a Note to the Publishing World:

Now I know that this post is going to come across sounding bitter, resentful, and potenially pretentious, but honestly it has to be said.

WHY in the name of all that is good, do publishers think it is a good idea to release complete BUNK?

Seriously.

I am not one to easily hate a book. While I don't necessarily love every single thing placed under my nose (contrary to popular belief) I do enjoy most, and hating a book for hatings sake, is not in the mix. But, if you manage to write a piece of literature that is 900 pages of complete idiocy, I might just have a few words.
Though naming names is essentially pointless, I would like to point out a few things NOT TO DO when writing a book.

I realize that having published a grand total of zero novels, novellas, poems, essays or anything at all what-so-ever my authority is lacking on this subject, but I think the validity of common sense still stands:

If your book is long, make sure there is a REASON it is long. 900 pages is an epic, so if your plot line can be summarized in under a minute, and envolves only one half-hearted plot twist, you can probablly cut out about half of your manuscript. And that isn't to say that back story, detail and the like should be removed - on the contrary - but there is a difference between filler for fillers sake, and actually impactful writing.

On a genre specific note, if you are writing a Fantastical novel (and trust me, I don't hate all fantasy novels on principle - see 'Favourite Book' list) then you BETTER follow a set of rules. I realize that as the author you get to create these rules, and that they may or may not coincide with logic and or the natural laws, but if you intend to do something outside the norm, create a set of standards, a set of laws - the books own logic, and STICK to it. Nothing drives me more crazy then when an author creates or changes rules simply for convenience. As in: JUST KIDDING you thought the mountain was in his way? now he can FLY.
no.
you can't change things like that. If he flys now, he needs to have been able to fly all along, or acquired the skill in some pointed and/or menaingful way. That's just consistancy issues, really.

Gratuitous-ness. Oh my word, there is no point in putting in excessive violence, sex, drugs etc. just for the sake of. Obviously if the writing is specifically about that - see 'Trainspotting' for example - or if it is part of who a character is, it makes sense (its part of life, therefore makes sense) that's fine, but it is when you throw in seven instances of overly explicit scenes that really add nothing to the character development, plot, or story structure in any way shape or form that I might question your reasoning. If it is there just for shock value, what is the point, really? If I can take something out of the story, and it doesn't really effect the story - explain to me, why should it be there? I am not impressed.

And last but not least, EDITING. I've come across this in several of the books I have read recently, and maybe this is also because I have an increasing passion for editing - which sounds outrageous, how can you be passionate about something like that? (maybe the better word is aspirition) - but I find myself spotting the mistakes in things more regularly. One here and there is fine, but if I'm spotting grammar and spelling mistakes every third page, that's a problem. Edit. If you hate editing, or suck at it, hire an editor. [which I'm sure they all did... get a better one] I find this tends to happen more in books that were rushed to press, which makes sense, but is still highly unfortunate.

There are several other things that can make a book unreadable, such as lack of interesting character, etc, but these are just a few that drive me up the wall. It's extra infuriating knowing that there are plenty of good stories out there left unread and unpublished, when things like some of the above alluded to books are read in droves.
Bunk.