Why I'll Never Be an Acquiring Editor
Sep. 4th, 2005 11:06 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ksmithTucked on my hard drive is a long, sort of rambling semi-review of The Historian. There it will stay. I'll never be a reviewer, either. I get to a certain point in the proceedings and lose interest. Wonder if the faults I'm finding in the work in question are just as evident in my own books--the mote in their plot and the beam in my own.
I started out wanting to like this book. The reviews I read were uniformly good, and I found the premise interesting.
I found scattered sections of TH quite gripping. Then about a third of the way through, it turned into peanut butter soup. The revelations consisted of discoveries made over the course of travels from Amsterdam to London to Istanbul and Eastern Europe. Academics, uncovering documents and making connections. The problem isn’t sense of place--Kostova is quite good with description and setting scene. I felt, unfortunately, that the level of background/description fought with the thriller aspect and came out on top too many times.
There are three main POVs, all academics, and at times I found it difficult to determine whose head I was in. I did not find their voices distinctive and their personalities strong. I didn’t care about them. That's a red flag for me because if I don’t care about the people I'm reading about, it turns into an exercise in reading to get to the end, which I don’t enjoy as a rule. But I wanted to see if I could determine why this book was worth $2 million, so I kept going.
At this point, Kostova can't write action to save her life, and the opportunities were there. This is Dracula, for crying out loud. Blood, and stuff.
The ending should have been a riveting culmination. For me, it seemed a fizzle with a not particularly satisfying twist. Again it's worth noting that Kostova can't write action to save her life.
Thing is, there's a copy of JONATHAN STRANGE & MR. NORRELL sitting on my shelf waiting to be read, and if it's anything like TH, I'm not sure I want to read it. I have heard that it's a slow mover and that Nothing Much Happens, and well, I just read NMH and didn’t have much fun.
Is this a trend in mainstream fantasy/alternate history/whatever? I've heard that Stephenson's QUICKSILVER books move slowly as well, with much convolution along the way. So what's the deal--folks who don’t normally read genre can convince themselves that they're still pure because they've digested all this chewy, nutritious, historical fiber along with the sweet, soft, caramel plot center?
I'm not a shallow all-action hussy--I enjoy Ian Rankin, Le Carre. The MAPP & LUCIA books are some of my favorites, for crying out loud. The first one begins with a multi-page description of Mrs. Lucas walking home from the train station. By the first few sentences, I was hooked.
Shortest form: Plenty of people love this book. I didn't. If I were an acquiring editor and had read this manuscript, I've have offered a low five-figure advance and an axe. So much for my editorial career.
I started out wanting to like this book. The reviews I read were uniformly good, and I found the premise interesting.
I found scattered sections of TH quite gripping. Then about a third of the way through, it turned into peanut butter soup. The revelations consisted of discoveries made over the course of travels from Amsterdam to London to Istanbul and Eastern Europe. Academics, uncovering documents and making connections. The problem isn’t sense of place--Kostova is quite good with description and setting scene. I felt, unfortunately, that the level of background/description fought with the thriller aspect and came out on top too many times.
There are three main POVs, all academics, and at times I found it difficult to determine whose head I was in. I did not find their voices distinctive and their personalities strong. I didn’t care about them. That's a red flag for me because if I don’t care about the people I'm reading about, it turns into an exercise in reading to get to the end, which I don’t enjoy as a rule. But I wanted to see if I could determine why this book was worth $2 million, so I kept going.
At this point, Kostova can't write action to save her life, and the opportunities were there. This is Dracula, for crying out loud. Blood, and stuff.
The ending should have been a riveting culmination. For me, it seemed a fizzle with a not particularly satisfying twist. Again it's worth noting that Kostova can't write action to save her life.
Thing is, there's a copy of JONATHAN STRANGE & MR. NORRELL sitting on my shelf waiting to be read, and if it's anything like TH, I'm not sure I want to read it. I have heard that it's a slow mover and that Nothing Much Happens, and well, I just read NMH and didn’t have much fun.
Is this a trend in mainstream fantasy/alternate history/whatever? I've heard that Stephenson's QUICKSILVER books move slowly as well, with much convolution along the way. So what's the deal--folks who don’t normally read genre can convince themselves that they're still pure because they've digested all this chewy, nutritious, historical fiber along with the sweet, soft, caramel plot center?
I'm not a shallow all-action hussy--I enjoy Ian Rankin, Le Carre. The MAPP & LUCIA books are some of my favorites, for crying out loud. The first one begins with a multi-page description of Mrs. Lucas walking home from the train station. By the first few sentences, I was hooked.
Shortest form: Plenty of people love this book. I didn't. If I were an acquiring editor and had read this manuscript, I've have offered a low five-figure advance and an axe. So much for my editorial career.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-09-06 06:40 pm (UTC)I know what all bestsellers are not the same. But when I read one, I usually find something that grabs me, and I understand why the book hit. I liked DVC for the puzzle. I read Ian Rankin for his wonderful takes on office politics, situations that I think touch a lot of his readers the same way they touch me. Sometimes it's because one character just gets to me.
It's when no aspect of the book grabs me that I wonder, what am I missing?