My top pet peeve? Adult women wearing their hair down in public! I’m pretty sure that in Europe, from Byzantine times to the 1920′s this just wouldn’t happen for most women.

I won’t buy anything that is this lazily researched.

I know that I have very little patience with heroes and heroines who have crappy parents – my reaction (perhaps because my own parents had more than their share of flaws) is ‘get over it’. It doesn’t bother me when they have problematic relationships but are clearly their own people, but when it is used as an excuse for TSTL or nasty behaviour, I really reject the book. As Larkin observed, that’s what parents are there for (see This Be the Verse).

Oh, and re: Twilight: I couldn’t even finish the first book for the reasons that some of you mentioned. Another baggage issue, but there was no living with my best friend in high school when she got interested in a boy, so after I realized that I wasn’t going to get a coming of age story with romance as a side plot, but rather a girl getting unhealthily obsessed with a boy, at least from my perspective, I just couldn’t keep going.

I don't deny having baggage, but my perspective is more a challenge to the author: “prove it.” Make me believe it, whatever “it” is. I'm actually pretty suggestible; I can be seduced, and all it takes it excellent writing. You will get me eating out of your hand with top-notch prose and characterization – I don't care if you have John Adams deliver the Gettysburg Address at the 1893 Chicago World's Fair; I probably won't even notice the anachronisms. It's the author's job, IMO, to deliver a world I can believe in. If she doesn't, if I start to see the seams here and there, I instantly become much more critical. It's sort of like seeing behind the curtain in The Wizard of Oz and realizing that there is someone in there, pulling the levers, and the magic – the chance for real magic – is gone and can't be regained.

I think there’s something to this. I was thinking about this post today. There are very few books I will categorically refuse to read because of baggage, or because of skepticism. I am even willing to read about amnesia and virgin widows.

The only category that I am strongly resistant to is romances set against the backdrop of the Holocaust. I feel that if they do the subject justice, it’s very bleak, and if it’s not very bleak, I feel that it’s being trivialized. I’m sure that’s because I’m the grandchild of Holocaust survivors and because some of my family members’ lives were extinguished in the Shoah and that’s about as powerful as baggage can get.

Reading Eva Ibbotson’s The Morning Gift made me realize that even one of my favorite authors could not really treat the subject to my satisfaction, at least not in the context of a romance novel, and that makes me skeptical that it can be done. But that doesn’t mean that someone couldn’t prove me wrong.

But aside from that, I have plenty of other baggage in life that affects my responses to books, but not so much that I’m not willing to overlook those things if a book is well-written enough. Great prose and characterization go a long, long way toward seducing me as well, and making me willing to forgive a lot of other flaws.

I don’t think there is such thing as a perfect book, there are only a books that seduce us to such a degree that we don’t notice the imperfections. And sure, that’s harder to do if we bring in negative baggage, but it’s not impossible.

Funny that you mention Janine’s review of The Spymaster’s Lady, because I was definitely seduced by the prose in the first half of the book, and it wasn’t until the heroine began acting ridiculously, unforgivably stupid and out of character that I awoke from the spell that that lovely writing had put me under. And then I began to see some of the things Janine pointed out as flaws that were there from the very beginning.

So, in one sense, authors have a lot of leeway with me. But since there are very few Kinsales or Ivorys out there, on a practical level, I think (know) that I am a very critical reader. Maybe I don’t give some authors “a fair shot”, but I’m not sure how to change that, even if I wanted to.

AnimeJune: I couldn't understand a lonely heroine who would intentionally distance herself from people who wanted to befriend her.

Yeah, the characterizations are rather problematic too (and not only with Bella, but nearly everyone else is written to look bad in order to make certain sparkly characters look good. . .which I think is simply weak writing). Mostly, though, it’s the continual victimization of many of the female characters, and especially Bella, that I really dislike. I could live with a antisocial loner, or even an antisocial loner who is also a Mary Sue, if she weren’t so. . .anti-Buffy. Also, I dislike the controlling and manipulative nature of Edward, who gets away with everything because he sparkles or it’s all “for Bella’s own good” or whatever.

I dunno. Personally, I would consider this more a flaw of the writing than ‘baggage’, but maybe it is my hang up. I like my female characters to have agency, and not be so passive or TSTL. And for my male characters to not be such awful examples. Unless it is deliberate and there is (a lot of) character growth/redemption or something (which I really do not think it is in the Twilight series).

But, you know, I’m still planning on reading the last book. . . I want to see how it ends. So, there is some part of it that works for me, or I’d just stop reading it. Possibly, I’m still waiting for this series to get better.

how can I know if I have got it wrong? Should I stick to “Writing what I know” or can I find a way to get it right?

Have other people read it? See what they think? I don’t think it’s necessary to stick only to what one knows — I like the inverse of that adage, which is to “know what you write”, so you’re accurate and emotionally true, even if it’s about something you knew nothing about prior to starting the story.

One of my huge peeves is horse stuff that is inaccurate, but that’s only because I will very likely notice that something is wrong. But most of that is technical, and I can get over it if the rest of the story (ie, emotions) is compelling.

I am a nurse and this was just something that wouldn't happen in real life.

LOL Shilo! I an a nurse too, and can’t bear to read medical romances at all- they just annoy me so much with the stupid inaccuracies. Historicals can often jar, too, with gross inaccuracies that the most minimal amount of reserach on the writer’s part would fix.

I love fantasy romances, and will willingly suspend all manner of disbelief, as long as the writer creates a world that is internally consistent. Unfortunately, so many aren’t!

On the other hand, I’m sure no writer sets out to create a book that will make readers want to throw it against the wall. The problem with ignorance is that we don’t always realise what we don’t know.

I will rarely read books featuring adoptees because authors often trivialize the emotional experience and I can't relate.

I am writing a romance where the heroine is adopted. I hope and pray I don’t trivialise her experience, but despite reading the research about the effects of being an adoptee reasonably widely, how can I know if I have got it wrong? Should I stick to “Writing what I know” or can I find a way to get it right?

If I’m really bored I’ll read anything thats well written and has romance.

Eg, I like the Twilight series (sort of, if I don't think about the treatment of the female characters), but I don't think it's particularly good (see: female characters. also certain other issues).

Hey – that’s another baggage. I didn’t mind the vampires in Twilight, it was selfish whiny Bella I couldn’t stand. I really disliked “Twilight” because of personal baggage – I was a loner and had a lot of trouble making friends in high school, so at the beginning of “Twilight,” when the people of Forks are basically bending over backwards to be friends with Bella and she snubs them like they’re radioactive townie hicks only to fall for the guy who treats her like dog crap, I knew I wasn’t going to like the book. I couldn’t understand a lonely heroine who would intentionally distance herself from people who wanted to befriend her.

I think there’s also a difference between “good” and “I liked”, not the two can’t be the same, but sometimes it just isn’t. Eg, I like the Twilight series (sort of, if I don’t think about the treatment of the female characters), but I don’t think it’s particularly good (see: female characters. also certain other issues).

I stopped reading reviews for a long time, and even now tend to be careful about what I read ahead of time (especially if it’s a book I’m already planning on reading; for something I know nothing about, I might go looking for reviews/recommendations), because I found they often set my expectations, which made me unable to enjoy or asses a story without someone else’s thoughts interfering (which probably says a great deal about me. . .).

After I’ve read something though and either want to discuss it or I suppose validate my feelings/make sure I’m not totally off-base, I might seek out reviews. But, generally, I am not invested enough in review(er)s to pay a great deal of attention to their baggage/preferences to see how they coincide with mine. I like reviews that say why they liked/disliked the book – and admit to their biases – but even that can feel like too much, for me. (Although I tend to think recommendations are another thing altogether, sometimes, and for those, I usually pay more attention to people whose taste I trust.)

If something is well-written enough, it can sometimes overcome my general distaste for a certain theme or plot device. I don’t usually like a large age gap between the principle characters, for example, but I don’t have a problem with Laurie R King’s Mary Russell/Sherlock Holmes series (possibly, in part because it’s also more about Russell than anything else, including the romance).

I wonder, though, how much of this baggage is simply reading more critically (and being less tolerant of, say, grammatical errors or plot holes or under-developed characters), or are they the same thing?

Yes, yes, and a thousand times, YES.

I've struggled with the same feelings, and I certainly hope that I've learned to manage them :grin: as I am still writing reviews-honest reviews too :wink:

One of my pieces of luggage: the stereotypical Latin lover hero. Another: the ancient Maya/Aztec/insert ancient MesoAmerican culture here curse/prophecy/what have you. What can I say? I'm picky.

Yes, I try to suspend my disbelief with every new book, but sometimes you just can't-and there's nothing wrong with that, is there?

I’ve reviewed books at Green Man Review for four years, and I never had that problem until really recently. I’ve had publishers send me presents (key chains! Postcards! The first two books in the series for free because I’m asked to review the third!), and if the book sucks, I still say it sucks. I dunno, as a reviewer, I’ve always felt like I’m behind a safe bulletproof glass window where I can say and do exactly as I please and an author can’t gainsay me without looking like an idiot.

However, I have to say that changed recently when I was given a paranormal romance to review that was signed by the author – to my editor. On top of that, my editor’s name was mentioned with a big giant thank you in the acknowledges as being a huge support for this author’s work. Well, the book was terrible, but for the first time I was unsure about being the one to write the review since it was obvious that the author and editor were close friends and I didn’t want to cause any friction. I still wrote the negative review of course, and it will be published, but hopefully the author won’t see it as a betrayal from her editor friend.

My father's a huge history buff – and HE nearly got him and my mum kicked out of the theatre while watching Gladiator because he couldn't stop complaining about how the Romans couldn't have had cavalry at that point because the stirrup wouldn't be invented for another 400 years.

Ah, the burden of being a history buff . . . I nearly got kicked out for saying waaaay too loudly WTF is she wearing? when the emperor's sister appeared in a sari with a Victorian corset over it (complete with 2-part metal busk!).

I read on one particular author’s site a long time ago that she felt books should be purchased in retail stores, and that when the reader doesn’t she gets shorted in the long run, and if everyone bought retail she’d be able to stay at home more. I am “thrifty” meaning I can’t afford to run out to my local B&N everytime a book comes out that looks good. I usually buy them from a used book store to test out the writing. If I like it, I’ll wait until the new release from that author and buy it retail. Not everyone nowadays can afford to shell out the $ for a new book, be it paperback, trade or hardcover. If you figure in my state that minimum wage is $6.00, and a paperback new at B&N is $7.19 + tax… Now for an author, I understand how they make their money. They rely on retail sales to boost their income and it allows them to hit the lists which can boost sales and careers as well. But I remember distinctly after reading this how affronted I felt. I stopped reading (and buying) this author’s books because I disagreed so strongly. I don’t feel that I should be guilted into buying books retail when it was the author’s decision to go full time writing. In the long run, readers control how many books they sell, but their publisher controls how much money they actually make. Readers are only one factor.

Sorry for my rant. (oops) But in short, I agree that readers should have open minds, and buy books legally (instead of buying/selling arc’s on ebay for a fortune). For me, personally I have a difficult time reading stories with plus sized heroines because I find the emotions behind the book to be so fake. How am I supposed to believe in the heroine’s mental and romantic struggles to deal with being a size 18 for the past thirty years, when she jumps into the hero’s arms after having a dilemma for all of 30 seconds. Nope, not gonna happen. Or the 30 year old virgin. It’s not only a rarity these days, but completely unrealistic to have a “drop dead gorgeous” heroine wear a pair of glasses for 25 years, take them off, and suddenly be knee deep in men. I don’t pick up fiction for the realism, usually I get them because they take me away for a few hours. But I do expect common sense.

I think we all go into books with expectations of the outcome. For me, that’s what gets me through some books (usually the god awful ones). I want to see how I can expect one thing to happen in a book, and get a completely different show. Its what can make the book amazing or awful. The ride we all take when our books open.

I've tried to review for a site and I'm hoping to get back to it, but I felt an enormous pressure to be nice when I knew I had gotten the book for ‘free' and I haven't quite reconciled my need to be honest with the sense of obligation I get from receiving books I didn't pay for myself or read via the library. And I'm almost suspecting that I liked a couple of the books less because I felt the (self-imposed) pressure to like them (which doesn't make any sense at all, I know, but I never claimed to be a rational being :).

Yes, yes, and a thousand times, YES.

I’ve struggled with the same feelings, and I certainly hope that I’ve learned to manage them :grin: as I am still writing reviews–honest reviews too :wink:

One of my pieces of luggage: the stereotypical Latin lover hero. Another: the ancient Maya/Aztec/insert ancient MesoAmerican culture here curse/prophecy/what have you. What can I say? I’m picky.

Yes, I try to suspend my disbelief with every new book, but sometimes you just can’t–and there’s nothing wrong with that, is there?

Second is the recognition that certain subgenres work better for me than others. I’m not a huge fan of paranormals so usually skip them, but if I decide to read one I recognize that it’s my responsibility to accept it on the terms of that subgenre. No criticism allowed because it contains paranormal beings, time travel, magic, or whatever.

However, we then come to the third category, and this relates to comments made by some other posters. No matter what the world or the characters, the author needs to make them believable to me. Whether Regency England or LKH’s Anitaverse, I’ve got to understand why the characters do what they do and feel what they feel. They need to be consistent with the world that the author has created. If the author needs to bring in a deus ex machina to resolve the plot (whether figurative in the Regency or literal in the paranormal), then I feel I have the right to criticize her because she did not build her world adequately.

Last year when I commented on the novel at DA, I quoted something that Jenny Crusie’s written about readers and how they relate to books. It was posted on the He Wrote/She Wrote blog, which has been taken down now, so I can’t find her whole post about community, so I’ll just have to quote the same bit I quoted before. Still, as Crusie was mentioned in this post it doesn’t seem inappropriate to repeat it:

the reader will bond to the community in the book if the community appears to share her values, which means the characters would recognize her as one of their own if she came into the story and would invite her to sit down and stay. This one is pretty much out of your hands: the reader chooses the kind of book he or she likes to read, the type of book that has the kind of community that shares her values

A heroine who keeps saying she’s normal can make some readers, who don’t resemble her, feel that she wouldn’t recognise the reader as “one of her own” and wouldn’t “invite her to sit down and stay.”

As MB (Leah) notes, there’s a difference in what one expects in different sub-genres, and even in contemporary romance I don’t actually need or expect to have a great deal in common with the protagonists. When I’m reading for pleasure, I’d just rather the difference wasn’t written about in such a way that the issue of identification is raised in my mind and then answered in a way that places me firmly outside the novel’s community. From an academic perspective, though, it can be interesting, but it does produce a different sort of reading experience.