Three Reasons Why You Should Abandon A Novel You Don’t Enjoy Reading

Although I’ve already written about when and how to abandon books that you aren’t enjoying, I thought that I’d look at some of the reasons why you should do this.

After all, if you read regularly, then there can often be a feeling that you should just keep reading a book even if it’s something that you really don’t enjoy. Getting over this reflex can have all sorts of benefits, even if it takes a little while to learn how to do so without feeling like you’re doing something wrong (you aren’t! Unless the book is a set text, abandoning it is the right thing to do).

So, why should you abandon books that you aren’t enjoying?

1) It keeps you reading: If you’ve started reading a book that you don’t enjoy, then one of the first signs of this is that reading it feels more like a chore than anything else.

It feels like you’re back in school/college/university again and have to slog through one of the more dusty set texts (on penalty of getting a bad grade if you don’t). It feels like you’re wasting your time. It feels like you’ve just volunteered for something arduous. It feels like you’ve been swindled by cool cover art or an awesome blurb. I could go on…

And, when this happens, you’re probably going to procrastinate or let yourself get distracted. In other words, you’ll be doing things other than reading. Needless to say, if you want to keep reading regularly or to remember why you read regularly (hint: it’s supposed to be fun), then this sort of thing isn’t good.

So, if you want to keep reading, then don’t be afraid to abandon books that you don’t enjoy and read something that you do enjoy instead. Think of it as literary self-defence or something like that. Abandoning a book that you don’t enjoy protects your enjoyment of literature as a whole.

2) Time is more valuable than money: Even if you binge-read fairly quickly, books are still one of the most time-consuming entertainment mediums out there. Even the longest and most drawn-out of modern Hollywood movies (and don’t get me started on this topic…) are nothing compared to even a medium-length novel.

Books, of course, repay you for this by providing a type of storytelling that is deeper than the most well-written TV box sets and more immersive than the latest VR technology. When a book is good, all of this time feels like time well spent.

Time is more valuable than money. Even if you’ve splashed out on a brand new hardback novel that you later find that you don’t enjoy, then the 4-12 hours you’ll spend reading it is more valuable than the £10-30 you’ve spent on it. At the very least, you could spend that time reading a better book instead. Yes, you might feel like you’ve wasted money if you abandon a book that you’ve bought, but you’ll have saved time. And, time is more valuable than money.

So, if you really aren’t enjoying a book, then don’t feel bad about abandoning it and reading a better one instead. After all, everyone only has a limited amount of time and you might as well spend it well.

3) You can’t read every book (so, make each one matter): Following on from my last point, there are more books published within even the last decade than anyone can ever dream of reading – let alone all of the books published during the centuries-old history of the medium. It is impossible to read every book ever written.

So, if you can’t read every book, then you should focus on reading the best ones. On reading the books that you really enjoy reading. On reading the books that are so compelling, atmospheric, profound, imaginative etc.. that they take up residence in your imagination long after you’ve finished reading them. On reading the books that make you think “I’m really glad that I read this“.

So, you shouldn’t feel bad about dropping a book that you don’t enjoy. You can’t read everything. I mean, you probably won’t be able to read all of the really good books ever written (because there are too many of them), so why miss an opportunity to read another good one by reading a less good book instead?

This brings me back to the underlying theme of this article. Time spent pushing yourself to read a book that you don’t enjoy is time you could be spending reading a book that you really enjoy. So, don’t feel bad about abandoning books that you don’t like.

————-

Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

Advertisements

Obscurity And The Written Word – A Ramble

A few days before I wrote this article, I was reminded of one of the major differences between film/TV/videogames and novels. The novel that I’m (still) re-reading at the moment is a spin-off novel based on the “Final Destination” horror movie series. This was a novel that I first read in 2005/6 and, when I first found my old copy of it, I thought “I remember this! I’ll look online for other books in the series“.

It was quite an eye-opener. Whilst DVDs of the films from this series were reasonably cheap, most of the spin-off novels (all less than two decades old!) were surprisingly expensive out-of-print copies. Whilst I was pretty amazed that I unwittingly owned a book that had become a collector’s item, it also crystallised one of the major differences between prose fiction and other mediums.

Namely that it is much easier for books to be obscure than it is for stuff in other genres. After all, if you see an interesting film or play an interesting game, then there’s a good chance that quite a few people have heard of it. There will be Youtube videos about it, fan art about it and maybe even mainstream press coverage too. On the other hand, if you find a really interesting novel, then there’s a fairly good chance that most people haven’t even heard of it.

There are, of course, a lot of reasons for this. Books take more time and effort to enjoy than other mediums. Publishers’ advertising budgets are lower, so only a few big name authors tend to get promoted. The experience of reading a book is slightly different for every reader. It costs less to produce a book, so there are many more of them. Reading is an inherently solitary activity. I could go on for quite a while, but there are a lot of reasons why books will often be more obscure than things in other mediums.

And, yes, this can be somewhat off-putting at times. I mean, when I got back into reading regularly a few months ago, I soon felt the familiar feeling of disconnection that comes from enjoying a medium that really doesn’t have a mainstream fan culture in the way that games, films, TV shows etc.. do. Or, rather, one that has a very limited mainstream fan culture. Seriously, aside from classic literature and a few big name authors, books really don’t get the kind of press that games, films etc.. do.

And, yes, this can make being a reader, rather than a gamer or a film/TV buff, feel somewhat lonely. But, it isn’t all bad news. For starters, the obscurity of most novels means that there is a whole culture that is “hiding in plain sight” in the modern world. Whilst film franchises might be well-known about, there are loads of even better book franchises that no-one has heard of. And discovering one of these is like finding hidden treasure or joining a secret society or something like that.

Likewise, this obscurity also gives books a level of freedom that other mediums can only dream of. After all, the more mainstream something is, the more it has to appeal to a mainstream audience. Because most novels won’t become well-known, this gives authors a lot more creative freedom. This includes everything from the choice of main characters to the types of stories told to things like censorship-related issues (seriously, read a 1980s splatterpunk horror novel. It’ll make even the most gruesome modern horror movies look tame by comparison.)

Plus, because books don’t require things like special effects, teams of programmers etc… books can do things that films, TV shows and games can’t do. Or, to put it another way, even the cheesiest and most “low budget” novel can be considerably more impressive than even a mid-budget film, game or TV show.

This obscurity also means that books can be years ahead of other mediums too. For example, this horror novel from the mid-2000s actually seems like it’s from the mid-2000s, rather than the “1990s in disguise” that films from the time often inhabited. This sci-fi novel from 1992 reminded me a bit of a sci-fi movie from 1995-99 (like “The Matrix” or “Ghost In The Shell”). I could go on, but because books don’t have to fit into mainstream expectations, they can often be years ahead of more popular storytelling mediums.

The obscurity of books also means that, if a genre that you aren’t a fan of becomes popular, then there are still loads of other good books out there. I mean, whilst superhero films and online multiplayer games might be all the rage these days, lots of new books in all genres are still being published all the time.

So, yes, books being the most overlooked and obscure storytelling medium out there these days isn’t an entirely bad thing.

—————

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Storytelling In Books vs Storytelling On TV – A Ramble

One of the most surprising things I’ve noticed since I got back into reading regularly a few months ago was how differently I started thinking about the stories of the few TV shows I still occasionally find time to watch. More importantly, I also started to think about why TV and novels tell stories in such vastly different ways.

A few days before I wrote this article, I noticed that a gloriously silly TV show from the late 1990s/early 2000s called “Relic Hunter” was being repeated on TV. So, I set up the DVR and rationed myself to one episode per day. Yet, my reaction to seeing it again was totally different to when I first discovered a few episodes of this show on DVD in 2014.

Compared to the novels I’d been reading, the storylines in “Relic Hunter” seemed even sillier than before. Things often seemed to happen totally randomly, there were lots of fortunate coincidences etc… Yet, it was still really fun to watch.

This reminded me of something that I’d also noticed in the few episodes of a US detective show called “NCIS” I’ve seen over the past few months. Whilst a detective novel might devote hundreds of pages to the careful, logical investigation of a mystery – “NCIS” will often have the clues fall into place quickly, neatly and easily. Yet, it’s still really fun to watch.

But why is this kind of compressed, contrived storytelling so much fun to watch? I mean, books offer much deeper, richer and fuller stories. So, why are TV show stories still so incredibly fun to watch?

In short, TV show storylines are a bit like watching someone speedrun a videogame – you get to see an expert player going through a series of complex, dramatic, challenging events in an impressively quick time. It’s a demonstration of skill. This sort of thing is extremely compelling to watch.

TV show storylines are also a little bit like listening to a heavy metal song called “Bridges Will Burn” by Iron Fire. The lyrics of this fast-paced song tell an epic fantasy story in an impressively concise and fast way. For example, a a single verse might cover events that take tens or hundreds of pages to describe in a novel.

Yes, the novel would probably be deeper, more atmospheric and a much fuller experience. Yet, Iron Fire’s song feels a lot more impressive and spectacular because it expertly runs through all of this stuff in a ridiculously short time. It’s like these epic events are an ordinary, mundane routine to the narrator.

In other words, it expertly gives the impression of a story rather than telling a full, proper story. Television often does something similar to this, and it’s compelling because it not only makes the characters look like experts, but because the audience feels like they’ve absorbed a full story in a short amount of time (which makes them feel like expert audience members). So, storytelling in TV shows is more about evoking the feeling of expertise.

On the other hand, storytelling in novels actually requires expertise from both the reader and the writer. It also rewards this expertise too. This makes, say, grappling with a complex, long novel feel really satisfying. It also makes blazing your way through a fast-paced thriller novel at light speed feel satisfying too. Reading fiction requires you to reconstruct characters, locations etc.. using your imagination and to keep track of more complex stories, themes etc.. too. In other words, it is a skill and you get to show it off to yourself when you read a novel 🙂

In short, the difference between storytelling in novels and TV is that one makes the viewer feel like an expert, and the other makes the reader feel like an expert. It’s a subtle difference, but a really important one. It’s like the difference between watching a video of someone speedrunning a videogame and actually playing the videogame yourself.

————

Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂

Four Reasons Why Novels Are More Punk Than You Might Think

A while before I wrote this article, I happened to watch a rather interesting Youtube video about punk videogames. Not only was this video absolutely fascinating, but it was also fairly thought-provoking too. In addition to reminding me why I love the original “Doom” so much, it also made me think about books too.

The more I thought about it, the more… punk… books seemed to be. And, yes, even the most “mainstream” novels are still more punk than things like mainstream films, mainstream games etc…

But, why? Here are a few reasons why novels are more punk than you might think.

1) Much less censorship: This was the reason I used to read so much when I was a teenager. Books were rebellious. Unlike films, books don’t have to pass a censor before they are published. They didn’t carry patronising age restrictions, they didn’t have scenes excised by tutting people in London or any of that sort of nonsense. And, to my teenage self, this was the coolest thing in the world.

So, when I was a teenager, I read a lot. In addition to general fiction, I also read old second-hand splatterpunk horror novels I found in charity shops, I read “edgy” high-brow fiction (eg: Ballard, Burroughs, Burgess, Thompson, Kerouac etc..), I read dystopian fiction etc… This got me interested in writing, it improved my imagination and it widened my perspective on the world. And it was because books were the only uncensored storytelling medium available to me 🙂

Whether it was the result of the landmark “Lady Chatterley” trial here in the UK, or the American first amendment, books are one of the most free forms of creative expression available to us. And, with the possible exception of theatre, no other creative medium can even come close in this regard. And, if this isn’t punk, then I don’t know what is.

2) No system requirements: [Note: This part of the article was originally prepared when I still used a slightly older mid-2000s computer, rather than a vaguely modern refurbished one. Even so, the point probably still stands] A few hours before I wrote this article, I was losing interest in reading again. I was getting nostalgic about the days, not that long ago, when I played retro/indie computer games and watched DVD boxsets instead of reading books. So, out of nostalgia, I went back to one of my favourite game sites with the possible idea of looking through the “sale” page and getting a cheap copy of a game I hadn’t played before.

With all of the gaming-based videos I’d found myself watching on Youtube over the past week, I was excited about the idea of getting back into playing/reviewing more than just the occasional fan-made “Doom II” level every month. Plus, there were lots of interesting-looking indie games on the site too. Then… I looked at the system requirements for these games. And I remembered why I read books these days.

Unlike computer games, which will often require you to have a modern computer just for the privilege of playing them, all that books require is literacy. If you can read, then you can read books published last week, you can read books published decades ago, you can read pretty much anything. You can read cheap second-hand paperbacks and expensive new hardbacks.

There’s much less of a barrier to entry. If you can read, then you can read. You don’t need to splash out on expensive technology just to keep up with the latest books. Again, is there anything more punk than this?

3) Individuality and humanity: Even the most mainstream of mainstream novels are usually written by just one person. Everything inside a novel is shaped by the imagination and sensibilities of one author. This might sound obvious, but it doesn’t really apply to some other popular mediums.

After all, films are large, expensive, collaborative projects. Games even more so. There’s a lot less room for individuality, a lot less room for personal expression or anything human like that. Plus, with more people involved, more money tends to get involved too. And this usually means that there’s someone pushing for things to conform to whatever they think will sell the most copies and please the shareholders.

Books, on the other hand, have slightly less of this. Sure, there are still editors and publishers in print publishing. But, because most books rely on one person to tell the story in their own way, books often tend to have a lot more individuality and humanity than most other mediums. And, even with the blandest of mainstream novels, this is still pretty punk when you think about it.

4) It’s easier to start writing one:
All you need to write fiction is a pen and paper. Even the most primitive word-processing program on the most low-end computer will also do the job too.

Not only are the tools needed to write fiction very cheap and easily accessible, but the basic skills of writing are usually taught to everyone at school too. Yes, you’ll still need to practice and read a lot to become good at writing fiction, but anyone can get started with it fairly easily.

Now compare this to something like film or computer games. To make these things even vaguely well, you often need a lot of expensive equipment and a team of people. In other words, the barrier to entry is much higher. Whereas, writing doesn’t have any of these problems. Again, this is really punk when you think about it.

———–

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Three Thoughts About Novelisations And Spin-Off Novels

One of the things that I’ve noticed recently is that, due to things like hot weather, time stress and stuff like that, I’ve found myself reading a lot more books based on videogames, films, TV shows etc.. over the past few days. Although this is mostly because they’re easy and quick to read, it has also made me think a bit more about this somewhat overlooked genre of fiction too.

So, I thought that I’d offer a few thoughts about novelisations and TV show/movie/videogame spin-off novels.

1) They’re more about the journey than the destination:
Simply put, if someone is reading a novel that is either directly based on or a spin-off from a familiar TV show, film, game etc.. then they’re probably going to know what to expect. This familiarity is one of the things that makes novelisations/spin-off novels so relaxing and reassuring to read. However, it can make things like suspense and drama a little bit more difficult to achieve.

Good spin-off/novelisation writers will usually get around this problem by focusing more on the journey than the destination. For example, this “Aliens” spin-off novel I read a few days ago really doesn’t contain much in the way of new stuff when it comes to the plot. The basic premise is similar to another “Aliens” spin-off novel and the basic “dystopian villain vs. plucky rebels” storyline is a classic sci-fi/fantasy staple. Yet, this novel was extremely enjoyable to read. But, why?

Simply put, the novel is written in a rather thrilling and atmospheric way. There are lots of mini-cliffhangers, enough characterisation to make you care about the characters, some dramatic locations etc… In other words, although the story itself is reasonably familiar, everything along the way is still dramatic and interesting enough to be worth reading.

A better example is probably S.D. Perry’s “Resident Evil: The Umbrella Conspiracy“. Even though I’ve read this novel before and played the videogame it was based on, it was still gripping enough for me to re-read it in a single day. This was all because of the writing, characters and structure. In other words, this novel is written in a reasonably atmospheric way, it is structured like a good thriller novel and there’s lots of extra characterisation when compared to the source material.

So, yes, these types of novels are more about the journey than the destination.

2) They age far better: Another awesome thing about novelisations and spin-offs are how timeless they are. After all, film and television have only been around for approximately a century or so and computer/video games have only been around for a few decades. The written word, on the other hand, has been around for millennia.

What this means is that novelisations of slightly older things can still seem fresh, new and interesting when compared to their original forms. After all, the written word has had much longer to refine and develop itself – so an old novel can easily be more spectacular than an old film or videogame. After all, it doesn’t have to worry about things like special effects, the state of computer graphics at the time etc…

3) Spin-off novels are like new episodes: This one is more about spin-off novels than traditional novelisations, but it’s really interesting nonetheless. Back in 2011-13, I went through a phase of reading “Star Trek: The Next Generation / Deep Space Nine/ Voyager” spin-off novels.

One of the cool things about these novels is that very few of them were directly based on episodes of these TV shows, with most of them telling new and original stories featuring familiar characters. And, since I’d already watched most episodes of these shows, the idea that there was a giant wealth of hundreds of extra “episodes” out there was really cool.

So, finding spin-off novels based on TV shows can almost be like finding entire new seasons of a TV show, new feature-length episodes and all sorts of cool things like that. Plus, since spin-off novels usually tend to be written in a slightly more informal and “readable” way, they’re often as relaxing as watching a TV show but with all of the added depth and sophistication that can only come from the written word 🙂

———–

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

Two Reasons Why Writers Include Metafiction In Their Stories

If you’ve never heard the word “metafiction” before, it’s a fancy word for “stories about stories”. It can also refer to references to other stories within stories. And, one of the interesting things I’ve noticed since I got back into reading regularly a few months ago is how often it can appear in novels.

Yes, it doesn’t always appear – but I’ve seen it in sci-fi novels like Neal Stephenson’s “The Diamond Age“, noir/horror novels like Jack O’Connell’s “Word Made Flesh” and dark fantasy novels like Clive Barker’s “Weaveworld” – and it’s something that always catches me by surprise whenever I see it.

So, I thought that I’d list two of the main reasons why writers include metafiction in their stories.

1) Influences and culture: Generally speaking, if someone is writing fiction then they’ve probably read quite a bit of it too. And, whilst this won’t teach you literally everything about writing, there is no better way to learn what does and doesn’t work in fiction than reading lots of it. Likewise, if you want to develop your own unique writing style and sensibility, then you need to read lots of different things by different writers.

As such, writers can end up including metafiction in their stories as a way of paying tribute to the writers who have influenced them and/or made them interested in writing. This is exactly the same as film-makers and game designers including references to other films/games in their work in order to both provide something for their fans and to tip their hats to their inspirations.

But, it is more than this. It’s also about culture too. Just like how films from the 1980s/90s onwards will often reference older films out of a sense of tradition and to reward those knowledgeable about the history/culture of cinema, writers also do something similar – but in a more general way.

In short, whilst novels are one of the older storytelling mediums out there, they aren’t really part of popular culture in the way that films and videogames are. Because there are so many novels out there and they aren’t usually that widely-advertised, it’s very easy to find lots of awesome novels that no-one around you has even heard of before. As such, reading can feel like a somewhat lonely activity when compared to watching films or playing games.

So, including stuff about the magic of stories, reading etc.. in stories can be a way for writers to make their readers feel like part of a culture or community. It’s kind of like how the indie computer game “Retro City Rampage” includes lots of references to other obscure indie games – these games may not be ultra-popular, but they are referenced in a way which makes them seem like they are. It’s all about creating a feeling of culture and community.

2) What books can do (that everything else can’t): Another reason why writers include metafiction in their stories is because it allows them to highlight what books can do that no-other medium can. Every medium has it’s own strengths and failings, and creative people will usually find interesting ways to highlight these strengths.

For example, a well-edited and visually-striking montage sequence in a film can’t easily be replicated in a stage play. Comic makers can use things like panel layouts and art styles in inventive ways that film-makers can only dream of. Game designers can use gameplay mechanics to create experiences that can’t appear in any other medium. I’m sure you get the idea.

And, the written word can do so much stuff that visual media can’t. It is a truly unique medium in a lot of ways. Not only is it ten times more vivid and immersive than even the most modern virtual reality games, but no two readers will imagine/interpret a story in exactly the same way as each other. Books can do things like altering the rate that time flows (where the events of a single second can take several pages, and a century might be covered in a single sentence). Books can linger in the imagination like nothing else can. I could probably go on for a while.

So, yes, writers include stuff about stories in their stories because it’s a way of showing what books can do that nothing else can. And, as I mentioned earlier, this also probably has something to do with how books are often overlooked in modern popular culture too.

————–

Anyway, I hope that this was interesting 🙂

The Joy Of….”Middle Brow” Fiction

Well, for today, I thought that I’d talk about one of my favourite types of fiction – “middle brow” fiction. This is the type of fiction that includes all of the thrills, creativity and cool stuff you’ll find in “low brow” fiction, but with the level of characterisation, linguistic skill, thematic complexity, descriptive depth etc.. that you’ll find in more “high brow” fiction.

It is quite literally the best of both worlds and it is utterly awesome. Yet, it is annoyingly difficult to define. Ok, I could probably list examples of it that I’ve read (like “Box Nine” by Jack O’Connell, “Snow Crash” by Neal Stephenson or, the novel I’m reading at the moment, “Weaveworld” by Clive Barker), but it’s really difficult to spot it at a glance.

I mean, it’s easy enough to see whether a novel is a fun “low brow” thriller/horror/detective/sci-fi novel or a prestigious, intellectual and realistic “literary” novel just by looking at the cover. One has excitingly dramatic cover art and the other usually has trendily boring cover art that is filled with adoring critic quotes. But, things that fall in between these categories are usually a little bit more difficult to spot at a glance.

But, I guess that this is part of the charm of “middle brow” fiction – that brilliant sense of surprise when you sit down to read what you think will be an ordinary thriller, horror, sci-fi or detective novel only to find that it’s a lot more atmospheric, deep, intelligent, unique or vivid than you had expected 🙂 Or, when you think “I should read something intellectual“, only to find that the book you’ve pushed yourself to read is a lot more gripping than you’d expected 🙂

Yet, this type of fiction is really difficult to define. Is it genre fiction with extra depth and complexity? Is it literary fiction with an actual plot, some imagination and a proper narrative drive? Is it both of these things?

Surprisingly, it’s actually easier to think of non-book metaphors for it. It’s kind of like the equivalent of a more prestigious popular TV show like “Game Of Thrones”, “Twin Peaks” or “Boardwalk Empire” – which contains enough depth and complexity to be more than mindless Hollywood entertainment, whilst also still being entertaining enough to make you want to binge-watch entire seasons of it.

Another interesting thing about “middle brow” fiction is that it also reminds us of what popular fiction used to be like. Yes, there’s a lot to be said for more fast-paced, informal and “matter of fact” modern narration – it keeps the story wonderfully gripping and it also means that modern books can compete with smartphones, the internet, videogames etc.. for people’s attentions. But, at the same time, it can also lack a certain depth and atmosphere that even the most “low brow” of older novels often used to have.

To give you an example, take a look at “Erebus” by Shaun Hutson (1984). This is a fast-paced, ultra-gruesome horror novel about zombie vampires that I first discovered when I was a young teenager during the early-mid 2000s. It just seemed like a really cool, fun and rebellious novel back then. But, when I re-read it as an adult, I was surprised by how complex the writing sometimes was when compared to some of the more contemporary novels I’d read in the meantime.

Here’s a quote from “Erebus” to show you what I mean: “Elsewhere in the office things were at various stages of organized pandemonium as other reporters rushed to complete their assignments, hampered by the fact that their typewriting dexterity had not yet extended to more than one finger“.

This was “low brow” popular entertainment in 1984! A mere 35 years ago, a novel containing complex sentences like this was seen as a mindless “everyday” way to pass the time (like videogames, Facebook or Youtube would be these days). Just think about that for a second.

Another cool thing about reading “middle brow” fiction is that it’s kind of like a reward for having to read more dull “high brow” fiction in the past (eg: the set texts at school/college/university). Thanks to your prior experience, not only can you read it with relative ease – which feels like playing a videogame you’re really good at- but you also actually have fun at the same time. It’ll make you see the wisdom of having to slog through the works of writers like Shakespeare, Bronte, Dickens, Austen, Fowles, Woolf etc.. when you were younger.

Of course, as a side note, one amusing irony is that Shakespeare and Dickens were, at the time they were originally writing, “low brow” popular entertainment. I mean, just do some research into 16th century theatre audiences (eg: wild, rowdy, chaotic etc..) or into how many of Dickens’ novels were originally published (eg: popular serials in newspapers/magazines).

Anyway, “middle brow” fiction shows you that reading all of those boring books means that you can breeze through much more interesting books with a sense of ease and skill that may very well catch you by surprise and make you feel like some kind of expert or intellectual.

In short, “middle brow” fiction is totally and utterly amazing. Yes, it was probably more popular in the past than it is now (I mean, all of the examples I listed earlier in the article come from the 1980s/90s) but – in a landscape where popular modern novels often seem to be sharply divided between grim detective thrillers/ Fifty Shades Of Twilight and pretentious plot-less “literary” novels, there has never been more of a need for intelligent, well-written novels with a good gripping plot 🙂

———-

Anyway, I hope that this was useful 🙂