12.11.08 the one about fiction (part the first)

Category: dribblings

this is just me thinking out loud. if it comes across as bitchy, i’m sorry.

i read. i read many things. i find that i can’t read loads of fiction without adding in a few nonfictions in because the fiction tends to start sucking and it will run together and seem very trite. i blame this on two things.

1. me. i’m very harsh on fiction. my bad.

2. american fiction writers. most of you are On My List.

so i’m harsh on fiction. this is not new. i know i should ease up a bit on it because i’m well aware that not all fiction can be Great Literature. it’s not even suppose to be. most popular american fiction is meant to entertain and not inform nor provoke great thoughts. i have to remind myself of this from time to time.

however, this does not mean that i will stop calling shenanigans on laziness! lazy is lazy whether in great fiction or shitty fiction (though i suppose you find less of it in literature than in say, a pulp.) and while you might say something like, “how can you call shenanigans on lazy when you blatantly disregard the rules of grammar?” i might say something in response like, “why don’t you go and write your own damn essay?”

so what i’ve become sick of lately is this: wealthy characters.

i cannot decide if wealthy characters are a plot device or just plain lazy writing. liz pointed out to me that aren’t most plot devices tools for lazy writing?
now don’t you wish you had a smart friend like liz?

obviously i’m not talking about using wealth as a class signifier. a rich prince, the beautiful milkmaid, and their’s was a love that was forbidden. while old and tired, it’s still somewhat of a dilemma of class.

what i am talking about is when an author adds a wealthy character to make it easier for the author. you know, so when the characters have to fly all over the world to find… clues or whatnot, there’s no big deal about airline tickets, hotels, car rentals, food. the wealth does not benefit the character really, just the author. there’s nothing clever. there’s no extra research. it’s just easier.

again, i have to remind myself that this is not supposed to be great literature. it’s entertainment. but i’ve been noticing it so much that it’s become annoying. not annoying in a, “here we go again” kind of way, but annoying in that authors

1. seem to get away with it.
2. a lot.
3. because they think we’re lazy readers?
4. are we?

i had a list of several examples written on an index card by my computer, and now i can’t find it. i know i had Twilight on it. and i was still debating Patricia Cornwell. but i can’t remember the other two i had.

any thoughts so far?

Tags: , , , ,

4 Comments