Well that’s one potential reader I’ve lost
I write weird fiction and horror. It’s full of interjections - usually by parentheses or dash. I believe conditioning (whether schooling, parenting, or just simple exposure) is more likely to inform our take on parentheses (and so on) in fiction rather than it being right or wrong.
Everything ain’t for everyone, but the thought of discounting such practices and techniques for an author seems like an own goal - especially when it’s not an empirical thing.
I’ve been listening (struggling) to the Losers Club podcast. It’s a Stephen King podcast that came highly recommended and I marvel at the ensemble of casters and the things they claim he’s good or bad at. But that’s going to be true for everyone isn’t it? For example, one of my favourite SK books is From a Buick 8. It’s allegedly universally disliked. That particular story has lots of open-ended threads which is what I like in weird fiction and horror. I’m far more entertained by 75% info and the ability to consider what ifs.
Conversely I struggled through The Stand. I found it pedestrian and dull and have only read it once as a result. I’ve read many of his other books multiple times.
One thing I find strange is that I don’t hear more positive things about Duma Key. It’s a phenomenal read with very little explanation of what and why.
What I’m not fond of isn’t his supposed problematic endings, but his depiction of the squalor of alcoholism. I’ve stopped Doctor Sleep 70 pages in even though I'd been looking forward to reading it. So often he includes those SK tropes and I’ve just had enough of alcoholism as one of them.
I suspect it’s just a case of the wider an audience, the higher the chance of people not liking (or liking!) the text.
pH
I write weird fiction and horror. It’s full of interjections - usually by parentheses or dash. I believe conditioning (whether schooling, parenting, or just simple exposure) is more likely to inform our take on parentheses (and so on) in fiction rather than it being right or wrong.
Everything ain’t for everyone, but the thought of discounting such practices and techniques for an author seems like an own goal - especially when it’s not an empirical thing.
I’ve been listening (struggling) to the Losers Club podcast. It’s a Stephen King podcast that came highly recommended and I marvel at the ensemble of casters and the things they claim he’s good or bad at. But that’s going to be true for everyone isn’t it? For example, one of my favourite SK books is From a Buick 8. It’s allegedly universally disliked. That particular story has lots of open-ended threads which is what I like in weird fiction and horror. I’m far more entertained by 75% info and the ability to consider what ifs.
Conversely I struggled through The Stand. I found it pedestrian and dull and have only read it once as a result. I’ve read many of his other books multiple times.
One thing I find strange is that I don’t hear more positive things about Duma Key. It’s a phenomenal read with very little explanation of what and why.
What I’m not fond of isn’t his supposed problematic endings, but his depiction of the squalor of alcoholism. I’ve stopped Doctor Sleep 70 pages in even though I'd been looking forward to reading it. So often he includes those SK tropes and I’ve just had enough of alcoholism as one of them.
I suspect it’s just a case of the wider an audience, the higher the chance of people not liking (or liking!) the text.
pH