As a companion to Annoying Fictional Characters , I pose the question, are there any authors who annoy you?
I nominate two, both British thriller writers.
First is Ted Allbeury for the simple reason that he creates sympathetic, likable characters, then kills them off at the end.

And then there's Colin Forbes. I went through a lot of his "Tweed" books before realising that they were all the same, Same characters, same plot - just set in different locations. And the stories are filled with the same tedious descriptive devices. Several times in each we read about a particular mannerism of a certain character.

And I nearly forgot: David and Leigh Eddings. Great books and great characters (though recent have been off the boil) but "The Rivan Codex" was pure "rip off the fans" time. This "ancient texts of the Belgariad and the Malloreon" supposedly set the background for all the preceding books, but it was tedious. It wasn't even a new adventure. I really felt that it was a cynical tactic to part loyal fans from their money.

I know I'll get a lot of flak for posting this, but I really can't stand Stephen King! What I've read of him, anyway ...

I think the first full novel of his that I read was called Rose Madder. It was a great story, very real, and I was completely involved in it ... and then all of a sudden people start jumping in and out of paintings and weird stuff started happening ... it was completely out of line with the whole tone of the book. I really was interested in finding out how the main character was going to resolve her problems and then it just seemed like King couldn't figure out how to end the story properly, or just didn't give a damn, so he just wrote in any old gibberish and counted on his good name to sell it. Pah, I say! Give me something good! I've read several other of his works since then (The Tommyknockers, The Shining, Cujo and Pet Sematary) and I haven't liked any of them. Definitely what I, as an acknowledged bibliophile, would deem "second-rate" at best!

Quote:

---

I know I'll get a lot of flak for posting this, but I really can't stand Stephen King! What I've read of him, anyway ...

---

You will not get any flack from me, I cannot stand the guy. I`ve read a half dozen of his works over the years and didn`t enjoy any of them. My parents purchased the first of the Dark Tower books for me then asked me if I had finished it,I replied yes but didn`t have the heart to tell them I didn`t like it so they purchased the second book for me. I`m up to the fourth book so far and have only read the first one!

Stephen King, to me, is either very very good or appallingly bad, with no middle ground. I do like sci-fi and fantasy though, so some of his more sci-fi ones appeal to me. I loved Rose Madder, and From A Buick 8, and some of his short stories are sublime. Some of his other stuff though, I wouldn't line a budgie's cage with! He's the only author I can think of who can write the same book twice and have it be bad both times :S

Laurell K Hamilton has peeved me a bit recently - the first ones of her Anita Blake series were brilliant, I can read some of them over and over, but they really slipped, the second last one had so little actual story line that if I'd missed it out completely I'd never have noticed. The latest one was better by comparison, but still not "up to scratch"

Sometimes I can get almost all the way through a book, and then with one line or plot twist the story just "goes off" and I will put it down and not bother to finish it. It's always disappointing when it happens. One I remember like that is called Bonesong, but I can't remember who by, it was really good right up until about the second last chapter and then UGH, one turn of the page and it was just "spoiled" as such a stupid thing happened, that the characters just wouldn't have done...

I preferred King's earlier stuff - Carrie, Salem's lot and the like. I've tried a couple of times with the Dark tower series but can't get on with them.

Another author I enjoyed initially was Dean Koontz (I am very lowbrow). 'Watchers' terrified me. However, he's very formulaic.

I've just read a couple of P D James' books. I found them very frustrating. The police interview a witness who says nothing helpful. However, we have a three page description of the witness's appearance, possible character and living room furniture. We never meet this character again and they have no relevance to the plot. Why? She half starts background stories about her detectives but then seems to abandon them and it's all a bit of a letdown, but the time I got to the end of the books I no longer cared whodunnit.

I loved "The Clan of the Cave Bear" by Jean Auel and was anxious to continue the saga in the sequels, but the author wanted to make each book a stand-alone novel and continually rehashed events from prior books in each successive one. Not just a simple reference, but long passages recounting earlier events. By the time I got to the 4th sequel I was so tired of hearing about that dang earthquake that I wanted to scream! I never read the last installment, but perhaps now, after about 15 years, I would need a refresher on some of the happenings - but the earthquake... noooooo!

Okay, at the risk of furthering the wrath. James Patterson. Ugh. Talk about churning the exact same plots with the exact same, lame attempts at suspense. It's like they are written for middle school kids, not adults. I find his books transparent to the point of boredom.