"The difference between the right word and the almost right word is the difference between lightning and the lightning bug." -- Mark Twain
I finished reading a book yesterday -- and it shall remain nameless. This is because, when I love a book I'll post it, when I don't, it disappears into the reading log never to be heard from again.
This writer's style is awful. Awful. It's juvenile and rushed and she constantly tells instead of showing. Ugh. I could go on and on (if her hero had "puffed out his chest" one more time, the book would have become a wall banger... it was a very close thing).
And yet, not only is she a bestselling author whose books are released in hardback, but I've read more than one of her books. Yes, I've put myself through the torture a total of five times so far.
Because her stories are interesting. She has and absolutely amazing, incredible, unbelievable imagination.
Still, I often wonder why she was selected to be published. I have a couple of writing friends whose work is astoundingly good, and several more whose work is well above par and yet -- rejection after rejection.
So... is it the story or the telling that matters the most? I know, I know -- you are all thinking "it's both!", but I'm beginning to wonder because so many of the books I read have only one of those components.
Just another one of the frustrating things I can't seem to figure out about the publishing industry. I'm certain that the list will continue to grow.
What do you look for in historical fiction?
1 hour ago