# Fiction turn-ons and turn-offs



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

What instantly attracts you to a book, even before you know anything else about it? What key words will make you stop reading a synopsis instantly? I'm not talking about 'good characters' or 'strong plots' or those abstract things, but certain trends and tropes and even genres that attract or repel you.

Just before I start, let me disclaim that I don't think there's anything intrinsically _wrong_ with any of my 'turn-offs', just that they aren't for me. This is about personal taste, not judgement. Please don't be offended if you love the things I don't, I'm not saying you're wrong to do so  In turn I won't be offended if anyone hates the things I love.

For me, I can't resist anything with pirates in it, or anything with superheroes/superpowers--I'll always give these stories a second look. Zombies are also a huge draw for me, I'll forgive many, many sins as long as a book or movie or comic or TV show (come on, second season of The Walking Dead!) gets the zombies right (and as long--this is very important--as they CAN'T RUN). I also love seeing strong female characters kicking arse--whether literally, in an action sense, or more subtly, with intelligence or grace or cunning. Also anything with a writer as a major character--although these tend to be split between the brilliant and the utterly rubbish. Michael Chabon's Wonder Boys and William Goldman's Color of Light are two of my favourite books. (Color of Light I especially have a soft spot for, because the way the main character writes his notes for story ideas is almost identical to mine, with enthusiastic YES YES YESs and NO OF COURSE HE'S ACTUALLY X!s sprinkled liberally through.)

As for turn-offs, I've never seen the attraction for vampires, even before the recent vamplosion. Just no appeal there for me at all, a story would have to be extremely good for me to read it if it has a vampire anywhere near it (obviously I'm excluding Terry Pratchett from this, his vampires are fine and Carpe Jugulum was fantastic). Elves also I tend to dislike, as they have a tendency to be portrayed as humans except better in every possible way (again, Terry Pratchett manages to make me love the things I normally hate, basically by skewering the 'glamour' of elves utterly and mercilessly; Lords and Ladies is one of my favourite Discworld books, certainly in my top ten) (number one is, of course, Night Watch). Thrillers generally I have zero interest in, whether they be criminal, political, legal, whatever, I just can't get into them. Any novel where a character starts describing in detail the events of a crime, I just tune out--although I quite like the TV show Castle (but not for the crimes, I like the relationships and characters and Nathan Fillion, and I think I already mentioned how much I love strong female characters). Romance novels also--don't get me wrong, I love reading about all kinds of relationships, friendships, familial, romantic, but when the romance IS the story, I just can't get interested. Finally, as mentioned earlier, fast zombies. Totally ruins them for me.

I have more, but these are the big ones for me. How about you?


----------



## James Everington (Dec 25, 2010)

I'm not sure I think about fiction in the same way as you (or most people). To my mind, a _good_ writer can write about anything and make it seem interesting. I don't like boxing particularly but I love the story Golden Gloves by Joyce Carol Oates; I've no intrinsic interest in courtship rituals in the Regency but I've read Jane Austen.

I just care whether the writer can _write_, damnit. Not such a big ask you wouldn't think, but then so many can't...

(I'm with you on fast zombies though.)

James


----------



## Dan Holloway (Dec 18, 2010)

It depends what kind of mood I'm in. There are times when I feel in need of comfort and pretty much the only thing that will turn me on to a book is the name on the cover (thankfully in my not comfort moods I'm always discovering new writers).

If I'm browsing though, I'm a sucker for the traditional things - cover, for example, and any link to authors I love. I also tend to go for time periods - anything from about 1969-1989 will raise my interest levels - anything before that will make me less likely to browse on. Also settings - I'm a sucker for anything set in the art or music world


----------



## sportourer1s (Oct 2, 2010)

The selling point of many novels is simply the genre or period of setting eg Napoleonic Wars will sell instantly to those obsessed with this period.


----------



## Shelia A. Huggins (Jan 20, 2011)

Ben White said:


> What instantly attracts you to a book, even before you know anything else about it? What key words will make you stop reading a synopsis instantly? I'm not talking about 'good characters' or 'strong plots' or those abstract things, but certain trends and tropes and even genres that attract or repel you.
> 
> Just before I start, let me disclaim that I don't think there's anything intrinsically _wrong_ with any of my 'turn-offs', just that they aren't for me. This is about personal taste, not judgement. Please don't be offended if you love the things I don't, I'm not saying you're wrong to do so  In turn I won't be offended if anyone hates the things I love.


I'm not sure why but I've just never really been intersted in romance or lifestyle type stories. Not that there's anything wrong with them. It's just that the totally weird side of me rules and prefers paranormal, thrillers, suspense, and horror. But really, I'm a nice girl. I promise.


----------



## theaatkinson (Sep 22, 2010)

I'm not a romance fan, either, but Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series is still a much loved favorite of mine (at least the first 4 books)

I'm not a crime/thriller reader either. My eyes glaze over no matter how many bodies are found in the opening scene.

I love characters. Anything character driven. Joyce Carol Oates can make me read about anything, I'm sure. Alice Munro: same thing.

although I *do* love zombies. and I *was* a fan of vampire fiction until the recent glut. ugh.

great discussion


----------



## Randy Kadish (Feb 24, 2010)

Maybe I shouldn't post this because my likes in fiction are limited. 

Turn-offs: Sex, four-letter words, paranormal, literary (plotless) fiction, unsympathetic, narcissistic main characters.

Turn ons: crime, history, military, good old-fashioned plots, and of course, good, simple writing where the author establishes point-of-view and stays with it, and also where the author creates good, though flawed, characters who struggle against obstacles - inner and outer - to help others.

Yes, call me old fashioned.

Randy


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

Loves:
Apocalypse/survival scenarios
Someone trapped at a deserted place and in peril scenarios
Ghost stories
Soul-mates (I KNOW! CRINGE!)
Romance
Zombies
Mythology/Fairy Tales

Won't Read:
Cop stories
Legal thrillers
Books without strong female characters
Mysteries
Anything with too much dialect
The special chosen one who happens to have all these amazing powers that no one has had in a jillion years, but are all conveniently bundled in a 15-year old farmboy/farmgirl


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

jillmyles said:


> Loves:
> Apocalypse/survival scenarios
> Someone trapped at a deserted place and in peril scenarios
> Ghost stories
> ...


You reminded me of another pet dislike--non-standard dialogue format. I'm not talking about single quote vs double quotes, I mean something like Trainspotting where speech is indicated by a dash. Could not STAND that, even worse than the heavy dialect (which was pretty bad). Not using any dialogue markers at all is irritating, too, it just seems like pointless pretentiousness--there are exceptions, of course, and in my own writing I've used this for 'internal' or 'voiceless' dialogue, but not for characters who are speaking out loud. I've also come across books where every bit of dialogue is, bizarrely, italicised. Couldn't figure that one out at all.

I love soul mates in fiction too, as long as the actual words 'soul mate' are never mentioned  Bonus points if the soul mates in question never end up in a 'romantic' relationship.


----------



## yomamma (Feb 10, 2011)

Ben White said:


> You reminded me of another pet dislike--non-standard dialogue format. I'm not talking about single quote vs double quotes, I mean something like Trainspotting where speech is indicated by a dash. Could not STAND that, even worse than the heavy dialect (which was pretty bad). Not using any dialogue markers at all is irritating, too, it just seems like pointless pretentiousness--there are exceptions, of course, and in my own writing I've used this for 'internal' or 'voiceless' dialogue, but not for characters who are speaking out loud. I've also come across books where every bit of dialogue is, bizarrely, italicised. Couldn't figure that one out at all.
> 
> I love soul mates in fiction too, as long as the actual words 'soul mate' are never mentioned  Bonus points if the soul mates in question never end up in a 'romantic' relationship.


YES. Cockney or Scottish accents (which are very common in a lot of romances) drive me up a wall. Other people love them, though, so it's just a YMMV sort of thing. But same goes for Southern accents, now that I think about it. I once read a book where the twenty year old Texan heroine was calling everyone 'Sugar'. Uh, no.

As for the soul mates - well, I'm a hopeless romantic so I like for them to get together by the end.


----------



## VondaZ (Apr 21, 2009)

Rehashed genre plotlines are a big turn off for me. For example, in the crime thrillers, I get turned off by the damaged middle-aged detective (alcoholic or bad divorce or disgraced cop or traumatic past) matching wits with a serial killer in an attempt to redeem himself and the conflict becomes personal. Or similar situation with the female detective trying to prove herself in a man's world by denying anything that might make her remotely appear feminine (and thus just turning her into the opposite - the female cop stereotype). I'm not saying there aren't good works with these plotlines - just that there are so many of them that whenever I see them again I can't imagine this new work being anything special (and after reading enough bad examples, I don't have any motivation to go there again).

Turn ons, conversely, are new original perhaps quirky ideas that I have never seen explored before. For example, someone on a different thread on this board mentioned Shadow of the Wind - instantly, this book attracted me and I bought it even though the Kindle edition is more expensive than the print edition, which normally gives me pause. The draw was instant and I had to have it right away even at a price I would normally avoid.

I guess this is really an abstract concept too and you asked for specifics, but honestly - I don't think I can answer this question with specifics as I may not love every genre, but I will read any genre if it meets the above criteria. For example, again, I am not a westerns fan per se, so I guess I could answer this question by saying westerns turn me off, but still I recently purchased Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian without any hesitation because it seemed like something original and I don't care what technical genre it falls under. Haven't read it yet, so I can't say whether or not it succeeds in practice, but it succeeded in getting me to buy it.


----------



## JFHilborne (Jan 22, 2011)

In fiction, turn-offs for me are predictable plot-lines and endings, lack of or weak motive for a character's behavior, cliffhangers at the end of a novel (I will be pissed off rather than enticed to buy the next in the series), overworked themes, fads. Although I read mostly mystery/thriller, I'm open-minded to other well crafted stories. I do draw the line at romance - I just find them boring unless there is a compelling story besides the romance. Unexpected twists are a turn-on as well as a surprising ending. I don't want to see it coming.


----------



## Straker (Oct 1, 2010)

I will not even consider a book dealing with vampires or vampirism. The vampire genre in this decade is like the spy genre in the '60s --- so completely overdone that you wonder if anyone can ever do anything good with it again.


----------



## Nell Gavin (Jul 3, 2010)

Ben White said:


> You reminded me of another pet dislike--non-standard dialogue format. I'm not talking about single quote vs double quotes, I mean something like Trainspotting where speech is indicated by a dash. Could not STAND that, even worse than the heavy dialect (which was pretty bad). Not using any dialogue markers at all is irritating, too, it just seems like pointless pretentiousness--there are exceptions, of course, and in my own writing I've used this for 'internal' or 'voiceless' dialogue, but not for characters who are speaking out loud. I've also come across books where every bit of dialogue is, bizarrely, italicised. Couldn't figure that one out at all.
> 
> I love soul mates in fiction too, as long as the actual words 'soul mate' are never mentioned  Bonus points if the soul mates in question never end up in a 'romantic' relationship.


I know what you mean, but I was astonished when I was able to ignore it in "Angela's Ashes". But it's like any other twitchy quirk. It takes writing skill to make you look past it.

One example of this is the book "Water for Elephants". I bought a used one on Amazon Marketplace, and was distressed (and angry) when I found that the entire book was filled with notes and underlining. I read it anyway, and after a while I barely noticed. By the time I finished the book, the underlining was just a part of the whole experience. I loved the book that much.


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

Nell Gavin said:


> I know what you mean, but I was astonished when I was able to ignore it in "Angela's Ashes". But it's like any other twitchy quirk. It takes writing skill to make you look past it.
> 
> One example of this is the book "Water for Elephants". I bought a used one on Amazon Marketplace, and was distressed (and angry) when I found that the entire book was filled with notes and underlining. I read it anyway, and after a while I barely noticed. By the time I finished the book, the underlining was just a part of the whole experience. I loved the book that much.


I just had a look at Angela's Ashes and oh far out no. I could never get comfortable reading that. Maybe I'm missing out on a great book, but that kind of thing is never going to be 'invisible' for me. Maybe someday they'll bring out a new edition, "With added quotation marks for niminy-piminy nitpicky pedants!" and I'll be able to enjoy it 

I used to have a collection of Robert Heinlein stories, secondhand, which was filled with little scribbled notes in the margins. It actually improved the stories a lot for me, I remember one especially about an amazing new kind of car (made of _aluminium_ of all things, who could even imagine?) where this mysterious note writer was actually arguing with Heinlein all the way through--with citations to back himself up! Very entertaining and illuminating.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Let's see - insta-sells for me:
* Dragons
* Horses - if there's a horse on the cover I'll give it a second look
* Animals, period.  Bonus if they talk. One of my favorite series was the Mrs. Murphy cozy mysteries. The animals could talk _to each other_, but all the humans heard was barks, meows, nickers, etc. Hilarious. Murphy would be trying to tell the heroine about a clue and she'd just laugh and say "Boy, you sure are chatty tonight, Murphy." Poor Murphy 
* Magical tattoos.
* Native American stuff (culture, spirituality, etc.) Same with Asian.

Turn-offs:
* No editing. Grrr.
* Stupid, vapid protagonists.
* Bodice-rippers. I love the romance genre as a whole, but that sub-genre doesn't do anything for me.

Great topic


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

Arkali said:


> The animals could talk _to each other_, but all the humans heard was barks, meows, nickers, etc.


Oh, I _love_ this. So much opportunity for laughs and pathos. I also like stories where only one character can understand animals, especially if it's left vague whether they can actually understand the animals, or if they're just nuts  Ah, Wonderfalls was good for that, actually--my pet theory is that Jaye was a latent psychic with limited precognizance, and the talking animals was how this ability manifested itself to her.

I'm enjoying hearing about everyone's turn-ons and turn-offs, I love diversity


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I'll have to check out Wonderfalls.  Sounds interesting!


----------



## Patrick Skelton (Jan 7, 2011)

I really have to be attached to the main character by page 3.

I don't like stories that start to fast...like a fight scene, for example.  I like to get to know the main character first.  Also, if there are F-bombs right off the bat on page 1 I'm moving onto another book.  There's too much strong profanity in books these days...


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

Patrick Skelton said:


> I really have to be attached to the main character by page 3.
> 
> I don't like stories that start to fast...like a fight scene, for example. I like to get to know the main character first. Also, if there are F-bombs right off the bat on page 1 I'm moving onto another book. There's too much strong profanity in books these days...


Could not agree with you more. I definitely want to spend some time with the characters before anything intense happens to them, and if I don't care about them then what's the point?

As for swearing, I don't mind it when it's used sparingly and intelligently--a single well-placed swearword can be very effective. I'm not a huge fan of the Harry Potter books, but there's a great bit in the last book--


Spoiler



"NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU BITCH!"


. Totally unexpected and hugely effective, and (in my opinion) the most powerful moment in the entire series. If the characters had been tossing around swearwords all though the series it wouldn't have had half the impact. Terry Pratchett is also very, very good at this (like everything else)--when one of his characters swears you know they're serious (odd exception in Hogfather, when Susan uses the s-word when 'crap' or even 'grit' would have done just as nicely, but oh well, nobody's perfect, not even Pterry). Jon Stewart on The Daily Show is also good at using swearwords precisely to really drive a point home.

But vulgarity with no purpose or meaning or thought behind, vulgarity for the sake of vulgarity--or worst of all, swearing as a 'joke' where the joke is that someone's swearing--is just immature and stupid. At best irritating and distracting, at worst an entirely valid reason to hurl the book across the room (or in the case of an eBook, to delete it really, really firmly).


----------



## Emma Midnight (Feb 19, 2011)

theapatra said:


> I'm not a romance fan, either, but Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series is still a much loved favorite of mine (at least the first 4 books)
> 
> I'm not a crime/thriller reader either. My eyes glaze over no matter how many bodies are found in the opening scene.
> 
> ...


Diana Gabaldon is really a fine writer. A favorite.

I like genre fiction, but I insist it be well-written. And when I say well-written, I mean better writing than is in the average book.


----------



## Mary Pat Hyland (Feb 14, 2011)

Ben, 
_*Angela's Ashes*_ is an amazing work, well worth putting up with a dialogue format that makes you twitch. McCourt's beautiful writing, despite the bleak reality of his memoir's storyline, is something every writer can admire.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

jillmyles said:


> YES. Cockney or Scottish accents (which are very common in a lot of romances) drive me up a wall. Other people love them, though, so it's just a YMMV sort of thing. But same goes for Southern accents, now that I think about it. I once read a book where the twenty year old Texan heroine was calling everyone 'Sugar'. Uh, no.
> 
> As for the soul mates - well, I'm a hopeless romantic so I like for them to get together by the end.


Parts of Trainspotting were written in Scots. Scots is not a dialect. Scots is *not* (*looks really annoyed*) an accent. Scots (or Lallans) is a language. Other parts were simply written in English slang that as it is used in areas of Scotland.

However, I found it annoying as a Scots speaker that Irvine Welsh spelled the Scots portions phonetically, instead of spelling the words correctly. This was BEYOND annoying. It is like trying to read a novel in which English is spelled phonetically. I couldn't finish the darn novel.

I will not read novels in which Scots is misused, where an inane 'Scots accent' is used or in which medieval Scots wear kilts. I'm really p*ssy when it comes to Scottish history.

I also won't read novels that degrade women or homosexuals.


----------



## Ben White (Feb 11, 2011)

IrishMPH said:


> Ben,
> _*Angela's Ashes*_ is an amazing work, well worth putting up with a dialogue format that makes you twitch. McCourt's beautiful writing, despite the bleak reality of his memoir's storyline, is something every writer can admire.


The thing is, though, it doesn't just make me twitch. It makes me stop, every single time it's used, and think "Why on EARTH are you doing it that way?". And so I lose track of whatever's going on because I'm so distracted and irritated by the pointless lack of dialogue tags. As I said, it's probably my loss, and I know I'm being a hopelessly pedantic twerp, but I can't just force myself to get over it.



Arkali said:


> I'll have to check out Wonderfalls. Sounds interesting!


I always hesitate to recommend Wonderfalls to people because although it's one of my all-time favourite TV shows, it only has one season (and was actually cancelled before they'd even shown the whole thing). Too good to last, like so many great shows (Firefly comes to mind as another obvious example, gone all too soon).


----------



## MrPLD (Sep 23, 2010)

Straker said:


> I will not even consider a book dealing with vampires or vampirism. The vampire genre in this decade is like the spy genre in the '60s --- so completely overdone that you wonder if anyone can ever do anything good with it again.


That's okay - we're all moving to Zombies now. Soon as our last books are published for the Vampires we're off to the world decay and odour


----------



## jdj5585 (Feb 13, 2011)

I like originality, or at least the uncommon. Many might mention zombies, vampires, wizards, dragons, etc., but they're all boring to me. I usually won't pick up a book with fantastical elements unless it was recommended by a trusted friend. I've also never been a fan of happy endings--tragedy always seems so much more pragmatic and realistic to me.


----------

