Talk to Me Tuesday (3).

This new fabulous meme is brought to us by Melissa at i swim for oceans.

Question: Do you have any specific literary pet-peeves in the genres you read, and why?

First, and totally unrelated: I missed last week's TTMT, so I'm glad to be participating again. Definitely love to get my brain thinking about books and the literary world I'm involved in.

Now, to answer the question.

One of my biggest pet-peeves in any genre (but which appears most in the YA literature I've come across) is the use of overly ecstatic, super girly squeals of delight or disbelief or anger, etc. You know what I'm talking about. The dialogue that is literally written as "Omigosh!!!!!" or "Ohmygawsh!" or "Ohmigod!"

You know you've seen it. It's in some of the most hyped books on the YA circuit, such as The Duff.

There's something about the use of omigod! and others that actually makes me cringe. Whether it's the incorrect grammar (although that's intentional, I know) or the pure girly-ness of it that bothers me, I'm not quite sure. I think it's a combination of the two. It just makes the character so unrelatable and fake to me. If I come across any use of the aforementioned, or a close variation, I sometimes refuse to read the rest of the book. I cannot tolerate it, unless there's something else about the story worth reading. I don't understand why it's ever necessary. It always seems to make the characters using such expressions appear unintelligent.

Talk to Me Tuesday (2).

This new fabulous meme is brought to us by Melissa at i swim for oceans.

Question: Do you prefer series or stand-alone novels and why?

Okay, awesome question, because I've been thinking about this for a while now, what with all the hubbub over paranormal romance/fantasy series. Thankfully I haven't run into many because I'm all for contemps, but still.

I will always prefer a stand-alone novel to a series. Always. For me, series rarely live up to their expectations (save for, you know, Harry Potter, which I adore). But the Harry Potter series is so developed, so thought-out, that a series was necessary; Melissa explains it best over in her answer!

I used to be the type that, when starting a series, felt the need to finish it, to read all of the later installments. Even if I disliked the first, or any in the middle. Case and point: The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants series by Ann Brashares. It was one of the first series I really, really got into. But by the end of the second book, and a little into the third, I realized the story and storytelling was falling flat. But I plowed through the rest anyway, and just like I knew I would be, I was disappointed in the ending.

I fell into several similar series ruts after that. The Jessica Darling series by Megan McCafferty, the Joe Pitt series by Charlie Huston, the Iron Fey series by Julie Kagawa, and even the Wicked Lovely series by Melissa Marr. Granted, I finished both the Jessica Darling and Joe Pitt series. But I have no interest anymore in finishing Julie Kagawa's series or Melissa Marr's series. Does that mean I'll never read them? No, because I probably will. But not right away. The point is series are no longer even able to maintain my interest and loyalty.

I know people have a beef with stand-alone novels trying to wrap everything together in a neat, tight little presentable package by the end. But not all stand-alone novels come together, and they don't always have precious, happy endings. And I'm okay with that, because I don't need stories to drag on. Of course, sometimes I wish they would, but in the end I feel like the characters had their time in their moment and in their place. There's no need to ruin that or switch it up - to do that, all I have to do is go find another book with another story with its own characters in their own moments and places. To me, this offers more, because I get a new story every time, and if I become frustrated with it, I can just move on to the next, which will have nothing to do with that frustration. Basically, I obtain a clean reading slate.

With a series, you don't get that clean reading slate. You're bothered by the same characters with the same problems, waiting for them to wrap it all up after however many installments. Sometimes they go over well, but more often than not they leave me hanging. Then when I'm finished I realize how many other stories I've been missing out on. I hate that feeling.

So for me, stand-alones all the way.

Talk to Me Tuesday (1).

This new fabulous meme is brought to us by Melissa at i swim for oceans.

Question: What books have better covers than content, and what books have better content than covers?

I absolutely love Swalling Stones by Joyce McDonald. But the cover... Sure, the book was published in 1999, but the cover is still horribly outdated, and I think that's what makes people overlook it. I've referred it to people again and again, but the cover always makes them hesitate to pick it up.

Seriously, it's a good read!

Another one published in 1999, and another unfortunate cover. Blood and Chocolate by Annette Curtis Klause is an awesome book. And an equally awesome movie (albeit very different from the book itself). I think most readers jumped on board after seeing the movie, because this cover isn't attracting anyone. It's dull, and doesn't appear to match the title in any way.

Look at that cover - gorgeous! Autumn in all its fading green and orange glory.  A serene, tree-lined path. And yet.... A Walk to Remember by Nicholas Sparks falls beyond flat. This is one of those rare times when the movie is actually better than the book. Tragic, right?

But the descriptions go on for pages and they're unimportant, and the story itself moves dreadfully slowly and comes off boring.

Oh, but that pretty cover...

Here we've got another awesome read: Acceleration by Graham McNamee. No, really. This is another awesome book. But you definitely wouldn't think so by the cover. And get this - it was published in 2005. 2005! And it looks that outdated.

I like the blues and the hint of purple, but the face and lame font need to go.

Love the book stack. Love the darkness. Love the font.

The story? Not so much. The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield has such a slow pace, and takes forever to get into the actual story. Hate to say it, but I couldn't even finish this one.

I know, I know. Meg Cabot? A bad read? Unfortunately, yes. I've been a fan of hers for years. But this was the end of the line for me.

Airhead's cover is flashy and glitzy and shiny - 3 things that I love and catch my eye. But the story, the writing, everything... none of it worked for me. This was another that I couldn't finish.

The cover may have lured me in, but I didn't take the bait.