6 Qualities of Bad Writing
By Marcy Kennedy (@MarcyKennedy)
Whenever a book becomes wildly successful (or even moderately successful), a funny thing seems to happen. Among all the people who love it, another segment of the population rises up who hate the book.
Now, some of this could be sour grapes, spouted by people who’ve wanted to write a bestseller and have failed. Some of it could be folks who like to disagree because they don’t want to be a part of any crowd or a part of any popular movement. They value being contrary.
But I have to believe that, equally as often, some of the people who claim to hate a popular book really do hate it. They really believe the writing is terrible. They really believe the story is boring or “nothing new and special.” They really couldn’t stand spending that many pages with the main character.
What started me thinking about this was watching the final Hunger Games movie with my husband. We’ve both read the books. I’d been anticipating this movie since last year. But when I asked my husband if he was excited about seeing the movie, he said, “Meh, it’s really more your thing.”
I valued the series enough to buy it in paperback. He thought the books were merely okay. He won’t ever read them again.
I couldn’t stand the Twilight series, but I have friends who loved the books.
So I have to ask, what makes something a good book or a bad book? What qualifies as good writing and what qualifies as bad writing?
These six qualities of bad writing can ruin a book. (My theory on why they don’t always do so is coming up afterward.)
Bad Writing Quality #1 – Flawed Writing on a Sentence Level
I’m not talking about the occasional typo here. I don’t even mean the occasional poorly written or wordy sentence.
By flawed writing, I mean regular use of awkward, overly wordy, or confusing sentences or sentence constructions. I also mean grammar or punctuation that’s bad enough to cause the reader comprehension trouble. Flagrant overuse of figures of speech fall into this category as well.
Flawed writing on a sentence level ruins a book because it makes the book difficult for most people to read. You’re not able to lose sight of the words on the page.
Bad Writing Quality #2 – A Slow Plot
A slow plot can be caused by a lack of stakes (which I’ll talk about in a second), but it can also be caused by subplots that never connect to the main plot, a character who thinks more than acts, or too much chronicling of daily life.
Any type of rabbit trail can slow the plot. So if we have an “exciting” chase scene in our book that doesn’t connect to the main plot, it will still make the book feel slow.
A slow plot leads to readers feeling like the book was boring—in other words, a bad book.
Bad Writing Quality #3 – Low Stakes
Another element that can lead to a boring book is low stakes.
Many writers misunderstand low vs. high stakes. Every book needs high stakes, regardless of genre. High stakes aren’t simply a threat on the character’s life.
Let me explain.
James Scott Bell has famously written that the stakes should always be death. That can easily be misunderstood. Death can be emotional or professional as well as physical. It can be the death of a dream. The risk of losing anything your main character cares deeply and passionately about qualifies as death stakes. A part of them will die if they lose this thing.
When we’re considering stakes, giving our character higher stakes is only part of it. We also need to explain why our character wants it so much. When the reader understands the why, they’ll be more invested in the story.
Bad Writing Quality #4 – A Predictable Plot
You might have noticed a pattern already—many people will define boring writing as bad writing. A predictable plot, without interesting twists or an escalation of events, will quickly lose the reader’s interest.
Another way of looking at this is the lack of a fascinating premise. If we’re telling the reader a story they’ve heard a hundred times, they’re not going to want to hear it again. The way around this is to take a tried-and-true premise and put a spin on it or to write the story that you could never find and desperately wanted to read.
Bad Writing Quality #5 – Flat Characters
Our characters don’t necessary have to be likeable in order for people to love our books, but they do need to be compelling in some way. Maybe that is a character who’s likeable. Maybe it’s a character who is interesting because they’re in a strange profession (that you leverage in your book) or who has fascinating quirks or an unusual skill. Maybe it’s a character your readers can relate to on an emotional level or who faces struggles similar to the ones your readers face.
Here’s the thing—a story about Bob the Plumber, going about a day that’s like anyone else’s day, isn’t interesting, especially if Bob is your average person with no unique qualities.
If Bob the Plumber wanted to be a detective, though, and has exceptional deductive skills that allow him to spot and solve crimes, you have a story.
Or if Bob the Plumber is a devoted single dad trying to help his daughter prepare for the Olympic trials while also running his business (which was always his dream), then you have a story.
Make your character special in some way. Make your readers want to spend 10 or more hours with them.
Bad Writing Quality #6 – No Emotional Resonance
This is a tricky one, but try a little exercise. Think about two books. One book you read once but won’t ever read again, even though you didn’t hate it the first time. The other book you read over and over again.
Oftentimes, the difference between the two is emotional resonance. Emotional resonance can hide under the alternate name of “well-executed theme.”
How did Harry Potter reach so many people? One of the reasons was that Harry’s deep need was one almost everyone could relate to. The stories and characters transcended the details of the magical world to tell a story of a boy who longed for a family that loved him, who just wanted to feel at home somewhere, who struggled to figure out the line between right and wrong, and who learned that some things are worth fighting and dying for.
In other words, the struggles of Harry, despite their magical trappings, spoke directly to many people’s hearts.
Then Why Do Some Books With One (or More!) Of These Flaws Still Succeed?
I have a theory about why some books with one or two of these bad qualities still become bestsellers.
Reading is subjective. Look at that list and rank those qualities from least important to most important for your reading enjoyment. If you compared your list to a friend’s list, they would probably rank those items differently.
So when we read a book, if that book fails miserably at one of our most important criteria for reading enjoyment, we’ll hate it. But that same book might beautifully execute the element that tops our friend’s list, and so they love it.
Wait!
This doesn’t mean I’m saying that as writers we shouldn’t try to do all these things well. We should. We should try to write the best book we can possibly write.
But we also need to understand where our strengths and weaknesses lie and be prepared for bad reviews. No book is ever perfect. No book will appeal to absolutely everyone. And books we think are crap will often become someone else’s favorite read.
What’s most important to you, as a reader, from the list? Do you think my theory is right or a load of hog-wash? 🙂
Interested in more ways to improve your writing? Deep Point of View is now available! (You might also want to check out Internal Dialogue
, Description, or Showing and Telling in Fiction
.)
I’d love to have you sign up to receive my posts by email. All you need to do is enter your email address below and hit the “Follow” botton.
Image Credit: Daino_16/www.freeimages.com
Jan 12, 2016 @ 13:50:36
Marcy,
I agree with all your points, but I’d add some more: in an old post on what NOT to do when writing a novel, “The Eightfold Way” (in my blog archives), I created a list that complements these points. Such points, of course, can often be genre dependent. What’s verbose and erudite, for example, has to be defined differently for YA novels and literary novels. The best thing a writer can do is read many books in her/his genre(s) to zero in on what seems to work and what doesn’t–that gives a good old heave-ho up the learning curve.
r/Steve
Jan 12, 2016 @ 14:35:51
I think genre plays a big role. For example, if we regularly read science fiction and go into a romance expecting to find those elements we love, we’re likely to be disappointed. There are so many genres in part because each caters to the preferences of different people.
Jan 12, 2016 @ 23:22:01
Hello Marcy and happy new year!Emotional resonance is my #1 reason for loving a book,but I pay attention to the structure as well.You talked about structure in sentences as one of the reasons why some people don’t like a book,my problem,however,is with the structure of the story.For example,people looove the raven boys,I rated 2/5 stars and the main reason was that the book felt like the introduction to a story rather than a story with beginning,middle and end.For the record,the #2 reason why I didn’t like this book was because I couldn’t understand what the author was trying to say,like you said in your post.
Jan 12, 2016 @ 23:33:53
Happy New Year to you as well 🙂
I think my #1 is the characters. I can suffer through a lot if I’m interested in the characters. For example, I’ve read two series from first book to last because I enjoyed the characters, even though the plots were flawed. In one series it felt like the author didn’t know how they planned to end the series when they started and so the longer the series went on, the more the plot fell apart with characters doing things that didn’t matter at all. In the other series, there was a lot of repetitious fighting. It got boring. That said, even though I finished each series for the characters, I’ll never buy another book from either of those authors. As much as I enjoyed their characters, they’re still not worth slogging through a bad plot for. Not for me at least. Others might feel differently 🙂
Jan 14, 2016 @ 17:04:04
It is definitely a correct list. If the book has too many mundane details, I will skip to the dialog. I don’t care about wallpaper or rock formations that have nothing to do with the plot.
Another issue that bothers me: when a character often makes common sense mistakes (unless a reason is specified). I lose respect for the character, and if it continues, I lose respect for the author. I feel like I’m either being talked down to, or I’m being manipulated. I generally won’t finish those books.
I’m glad I stumbled onto your blog. Thanks for your informative post.
Jan 14, 2016 @ 17:25:25
Thanks for the great comment! A big issue for me in books is a stupid character or a character who annoys me (usually because they’re too impulsive or childish). I won’t finish those books because the characters are what matters most for me.
Jan 14, 2016 @ 17:53:22
Alana and Marcy,
You have to be careful with that attitude. In a mystery, is a guilty party trying to appear stupid and silly so that no one thinks s/he has committed the crime? In a comedy, maybe characters are trying to out-buffoon one another just for the hell of it or to gain attention?
I was struck by the character Tonto in the recent Lone Ranger movie, as played by Johnny Depp. In this movie, the Lone Ranger wasn’t the brightest bulb in the chandelier, and Tonto wasn’t only smarter while being hilarious but turned out to be the sage at the end. That last scene during the credits of him walking away across the desert also spoke volumes of the plight of Native Americans in this country. Old silent film stars–Keaton, Chaplin, and Fields are examples–knew how to mix these elements well. Books often contain similar profound messages amidst silliness and comedy–consider Hiassen’s books; for example, Skinny Dip.
Buffoons in real life are often insecure people yearning for attention. There’s no reason why a novel can’t contain such a character. Let’s work with the whole spectrum of human behavior, please.,
r/Steve
Jan 14, 2016 @ 18:12:34
I’m happy to read a book where the writer has created an intentionally funny, silly, or foolish character. But oftentimes a writer hasn’t intentionally made the character that way or they have but it’s poorly executed.
For example, I lose patience quickly with a story where the character acts against common sense for no clear reason and yet they’re supposed to be a wise/intelligent character within the story. That’s an inconsistent character who is stupid for no reason except that the author was lazy and needed them to do something that a reasonably intelligent person wouldn’t do–something that character wouldn’t believably do.
I also lose patience when a character acts in a childish or impulsive way that jeopardizes their stated goal and they never seem to learn from their mistakes or there’s no acknowledgment within the story that they are impulsive or childish. If the author is doing that to make a statement, fine. I’m on board for that. If the author has done that and doesn’t realize that they’ve created a character who represents unenviable qualities and yet triumphs as the hero, it’s one of my pet peeves. Those two scenarios create a very different reading experience on the page because the message behind it all is very different.
I think we also have to allow for reading preferences (which was one of the points I tried to make in this post). It’s okay for writers to create buffoon characters, but that doesn’t mean that a reader has to like it or to want to read books with those characters in them. That’s why not every book will please every reader. I won’t stop anyone from writing what they want to write, but I’m also not obligated to enjoy, or even to read, what they’ve written. I’m not obligated to think it’s a good book at all. Someone else might think it’s the best book ever written.
Thanks again for chiming in with a great discussion point!
Jan 14, 2016 @ 21:42:55
Excellent post Marcy. Thank you as always. 🙂
Jan 18, 2016 @ 01:05:46
We should also accept the fact that I read a book and trash it because I have a genuinely bad response to it, and a friend trashes it based on my response without ever having read it, influencing another friend to trash it and another. This is not a good reason to trash a book (or movie). I remember sitting in a theater with Carol and two of a dearest friends during a screening of Tarkovski’s Solaris at U Texas. Our friends apologetically walked out, hating it because it was so slow. We loved every moment. I still watch it every few years. But I understand why the pace caused them to hate it. On the other hand I originally hated Big Trouble in Little China and that same couple convinced me to watch again, introducing me to a lifelong love of Hong Kong movies. We need to realize that negative (and positive) responses aren’t always rational and some aren’t even based on first hand knowledge. Just because someone hates a book doesn’t mean they’ve read it, (or in the case of my freinds and the movie) even finished it.
Jan 25, 2016 @ 14:02:04
Phillip,
I don’t accept that, but I value logic and reason over emotion. History often seems to be a pendulum (Poe’s?), swinging from irrational behavior to rational and back again. However, I fail to excuse your friends, especially because their only argument was that “it was so slow.” I might not like some creative efforts out there, but I believe I have rational reasons for my likes and dislikes. They had nothing but a perception. John Le Carre novels are slow too, but one can savor that slowness like a roast in a crock pot on a snowy afternoon,.
My opinions don’t mean I devalue emotional content. We can have rational opinions and then defend them with fervor. I can understand that part about human behavior. I write about it. What I find hard to understand is a person who only reacts emotionally without thinking, accepting another’s opinion as gospel. A large portion of humanity does that, becoming mere marionettes on the strings of the media and politicos. One period in history was called the Age of Reason. The pendulum has swung: we’re in the Age of Stupidity.
We’re technical savages now. Anti-science sentiment is common as people happily use their gadgets and gizmos without understanding one iota how they function. “Intelligent consumers” is an oxymoron in our society. A great novella by C, M. Kornbluth, “The Marching Morons,” pretty much describes the situation. It was intended to be humorous–it’s not funny anymore.
I read through your post, analyzed it, and just wanted to say that I had a problem with your attitude toward your friends. That’s a rational observation of nefarious trends in current culture where I became a bit too emotional. I apologize. You probably meant well.
r/Steve