Critiquing Books You Read

This is such a problem for me, and others I am sure.

I was urged by a horrible sentence to make this thread.

"But Rieux was gazing frowningly at the figures on the sheet of paper." — From The Plague by Albert Camus.

WOW! I stopped and reread the sentence four times. I hate that word!!! If I had a red pen in hand, and didn't intend on leaving this book in the best of qualities so I could resell it, I would cross the word out and fix the sentence!

I know I'm not alone, who else is on this bad grammar and ugly word/sentence boat?

Here is one from King Lear. I don't think this is the original, but whoever edited it didn't do such a great job:

"There's a division betwixt the dukes; and a matter worse than that: I have recieved a letter this night; 'tis dangerous to be spoken; I have locked the letter in my closet: these injuries the king now bears will be revenged home; there's part of a power already footed: we must incline to the king."

GAH! So many colons and semi-colons!!! Seven!!

Claudette wrote:This is such a problem for me, and others I am sure.

I was urged by a horrible sentence to make this thread.

"But Rieux was gazing frowningly at the figures on the sheet of paper." — From The Plague by Albert Camus.

WOW! I stopped and reread the sentence four times. I hate that word!!! If I had a red pen in hand, and didn't intend on leaving this book in the best of qualities so I could resell it, I would cross the word out and fix the sentence!

I know I'm not alone, who else is on this bad grammar and ugly word/sentence boat?

But Camus is translated, you know. You'll have to be critiquing the translator. ^_^

...Though more to the point, I have been inclined to rewrite whole books when it comes down to some of the worst... !_!

I remember that reading Cold Mountain killed me because of its grammar, you couldn't tell when people were talking because there no speech marks. At all. It was a school copy that was just going to get thrown out though, so I sat with my pencil and put them all in where they should have been.

Tin Fish: Some stories are meant to be read without speech marks - it's a style of writing (even if it's one I don't like). I believe the Color Purple (an award winning novel) didn't have any speechmarks in it either. Putting in all those speechmarks is probably akin to crossing out all the 'thou's in Shakespeare, and replacing them with 'you' .

Poor Imp wrote:

Claudette wrote:This is such a problem for me, and others I am sure.

I was urged by a horrible sentence to make this thread.

"But Rieux was gazing frowningly at the figures on the sheet of paper." — From The Plague by Albert Camus.

WOW! I stopped and reread the sentence four times. I hate that word!!! If I had a red pen in hand, and didn't intend on leaving this book in the best of qualities so I could resell it, I would cross the word out and fix the sentence!

I know I'm not alone, who else is on this bad grammar and ugly word/sentence boat?

But Camus is translated, you know. You'll have to be critiquing the translator. ^_^

...Though more to the point, I have been inclined to rewrite whole books when it comes down to some of the worst... !_!

Ah, I was just going to say that it had to have been translated... then I saw you beat me to it.

Haven't read much by Camus -- Only have L'Etranger and La Chute. Got up to chapter one with the former, but it takes much longer when I have to keep checking vocabualary and things.

The one that got me going was Philip Pullman's 'Ruby in the Smoke'. I loved it the first time I read it, but I reread it a few months ago, and I hated some of the things in the first chapter. He actually had this paragraph describing the main character, without using action or anything with it, which I don't usually like... Not only that, but he describes Sally as unusually pretty. I don't know... I just don't like those sort of things when it's third person.

Sureal wrote:Tin Fish: Some stories are meant to be read without speech marks - it's a style of writing (even if it's one I don't like). I believe the Color Purple (an award winning novel) didn't have any speechmarks in it either. Putting in all those speechmarks is probably akin to crossing out all the 'thou's in Shakespeare, and replacing them with 'you' .

How does ignoring basic rules of grammar constitute a style of writing?

I think effective writing (using grammar and words properly) is about a million times more proficient.

Writing for effect is like weird camera angles, nice gimmicks, but they ultimately backfire.

I'd have to second Grif there...

Some French books that I've read haven't had speech marks. Perhaps that's just a foreign thing that I'm going to have to get used to, but it really is annoying...

Griff: I didn't say I liked it (I too think it's far more effective to use proper grammar). But it's still a style of (experimental?) writing that's used - and presumably liked, by some.

Remember, it was the author's intention to break that particular rule - as opposed to just shoddy writing, which I'm sure most writer don't intend to do - so we can't really 'correct' it.

Sureal wrote:Griff: I didn't say I liked it (I too think it's far more effective to use proper grammar). But it's still a style of (experimental?) writing that's used - and presumably liked, by some.

Remember, it was the author's intention to break that particular rule - as opposed to just shoddy writing, which I'm sure most writer don't intend to do - so we can't really 'correct' it.

Don't worry Sureal, I was accusing the author, not you.

I don't see the rationale for breaking that rule. Breaking rules for purposes of dialogue make perfect sense, but breaking rules to make a point seems stupid.

But Camus is translated, you know. You'll have to be critiquing the translator.

Yeah, i realized a few minutes later that Camus is French, and felt somewhat stupid (I realized it when I found he was the guy who did l'etranger.)

So the translation was what ruined it... :p

Hehe... I hope I don't end up getting blamed for anything like this if I ever get to be a translator. I'll just have to make sure I don't put any scary words like 'frowningly' in.

Didn't Ellen Foster have no speech marks? I can't remember. But anyway, I think that lack of grammar in some places can be effective, like in Ellen Foster, so we really feel that it's being told from the perspective of a child.

A Moth At The Glass also had no speech marks but I managed to read most of it before giving up (I know how lazy I am or maybe I was bored)

I read a book called the 5th Horseman by someone and it sucked, I wanted to critique it but there would be no point.

The one that got me going was Philip Pullman's 'Ruby in the Smoke'. I loved it the first time I read it, but I reread it a few months ago, and I hated some of the things in the first chapter. He actually had this paragraph describing the main character, without using action or anything with it, which I don't usually like... Not only that, but he describes Sally as unusually pretty. I don't know... I just don't like those sort of things when it's third person.

LOL, I just read that book. I noticed that part too, and for a split-second went into critique mode. I did love the book overall, though.

Anyway, yes, I do get these urges to critique stuff already published when I spot something irksome. It's only been since I joined YWS, though.