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?
Lady Glamis says
I don’t like to think that anything is “trash” – it just appeals to different audiences. Yes, there is lots of stuff published that I don’t like and deem “trash” by my standards. But somebody else might not think so.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but not everyone is entitled to hurt, belittle, or bring others down simply because they disagree or don’t like something.
I don’t watch television because we can’t afford anything other than the local stations. And most of them are fuzzy. I choose to pay for Internet rather than television.
I think you are right, Nathan, about this being a golden age for television. That’s why I wait for the good series to come out on DVD so I can at least rent them and watch them. So glad to have your suggestions of what is good out there.
Anita says
Part of the reason the big cheeses at my local newspaper, the Colorado Springs Gazette, were so open to my book recommendation column is because it doesn’t trash anyone. I only write about books I like. Do I run across books I don’t like? Yes, of course. But like Bambi’s mama suggests, I don’t say anything at all about those books.
I wish more publications would offer a RECOMMENDATION, as opposed to a review…I think the approach is more useful to readers, which should be the point, don’t you think?
Anonymous says
I am currently judging Golden Heart contest entries in a subgenre I love to read but would never write. So I want these unpublished authors to do well. Half of the entries are good (even excellent). Half are just bad, bad, bad.
Would I call the bad ones trash? No. But they’re still not good. They are guilty of poor writing or boring plot or both.
If the good entries were published, I would not buy one of the three. But I can still tell it will make a good book (in the hands of the right editor.)
I have a visceral rating system for published books. –How quickly do I put the book down?– Over the last five years, the percentage I put down before finishing has risen dramatically. Probably 80% or higher. Does my little statistic mean the overall quality of the market is declining? Or does it perhaps mean that I have been hideously unlucky in the books I select? I’m not sure, but I shouldn’t have to apologize for thinking some are bad–or be accused of jealousy.
liz
Emily Cross says
As always very interesting post Nathan
“Nothing, not love, not greed, not passion or hatred, is stronger than a writer’s need to change another writer’s copy.
– Arthur Evans”
– and i’m now going to post a nice stat related but very off topic question:
what are the actually stats of being published? (i know its “fate” and like “winning the lotto” or “oscar” etc. but bear with me)
i’ve reasoned it out and am wondering if it sounds about right from your perspective?
“Here is my reasoning:
1. You Have To Write the Story – Only 3 % of writers that start out writing a novel actually finish it
2. You have to query it – Literary agents reject (give or take 99.5%) of all manuscripts that they recieve.
3. It has to get passed by an editor – who are few in numbers and short in patience (due to being overworked)
4. Getting it published – from negotiations to deals to this and that, its surprising we even have the number of books published!
5. Then only a very small amount actually make a decent (livable) profit while the rest are dropped by the publisher for being flops.
So, basically you start as 3% of those who actually finished a novel. Of those 3% – 99.5% are rejected by Literary Agent. I have no percentages of how much on average a L.Agent sells to a publisher?
So that would be less than .5%?
Once L. Agents get a client, is there a high percentage of actually selling a book?
Sorry if you’ve been asked this already – with less use of % symbols. 🙂
Just_Me says
No book is trash, but there are some I don’t care for. Ditto for some shows and other entertainment. They just aren’t my cuppa’.
Rick Daley says
Please judge this writing:
Option A: I am extending to you an informal greeting.
Option B: Hi.
Which is better? And more importantly, why?
I think good writing should be defined as “the ability to convey thoughts through written words.”
If the words convey the thoughts accurately, then the writing is good. If the words obfuscate the thoughts, the writing is not good. And using big words like “obfuscate” does not necessarily mean the writing is good, especially if the meaning is lost on the reading audience. Throw that line into a children’s book = bad writing; use it here = you tell me…
Consider the difference between the words imply and infer. Imply is the meaning I put into something; infer is the meaning you derive. If the writing is good, you infer what I implied. If the writing is redundant, I just said the same damn thing I said in the preceding paragraph.
(Pause waiting for laughter to subside, wonder at the sound of crickets chirping)
The real subjectivity comes into play when we consider the thoughts that inspired the writing. You may not agree with the thoughts, but that does not mean the writing is bad. Didn’t like my joke? Doesn’t mean the writing is bad, it just means we have different concepts of humor. Had no realization that I was trying to be funny in any way? That may be bad writing.
Lupina says
Because it’s easy to fall into lazy, knee-jerk hyperbole… that’s why you see so many books called sucky trash these days. If it were merely the anonymity of the Internet at work, more of these unknown critics would use that cloak of invisibility to drop more devastating and inventive insult bombs.
Dan Radke, “Buffy” in its entirety is an artistic tour de force. The Buffy Musical alone is to swoon for.
And yeah, I do think there is a high degree of subjectivity in judging writing versus judging English usage. Writing encompasses not just usage but style, content, implicit world-view, and other terms you’ll find in how-to-write-unsucky-novel books. Every human evolves biases. So how could any agent claim to be purely objective in judging queries? How else to explain sending the same query to three agents, getting a rejection that made me inspect myself for leprous sores from the first, a request for a partial from the next, and a request for full ms from a third?
Esther Jade says
I don’t think it helps to be unnecessarily nasty in reviews (on Amazon, say) but I think people do need to be able to call things “trash” or something similar. Otherwise, how am I supposed to sift through all the books out there and figure out which ones are worth reading?
Not to say that anybody saying it is “trash” means it is (as you say plenty of people whose hands the book passed thought it wasn’t) but if one can find a reviewer with similar tastes, then one needs to actually know whether they liked it or not. Mincing around the truth and trying to find something good about everything can seriously undermine the usefulness of reviews.
Carley says
What a person chooses to read is a personal choice, as unique as that person is. I don’t like everything I read, and prefer to leave it with, ‘it just wasn’t my cup of tea.’ Because it’s not. What I claim to be the best book I’ve ever read, may not be someone else’s ‘cup of tea’, but that doesn’t make it trash. Reading and even TV are all personal taste, and not everyone likes the same things, that’s why there is so much to choose from.
So, I’m with Nathan, no more trash; lots more, ‘not my cup of tea’ or ‘it just didn’t float my boat’, or what ever adage you choose! Because when it comes down to it, it’s just plain courtesy! 🙂
(I’m stepping off my soap box now.)
hi, it's me! melissa c says
First, I’d like to know if you actually read all these comments. lol. I don’t know that I’d have the time.
So, for my opinion. I agree with you. It’s all subjective. I love Stephen King. I know people who would rather die than read anything he’s written. I think he’s brilliant. Others think he’s satanic.
The question here is, do I believe what people say? No. I read what I want to and judge for myself.
I also know people who have said Stephanie Meyers isn’t a good writer. Who the crap cares? She’s a millionaire now! She wrote a story that people couldn’t put down.
In my opinion, a good writer is someone who writes a story you don’t want to lay down. Period.
Nathan Bransford says
melissa-
(yes, I read them)
hi, it's me! melissa c says
Oh, to add one more thing. Being a good story teller is one thing. Having good technique is another. You need both.
Adaora A. says
I think people can find themselves to be unwilling to open up to new things. There is so much out there to choose from that it does seem easier to just throw it all in the garbage bin. That’s where all the terminology comes from (your “trash” and your “I hate”.) It’s easier to tack a label on things then to take the time to educate yourself and learn about it. I really think people can walk the line between having expertise and being open minded. There is so much to choose from when it comes to books, and that’s what makes it so interesting. Knocking a huge chunk of it as ‘trash’ is kind of sad. It’s the same kind of attitude that some people bring to the table in all areas of their lives. It’s dangerous buisness. It’s ignorance.
Anonymous says
Actually, a 65/35 split is not statistically impossible; in fact, it’s not even all that improbable. It would be possible for 99% of your readers to believe, and be right, that they are above the “average” if the 1% were truly abysmal. First, we apply a hypothetical mathematical value to the quality of each of your readers’ outputs. Say, 1, 1, 1, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10. This gives us a total of 73, which we divide amongst the 10 data points, revealing an average quality score of 7.3. Congratulations. 70% of your data points are higher than average.
It is more likely, of course, that there is a clustering of data points somewhere in the central range, in which case, it would not be necessary for them to be such extreme outliers.
It seems that the majority of your readers have interpreted “average” as meaning the median, as in Bell Curve, with standard deviations on either side. I find that a little bit disturbing, since you would typically specify “median,” if you intended anything other than the good ol’ arithmetic “mean.”
From now on, I’m only reading books by authors who are proficient in statistical analysis, and saving myself the trouble of more subjective definitions of quality. 😉
I love artsy people. They’re so whimsical.
Emily Ruth says
Well, seeing as trash is *usually* something nobody wants (unless they are very poor and, well, I’m getting off subject. ahem.)
Seeing as trash is usually something nobody wants.
And seeing that all books that are published (excluding self-published) have been liked by an agent and published by a publisher…
Then really, no published books could ever be considered trash, right?
*Somebody* liked it. And that somebody was somebody who turned down other queries and thought that that particular query, or that particular story, was something people would like to read.
So yes, the writing may be bad. Awful.
Yes, the storyline may be bad. Awful.
But it must have redeeming quality somewhere that *someone* saw.
Which means, since at least a couple people considered it above other stories,
“No published book is trash.”
*cheer*
Anonymous says
I think all of us in the book industry agree, we don’t want to hear our work or anyone else’s work called trash. It is personal to us, but HEY to the readers it’s not personal. Trash is a everyday common word, the same as saying they didn’t like it for whatever reason. You cannot please everyone, so if you don’t want to hear someone call something trash, DON’T READ!!!! don’t read the paper , blogs, whatever, because you are going to get upset! They are not saying it to you personally. I don’t know where you all are from, but if I walk around with kid gloves on, they get dirty.
Faith and Fiction says
I hate to bring it up because I’m sure it has been talked into the ground, but Twilight, for example. I teach English to juniors and seniors and we’ve had plenty of arguments over that one book. One group feels they’re “trash” (even though they’ve read them all, cover to cover), while the other group gets red-faced and pissy at the mention of Twilight being associated with any negativity.
To be honest I’m just glad they have an opinion about something besides cell phones.
-Faith
AS Meredith says
Holy crap! I meandered over to Book Roast to see your post (very funny, btw) and those people are crazy over there.
Jen says
I’ve read a few books that I heartily disliked. Books beloved by millions of rabid, screaming fans. This dislike left me briefly questioning my own taste, until I realized that hey, I could tell they were well-written books…they just weren’t my sort of thing.
As to why people can’t be bothered to say something like what I just did above instead of using the dreaded “T” word? I have my theories. Proximity rage, sure. A lack of basic manners? Possibly. A complete blindness (or lack of concern for) how their words might actually affect others? Absolutely.
However. That doesn’t mean that the occasional textual turd doesn’t make it through. Sometimes, things just really aren’t up to par. But to call it trash seems a bit harsh to me.
Oh, and just for the record? Buffy. Is. Incredible! And that’s just one of several clever, well-written shows that have come out over the last ten or fifteen years.
A Golden Age for TV, for sure. *runs to fire up DVR’d copy of Fringe episode*
Annalee says
The only time I’ve ever called a book “trash,” I was referring to a popular YA series that promotes violence against women as cute and romantic. I’m not a “think of the children” type, but YA’s target audience is at an age where they’re forming their sense of what relationships should be, and I find it appalling that a popular book series is sending them the message that abusive behavior is how boys show their love.
I wouldn’t call a book “trash” just because I didn’t think it was very good. But if I were going to insinuate that some people didn’t deserve to be treated with basic respect and dignity, I’d have the stones to do it in a non-fictional context instead of trying to pass it off as harmless entertainment.
padaeum says
I’ve used the word “trash” to describe books. Generally, I don’t use the word to be hostile. I call certain books “trash” the same way I call fast food “junk.” The books might not be the best thing ever, but they have their place in the world. Sometimes, you just want french fries.
It’s wrong to act like such books shouldn’t exist. It’s wrong to act like people are bad or stupid for reading them and enjoying them. Not everything has to be great or challenging or profound. Given how grim the world can be, I think it’s good to have books that are fun and easily consumed. I’m all in favor of things that increase the happiness of the human race, even if they’re silly. (I like silly.)
That being said, I do think it’s important to realize that not all books are equally good. And I don’t think anyone here is really arguing that Danielle Steele and Jane Austen are equally meritorious. But I am a little perturbed by the idea that there’s really no such thing as a bad book, that there are only things that are just “not to your taste.” I can recognize good writing or good storytelling when I see it, even if, for whatever reason, it’s not to my taste. Faulkner and Hemingway aren’t to my taste; I still recognize their greatness. Tolkien isn’t to my taste; I still recognize his skill, and understand why he’s so beloved by so many. Stephenie Meyer isn’t to my taste; I still understand her appeal, and I think it’s fantastic that she’s had the success she’s had. I love it when authors are successful, because I love stories, and I want authors to be rewarded for telling them well.
Generally, the books I read fall into four categories. There are the books I love, the books I’ll read over and over and over again. There are the books I like enough to finish, and will perhaps read again sometime in the future. There are the books that bore me, that I don’t finish for whatever reason (these books can be good, great, or mediocre; they just don’t appeal to me).
And then there are the books that actively offend me, that I hate and loathe and despise, and that I feel no qualms about hating, loathing, and despising. Mein Kampf is such a book. I won’t say it’s “not to my taste,” the same way Twilight is “not to my taste.” Mein Kampf is a horrible, rotten, odious, evil book. I don’t think you can say enough bad things about it.
I realize that’s an extreme example, but extreme examples are useful in illustrating a point. Yes, there are horrible books out there. Yes, there are horrible books that are published. Yes, there are horrible books that are published currently. And they don’t necessarily have to be advancing an agenda, like Mein Kampf. I’ve read plenty of modern fiction that I’ve found objectionable in the extreme, not because it’s dealing with a controversial subject (I’m a lawyer; I live for controversy), but because the theme is something I find utterly reprehensible. That goes beyond “not to my taste.” My reaction might be subjective, but it’s subjective in a far different way than “not to my taste” is. There are books that offend my conscience. And while I think authors have the right to write them, and publishers have the right to publish them, and readers have the right to read them (and, God help me, like them), I certainly have the right to dismiss them, to criticize them, and to hate them.
That hatred is not “lazy, knee-jerk hyperbole.” It’s sincerely felt and sincerely expressed. It has nothing to do with jealousy or general ill will. Most books I don’t like, I don’t like because I find them boring. I don’t tend to say much about those books, other than that they bored me, and I have no problem with them existing. The books I hate, I will say a lot about, because I think something needs to be said against them.
Of course, the words I use in that situation tend to be a lot stronger than “trash.”
Morgan Dempsey says
Though I’m pretty far down and likely no one will see this… or maybe somebody’s already said it…
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.
We call this the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
Not calling anyone incompetent. But maybe we should all pause and think on this.
Kimber An says
I agree with your conclusions, Mr. Bransford, and I'll add one more.
I think the 'trash' label might arise from the Gag Factor.
I like Twinkies, but more than two and I'll throw up.
Once one novel, say Twilight, or kind of novel, like 'Dark & Sexy' romance, does well, suddenly the bookstores are flooded with an Endless Parade of the Exact Same Thing. As a reader, it makes me want to gag.
As an aspiring author, it makes it difficult for me to believe agents and editors when they say they want something different.
Faith and Fiction says
Morgan-
Maybe, but what’s wrong with having confidence? I think, and I can only speak for myself and the group of writers I know, as writers we are constantly perfecting our art. Not that it will ever be perfect, but we have to have some ounce of confidence, don’t we?
-Faith
Suzan Harden says
The only time I’ve referred to a book as “trash” was while stripping covers at a bookstore job and tossing the poor tomes into the compactor. I cried every time, even though many were books I would never have read.
Miss Viola Bookworm says
For those of you talking about Buffy, check it out. Joss Whedon is a genius, and I have to agree with Entertainment Weekly: they’ve said Buffy is one of the ten best shows on television for years. Firefly is awesome too!
About trash…
I think that clearly we’re all entitled to a difference in opinion, so obviously I may not like the same things other people like. This happens to all of us, whether we’re talking about movies, television, food, books…it doesn’t matter. It’s all subjective.
Why do people call it trash though? It’s a personal choice, I suppose. Some people are courteous and have tact, and some don’t. Or rather, we all have different ideas about what is tactful, courteous criticism and what is not.
For me personally, I don’t go running around calling anything trash simply because I don’t like it, but I’ve seen it done often, often in my own classroom. I have high school students mention how a movie “sucks” or how it’s “trash” or how much they hate it, but when I ask them why, the typical response is “just because it sucked.” Hmmm. I then tell them to come back when they have a better answer; they usually don’t.
A better example of this “trash” idea would be with a certain 4th book that was mentioned in a different comment. The discussions on the Amazon boards (which are still running strong and are still full of people talking about trash) didn’t just call the book trash. They trashed the author, her family, other fans, and basically, the entire series/franchise. This book was released in August, and they are STILL on that forum discussing ways to make the movie flop, the next movie flop, the next author’s book flop, and all for what? Because they didn’t like something?
Again, I’m not saying we all have to like the same things, and I’ve been known to love things others don’t, and I’ve been known to dislike things the majority thinks is genius (ie. The Matrix). Still, I’m not a person to go around “trashing” another person or their art. I don’t talk that way about anyone really. There are better things to do with my time, but aside from that, it’s just not in my nature. And yes, it seems like this type of talk occurs more often now than ever before and maybe that is true, but it could also be that such talk is more readily available than ever before because of the internet.
Again, is voicing an opinion wrong? Certainly not, but I think we all have our ideas about what is appropriate, respectful or tactful, and that, to me, is the real issue. Those posts on the Amazon boards literally made me sick, but the people posting them, the dark siders as they like to call themselves, are still laughing at how funny they think they are. Clearly, we have a difference in opinion on how to act. I won’t tell them or anyone what is right or wrong. I just choose not to do it, and I’m trying to teach my children that as well. It’s the best I can do.
Bethanne says
I was invited to join a review blog this past year. One thing, as a writer, I’ve decided I have to do is Find The Good. I believe there is always something good to say about a book/novel even if it’s one I don’t particularly like or found poorly written. That’s all.
I voted that I probably didn’t write better than anyone else…but it’s likely I write AS well.
I don’t like the word TRASH because it’s been used to describe romance for WAY TOO LONG. *shrug*
[plug]www.thegirlsonbooks.com[unplug]
Cindy Jacks says
I may be oversimplifying things a bit, but I think the over-use of the word ‘trash’ might have more to do with the fact that we are–by choice–bombarded by the written word.
With super-sized book emporiums, magazines on every topic imaginable, e-publishers popping up everywhere, e-zines, blogs, chat boards, email groups, and 140 character bites of what our friends and family are doing at any given moment, folks have more reading material than we can manage every day.
Since we’re saturated by words every day, perhaps it’s more difficult to impress us than it was in the days that books (or even paper itself) were rare commodities.
Or I could be totally off the mark. I mean, I write ‘trash’ for a living and love doing so. LOL.
Roscoe James says
Trash = Lazy. Trash because??? Plot holes, poor character development? Poor world building?
Anonymous says
Hey, I didn’t respond to your ‘poll’ yesterday, but now that you’ve mentioned it again, I’m afraid I’m one of the 35 percent who is sure I don’t write as well as most of the readers of your blog.
I’m still learning my craft. Such as it is. And I probably write ‘trash’. Hee. I am an artist by trade and I learned long ago that you have to be fantastically awful now and then or you’ll never learn.
I’ve read quite a few scathing, angry, reviews of books. On blogs and online. My objection to most of these is that they aren’t useful. Good critique is rare and invaluable, whether the critic loves or hates the work. When I thnk of good critique, I think of the poet, Robert Lowell, who could critique a ‘bad’ poet in such an incisive and specific manner that the poet would benefit from the critique.
It is much harder to review a ‘bad’ work than a good one, in my opinion. The persons who write these negative reviews online seem hideously underqualified to write anything.
‘Trash’ is a word used by persons whose aesthetic vocabulary is sadly underdeveloped.
Anonymous says
I think it’s possible the increasing rate of new publishing deals for second editions of novels whose self-published first editions were rejected by pretty much the whole publishing industry is an indication that, perhaps, there’s a bit of an issue with institutional tastemaking having gone somewhat awry.
bunnygirl says
So, Nathan, are you suggesting that people who are critical of other people’s writing must think their own is better? Your words suggest that’s what you are trying to say, and of course that’s a fallacy. I don’t have to be a concert pianist to know the difference between a brilliant rendition of Mozart vs someone who is fumbling for the keys. I don’t have to be a genius writer to recognize poor craft in others.
It’s true, though, that writers are particularly vicious when it comes to their own kind. I think a lot of this comes back to the way we make ourselves crazy with “rules.” We beat ourselves up over adverbs, we endure snarky remarks about POV and verbs of being, and then we pick up a bestseller, flip through the pages, and…OMG! Adverbs! POV shifts! Passive voice! Instead of seeing a rollicking good story, we pick the book apart like we pick apart our own prose, then fall into a funk because Famous Author didn’t follow the “rules.”
The truth is that most writing that gets published is competent, not brilliant. But because there’s an artistry to the written word, we hope for linguistic majesty when we open a book. It’s not going to be there every time. Sometimes what we find is just someone’s idea of a good yarn, and that’s okay. It sells, and publishers have to eat, too.
PurpleClover says
It hasn’t even been a week since the Presidential Inauguration and people are being berated about exercising their freedom of speech…interesting.
I don’t agree with calling everything on the shelves “trash” since I happen to like quite a few things. I have put a book down in the middle because I thought it “sucked” and those were my words. But that doesn’t mean the person can’t write well or that the next person doesn’t think its “juicy”. It just means I’m not into what they are writing.
On the other hand, I wouldn’t make a public statement about it either…that is just inviting the influx of comments.
Oh and who is knocking the SciFi channel??? I LOVE Firefly, 4400, Stargate Atlantis, etc. It seems as soon as they are on a roll, they cancel the series. What is up with that?!
Eva Ulian says
To be fair, I really don’t think “unknown” writers, let’s call them that, because all of us are published in some way or another, say their books are better than the trash that is being published; out of envy, bitterness, or sheer revenge. They, we, say so because that’s exactly what we know, see, feel and read.
What is trash? To me trash is not necessarily bad writing, but bad morals and “f” words sprinkled like pepper and salt. Television is full of trash, possibly more than the publishing industry. However when writers refer to trash it usually means books that are boring.
I think last year I read two books in all, and I wasn’t much enthralled by them. At the moment I’m trying to read a thriller, I’ve been doing so for the past month and I’m not even through the first chapter yet. It’s beautifully written, the language is clean, a delight and yet I prefer to pick up the TV guide to see what’s on Telly instead, which I never watch. I just can’t get involved, and yet I love thrillers- adore Agatha Christie. Maybe I should read something which involves the emotions and I go and look at the preview pages on internet and what do you get? Men, women children all served up with the right dose of conflict at all the appropriate places- there is nothing that makes you want to curl up with any book and read it like those of Jane Austen and Charlotte Bronte. Just a browse through the titles themselves and there’s no spark that lights up inside me that attracts.
Some of the novels I read for my English degree, did not just attract me, they grabbed me, they dragged me to read them. Nowadays, I can’t remember the last time I felt that sensation. Maybe I’ve just fallen out of love with reading and prefer to watch the movies of the great novels like Forster’s Passage to India by the late marvellous David Lean. Maybe I’m old fashioned… maybe I’m disenchanted… maybe … maybe But that’s the reality of why most of us don’t read anymore, there are no good, great, wonderful books to read and the publishing industry should realize that life is too short to read anything less than that, and completely revolutionize its outlook.
Vieva says
I think there’s a snooty sense of books as “culture” vs. “entertainment” – with entertainment losing.
I was referring to my own fiction at one point and called it “junk fiction” – also known as beach reads, that sort of thing. And the person I was talking to was APPALLED that I would even CONSIDER writing such things when I could do something EPIC.
Completely ignoring the fact that, of course, people LOVE beach reads. We devour them. We talk about them, we trade them, we collect them in giant heaps in the back of our closets where we pretend we don’t read “that stuff”.
Sometimes I really think trash is code for “far too entertaining to be cultural”. Because culture should be boring. Culture should HURT. We should suffer to be cultured so we know we’re better than the “them” that like to .. enjoy their fiction.
But I really love a good beach read. And I don’t care if it’s cultural or not – I care that it’s entertaining. As do most people.
Culture can take care of itself.
Mystery Robin says
It all comes down to defining terms. I can loathe a book that you love and vice versa, but what makes it trash? Couldn’t someone love a trashy novel? Could a novel considered “trash” sell well? Sure.
I agree that there are sour grapes and haters out there. I also think that any industry trying to sell anything will at some point sell stuff because it sells. I think local news is often trash, and I know it’s hard to produce. Doesn’t mean it’s elevating or enlightining.
Jana Lubes says
Janelle said:
**”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?
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!”**
My thoughts exactly.
But people can’t seem to stick to one definition of “trash” on these comments either. When I call something trash, it’s for the reasons the poster above noted, not because the book is “commercial” or “entertainment only.” I would never call something trash because it didn’t ponder The Existence of Life, or conversely, if it espoused subject matter I objected too.
And while the internet has bred its share of jealous haters, its also splooged out a whole lotta undeserved love as well for people who cannot — in the technical sense — write well.
Stephanie Meyer may be able to tell an engaging story, but she cannot write well or weave a cohesive plot. Twilight reads like a teen girls daydream, and that has its place, and I enjoyed it immensely on that level, but please don’t hold that book up as some shining example of literature because it is not.
Cormac McCarthy constantly breaks grammatical rules in his wrting. But the difference with him and someone like Meyer is tht McCarthy KNOWS WHAT THE RULES ARE TO BEGIN WITH! This is called style. And in the hands of a master it is not mere affectation but that mysterious thing which can elevate a book to art and turn something into a classic.
I hated Heart of Darkness. But I cannot fault it technically or call Conrad a bad writer.
So while bashing a book or writer may not be the “nicest” thing, it’s also cowardly to back away from giving it a negative review in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings.
A book is a product. It damn well should be judged and scrutinized. And constructive criticism isn’t always feasible when someone’s reacting with emotion. It doesn’t mean that their critique is automatically the product of a jealous, unpublished soul. That sounds more like the delusional rantings of authors who have been criticized and hurt in that manner.
BarbS. says
Well! I’m abundantly glad I used “garbage”instead of “trash” in my reminiscences of agents visiting Macmillan! 🙂
“Trash” is the literary equivalent of the most-famous-of-all-naughty-words: a convenient cue that suggests all the bad things about commercial writing and lets the utterer vent without fear of being censored or censured.
Of course, my explanation could be trash, LOL
Gregory says
Excellent piece, Nathan. Some seem to think that a purely entertaining book is “trash.” That a book should be ennobling or enlightening or informative. I can’t bring myself to criticize a book simply because it doesn’t happen to appeal to me or enlighten me in some way. Indeed, pure (mindless?) entertainment occurs to me as a very important component of human existence. Nothing ignoble about it. However, you make an excellent point, Nathan, when you claim that there are objective elements to excellence. As you say, the best writing almost always bubbles to the top.
We all see (and produce!) a lot of sub-par writing measured by those objective standards. The question is, what are the objective standards? Seems to me that most good books on writing cover the bases. My favorites include Sol Stein (Stein on Writing), Browne and King (Self-Editing for Fiction Writers), and Donald Maass (Writing the Breakout Novel). The latter deals more with story structure (raising the stakes, plotting, time and place, point of view, character development, theme, etc.).
I’ve noticed that works that employ the objective standards these authors advocate tend to be the consistent winners. And I find that works I experience as examples of sub-par writing tend to ignore those objective measures. Are there commercially successful authors who ignore those principles? I’ve read commercially successful authors who ignore a FEW of them SOME of the time, but never MOST of them ALL of the time. Successful authors are, invariably, great storytellers and pretty decent writers. Happy writing!
Anonymous says
Here is a crucial distinction:
I don’t mind the word trash, but I HATE taking OUT the trash. Anyone? Anyone?
Also, for what its worth, even though the whole self/other dichotomy isn’t so interesting to me, I do care about having a community of writers, virtual as it may be. So Nathan, thank you for your expertise and attention to detail. It is appreciated, helpful and frankly, impressive.
That said, one more opinion. Yesterday’s Anonymous post that mentioned one agent’s hair, was f***ing hilarious. I couldn’t believe no one else thought so. I even read it aloud to my kid because I found it so funny and compelling. That’s good writing, even if I didn’t agree with every nuance.
Christine says
Hello Nathan~ Oooh what a wonderful blog to stumble upon for the first time, I am going to be up all night consuming every intriguing topic of discussion here.
As for “Trash” I would say, as a storyteller…it is not necessarily the words, or their perfection that hold us, but the spell we weave around them.
I am hoping one day to prove myself and my writing above anything attached to that nasty word…”trash”.
In my blog…I had to examine my own fascination with novels “less worthy” yet compelling. I came to the conclusion that my own imagination was filling in the gaps and sometimes that was enough to sustain the experience.
If you do indeed read these comments…could you answer one question for me? How does one get an appointment with an agent such as yourself?
Anonymous says
When we are speaking of “trash” in literature and movies I think many people are holding a moral candle up to the work, and this is very different than looking at the work with a critical eye for craft.
No written work is perfect. Everything can be picked apart and shredded until it seems the most worthless piece of “trash.” And the more successful the work, perhaps the more picked on. I’m getting really sick of the rants on Meyer and Paolini. Shut up and write a better book if you think you can, but the fact is a lot of people like their work. It may not be shining in literary brilliance, but what they do they do very well. Their books submerge people. It takes them to a place they would rather be. That’s not trash. That’s skill. To get people to willingly suspend their disbelief, to make them consider things they might never have considered is something that takes craft, talent, and a lot of work.
Now I will say that there are a lot of books out there that are not well written. Poor plotting, shallow characterization, flat voice…boring. And the could be completely subjective. Another person might find it fascinating.
Trash? Maybe some, but to throw that word out so flippantly is neither intelligent nor considerate. This is a tough market, a survival of the fittest kind of place. Getting published in and of itself is a pretty good sifting process. Beyond that, I believe enough in basic human intelligence that a person can pick up a book, and if it’s good (as in well crafted and interesting) they will keep reading. If not, it will die away. People throw away trash. They generally don’t buy it.
Lucy says
So many of the possible reasons for “why trash?” have been discussed already: inadequacy, poor manners, strong opinions, it is trash, it’s all subjective, why can’t I say trash if I want to?…
My thought is this: Regardless of how subjective art or literature may be, there’s a strong human preference for giving it an objective or concrete classification, and that preference tends to form the backbone of what we call the public taste.
I think, too, that by narrowing this discussion to literature, or to popular entertainment at most, we are passing over the fact that this kind of tension exists in terms of politics, religion, morality, education, and every other subject over which human beings can possibly divide. It’s the age-old question: “By whose standard shall we judge?” If not yours or mine, is there a better one? Are they all equal? And which, if any of us, has the moral authority to determine even the issue of equality or inequality?
Nathan, I know from reading other blogs that you are not the only agent/publishing professional who has strong feelings about the “trashing” of books. Part of what I see is that while you and other agents feel able to make judgments on the personal appeal or saleability of the work in question, the word “trash” and its equivalents carry the weight of a moral evaluation, which I think most of you try to avoid. That too is a conscious decision based on a standard–your own, which you may hold in common with others.
But it remains a human standard, nonetheless, and until we come to an absolute standard formulated by an entity with the moral authority to overrule all our private standards and the conflicts between them, there really isn’t an end in sight.
And yes, I did have to write a paper on a similar topic in college. 🙂
Diana says
I’ve only skimmed the other comments, but I wonder if part of the reason people tend to talk trash about books (or movies or restaurants or what have you) is because secretly, they’re afraid that if they say they like a book, other people will look down at them for having bad taste.
Richard Lewis says
Lately I’ve read two novels by authors whose previous novels I’ve thoroughly enjoyed as an after surf entertainment, salt water dripping out of my nose and into my cold beer, and was disappointed by their current offerings (well, as current as a tourist left behind can be in Bali – that’s how I get much of my reading, as there aren’t any full service book stores here). These books weren’t so much trashy as they were lazily written. Lazy, not trashy, and I think I deserve to call the authors on this because I know they can do better. They *have* done better.
Newbee says
Enough of this “trash talk”!
This is my take on the subject. It’s all about class in my opinion. I don’t think it’s ever a positive thing to talk about someone’s work of any kind in that manner. It just makes you look bad. If you want to say those things…go right ahead. But, I think you’re making yourself look like the fool.
Sarah Jensen says
I often leave comments without reading through them all, and I’ve read Authoresses. I believe I understand what she’s saying. Some stuff shouldn’t be published because it seems that the editor was left out of the process.
I said earlier, we all need work, and I don’t believe in destroying someone by telling them that their work sucks, but sometimes, it does.
Heaven knows my book did in the beginning. I hope it’s a thousand times better now. And if you would’ve read it back then, I bet most of you would think it sucked. Some of you probably still would.
And again, good writing is good writing whether you like it or not.
And my book was NOT well written.
I’ve never known Authoress to trash talk, she’s polite and kind, but sometimes, books–published and on shelves–are poorly written.
Nick says
Do you think you are a better agent than most of the other agents in the profession?
Anonymous says
I don’t think that thinking many poorly written books are published has anything to do with whether or not you believe yourself to be a good writer. It has more to do with whether or not you enjoy the majority of books you pick up to read. Have you noticed that many readers believe there are bad books published, but most agents/publishers who have commented on it claim that it’s not true. Perhaps those within the industry are merely defensive…since the books are published for the readers, and the readers believe there are books of poor quality published…
Sure, the majority of published books are good books – even if they are not necessarilty to my taste – but there are a lot of crappy books out there with lazy writing and skimpy plots. Not to mention the lack of orginality…I hate it when I feel like I’ve read a book 15 times already and it was just published.
RainSplats says
If I’m expecting a roast and I get a coffee–even a great coffee–I’m gonna feel disappointed.
It’s natural for aspiring authors to critique writing skills as they read. It’s part of the learning experience. “I could do that,” and “I could do so much better..” inspire you to work harder. “I could never do that – he is a GOD!!!” makes you reach for the chocolate brownies.
It may be impolite to type it out, but we’re all thinking it.
Tell me you don’t laugh at the poor souls on American Idol who only think they can sing…..