What is a good book

this piece was written a few years ago. my taste has evolved and changed somewhat since; still this represents my "gut feelings".

What is a good book?

I. About fictions

It is a very subjective matter to judge a book. This belief makes me feel pretty comfortable talking about it. There are certainly objective criteria; but then, I get to decide which books fit them and which do not.

I will not write a comprehensive piece, but a few key points I feel particular about. I will make my points mainly by citing negative examples; the good ones can be found on my bookshelf.

-Good stories and good ENDs. Twists and turns and branches, the more the better.

It seems hardest to end a book. Many a book starts spectacularly, develops smoothly and falls apart in the end. Often, a bad ending suffices to reduce the whole work to mediocrity. This problem is particularly obvious and fatal for thrillers. I enjoyed "Marathon man" (by William Goldman) literally to the last page, only to be disappointed, because the unfolded plot is not nearly as intriguing as the whole book has alluded to.

Good fictions teach us one thing or two; but they are NOT tools to express belief or ideas. John Irving's "Cider house rules" was well written with interesting characters and stories. Yet it was designed by the writer to illustrate his stand on abortion. The twists and turns served his points fine but look reluctant and deliberate despite his exceptional skill.

Big themes do help novels get recognized more readily. But I do not credit them as criteria for quality.

-Memorable characters. Sometimes good stories are sufficient to make a good book. The finest books, however, always have distinctive characters, who, like real people, are unique, have lives of their own and make stories realistic. On the flip side, fictions with stereotyped characters are the most common form of second-rate books. Michael Crichton's "Rising sun" defines this category well.

-Good language and style. Every writer, good or bad, has his own style. What is considered good is quite subjective yet recognizable and comes in different forms. I pretty much feel it, probably through the choice of words, fluency of sentences, and cohesiveness of the whole work. One notable flaw is redundancy - a writer uses certain words or expressions over and over again - a sign of paucity. Sue Grafton might be a fine writer but I could not even stomach her alphabetical titles: A is for apple; B is for bat...(These are actually better than hers).

-That Magnetic Sensation. I cannot find appropriate words to describe this. Many modern novels grab and surround you with certain emotions, exotic, intense or mystic. Generally, these books are well written and stylish (to have been able to achieve such effect) yet they tend not to stay in one's memory. I enjoyed Toni Morrison's novels while reading; almost immediately afterwards, however, I was left with a blur and couldn't recall anything substantial.

They are big prize grabbers, though. It seems the best formula to win something is to have a sensational style and a larger than life theme. Toni Morrison won both Nobel and Pulitzer. "The English patient" (by Michael Ondaatje) also fits neatly in this category. If I have to choose, however, I usually prefer a poorly-written thriller to a stylish emptiness.

A few words about writers. Having served as a self-appointed authority, I have to emphasize my true admiration for those who can write fictions (or those who can paint or write music notes...). Novels are works of creativity and imagination. And for me, I can only imagine what is missing in my own brain....