|
Post by Knightfall on Aug 31, 2010 11:19:08 GMT 1
So, this whole thing about me getting really put off by THE BLACK PRISM by Brent Weeks got me thinking. Mostly because I sucked it up and kept reading it, and found that the writing got so much better in subsequent chapters. It made me think that maybe I'm just picky.
When you read a book, how much of a chance are you willing to give it if it doesn't strike your fancy immediately? And also, what are the ideal conditions it has to meet to really hook you?
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Aug 31, 2010 12:09:55 GMT 1
Ah this old thing. I thought you had a rule, Knight - read the first... 100 pages? That seemed pretty reasonable to me.
I'm very forgiving. Even if it's bad, I still want to see it through if I can.
But I had left some books unfinished lately. 'Pride and Prejudice and Zombies' got very old after a few chapters. There's only so many time you can insert the phrase 'the deadly arts' * into Jane Austen before you want him to shut up and let you read the story.
I really try to read through to the end every time. There does have to be something there to get my interest though. I didn't enjoy 'The Shack' from the beginning, but stuck with it just because of the premise.
*and what the hell does that have to do with zombies anyway?
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Aug 31, 2010 13:40:23 GMT 1
Something usually has to grab me by the end of the first chapter. If not then it gets put down. I always eventually pick it up again and finish it.(never ran into REALLY bad books yet) But if a character, or a premise or the prose does not suck me in by the end of chapter 1 then usually I will not like the book as much as I like others.
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Aug 31, 2010 21:46:18 GMT 1
Yeah, my rule was always the first 100 pages, and if I wasn't going crazy to try and finish it, then I'd move on. The Black Prism didn't hook me until somewhere past page 200, and I kept wondering if that's even a good thing. Should there be a Chapter One hook, or should you always give books a fighting chance for a few hundred pages? o.O
|
|
|
Post by Battlechantress on Aug 31, 2010 22:21:03 GMT 1
I usually give a book about three chapters before I give up on it. If it can't keep my interest by the third chapter, then the author has either written a book about statistics, or has managed to make a story even MORE boring than a book about statistics (which is worse).
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Glow on Sept 1, 2010 0:33:55 GMT 1
On the rare occasion I ever read something, I usually slog through it to the end, like it or not.
|
|
|
Post by ommadawn on Sept 1, 2010 4:22:38 GMT 1
Sadly, once I start a book I feel compelled to finish it. That's not always a good thing. =/
|
|
|
Post by lieden on Sept 1, 2010 7:03:12 GMT 1
I get very impatient with books if there are things that bother me, and there are also a lot of things that bother me on top of that. (Which I'm sure is NOT a particularly good thing!) I have quit right at page one in some cases, and usually before the end of the first chapter if I find three or more instances of the following: indulgent description or presentation of the main character, a presumptuous, or snarky narrative, choppy, clumsy language. (By the latter I don't mean a crisp style, rather something like The Da Vinci Code's first page. I think that's very bad.)
I will periodically go on reading if there's a good enough reason, i.e., a recommendation from someone whose opinion I take seriously, or if I need to read something through to be able to offer a complete opinion (i.e., engage in vigorous flaming :D).
A (very feeble) excuse for the above is I don't have much time for reading (it's mostly done during commute, or else I have to neglect other things), and I guess I want it to be worth my while.
But mostly I'm just being a weird and cranky reader. ;)
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Sept 1, 2010 14:54:13 GMT 1
I'm mostly like Ommadawn. If I start, it nearly kills me to not finish it. It may take me months or even years, but eventually I will come back and finish it.
However, I'm much simpler about selecting what books I want to read. Alas, the cover plays an important role. That and the info they put on the book jacket. Had I not read Weeks' other works, I don't know if Black Prism would have grabbed my attention, as it looks large and wordy, meanwhile all the reviews on the cover are about his other books.
|
|
|
Post by Tillian Panthesis on Sept 4, 2010 16:33:38 GMT 1
That's kind of a hard question for me. It all depends how the style of the writing itself. Usually I've last probably almost the whole book if it's written in 3rd person, since you can easily distance yourself from the characters if they rub you the wrong way. I can finish most books that are in 3rd person, even if it's left to be desired.
However, 1st person is a different story. You're stuck inside the mind of the protagonist, they explore through the narrative, so it's quite hard to distance yourself from them. If the character is likable or believable enough, I'll keep going till the book ends. However, if the protagonist is a whiny loathsome bastard/bitch, it would take me 2 two chapters before I put the book down or hurdle across the room depending how bad it is. Yes, I'm aware of some stories do have anti-heros and villain protagonists, but my main rule is this: If the character is interesting and not a boring mary sue that is a hypocritcal asshat, I'll keep going.
That's probably why I've tend to read mostly 3rd person since childhood.
|
|