BTT: Well, Since You Asked…
Bookish Sarah asks:
What are your literary “pet peeves”?
Let’s see. There are subjective and objective items on my list, here.
The obvious objective pet peeve is poor grammar or typos the editor missed. Grammar, you say, could be slightly subjective given the voice or attempted irony but I’m talking about the stuff that straight up defies grammatical sense. The biggest offender? I can not handle it when I read “I could care less”. What you mean, when implying indifference, is that you “Could NOT care less”. Therefore, you are saying the opposite of what you mean.
Also, do not get me started on “irregardless”. “Regardless” will do just fine as a dismissive concept. Doubly negating the issue makes me very confused.
When it comes to subjective stuff, I also have certain REAL words on my hit list (like the dreaded “plethora”that sounds like a duck on his death bed) but I feel justified in my dismissal as I have pretty, more palatable alternatives at the ready (In the case of “plethora”, anyone who uses “myriad” is a hero in my book. Love that word!)
The bigger subjective issues are less pet peeves and more so personal reading preferences.
I am not a big fan of books featuring women (and on rare occasion, men) who let themselves be mistreated for the sake of a relationship. Writing about actual abuse specifically is different than the stereotypical chick-lit heroine written toward pining after a guy “out of her league” or who makes her work for attention and affection as if this is the only way to be I’m partnership with people. Throwing your life away or bending over backward and calling it normal just so you don’t have to sleep alone.
Likewise, general self-deprecation (be it relationship oriented or more widespread) is to be avoided, as well, or I’m just going to shut the book.
Oh Lordy, I guess that’s all. I didn’t know I had quite so much to say on the topic!