’t enjoy it is lazy.
Anonymous says
Guys,
Go easy on authoress. She was just stating her opinion. I hate witch hunts. Show her the same courtesy that no one showed me the other day, when I went against the grain. Trust me it is no fun to see your words pulled out of context. As a matter of fact I read the it was a BLOG No-No today.
Anonymous says
I’m going to come in anon on this one. I used to think romance and erotica were “trash.”
Does trash sell? Very well, apparently.
Well enough that I’m going to take a hiatus from my more “respectable” genres, like YA, and write some of that lucrative trash (under a pseudonym–hence the anonymity here).
dan radke says
@Marilyn
Oh yes, Firefly is good times. It almost, almost made me want to watch the Buffy series.
Karen says
I concur with you 100%. Couldn’t have said it better myself, actually. Oh no! Does that make you a better writer than me?
Personally, I’m am almost always in awe of the amount of good-to-great writing I find both on the shelves at the bookstore/library as well as in my many and varied writing courses and groups. I also think I’m a pretty good writer and don’t seek to compare myself to others.
Yes, subjectivity comes into it, but there are definitely defineable elements that are found in a good piece of work.
But TRASH? Nope. Don’t like that word either. I respect writers too much to use that one.
Nathan Bransford says
anon@12:32-
Very well said, and I apologize for my own lowering of the bar of discourse earlier. Don’t want to be guilty of that which I’m bemoaning.
other lisa says
@dan – BUFFY is wonderful! Really! Okay, there are better episodes and worse episodes and better seasons, etc., but hell, it ran for seven years. It’s incredibly tough to maintain consistent quality over that period of time. The TV biz is grueling, it really is.
I recommend you start at the beginning. The first season was pretty low-budget in terms of FX but the writing is really fun.
(Stepping off fan soapbox now)
Marilyn Peake says
dan radke,
Have you seen the blog musical, Dr. Horrible, created by Joss Whedon during the writers’ strike and posted free on the Internet during the strike? It’s weird, but absolutely brilliant. I saw it online, then ordered copies of the DVD after it was finally offered for sale.
JLR says
I agree with Melospiza. I didn’t vote for several reasons.
The question brought me back the days of high school and peer pressure, when I felt uncomfortable for scoring high on tests and homework. I think I am a good writer, but I feel uncomfortable forming an opinion about whom I am better than. I much rather just compare my writing to my last efforts and say, yup, I’m getting better. I am probably shooting myself in the foot in this business by my unwillingness to say I am better than someone else, aren’t I?
Next, there are so many different styles and genres out there, how does one make an accurate comparison? I can tell when writing looks like it came from a bookstore shelf, but beyond that, I rely on personal taste to say that one book is better than another. That’s a very subjective test.
Thirdly, like Melospiza, I didn’t like the either/or nature of the question, I am either good or I am bad.
I understand your frustration at writers saying “this published stuff is trash”. But as a reader, I’ve thought some books were flops, some were ok, and some were gold. As a writer, I’ve seen some things that didn’t work in novels, that were ok, and some that inspired me.
Sorry for the length of this post, but I just wanted to share why I didn’t vote myself.
Jodi
Jaenelle says
And further to my earlier rant: claiming that a writer calling another book or writer “trash” is somehow embittered or frustrated is just as logical as claiming that writers who refuse to use that word (or similar ones) out of some (misguided) notion of respect are afraid of their own mediocrity being called out — if it hasn’t happened already.
Both are fallacies.
And by the way — crying out about the cowardliness of posting “Anonymous” online when your own internet handle is some thing like “Writer2Kute” is equally ridiculous.
dan radke says
@other lisa
Heh, all right, I’ll give it a shot. I can’t really deny watching it on masculinity claims, I’ve seen the entire run of Sex and the City. Twice.
Marilyn Peake says
One more post, then I need to step away from the computer. I’m supposed to be working on my new novel today, but I love discussing TV shows, books and movies. Get me started on all three topics at once, and I could blog all day long.
I often discover TV shows after they become available on DVD, then have a blast watching all the episodes. Two more Sci Fi series I love:
Andromeda
and
The 4400
dan radke says
@Marilyn
I never got to see it, but I heard a lot about it. I love the NPH. I’ll check it out.
Josephine Damian says
I think most modern/current books and movies are trash!
Sarah Jensen says
I read a self-pubed book yesterday that really needs a good editing. And I mean–REALLY.
But it has potential. I try to look at books, life and people that way. None of us are perfect, but I like to think we all have potential. It’s not always met, and that can be frustrating, but that why we continue to search. Looking for that which we would think is great.
Do we not all do that with books? And when we find someone we love, we read everything they write.
My author is James Patterson. And some of his books aren’t my favorites, but still, I’ve read now all but maybe 5 of his. And I own most.
And I do think most of television isn’t worth watching. That’s why I don’t watch. Whether it’s trash or not, I won’t say. 🙂
Sarah Jensen says
But I do love House and The Mentalist. I only watch them on occasion though.
🙂