Good vs Bad writing

[Mike Ashe]

You can read a review of a book that says its well written. Then you can read another review of the exact same book that says it's poorly written.

I know that things are subjective, but I'm interested in knowing what YOU have to see in order to recognize good/bad writing.

 

[sparkchaser]

It really depends on what I am reading but overall I would just base well versus poor on the criteria "does the narrative flow smoothly?".

 

[nickherc]

Well, like you said, it's highly subjective. I don't like generic writing, dumb motivations of main characters, slow pacing, description of "every cloud in the sky", that sorts of things...

 

[jennybug87]

I honestly think that people just didn't like the story and rated that particular book horrible, when in actuality it wasn't to bad.

I feel free flowing writing, punctuation, proper use of grammer makes good writing.

Stories on the other hand is what the reader makes of it.

I've read many of the Amazon rating comments on many books,I read the five stars and one stars mostly. One stars to get a good chuckle. And mostly they ALL say the same. "The book was brilliant," "the book was God awful"

I'd like to know if college education makes a good book, or a creative mind that lacks the journalism degree?

 

[DATo]

I think for most of us there are two primary ingredients to a good story - the premise, and the manner in which it is delivered. I don't think most men are drawn to the plot of Austen's Pride and Prejudice, but there are few men with any literary acumen who would deny that Austen's prose is exceptionally well-crafted. On the other hand, Joe Heller's Catch-22 became enormously famous not because of the quality of the prose, but rather the cleverness of the comic conceits. One writer comes to mind who did it all. Charles Dickens was, and remains one of the most beloved writers of all time. Not only were his stories captivating but his characters fairly came alive and engaged readers emotions vicariously. We loved his protagonists, and absolutely hated his villains. Dickens could also be critiqued positively with regard to the literary devices he employed such as metaphor, foreshadowing, symbolism and irony which he delivered in precisely the right doses and at precisely the right times.

With regard to literary criticism :

A good literary critic is hard to find. I agree with those who say that appreciation of a literature is subjective - ALL art is subjective. An honest critic must put personal tastes aside and judge a work objectively and strictly upon its merits. I don't know if I could do this. Once, long ago at a movie website I voiced my disgust with that year's winner of the Academy Awards for "best picture" and many agreed with me. I made the comment that the viewing public would make better judges and that perhaps the "best picture" should be chosen by the number of movie patrons who actually went to see it in theaters. I was brought up by the short hairs when someone reminded me that the movies which get the highest number of visitors are children's movies because parents take their kids more than one time. The same could be said for books. There are some outrageously high volume sales of novels out there which are, for the most part literary crap. Not to say that these books are not entertaining within their own circle of fans, but they are not even on the radar with respect to being Pulitzer, or Man-Booker worthy.

I must admit that, like jennybug87, I visit the Amazon site to read critiques by average Joes like myself. I figure the high number of postings by the general public is going to average out to give me a better handle on whether or not I will like a book than a professional literary critic. More often than not it works but then ... sometimes it doesn't.

 

[753C]

Amazon and Goodreads. Yessir. Totally agree with you about Dickens, DATo. I think one of the things about Dickens, in addition to everything that you mentioned, is his readability. There are tons of lists of authors that you should read. I think somewhere along the line, the adjectives "Dense" and "Challenging" became requirements for describing a great piece of literature. Reading Dickens is effortless. To me that is great writing.
I recently picked up a copy of Thomas Pynchon's Against The Day. I have never read him though I have seen the name over and over again on lists. The reason I picked it up wasn't for the lists, it was because I read a very interesting review of it on Goodreads.
I'll let you know how it is sometime in January. Lol! it is 1000 + pages, and I'm talking big hardcover with little print 1000+ pages.
Anyway, the point is reviews by the masses have always been the best guide for me.

 

[Mike Ashe]

I also agree with DATo. Very few writers are on par with Dickens. It's also very hard to find critics that can put aside their own biases and review a work objectively.