Imperfect writing

I'm currently reading a book my sister lent me. I won't say too much about the book itself because it's very adult and saucy, but reading it is irritating me quite a bit. It's non-fiction and mostly made up of emails sent between the author herself and other people, with bits she's written describing their meetings in between. And it is full of grammar and spelling mistakes. I mean, fair enough, there are mistakes in the emails and she has reproduced them as she received them, but the parts she actually wrote in the book even had spelling mistakes, mis-use of commas and run-on sentences, and one or two blatant typos that I don't know how she could have missed. The emails she sent to other people are full of errors as well. I know she probably wanted to keep those as they originally were sent as well, but shouldn't she take more care as a writer - shouldn't it just come naturally to her? And as for the creative writing, didn't she even proofread her book?!

So my question is, as writers, should people expect us to be near-perfect all the time, no matter what situation we're writing in, and how important is this to you when you're reading a book? Is it just important to you that the book has good description and plot, etc? Have you read any other books that have irritated you with this as much as it's irritating me?

As writers... well... I just had this crazy idea for a metaphor:

Writing is like being the President. Anything you do is going to be criticized - down to every last minute detail. People are going to love you and praise you, but then there are others who are going to hate you and despise you, even if they have no basis to their feelings. And atop all of that, all you can do is just to keep on going strong, doing what you think is right and making decisions that the people you are trying to help will appreciate. (For writers, these people would be your readers) But as the president, you are not God - you have limitations - and can only do with what you have been given. But also, as the President, you have an air of authority that makes people think twice before questioning you, an aura that makes people realize that "Hey, you're the President, and you can do whatever you please, and it would be really hard for me as a single person to change that." Sure, if you do something most of your people won't like, you could be impeached or killed...

Ack! That metaphor lasted long enough. I hope the meaning got across. If not... well, then that was an epic fail . So, basically, I believe that all writers should be proud of their work - no matter what state it is in - and that we, as the readers, should at least try (Pahahaha, no matter how painful) to appreciate that the writer went through the hard work of writing a novel and then proceeding to get it published. Legally, I feel that any horrible grammar/spelling/plot hole mistakes should be the responsibility of the editor of the piece (what else did the editor get paid to do, other than to edit???), but everyone knows that it's really the writer's fault.

I think people that do not write often have the misconception that writers are supposed to be perfect. Heh, well, we all know that no writers are "perfect", but writers that are "very good" know how to make the readers think that they are "perfect".

Hmmm... the description and plot in a book is very important to me, of course, to make the story alive and real. But, like everything else in the world, description must be used in moderation - otherwise, the reader is going to think that the book is a boring 700 (whatever) pages of purple prose, where nothing really happened (while in reality, a LOT happened, but the description was simply bogging the story down... teehee, the only exception to this is Christopher Paolini's "The Inheritance Trilogy" - there are going to be 4 books, lol - where there was entirely too much description that I threw my book across the room, and in between all of it... there was no plot. Whatsoever. Yep. None.). Plot is essential to a good story - it makes it interesting, gives it twists and turns... but you know what I think the most important part of a story is?

Characters. Because, how could a reader relate to the book itself if they could not first relate with the most human part of it? If your characters are like real people to you as the writer, then they will be like real people to the reader - and that is what creates the first link between writer and reader.

Oh dear, my reply kind of went really off-topic for just a little bit, didn't it? I'm sorry, Matt!

Asides all of this... the writer you are talking about CLEARLY had a horrible editor, and how in the world was her book published? I wouldn't necessarily say I'd expect her to be perfect... but at least use a spell-check, right?

Cheers!

-Mazey

I can't think of any metaphor, but heck I'll write what I think anyways.
Personally I think it's upto the writers how they converse with people in their private life, I mean when I sit in front of the computer and chat, the other person writes so fast that I am only able to catch up when I write 'lk ths'.
But I think when you are publishing a book then you should make sure that you use the correct language and grammar.
All people learn writing through reading, therefore writers should write using correct grammar. And as Mazey said, people will always blame the writer for the mistakes printed in the book, so being a professional isn't it your responsibility to self-edit your manuscript thoroughly before sending it to a publisher?
And personally, I am not perfect when I interact on the web, except for YWS, and I don't care how a writer chats or writes emails, BUT when s/he is interacting to her/his readers then I think the writer should maintain the proper use of language and grammar.

Re: how writers should write in everyday life, whatever floats your boat. I myself try to write as well as I can whenever I can, be it through emails or texts, but I know other people would rather go with expediency and speed, and that's fine.

But. If I find grammar/syntax/punctuations errors in any book that I'm reading and can't attribute it to the odd typo? Instant put the book away and move on to something else. Simple as that. The way I see it, form is as important as meaning (sometimes even more, when it comes to engaging a reader), and if the writer can't understand that, then I have no interest in reading him. It's just a matter of respect.

So my question is, as writers, should people expect us to be near-perfect all the time, no matter what situation we're writing in

Yes, but as readers they should perhaps be more merciful.

It depends.

Ask the folks I talk to on Skype all day about grammar/spelling/etc, and they'll giggle. But if I'm writing emails, and generally texts to folks who I don't generally speak to, then I try to maintain stringent control over my grammar. It's much more satisfying for me when looking back, and a few doors have even opened for me in my educational career due to my carefully-written emails. It's odd, really, how much little things like email grammar can affect your outward perception.

...the game changes, however, when you're talking about writing a novel. Maybe I'm old-fashioned in this sense, but I can't stomach reading broken grammar, and I don't expect anything more from anyone else. I couldn't even read Precious in its entirety because of the intentional grammatical mistakes. It's painful. On that note, however, there is a difference between stylized grammar and lack-of-care-or-a-good-editor.

Of course, I am a grammar Nazi.

/bias