Choose 3 top reasons from this list that give YOU the most satisfaction from reading FICTION novels?

[Stuart Suffel]

More detailed explanation of each choice.

Voice Or Tone of the novel. Overall vibe or vibes. tongue-in cheek, sardonic, light-hearted, sombre, devil-may-care, conspiratorial, intimate, challenging, assertive, direct, indirect, plaintive, coercive, open, non-judgemental, critical, happy, angry, etc.

Writing Style. Pacing. Omni-Person/ Third Person/ First Person/ Narrator/ Cinematic/ Flowery, Sharp/ Tight/ Loose, Dense, Original/Free-Flowing, etc

Characters & Relationships: Basically types of personality and complexity of same and their interactions. Brave, arrogant, decisive, belligerent, tolerant, kind-hearted, cruel, impulsive, creative, recalcitrant, conscientious, mule-headed, wise, perceptive, selfish etc

Writing Technique Or Readability. Appropriate / correct use of Grammar, Syntax, Punctuation, Spelling. Not too many unintelligible words/ unnecessary or excessive use of 'big' words, ‘foreign’ words, well formatted, clear chapter headings, good formatting (eg use of page breaks, double lines or whatever) etc

Engaging Concept Idea or Premise. As it says, but also to include plot.

Setting or Surroundings. Appropriate to the emotional tone, plot, character's knowledge skill set.

Gaining of Insight or Moral awareness: New understanding about a topic or piece of information of significance to you.

Sense of Community. Sense of being part of a wider community which shares your value system.

 

[PadreTX]

Characters and relationships
Settings or Surroundings
Engaging Concept Idea

 

[Stuart Suffel]

Characters and relationships
Settings or Surroundings
Engaging Concept Idea

Can you check the little boxes above? (3 of them only)

 

[PadreTX]

Can you check the little boxes above? (3 of them only)

Sorry. I didn't see the checking boxes part. I thought it was list them.

 

[hitmouse]

Honestly, I really don’t break my reading experience down in these terms.

I guess I just like the vibe of the thing, but my definition of vibe is more Denis Denuto’s, which is a bit different from yours, I think.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

Look at it this way. Supposed you got excited about something. When you describe it to a friend the next day, you say “I was excited!”

But supposing your friend was into defining ‘”excitement” in more analytical terms, coz, a/ He’s a bit of a nerd, and b/ He wants to be a doctor if he grows up one day, and in an attempt at some rough amateur impromptu, quasi-useful science experiment, he says “Tell me friend (buddy/ mate/ or guy), of the following 8 items, which 3 did you notice the most when you were excited?


Change in heart rate, stomach contractions, blushing/turning pale, *piloerection, breathing change, sweating, energy change, or da pooping of da pants?

Wouldn’t you want to help him out? Especially if he gets to show it off to his friends/ buddies, guys, mates or fellow nerdist/ herdist, hippies, slinkies, dinkies or dorks?



*No. Not what you all thought it was. It’s “Erection of the hair of the skin due to contraction of the tiny arrectores pilorum muscles that elevate the hair follicles above the rest of the skin and move the hair vertically, so the hair seems to 'stand on end’.”

 

[Bick]

I don’t think what I look for are in your list exactly, and depending on the type of book, all your ideas can be important but the order will vary depending on author, genre, era, etc.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

I don’t think what I look for are in your list exactly, and depending on the type of book, all your ideas can be important but the order will vary depending on author, genre, era, etc.

Have you read the above post? Not every rocket science experiment involves a top end rocket.
(Just squint your eyes and pick the 3 you like the most, or...ignore the 5 you hate the most, and tick the remaining boxes. Future generations will spank thank you, if they ever find this thread, and need a giggle)

 

[AnyaKimlin]

I kind of agree with the others and my reading doesn't boil down that easily. It's entirely on a book by book basis.

I'm currently reading "The Carrot Field" and in this case I think the worldbuilding beats even characters and story. For me it's why I love Cadfael.

But then my favourite book, I love the feminism and colour.

My second favourite book is the characters and it's unusual location.

Another book I love that I live close enough to go and read it in its surroundings.

Elizabeth Gaskell's story I love the language and the overblown descriptions.

The Living Mountain by Nan Shepherd is a beautiful experience on multiple levels: characters, the feminism, the journey, the place, the poetry. As good as the book is the audiobook, read by TIlda Swinton, is another experience entirely.

Ultimately though I get satisfaction from the book that almost makes me miss my bus.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

I kind of agree with the others and my reading doesn't boil down that easily. It's entirely on a book by book basis.

I'm currently reading "The Carrot Field" and in this case I think the worldbuilding beats even characters and story. For me it's why I love Cadfael.

But then my favourite book, I love the feminism and colour.

My second favourite book is the characters and it's unusual location.

Another book I love that I live close enough to go and read it in its surroundings.

Elizabeth Gaskell's story I love the language and the overblown descriptions.

The Living Mountain by Nan Shepherd is a beautiful experience on multiple levels: characters, the feminism, the journey, the place, the poetry. As good as the book is the audiobook, read by TIlda Swinton, is another experience entirely.

Ultimately though I get satisfaction from the book that almost makes me miss my bus.

G'wan, give it a go. Imagine you most favorite five books, like, totally favs, and see if any of the 8 boxes are relevant. (Like say, Settings & Surroundings (real or imagined), or I dunno...,maybe, Writing Style, or Characters. I reckon you'll probably come up with one, or two, or even three items from the list above, which are consistent across the five favs. The first post describes the list selections in more detail.
for example "Elizabeth Gaskell's story I love the language and the overblown descriptions." might come under Writing style (use of language) / Flowery. (overblown descriptions)

 

[Stuart Suffel]

Although there's only 12 votes so far, the results do seem to indicate a bit of a trend already. (Vote BEFORE you peek!) But it's much too soon to call any definite patterns. With a large enough voting number, this data may well have some value.

 

[bretbernhoft]

I voted for "Engaging Concept, Idea Or Premise", "Gaining Of Insight" and "Writing Technique Or Readability". These are important qualities, in my opinion, for any good fiction book to have. Thank you for the prompt this morning, it was fun to consider.

 

[Victoria Silverwolf]

Please, sir, I want them all.

I was very reluctant to pick just three. I had to painfully throw away the others, one by one.

"Sense of Community" went overboard first. It's nice to feel that you belong to the author's in-group, but hardly necessary to one's enjoyment of the work. Of course, if the author is espousing something repugnant to you, you'll have a hard time appreciating the work for whatever other qualities it might possess. However, if the theme is something you can at least tolerate, you can admire the work for other reasons. (As an example, I like Robert A. Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers while simultaneously feeling that I do not share the author's worldview.)

"Voice or Tone," farewell. Just about any voice/tone will do, as long as it is consistent and appropriate to the work.

"Setting or Surroundings" must go. This is important, but perhaps not as much as other factors.

"Gaining of Insight," adios. It can make me a better person, but is not strictly necessary for sheer enjoyment.

I am very sad to have to bid a fond aloha to "Characters and Relationships," as this is truly a vital part of literature.

That is because I must have "Writing Technique or Readability," first of all. Without it, I will toss the work aside. Very closely related to this is "Writing Style." I need to be able to read the work without suffering from the author's poor use of language (whether from technical errors or what I can only loosely describe as "poor writing.) I cannot -- literally cannot -- read anything by E. E. "Doc" Smith, for example, due to his (in my opinion) bad writing style.

That leaves "Engaging Concept, Idea, or Premise" as the third mandatory factor. The work needs to be about something. I don't mean just mind-blowing science fiction ideas. I mean something as simple as a psychological portrait of an ordinary person. (And thus we get back to "Characters and Relationships" as well as "Gaining of Insight!" These are all intertwined, like the multiple strands of a spider's web. Take one away, and they all weaken, and may collapse entirely.)

 

[AnyaKimlin]

G'wan, give it a go. Imagine you most favorite five books, like, totally favs, and see if any of the 8 boxes are relevant. (Like say, Settings & Surroundings (real or imagined), or I dunno...,maybe, Writing Style, or Characters. I reckon you'll probably come up with one, or two, or even three items from the list above, which are consistent across the five favs. The first post describes the list selections in more detail.
for example "Elizabeth Gaskell's story I love the language and the overblown descriptions." might come under Writing style (use of language) / Flowery. (overblown descriptions)

Those are my top five books and that's the problem it would be different for every book. I take each book at its individual value. What I love in a book is more about me and less about the author or story or even characters.

For example I find Patrick Rothfuss's language and style of writing amazing but it makes for one dull book.

I think JRR Tolkien is an amazing worldbuilder but my goodness are his characters are boring and his story slow.

Whereas Thomas Hardy writes the most amazing characters, has beautiful language and settings but he is way too miserable for me to actually enjoy a story. He is also a bit of a reverse kailyard.

If I am honest the characters in my favourite book are a bit Mary Sue and the writing style is full of adverbs but I don't care.

Sunset Song is one of my favourite books - it really deserves its place in Scottish literature. But that's the language, the characters, the world building, the insights, the premise etc - it's there as a favourite because it has it all and quite frankly it's as miserable as anything Hardy could come up with but Grassic Gibbon made it feel real, authentic and had flashes of humour.

Brothers Bishop was going to be one of my favourite books. As miserable as Hardy, the characters, story, premise, social message were amazing and it made my heart race as I read. Then it fecked it all up with the ending.

There are other books where I love the voice but struggle with story, wondering when it's going to start. Zadie Smith is an example of that for me.

The ones I may have ticked aren't there:

Varied emotion: Pathos, misery, humour, romance, anger, excitement all in one book - now that grabs me. If I don't laugh and cry it doesn't make it onto my list of favourite books. Engage me in those emotions and it might make the list.

Another is time and place: it has come into my life at the right time for me to really need it there. The actual writing is not the most important thing. For example I love Jane Yeadon. She's perhaps not the most academic or best writer but her books are there when I am down and miserable and in need of a pick me up. My favourite book came into my life and transported me whilst my parents were going through a divorce; A Living Mountain guided me through covid and allowed me to live vicariously likewise Findings by Kathleen Jamie (I love Jamie's work).

Magic, transportation and amnesia: if I forget to hail the bus like I did when reading Jo Zebedee's Water and the Wild it earns its place on the books I love list. More recently The Thursday Club did the same thing. If I am honest the language is simple, so is the world building, the premise really doesn't stand up and the characters need rounding out more (some are plain ridiculous) but I was so engaged that I nearly missed my stop.

I'm currently enjoying The Carrot Field which is what would have happened if Tolkien had written Animal Farm. But it lacks deep emotion (kind of like Animal Farm and Lord of the Rings for me). It won't be on my favourite book list. But it's cool, the concept and premise is fun. The language is great. The humour is there - it's tongue in cheek but not laugh out loud. But I won't walk away with the feels. In terms of similar stories The Book of Dave had me feeling more and that's in spite of struggling with the mock Cockney. China Melville's books have equally ridiculous language but I didn't enjoy them enough to work my way through it.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

Those are my top five books and that's the problem it would be different for every book. I take each book at its individual value. What I love in a book is more about me and less about the author or story or even characters.

For example I find Patrick Rothfuss's language and style of writing amazing but it makes for one dull book.

I think JRR Tolkien is an amazing worldbuilder but my goodness are his characters are boring and his story slow.

Whereas Thomas Hardy writes the most amazing characters, has beautiful language and settings but he is way too miserable for me to actually enjoy a story. He is also a bit of a reverse kailyard.

If I am honest the characters in my favourite book are a bit Mary Sue and the writing style is full of adverbs but I don't care.

Sunset Song is one of my favourite books - it really deserves its place in Scottish literature. But that's the language, the characters, the world building, the insights, the premise etc - it's there as a favourite because it has it all and quite frankly it's as miserable as anything Hardy could come up with but Grassic Gibbon made it feel real, authentic and had flashes of humour.

Brothers Bishop was going to be one of my favourite books. As miserable as Hardy, the characters, story, premise, social message were amazing and it made my heart race as I read. Then it fecked it all up with the ending.

There are other books where I love the voice but struggle with story, wondering when it's going to start. Zadie Smith is an example of that for me.

The ones I may have ticked aren't there:

Varied emotion: Pathos, misery, humour, romance, anger, excitement all in one book - now that grabs me. If I don't laugh and cry it doesn't make it onto my list of favourite books. Engage me in those emotions and it might make the list.

Another is time and place: it has come into my life at the right time for me to really need it there. The actual writing is not the most important thing. For example I love Jane Yeadon. She's perhaps not the most academic or best writer but her books are there when I am down and miserable and in need of a pick me up. My favourite book came into my life and transported me whilst my parents were going through a divorce; A Living Mountain guided me through covid and allowed me to live vicariously likewise Findings by Kathleen Jamie (I love Jamie's work).

Magic, transportation and amnesia: if I forget to hail the bus like I did when reading Jo Zebedee's Water and the Wild it earns its place on the books I love list. More recently The Thursday Club did the same thing. If I am honest the language is simple, so is the world building, the premise really doesn't stand up and the characters need rounding out more (some are plain ridiculous) but I was so engaged that I nearly missed my stop.

I'm currently enjoying The Carrot Field which is what would have happened if Tolkien had written Animal Farm. But it lacks deep emotion (kind of like Animal Farm and Lord of the Rings for me). It won't be on my favourite book list. But it's cool, the concept and premise is fun. The language is great. The humour is there - it's tongue in cheek but not laugh out loud. But I won't walk away with the feels. In terms of similar stories The Book of Dave had me feeling more and that's in spite of struggling with the mock Cockney. China Melville's books have equally ridiculous language but I didn't enjoy them enough to work my way through it.

Oookaaay. Gonna give you, a Hall Pass on this one.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

Please, sir, I want them all.

I was very reluctant to pick just three. I had to painfully throw away the others, one by one.

"Sense of Community" went overboard first. It's nice to feel that you belong to the author's in-group, but hardly necessary to one's enjoyment of the work. Of course, if the author is espousing something repugnant to you, you'll have a hard time appreciating the work for whatever other qualities it might possess. However, if the theme is something you can at least tolerate, you can admire the work for other reasons. (As an example, I like Robert A. Heinlein's novel Starship Troopers while simultaneously feeling that I do not share the author's worldview.)

"Voice or Tone," farewell. Just about any voice/tone will do, as long as it is consistent and appropriate to the work.

"Setting or Surroundings" must go. This is important, but perhaps not as much as other factors.

"Gaining of Insight," adios. It can make me a better person, but is not strictly necessary for sheer enjoyment.

I am very sad to have to bid a fond aloha to "Characters and Relationships," as this is truly a vital part of literature.

That is because I must have "Writing Technique or Readability," first of all. Without it, I will toss the work aside. Very closely related to this is "Writing Style." I need to be able to read the work without suffering from the author's poor use of language (whether from technical errors or what I can only loosely describe as "poor writing.) I cannot -- literally cannot -- read anything by E. E. "Doc" Smith, for example, due to his (in my opinion) bad writing style.

That leaves "Engaging Concept, Idea, or Premise" as the third mandatory factor. The work needs to be about something. I don't mean just mind-blowing science fiction ideas. I mean something as simple as a psychological portrait of an ordinary person. (And thus we get back to "Characters and Relationships" as well as "Gaining of Insight!" These are all intertwined, like the multiple strands of a spider's web. Take one away, and they all weaken, and may collapse entirely.)

Now, now Olivia, you mustn't be greedy, so you mustn't! You can take 3 boxes only, the rest gots ta stay home...

Oh wait - you made the painful decision? Excellent.

 

[Parson]

This was SOOO hard. I do not consciously parse these things out when I read. I read a book; if it's okay I finish it. If it's good, I read the next one or something by the same author. And if it's very good, I'll review it and recommend it. But as @AnyaKimlin says it's really different things for different books. It's much more of a whole experience as @Victoria Silverwolf says than any one or group of things.

 

[Stuart Suffel]

This was SOOO hard. I do not consciously parse these things out when I read. I read a book; if it's okay I finish it. If it's good, I read the next one or something by the same author. And if it's very good, I'll review it and recommend it. But as @AnyaKimlin says it's really different things for different books. It's much more of a whole experience as @Victoria Silverwolf says than any one or group of things.

Yes, for sure. So the idea is to help authors get a sense of what is the elements of a FICTION novel that seem to be deemed the 'most' important. But this is an examination of people reading novels - about as subjective and multi-layered an experience a human being could have (while stationary). So for some/many, it will take a bit of thinking.
Re the benefits of this mini, not-exactly-scientific experiment, it's hard to say for sure. For me, it has shown me the apparent importance of Characters, almost above all else. I can say for certain, if that remains true/ consistant over larger numbers, it will definitely affect how I approach my future writing. Bigly.
I nearly wish there were more 'boxes', but then, too many might be a worse idea..
Anyway, main thing is for no one to suffer too greatly in deciding their top 3. If anyone finds it requires tons of beer/ doughnuts/ or especially a desire to take up jogging, to gain clarity, then the price might just be too high...

ETA. This is not to suggest that authors should 'write to market' - they should not, IMO. But, if your novels are not selling, and are primarily in the bottom 3 boxes, then at least you might get some sense of why. (And you then get to describe your work as 'uncompromising'! Bonus!)
ETA 2. Just reflecting on my more 'successful' work (the stuff that got published). All of them had the characters as the main driving force. My current WIP, is driven by other elements, which is why I think it's not working so well. So, interesting. (to me, anyway, lol)

 

[psikeyhackr]

1, 3 and 4

Had to debate between 3 and 8.

Don't care about the writing much unless it is really bad.

 

[psikeyhackr]

English literature was a pain in the ass. Relatively easy but a pain. I could not remember what person it was written in though I could explain the story in good detail. The entire story was boring. I read more SF in 8th grade than all of the books assigned in 4 years of high school EngLit, but they were constantly asking questions about stuff I didn't pay attention to.

The Mayor of Casterbridge! People actually behaved like that back then? I suppose I could understand it better now after watching decades of stupidity. Just wait 'til the global temperature is +3 degrees C in 2100 and see how stupid things can get. Useless war in the Ukraine for the sake of some clown's ego. Wait until all of the soldiers on both sides are desperate.

I presume Lois McMaster Bujold's writing is just as good in her fantasy as it is in the Vorkosigan Series but the entire setting makes no sense to me. Gods must be idiots, so what the characters are doing makes no sense.