This thread was mostly intended for research but I do prefer to get back to people, who have spent time responding. Due to unexpected work pressure, I don't have the time to give the proper responses deserved. All comments have been read, though.
Literature teachers/professors who just up and add symbolism where there isn't supposed to be any. The cakes symbolizing coming-of-age, the snowman symbolizing racial equality, the fire symbolizing gossip and lies...
Fantasy authors that can't make anything out of Tolkiens shadow Post Modernist poets
Creepypastas that try to be deep, but come across as pretentious
I cant stand creepypastas that try to be something other than what they are, creepypastas. The nosleep podcast is the exception to this, but they are on the edge. They call themselves more than creepypasta, but use many of the same tropes and conventions.
It was all just a dream! Or first chapters that turn out to be dreams. Deam scenes that don't reveal anything important about the character. And why not add the prophetic dreams to it while we're at it? Protagonists that just let things happen to them. Like seriously, if all they do is react to stuff, why are we reading the story from their perspective? The chosen one. Describing your character's appearance in detail and detail. Like they don't have just green eyes, nah they have forest-green eyes! First off, if you want to describe this stuff so specifically, why not add what kind of forest-green we're talking about? You do realize that forests come in many shades of green?... Well then. I think I'm only reinforcing this writing habit.
Writings which are labeled science fiction, but only have fiction and no science. Please label those fantasy or futuristic fairy tales, but science fiction once was fiction about scientific developments, and I reall would like the term to be used this way again.
really don't like
Stuff that is advertised as science fiction but which is mostly about society and not technology. I'd like this to be named social fiction, but it's usually sold as science fiction even if there is no science in it. Having said that, I think these social fiction works, utopic and dystopic, are very valuable to explore possible social structures, and I really wish, politicians and also technicians in executive positions would read them to see what dangers this or that development can bring. Many of these dangers have been envisioned and are ready to be picked from the books.
are just not particularly fond of
90% of the world. Too much to list. I'm a bitter cynic deep inside, also a hermit.
In medias res - Is probably the thing I hate most. I'm also not fond in flashbacks.
Autor Filibustier - when the author put his own thoughs about politics, religion but also lighter topics like music in the mouth of his favourite character. Is noticeable that is not the character that speak but is the author.
its vs it's (aka using "it's" for both usages) stories with no plot, just characters fucking around character death for the explicit purpose of shock value romance in general. scenes where two characters are having a moment (not necessarily sex—just them being close and staring at each other seductively, and that sort of thing) are the most uncomfortable scenes to watch for me; I often look away during them, just as I would for a more traditionally uncomfortable scene (like a character making a total fool of themselves, or a torture sequence). it's probably why I don't write romance (and if I do, the relationship has already been going for a while once the story begins)
Fluff writing - What's the point of it??? Obvious lack of research - for anything! I especially hate this when it's in regards to writing mental illness, culture (otherwise called "Cultural Appropriation", among other things) and romance/intimate relationships. Shipping - This one is a bit less set-in-stone; it depends on whether or not the pairing makes sense for the canon (for example, Cloud and Tifa makes more sense for the FF canon than does Cloud and Zack; yes, that is a thing), and how it's executed in-story, how big of a role it plays as a plot element. If the pairing makes sense for the canon, and is used somewhat sparingly, I'll tolerate it. But if the story ends up revolving around it, and it doesn't make any sense for the canon, I'm out.
But then that's just my opinion. Personally, I think Zack and Cloud share more the type of bond formed between close friends, or in some respects, brothers. Cloud and Tifa, on the other hand, is more understandable I think, looking at it in comparison to Simba and Nala.
And plus, I'm not too fond of yaoi and yuri pairings in general.
the wants-to-be-perfect-but-is-shy-and-hates-herself female lead (why are there no confident female leads?) extreme fantasy or whatever it's called, where nothing makes sense and everything and everyone has really weird names the friend group of two guys and one gal (did Harry Potter start this, or has it been going on longer than that?)
I feel like if you have an incredibly evil character that does incredibly evil things to a whole lot of innocent people throughout the story then to have the ending be where the incredibly evil character just gets shot and dies is really a let down.
I mean I want that fucker to really suffer first and also have the shit kicked out of him god dammit!
And obviously I need to stop reading unsatisfying books.
- Characters that are obnoxiously perfect in body and talents. - Overly arrogant self important main characters. - A large cast of unnecessary indistinct characters. - Big important plot developments that come out of nowhere. - Overly long descriptions of scenes.
Ignoring the wider implications worldbuilding elements have on characters and the story. Exposition dumps and pointless character traits. Boring dialogue. If the dialogue is clunky, sounds the same-ish between characters and is filled with cliches, it affects the rest of the writing, which ruins my enjoyment of the story. Stories that are dark for the sake of being dark without any optimism to keep me caring. Even the darkest stories have some glimmer of hope to them despite all the terrible shit that happens to the characters, like Berserk, since it's nice to see characters we love and relate to struggle their way through to a satisfying ending, or in the case of Berserk again, little moments in each story arc that give them a reason to live.
insta love (no buildup/conflict in romance fiction) obnoxious 'chosen one' main characters who get everything handed to them (no conflict, any conflict gets resolved instantaneously, there is no suspense, the character doesn't have to work for it, there is no struggle -- the antagonists/villains are weak as fuck and instantly cave whenever there's a battle) writing styles that rely on the infodump or overly long paragraphs of backstory and telling instead of showing
It's addressed to people, who haven't yet been in a loving relationship but tried one-sided love, and still hope, that everything will just work itself out one day. As in "where the outcome of the entire story is given in advance, because the protagonist wins anyway"? Such themes are often combined with
people sacrifing their own best interests for romance
The thing that bothers me about that particular trope is how one-sided it often is. It's almost always female characters that are made or unmade by their romantic or sexual entanglements, no matter how talented, educated, skilled, capable or otherwise special they may be, or what sort of problems, puzzles or challenges they face.
Male characters, on the other hand, seem to have no problem completely disregarding their romantic partnerships or putting them on the shelf when duty calls, there are fires to put out, enemies to fight or space to explore.
Hah that's why I specified promotion, those people exist and shouldn't be written out of stories, but making them look like heroes for having those views is a problem. I think American History X was great in that regard, you understand Edward Norton's character but you sure as hell don't sympathize.
- Weak characters who stay weak throughout the whole book - Too much/ too little detail - Barely any dialogue - The plot is pushed aside to make room for the romance - Little to no diversity (unless it's in the olden days when diversity wasn't that great)
There's an interesting story I heard about a bunch of Samurai who were exiled from Japan after the Tokugawa shogunate took over and wound up working for the Spanish guarding their operations in the new world.
So, basically, when I'm saying is that a story about a Japanese samurai teaming up with the Last Aztec Eagle Warrior and a swash-buckling, cross-dressing, lesbian to topple the Spanish viceroy and restore the Aztec Empire is utterly realistic.
This is posted in literature so I guess you talk about books I seriously don't like when a story goes too sentimental and emotional to the point the story becomes a story for the sake of a couple and the plot gets forgotten.
I really don't like plot holes
I am not particular fond of cheap ways to give depth to villain characters like childhood abuses or having lived a shockig moment in life.
I do indeed - genres, specific works or whatever you come up with. Not so much to discuss it, more to hear what people think.
Hehe, I get you! The whole concept of troubled childhood/youth is like seriously! Come on!. That's why I like James Bond villains - they're just evil, filthy rich and go for world domination! I can relate to that!