I'm not sure why I feel vindicated by this, but I do.

[dira]

Jo Walton continues to confirm my impression that she is really a pretty hoopy frood by discussing why people read stuff that isn't actually, you know, good, with Midshipman's Hope as an example: here at Tor.com.

She's talking about books, of course, but I think she's working her way around to things I've heard fanfic fans discuss in relation to badfic and crackfic (and possibly the Id Vortex, though the button-pushing she talks about doesn't go quite that far).


(I think the feeling of vindication stems from seeing someone I respect confirm for me that, oh yes, the ludicrously misnamed Midshipman's Hope series really is that bad.)

(It should be called Midshipman's Utter Despair, is the thing.)

(ETA: You know, in retrospect, I do believe I object really really strenuously to the portrayal of Christianity in those books, even if it is meant to be a particularly dour 22nd Century Protestant sect.)

PS, I not only have not seen Torchwood yet, I have remained largely unspoiled. It makes for a very quiet internet. So far today I have entertained myself by discovering exactly what was growing under the crisper drawers in my fridge and eradicating it. I hope.

Comments

[amalthia]

I don't get why she keeps saying Midshipman's Hope is a bad book! I completely loved the series and have rarely felt so drawn to the characters and world building and the plot!

I'm kind of afraid to ask the lady what she considers a good book? Because I was under the impression good writing entertains and makes you think and in some cases cry. (okay I totally cried like a baby the second book)

But um yeah your alt title is completely fitting! :)

[dira]

Well, to split hairs a bit, I think it's possible to draw a distinction between really good writing (the kind that wins awards and is critically acclaimed and whatnot) and really effective writing (the kind that sells millions and inspires really passionate reactions--like Twilight, or the crackfic on fanfiction.net that has hundreds of comments and more typos than commas per paragraphs). Good writing, to be truly good, is probably effective; effective writing is not necessarily good. Some of those books or stories plug so directly into what a reader wants - characters, world building, plot, emotional button-pushing, etc. - that they don't care that the prose style is not the smoothest or most beautiful, that the world-building has been inelegantly and obviously contrived to serve the plot which has in turn been transparently constructed to torture a character... for instance. *g*

And what Ms. Walton is saying, I hasten to reiterate, is that that's okay, that there's nothing wrong with effective writing - it's effective, after all! - and that lots of people, including herself, enjoy it.

(For myself, my main objection to the books (I read the first five or six--up to Voices of Hope, I think? with his son?) was that I hate dystopias, and whatever was going on in the world around him, Nick Seafort was obviously locked in his own private dystopia, and by book three I was desperately hoping he would die and put himself out of his misery. *g*)

[amalthia]

oh boy, I could barely finish Voices of Hope! I don't know what he was thinking to write in trannie language???? but um yeah that was the only book out of the series that I thought really sucked.

And yeah, I can see why the series never got nominated for a Hugo...I would have to say the Snow Queen (to me) is a prime example of awesome science fiction and good writing. She had a lot happening there. Or even Lois Bujold McMasters not all her books are great but Mirror Dance, Memory, The Vor Game they are among my favorite books.

I did like Twilight but then again I also read romances from time to time. I think I like turn your brain off at the door books.