I’m reading a book that I saw several people say they really liked. As in a lot. So I bought it and have started reading it. Despite an incredibly cheesy series subtitle.

I will represent to you that the subtitle is . . . well . . . approaching self-parody, only totally serious.

In the first paragraph an object is described like this (I am not using the exact phrase.)  “shiny matte-finish.”  A  matte-finish is, by definition, not shiny.  So, I said to myself, “this is a very careless, thoughtless even, choice of words.”

By the middle of the chapter, I was thinking, “wow. I were [Author of a NYT bestselling series] I would be thinking about talking to a lawyer.”  If felt to me like all this author had done was slant a few salient details as she essentially writes the exact  same series framework. EXACT.

But then there were elements from another NYT Bestselling series. Though when you’re able to say, “oh, that line came from the first book in Series X, and this is Character Y from series X, isn’t that kind of a problem? So maybe a mashup, kind of?

It’s not badly written. But it’s not thoughtful and it’s completely unoriginal.

I’ve already reached points where I know exactly what a character’s internal narrative is going to be. Because that’s what it ALWAYS is.

It’s grammatically correct, about 1/2 deep, and completely and utterly derivative.





2 Responses to “Trope-A-Dope?”

  1. Erin Satie says:

    These posts are like the blind items that show up at celebrity gossip sites, except there’s nobody in the comments to tell me what the answer to the riddle is.

    I need to forget I read this before I get too frustrated.