Total orderings

[mrissa]

We hates them, precious.

Some people are set up from childhood for total orderings: "Gina is my first best friend and Tina is my second best friend, so you're only my third best friend." I am not that person. I never was that person. I have the kind of life where I don't have to be that person. This is not accidental.

However, sometimes total orderings are demanded, and Hugo Award voting is one of those situations. So I'm thinking about which books are better than which other books. So far I've read three of the five novel nominees. I'm working on the fourth, and I read the first book in the series for which the fifth is second this weekend (got that, or do I need to add more numbers?). So far, the ranking is clear.

However. The book in my current third position was...drab. Mediocre, bland, blah. And I suspect that at least one of the two remaining books will have both higher and lower spots than the current #3.

So what would you do? Would you rather have a book that never ticks you off royally, never makes you want to scream, never seems to just be stupid -- but also never really excites you in a good way, either? Or rather: in what ways are lower-lows so off-putting as to balance out higher-highs for you? If the characters are gorgeously drawn but the plot, when poked, makes no sense? If one of the characters, with apparent authorial approval, spouts some bigoted or otherwise ill-informed notions (and at what length)? If the ending is tacked on and awkward and unsatisfying? Where does mediocrity pass up failed attempts at something better?

(Also, did you know it's my birthday a week from today? Birthday birthday birthday!)

(I do not play the game where I test my friends and family to see if they remember. If I wanted to play Memory, I'd get some cards and have Miss Siri play with me, since she's about the right age. What I want to do is celebrate my birthday. It's much more fun this way.)

Comments

Re: heinlein

[mrissa.livejournal.com]

I would be cautious of ascribing personal fantasies to an author based on their writing. I, for example, frequently have horrible things happen to people's ankles and Achilles tendons in my stories (in fact, after this book I am on Ankle Ban), but I have neither desire for such a thing myself nor particular horror of it.

I think flawed characters and flawed stories are entirely, entirely different issues.

Re: heinlein

[cooperati.livejournal.com]

concerning heinlein, i would normally be as equally cautious about stating what goes on in any authors mind. but when it goes on so consistantly, and you have people explain to you as to why he might have sounded a little off-kilter (explaining that it was a particular time in his life when he explored such things, as well as fitting with the open-minded 70's slant.) when i write, or when i read, i look for a common thread with variations that keep a story in flow, without getting tired, like a good operetta or ballet. there were few variations on the theme i could accept beyond the first few chapters. it seemed to be repititious and nauseating, explaing that this person, living a woman's life (written by a man with a very bad view of how women could be, and focussing on how much of a slut this particular woman would be), wasn't a problem until i kept seeing the same types of phrasing "but this used to be a man, dude." it got tired, and how the evolution of the character dragged through the gutter(literally) when he became a she just ended my interest in the book, and heinlein altogether. i keep forgetting how aweful he plodded along with the same old mantra, "seeing things for the first time; first touch, first sensation, first desire..." yuck.

anyways, i wouldn't say that heinlein, from this example, is in any way in need of therapy. this is a fantasy of his. any mental journey is a fantasy. but i don't make a claim that this is a habitual fantasy of his. this "trans" theme of his was workable, and he did it thoroughly, but the conclusions of the characters wasn't worthwhile to me, chiefly because of his sexist views, or maybe something within the last ten pages of the book i still haven't read. i skimmed them, searching for something redeamable, but nada.

as for flawed characters and flawed stories, no. they are too related to me. yes, you can have a character that is allergic to peanut butter without having that in relation to the story line. but you aren't likely to mention that specific weakness or flaw unless it was in direct relation to some at least miniscule corner of the story. and if one might mention it, one risks the complaint that several people have concerning tolkien, too much irrelevant data.

on the other hand, too much irrelevant data is something pleasing to some readers. it has been hailed by a few of my friends.

i feel like themes should fit. in fact, i am working on a backstory that doesn't fit into the main theme of my main characters. the middle east 6000 years ago hardly relates to eastern europe 1000 years ago. so i'm making it as an addendum, an apocrypha, to keep the flow separated and uninterrupted. heinlein sought a theme, and maintained it, but did so with bad results that makes me look badly upon him, as far as i can for one single book.

i have been exposed to the idea that his own character has an evolution. heinlein changed over the decades. at least, this is what's been said about him. i can believe it. though, i just picked up an early short story of his that deals with alot of physical transformation, and adaptation, by most of the characters.

hey, thanks for the response.

-t-