]]>
Most of this links back to characters and plot. I'm not usually as concerned with the quality of the plot as by how well it flows and how well the characters adhere to it. With characters, I usually pay attention to how well they stick to their traits and how they're written - I like well-written characters over characters that I identify with.
I also tend to enjoy books that pull me out of reality (books that create an alternate world and don't reflect our current reality) more than ones that reflect current events.
That's all I can think of for now.
Statistics: Posted by Shield Maiden — Tue Jan 12, 2016 4:27 pm
]]>
Characters of non-villains (both main and side) should have normality - like Chesterton said : a fairy tale is a sane character in a world gone mad, a realistic novel is a sane world with characters gone mad.
By sane characters, I mean what I can relate to as sanity (not necessarily what a shrink would call such) including the fact of not committing suicide when having considered it. By world gone mad, I prefer it be not so depressingly mad as to drive characters otherwise sane mad (like the real world starts looking to me).
Of course, the fairy tale element of a world gone mad is not a requirement. Of Astrid Lindgren (a Lutheran parson's atheist daughter, who wrote as good a meditation on the Apocalypse as Akallabeth and Last Battle in Brothers Lionheart - except for the final suicide cum mercy killing), there are fairy tales with dragons or a knight with a heart of stone or harpies (Brothers Lionheart, Mio, Ronya the Robber's Daughter), but there are also humdrum tales set in humdrum countryside settings, like Bullerbyn or Saltkråkan. Nearly like realistic novels, except the characters stay sane.
Statistics: Posted by hansgeorg — Sat Jan 09, 2016 11:49 am
]]>
That said, plot is also important. If there isn't enough with which to drive the characters, then there's a good chance you've lost me. Plus, I love to get lost in a story. As much as I love characters, it's the plot that takes me to other worlds.
Connected to both, the antagonist has to present enough of a problem for me to care, whether it's another character, an idea, or the physical setting. Depending on the story, the antagonist can be of great scale or of great personal importance... or both. The stakes must be high either way and be treated as such.
Jumping back to characters, a friend has jokingly accused me of loving "boring, lawful-good characters" ("lawful good" being a role-playing game term for a character that will always follow the rules to the letter no matter what; I gravitate toward these and the "lawful-neutral" sort (those that generally follow the rules, but may bend or break them on occasion)). I automatically give major points to realistic and well-written characters that are moral, noble, and honourable; extra points to those that build excellent relationships with other characters and/or are leaders and/or overcome a great struggle. Peter, Edmund, Caspian, Aragorn, Sam, Eomer, Faramir, Captain America, Aqualad (Kaldur'ahm, not Garth), so on. These are the characters that appeal to me the most because they (usually) live at a standard I want to see in myself.
That said, I do like a good, conflicted character from time to time. Ones that struggle, that sometimes do the right thing but other times do the wrong thing. Once Upon a Time is loaded with these guys and I like those characters' story arcs (particularly Rumpelstiltskin (who usually does wrong, but has made some efforts at right) and Regina (who believably went from good to bad and then slowly came back to good)). If done right, I like these characters because they reflect the daily struggle in our own lives.
Aaaaaaaand that's all I can think of for now.
Statistics: Posted by Ariel.of.Narnia — Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:22 am
]]>
]]>
The Ranger's Apprentice series isn't heavy on making you think, but it is good at making you feel for the characters. In one scene in book three, one of the characters slanders the king in order to lose his job because he can't get time off from his job to go rescue his apprentice from the Skandians who kidnapped him. You honestly feel for King Duncan as he's forced to hand down a sentence of death or banishment to a man who's served him faithfully for years. (Really wish they'd explored Duncan's character more in the prequel that just came out. Totally skipped over his journey with the Rangers once he was rescued. We're always told that Duncan is popular and good and noble and I WANT TO KNOW WHY, DARNIT!)
Statistics: Posted by kristi — Sat Jan 09, 2016 12:05 am
]]>
Statistics: Posted by hobbit_of_narnia — Fri Jan 08, 2016 11:39 pm
]]>
As I look into starting another novel, I've been thinking about what it is that makes me want to read a certain book, or, conversely, turns me off of one.
Things that attract me to a story:
Interesting characters: Not necessarily the main character. For example, the Pevensies are a little light on personality traits. They are more portrayed as Everyman characters, and it works. We live vicariously through them. I think even Frodo is a little more like this than other members of the Fellowship, but he works as the hero anyway. Mind you, surrounding characters make up for the relative blandness of the POV character: Puddleglum, Reepicheep, Aslan, Jadis, Gimli, Boromir, Sam...
An interesting premise: Jurassic Park the book gets by on the strength of its concept, because honestly, none of the characters are pleasant enough that we much care if they survive, though we are nominally rooting for Grant (And wish Rexie would eat Lex).
Those two features of a story are probably universally recognized, but I'd add another few that I've been missing lately:
Honor: What happened to this? What happened to characters like Aragorn and Faramir who do something because it's the right thing to do, without making a great fuss about it? I don't see this in the latest crop of dystopian, humanistic fiction. (But I'd love some recommendations of contemporary stories where it can be found.) What happened to Jim Hawkins giving his word to Long John not to run away and KEEPING it when Dr. Livesay encouraged him to flee? (Let's be honest, we'd all run, and we'd probably tell our kids to run, but...it's just so refreshing.)
Thought-provoking: Not always required. Sometimes it's enough to just sit back and enjoy an adventure. the Ranger's Apprentice books and the YA Jedi Apprentice books weren't gonna make you think, but sometimes it's nice when a book does. (Conversely, sometimes a book can make you think almost too hard. Lawhead is great, be he demands a lot.) I felt the Wingfeather Saga really missed the opportunity to explore the nature of its four or five sibling relationships, which would have added depth to the story.
What do you guys think? What makes or breaks a story for you?
Statistics: Posted by kristi — Fri Jan 08, 2016 9:36 pm
]]>