But, I had to wonder if my dislike of the book stemmed from it being a so so story or my love of some of her other books. Winter Garden (my favorite), Stolen Charms and My Darling Caroline are all keepers for me.
I know I'm comparing. I also know I do it with Catherine Coulter, Jane Feather, Mary Jo Putney and Joan Wolf--loving older books and being disappointed in later ones. I no longer read Coulter and Putney, Wolf I keep trying simply because I can't believe her writing style has changed that much, and I vacillate about Feather from book to book. I realize my reading tastes evolve at the same time authors writing styles are evolving and perhaps we're going in opposite directions.
It leaves me wondering...
- Is it fair to judge a book by previous ones, instead of on the merits of the story and storytelling?
- Obviously I'm not the only one who does this :) So for those who don't, how do you not make comparisons?
- How is it possible that a writer like Joan Wolf's writing style and voice evolve into something SO completely different?
- And do editors, agents and publishers push authors to fit their molds? ie Avon and their interchangeable stable of Regency/Victorian writers?
That last question might be a little snotty, but I find myself reading less and less books published by Avon, there are only a handful of authors with their own truly distinct voice, the rest seem like so much of the same. Maybe it's just me, but I don't think so.
So, what do you think fair, unfair?
Now, the flip side of that. Do you give freshman authors a break?
When a book is by a new author or a new to you author do you give them a break as long as the story is good? I'm starting to think so. When I look back at my list of books read YTD I've read 17 new to me authors, some complete newbies and some I've tried for the first time. If I compare some of these to my keepers, in some cases there's no comparison, but yet I still liked the stories. Does any of this make sense?
And then do you have different standards for different genres or romance sub-genres? This I know I don't do, but am pretty sure others do, and they may not even realize it. I'm leaving this thought rather vague on purpose :D
PS--you may have noticed I didn't include Linda Howard in my list of evolving authors. Though I know so many people don't feel her newer books are as good as her older ones, I'm apparently bordering on rabid fangirl status and if she wrote the phone book I'd at least like it, if not love it :D
9 comments:
You know, I don't do this much. The only author I tend to whine about is Lorraine Heath - and that's only because I started losing interest the minute she started importing Englishmen to Texas. Also, to a certain extent, Susan Wiggs. I still have a ton of her historicals in my TBR, but I have several in my keeper stash (4 I think). That said, I tried one of her contemporaries and her voice just didn't work for me in the same way. I don't want to write off her contemporaries completely though since I only tried the one and I'm thinking that's not fair :)
I do think I give newbie authors a "break" - but it really depends on what I find wrong with the book. If it's just a matter of thinking they need to tighten up their technique and writing - I'm gentle. But if the hero is a jerk, the heroine TSTL, and there are gaping plot holes - I tend to be harsh. Newbie or not.
Wendy, crap am I whining? LOL
...it really depends on what I find wrong with the book. If it's just a matter of thinking they need to tighten up their technique and writing - I'm gentle. This was my point, but would you be as gentle with the book if a favorite had written it? It's just a curiosity thing. :D
Tara:
LOL - I didn't mean to imply that you were whining!
I don't think I'd be as gentle with an established author as a newbie. I just expect that there might be a few writing quirks in a debut novel - but someone who has been around and written several books - well by that point I'm thinking their style/voice should be pretty well established. Is that fair? Maybe not. But the newbie doesn't get a free pass forever.
I think many readers get in a comfort zone with some authors and it's hard for them to look at that one single book on it's own without thinking of the author's entire backlist. Romance readers tend to romanticize favorite books - so I think this is a fairly common practice. Should it be? Probably not - but I also know we've hardly cornered the market on it. Other genre readers, and even literary fiction fans, tend to bemoan how SoAndSo's books just ain't what they used to be....
You know I've thought about this a lot since I read Cover of Night and will probably do a post on it - but short answer - I do tend to judge well-loved authors harder, or at least by a set of different standards. The thing is - I liked Cover of Night - I really did. But at the same time, it was so unlike what I'm used to from Linda Howard that I couldn't help but add the author herself into the equation. I don't know if it's fair or not that I did that.
I think it's very, very difficult to see a book by an author one loves or hates separately from their other work. And IMO that's okay as long as you disclose the bias. Because aren't we always sort of judging by what we've already read? Isn't that how we determine whether something feels fresh or stale to us as readers?
As for Ashworth's new one, the AAR reviewer did not like it (C- I think). I liked the first one in the trilogy okay, felt the second one was terribly edited, cliched, and inconsistent, and haven't read the new one. Interestingly, I've seen a number of readers say they didn't like her pre-Avon books and see the same problems in her newer books, too. So . . . I don't know what that means, but I thought it was interesting.
Has anyone read the second Raintree book yet (it's for sale on eHarlequin)? I like it better than Howard's entry, but still I have to wonder how this worldbuilding took five years. Maybe it has to do with the fact that three people were involved?
Wendy, I just expect that there might be a few writing quirks in a debut novel - but someone who has been around and written several books - well by that point I'm thinking their style/voice should be pretty well established. They need to work out their kinks/quirks. I pretty much feel the same way, but is it right to give them that free pass to start with.
I do tend to judge well-loved authors harder, or at least by a set of different standards... I don't know if it's fair or not that I did that. Obviously I have a tendency to do it to, so I have to think that if it's not necessarily fair it's probably hard not to.
I really liked Cover of Night, but part of that is because for years I not only read romance but was also a "genre" reader picking up suspense, mystery, horror too. It ties very nicely with my comments for Robin's newest column on Access Romance. I like suspenses when the romance is secondary to the suspense/mystery.
Robin, And IMO that's okay as long as you disclose the bias. Because aren't we always sort of judging by what we've already read? Isn't that how we determine whether something feels fresh or stale to us as readers?
I completely agree with this, but at the same time I still have to wonder if it's fair or even possible to come at every story with a completely blank and clean slate. I'm starting to think if a reader can do this they probably enjoy more of what they read.
As to the pre-Avon Ashworth's I realized her voice is different, at least is seems so to me, more homogenized to the Avon "voice". I think I'll post another column about voice and style changes.
I haven't seen the second in the Raintree series yet, but I'll get it when it does. Raintree: Inferno worked for me as part of what I hope will be an overall series story arc. I'll port something about that too this week.
I think that not only do I compare an author to their own backlist, I compare their current work against other books in the same genre that I loved.
For example, I do love paranormal books but I can tell a bad one from an excellent one. The problem is when you are reading a 'good' one but you know it's not as good as say a Ward or Singh or Cole. You wish the book was as good as that but it's just not a keeper.
I think it's hard for me to go into a book with a heroine with psychic powers and not think about Dream Man by Linda Howard. Unless the author creates something completely different (Singh) then the story can just feel like a watered down version of Dream Man.
I also think I am easier on a debut book than on a new to me author. For example, Sherilyn Kenyon has a ton of books out and if I try her latest and it doesn't work then I'm out. If however, I had read her debut novel and thought it was something different then I would give her more leeway. Strange as it seems. I guess I expect that by a certain number of books an author has found their voice and should be near the top of their game. Newbies are harder to judge because they may have had all the time in the world on the book or it might have been snapped up on spec - so sometimes the first book is an authors best and then sometimes it's not.
Helpful, no?
CindyS
Post a Comment