Opinions of a Novice. Or, I Feel Grouchy Today.

You know, if I were to have written Flowers in the Attic I would have changed one thing. If I had been the author, then there would have most surely been some point where the protagonist, Cathy, found and confronted the evil grandfather that she and her siblings had been so cruelly hidden away in an attic from from. I would have loved to have read a spectacular confrontational scene where everything comes together--the grandfather, the abusive grandmother and the mother who is trying to murder her children.

Now this should tell you one very important thing. This:

I am not the author of Flowers in the Attic and nor am I qualified to be.

Flowers in the Attic is a best seller. The author (who passed away when I was five,) and publisher really aren't going to benefit greatly from my opinion. Still, I think that Cathy confronting her grandfather would have made a spectacular scene. However, this was not the author's vision when she sat in bed late at night with her typewriter night after night. A scene where the children confronted their grandfather would not only have changed the ending considerably, it also would have buggered up any chances of a sequel where Cathy gets revenge on her mother. This was also the major mistake made by the scriptwriters of the 1987 film adaption of Flowers in the Attic, which ends with the children confronting their mother on her wedding day. The ending was basically panned by fans and critics alike and for one good reason. The scriptwriters tampered with a hit. It also ruined any chances of there being a film adaption of the sequel.

So what does all this mean. Well, as you know, I review books. Lots of them. I read a lot more books and I read a lot of other people's reviews of book. The majority of reviews I come across are always going to be well-written and fair. But sometimes, I come across some things that really annoy me. As some of you may remember in my recent review of Gameboard of the Gods, I had a bit of a crack at some of the reviewers on goodreads who felt that the author should have stuck to writing YA novels about vampires. Umm, excuse me. I think the author has a right to choose what subject matter she writes about. She doesn't owe you anything. I saw a similar outcry when J.K. Rowling released The Casual Vacancy. It seemed that some readers couldn't understand why the author of Harry Potter would suddenly want to write a novel about small town politics that was, essentially, a criticism of middle-class England. Again, Rowling doesn't owe you anything. Sure, it's disappointing when your favourite author who you've grown up writes a book that you have trouble connecting with (or dare I say it, understanding,) but it doesn't mean that they should stick with one subject or do something simply because you're a fan and you think it would be a good idea. Yes, I understand that reviews are subjective, about freedom of speech and by all means people should give an honest opinion, but I do wonder at times, do some of these people actually think, or look outside of the realm of their own surprise or disappointment? Are they judging the book on its own merit, or are they judging for not being the book that they wish the author had written?

Maybe. Or maybe not.

Bonus question: Do you think authors should stick to writing in the genre they are most famous for?

Comments

Andrew Leon said…
It's Phantom Menace syndrome. "You suck, because you didn't do what I wanted you to do/do it the way I wanted you to do it!" Most people are incapable of looking beyond their own expectations and completely unable to even think about what objectivity means.

Authors should write what the want to write. Unless they've agreed to write something specific for pay. That does not mean, though, that just because you have paid for a forum project that that gives you the right to dictate future projects (again: Phantom Menace).
8 July 2013 at 04:19
Kathryn White said…
Agreed. Totally.
8 July 2013 at 19:38
Unknown said…
Okay, I really need to read some 'Andrews.' Everyone tells me I'd love it, and I've just never gotten around to it. Seriously!
9 July 2013 at 08:36
Kathryn White said…
Do it. I highly recommend the early books which were written by the original author--Flowers in the Attic & it's sequels, My Sweet Audrina and also the Casteel series (though half was finished by a ghost writer after the authors death.)
9 July 2013 at 20:26
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Peppermint Patty: I Cried and Cried and Cried

Image
Unrequited love is a common theme in the Peanuts Comics and is one that I have previously explored on this blog. We know that Lucy loves Schroeder, Sally loves Linus and Charlie Brown has a crush on the unseen, unnamed and utterly unattainable Little Redhaired Girl. But perhaps the saddest unrequited love stories from the comic is that which ran in late June 1972. It was the series of strips where the usually self-confident Peppermint Patty came face-to-face with the Little Redhaired Girl with the intention of thumping her and then something surprising happened: Here we have a usually self-confident girl, who is funny, unashamedly herself and talented at sports reduced to tears by the realisation of who she is not and never can be. I really feel for her in this series of comic strips. She knows that Charlie Brown can never love her, when he is so hung up over a girl who represents a supposedly ideal feminine beauty. Fortunately Linus, the most spiritual member of the Pean
Read more

Charlie Brown, Lucy Van Pelt and the Football

Image
One of the longest, and arguably, most infuriating, running gags in Charles Schulz's otherwise brilliant Peanuts comic strip, is where Lucy promises to hold a football for Charlie Brown and then pulls it away at the last minute, causing Charlie Brown to fall flat on his back. A typical strip looks like this: Source: Go Comics The gag is one of the darker themes in the strip. It works on the concept that every year, Lucy promises to hold a football for Charlie Brown. Every year, Charlie Brown is initially filled with doubt but is eventually pushed on by a kind of optimism that perhaps, this time, Lucy might just let him kick it after all. As a metaphor for life, it is pretty simple. It talks of the moments when we choose to put our trust in people who have let us down only to be taken by surprise when they let us down, again. Lucy is, arguably, one of the crueller characters in the comic. Described as crabby by the other characters, she is often selfish, takes delight in wilfully hu
Read more

Phrases and Idioms: Tickets on Himself

To have tickets on himself: (Australian slang.) To be conceited or vain. To have an overinflated opinion of oneself.  He's got tickets on himself if he thinks that any woman would fall for that. I was thinking about this particular bit of Australian slang the other day, after my boss said, "He's got tickets on himself," to describe the actions of a particular individual. At the time, I smiled, knowing exactly what the boss meant. Later on, I started to ponder on this unusual phrase and wondered where it might have come from. A search on google helped me find the definition, but that was about all. There are no references to it being used in pop culture or literature (if you find one, let me know,) and at the time of writing this post, Tickets on Himself was not listed on Urban Dictionary. (I tried to add it, but the fuckers rejected my definition. They probably think I have tickets on myself or something for trying to add a relatively common piece of A
Read more