What makes a book good in your opinion?

[Xanderx]

As a novel reader and a comic reader, I’ve always wanted to know what exactly makes me want to read more, for me it’s when the characters are written in a way that keeps me hooked, or the story keeps getting better or the cliffhangers just make me want more. So I’m wondering what makes you see a book or write a book and make you want to keep going ?

 

[Racosharko]

Nothing to do with the book, just what I am feeling at the thyme.

 

[Eldoria]

Well, the answer depends on how you define a good book.

Literally, a good (fiction) book is one with thematic depth, an original premise, human and complex characters, an unpredictable plot and conflict with few (or no) plot holes, and vivid worldbuilding.

However, from the perspective of causal readers... a good book is one that touches and fulfills their emotions (read: entertains).

For me, a good book is a story with thematic depth concerning the human side (whether dark or light) delivered in an entertaining manner.

In this way, we are not only entertained by fiction but also gain moral lessons that help us better understand what it means to be 'human'.

 

[JordanIda]

Great books are the ones I need to read again.

The ones in which every word leads to a great ending that leaves me knowing more about the world and my place in it.

 

[AliceMoonvale]

For me personally, I think a good book is one I DON'T want to read again.
Not because it was bad, but because it was so good the first time, I don't need to read it again. It's there in my head.

For example, the Warrior Cats series by Erin Hunter.

When I was in high school, I LOVED this series so much I bought every book. To me it was unique, creative and emotional, despite it not having any relatable human characters. Just cats. Sure, might be just my bias because I'm a crazy cat lady myself, but I got so immersed in those books. I loved the lore, all the characters that I became emotionally invested in or devastated by certain plots/events. And for exactly that reason, I would probably never re-read it. Why? because I already experienced it, I won't be able to fully experience it again. I don't want to go through all the frustrating parts, the depressing parts all over again only to know how it ends.

Of course, it all really depends. There might be some stories you revisit after a loooong time because of nostalgia.
Warrior cats might get a brief revisit from me, who knows.

Tl;dr: Books that are memorable af that hit hard after many years.
Eldoria summed up most of what I'm thinking in a way my autistic brain cannot.

 

[RepresentingCaution]

Identifying with the main character, feeling like I could be her

 

[LiteraryWho]

As a novel reader and a comic reader, I’ve always wanted to know what exactly makes me want to read more, for me it’s when the characters are written in a way that keeps me hooked, or the story keeps getting better or the cliffhangers just make me want more. So I’m wondering what makes you see a book or write a book and make you want to keep going ?

Good writing makes me want to read more, bad writing makes me want to stop. For a less circular reason, I hate when the narration wastes my time with pointless description of the scenery, I hate it when the POV character is whiny, stupid, or boring, and I hate it when characters mill around on set doing nothing. Stories which do the opposite of all that I keep reading, and stories which do not I will stop.

I also don't like it when author's drag out the plot, which is why I don't really like WN.

 

[foxes]

I have a lot of requirements. But I do have preferences. One of them is an interesting, contradictory hero, struggling with his own or societal prejudices, finding himself in an awkward position. And preferably some exploration of the world. But that doesn't mean every such comparison will be good. Often, stories I like don't appeal to the general public, which is unfortunate for a writer.

 

[Exiled_From_Earth]

For me, the primary thing is just for the story to be compelling or interesting. That can be done in any number of ways, but I think fiction works best when it explores the human experience in a unique way.

For example, in "The Metamorphosis" by Franz Kafka, the main character awakens as a bug one day and slowly grows to feel like he is becoming an inhuman freak and a burden to those around him. That situation could never happen in the real world, but those feelings of discrimination and being an outsider are a common part of being human.

In a similar way, I think examining the inhuman experience works just as well. I hope that I never meet a person as terrible as Patrick Bateman from "American Psycho," but at the same time, that movie both interests and horrifies me so much because I never have encountered someone like that.

 

[Snake99]

that makes you feel strong emotions, it can be drama, suspense, sadness, adrenaline or even horny if you write something sexy, whatever it is but they must be strong emotions, a good writer is a drug dealer

 

[Xanderx]

Well, the answer depends on how you define a good book.

Literally, a good (fiction) book is one with thematic depth, an original premise, human and complex characters, an unpredictable plot and conflict with few (or no) plot holes, and vivid worldbuilding.

However, from the perspective of causal readers... a good book is one that touches and fulfills their emotions (read: entertains).

For me, a good book is a story with thematic depth concerning the human side (whether dark or light) delivered in an entertaining manner.

In this way, we are not only entertained by fiction but also gain moral lessons that help us better understand what it means to be 'human'.

Great books are the ones I need to read again.

The ones in which every word leads to a great ending that leaves me knowing more about the world and my place in it.

I feel you, as a book work myself I love reading books that leave me fascinated or wanting to know more.

For me personally, I think a good book is one I DON'T want to read again.
Not because it was bad, but because it was so good the first time, I don't need to read it again. It's there in my head.

For example, the Warrior Cats series by Erin Hunter.

When I was in high school, I LOVED this series so much I bought every book. To me it was unique, creative and emotional, despite it not having any relatable human characters. Just cats. Sure, might be just my bias because I'm a crazy cat lady myself, but I got so immersed in those books. I loved the lore, all the characters that I became emotionally invested in or devastated by certain plots/events. And for exactly that I reason, I would probably never re-read it. Why? because I already experienced it, I won't be able to fully experience it again. I don't want to go through all the frustrating parts, the depressing parts all over again only to know how it ends.

Of course, it all really depends. There might be some stories you revisit after a loooong time because of nostalgia.
Warrior cats might get a brief revisit from me, who knows.

Tl;dr: Books that are memorable af that hit hard after many years.
Eldoria summed up most of what I'm thinking in a way my autistic brain cannot.

I love cats as well pookie ?

Identifying with the main character, feeling like I could be her

Or him, but ya

Good writing makes me want to read more, bad writing makes me want to stop. For a less circular reason, I hate when the narration wastes my time with pointless description of the scenery, I hate it when the POV character is whiny, stupid, or boring, and I hate it when characters mill around on set doing nothing. Stories which do the opposite of all that I keep reading, and stories which do not I will stop.

I also don't like it when author's drag out the plot, which is why I don't really like WN.

Omg i get you I hate it when they take too long describing the scenery, I also hate when the characters have no life and just do nothing, it annoys me, I rather we have like an idea of what’s going to happen even if the plot is taking a long time, thats why I like prologue’s sometimes.

that makes you feel strong emotions, it can be drama, suspense, sadness, adrenaline or even horny if you write something sexy, whatever it is but they must be strong emotions, a good writer is a drug dealer

No way you said a good writer is a drug dealer ??

 

[CharlesEBrown]

A good book is one that is either well-written, or has such engaging characters that writing flaws are easy to overlook.
A GREAT book is one that somehow resonates with the reader - and some books may be great at one point in your life, and not at another.

For example, most people I know who've heard of Lloyd Alexander love his Chronicles of Prydian series, based on Celtic mythology and focusing on a simple pig farmer, Taran (Disney made a movie merging the first and last books, as The Black Cauldron). I hit them at the wrong point in my life - the writing was too "juvenile" for me to really enjoy, and I didn't know enough about the mythology to appreciate how he had woven it in, but the character of Taran (whom he did not create but did breathe new life into - Taran is kind of a prototype for young King Arthur, right up to pulling a mystical sword from an odd hiding place to prove he's noble and was mentioned in some older myths;, much as the Silver Chalice was merged with the Holy Grail in the Arthurian sagas as well) was fascinating so I made it through the series. If I'd encountered it about three years earlier, or about five later I'd probably count it as one of the greatest series I'd ever read.

Likewise, I never got into Starship Troopers, reading it on the heels of Heinlein's juvenile fiction (which, starting with The Star Beast, had been my introduction to science fiction) before I was ready to read his more adult stuff. On the plus side, I was not as annoyed by the movie as most of my friends, who all LOVED the book and hated the film... The first time I read Heinlein's Time Enough for Love, I was almost old enough to "get it" but thought it was kind of a rambling mess. The first time I read Stranger in a Strange Land, I thought it was a work of true genius except for the strange ending. I re-read both for a class in college, and, just like our teacher, found my views of both switching - TEfL is probably one of Heinlein's greatest books BECAUSE it manages to ramble a lot yet maintain a cohesive story (and the character of Lazarus Long, aka Woodrow Wilson Smith, admits this is due to the influence of another great piece of literature, One Thousand and One Nights) while the cynicism and bitterness of Stranger makes it kind of a tough re-read.

 

[L1aei]

Didn't The Black Cauldron film get hijacked? I remember that from somewhere and that's why it didn't do as well as it could have.

But, yeah, a good story in my opinion is one that introduces different perspectives. If I'm reading the same old responses and reactions, then it gets old. Simple as that.

Keep my interest by changing up the chemistry.

 

[Envylope]

A good book has a beginning, middle, and end. In that case, I have written only a couple good books.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

Didn't The Black Cauldron film get hijacked? I remember that from somewhere and that's why it didn't do as well as it could have.

Hijacked? Not sure what you mean. I heard that, originally, they planned to do the whole series of five novels as three films, but then budget concerns led them to just smoosh the endpoints together. I think it was Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of Nimh that got hijacked and became The Secret of Nimh (out of fear that the inspiration for the series, the group the author had briefly worked for, the National Institute of Mental Health, might take umbrage), if I understand the term correctly in context.

 

[L1aei]

Hijacked? Not sure what you mean. I heard that, originally, they planned to do the whole series of five novels as three films, but then budget concerns led them to just smoosh the endpoints together. I think it was Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of Nimh that got hijacked and became The Secret of Nimh (out of fear that the inspiration for the series, the group the author had briefly worked for, the National Institute of Mental Health, might take umbrage), if I understand the term correctly in context.

You are most likely correct. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: you have far more knowledge in this area than I ever could keep up with; my memory is not improving as I age and... commit to other unhealthy habits.

 

[CharlesEBrown]

You are most likely correct. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: you have far more knowledge in this area than I ever could keep up with; my memory is not improving as I age and... commit to other unhealthy habits.

My memory seems to be... uh... what were we talking about?

 

[L1aei]

My memory seems to be... uh... what were we talking about?

Thank you. I appreciated the laugh.