clutterconqueror
Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 84
Location: Elmhurst, Il
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:59 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: | | So did this one small comment mar my enthusiasm for the story? To a degree it did. Only because I possessed enough knowledge to know the description was erroneous. Overall, it didn't lessen my enjoyment but I wish the mistake had not been made. If an author becomes so consumed with research, verifying information and generally consumed with errors will many authors soon despair of writing? Should everything be perfect or should passes be given to some things that are actually irrelevant? |
Well, I wouldn't want to put too large a burden on an author, but why bother setting the book specifically in the Keys, if a mountainous setting is needed? Or if you want to use the Keys as a setting, a simple look at an encyclopedia would help. In this case, why would you (the reader) assume that any of the other settings were described accurately? I don't understand why an author would bother including that detail if she doesn't know it's accurate?
Personally, I'm just as happy reading books set in an anonymous location with little description in the way of specific flora, fauna or geography, as I am reading books that are rich in detail. The important thing for me is that the story is good and the characters are interesting. However, while I don't get worked up over every little detail, I do expect that information that is being passed off as fact be accurate. Otherwise, don't bother putting it in there in the first place.
As I read, I know there are some authors I'm trusting to educate/inform me and others that I'm just reading for pleasure. In either case, I believe when an author chooses to detail specifics about which she's uninformed, then she's just misinforming her reader.
Joyce
_________________
http://www.shelfari.com/o1518129820 |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
