But to keep this place from going utterly silent, I will at least keep up my reading diary:
25) Rita Book #7: A particularly frustrating read, because despite being from a major print publisher it was very poorly edited. This is the first year self-published books have been allowed in the contest, and I was dreading the possibility of getting a sloppily written, unedited self-pub. But I was even more dismayed to find repeated grammatical errors and generally awkward writing in a traditionally published work. I know some readers don't mind that kind of thing as long as the story is compelling, but to me that's like saying it doesn't matter if the soloist can't carry a tune as long as the song is good.
26) Hild, by Nicola Griffith.
Hild is historical fiction, but set in an era so unfamiliar to me as to feel more like fantasy. Griffith has taken what very little is know about the early life of St Hilda of Whitby, paired it with what appears to be exhaustive research into the cultures, politics, and lifeways of 7th century Britain, and woven it into a lush, meandering, and ultimately captivating story.
27) Rita Book #8: Nice voice, but the pacing dragged and dragged.
I am finally done with my judging for the year! For the next 11 months, I get to CHOOSE what to read again! Don't get me wrong, I enjoy judging the contest, and this year I found two authors whose work I'll probably seek out in the future. But it's still a bit of a slog to push through eight books not of my choosing in as many weeks, and to be obliged to finish them even if I'm ready to set them aside by the end of the first chapter.
I have a friend whose published romances (from a publisher) included a lot of errors, which is partly because she can't spell so there were way more than usual.
ReplyDeleteThe worst error I ever saw in a published manuscript was one where the POV switches mid-paragraph with no warning, from the viewpoint of someone leaving his house to the assassin watching him. It's incredible a mainstream house let that slip through.