How do you feel about chapter length in a book? Do you prefer long or short chapters? I read on a Kindle and whenever I turn to a new chapter and see that its 5-10 mins long I get a motivation boost and keep reading, and I can read multiple like that in a row, but if it's a 40 min one, boy...I feel like time is dragging (EVEN IF I LIKE THE CONTENT OF THE BOOK LOL) I've tried reading without the info about the amount that I've read but it feels so ghostly

Is it just me? Since the start of the year, all of the books I'm reading, even those I didn't like much, I'd love to reread.

Some in the future, which is pretty normal in my opinion. Like, maybe one day I'll have a new outlook on it. A new perspective.

Most, though, and what I find weird, I want to reread right now. Already. I'm a person that loves stability and known things, but it never got to this point.

Hell, I'm not even really a rereader. I only reread one book in my entire life, up to this point. I don't get why I want to reread everything I just read immediately.

Does this happen to somebody else? Do you have any idea why?

I'm curious how much importance readers here put on an author's unique style or voice.

This came to mind while thinking over a lot of the writing advice I've seen in writer and author spaces online. Much of it is good advice, when given and taken judiciously, however much of it is also set out as prescriptive, without regard to an author's style or voice. You see it most often in things like "show don't tell" (just thrown out there, with no thought behind it) or exhortations toward the leanest possible prose, admonitions against purple prose (without understanding what it is), and so on.

I think the general effect of such advice is to try to move prose toward the most generic, commercial quality possible, and I think newer or starting authors are more likely to be influenced by the advice.

For sure, that type of prose works well for certain books--thrillers, for example, often benefit from prose that is more generic and kind of fades into the background as a vehicle for delivery the action of the plot. I also enjoy many books written in that lean, commercial manner. However, what makes many books such fun to read and such wonderful works of art are the idiosyncracies of style brought by the author, the word play, sentence and story structure, experimentation, or what have you, that makes the writing itself part of the art rather than the mere method for imparting the story's action.

Anyway, the most popular new works that I've read tend toward a more generic style, which I guess makes sense on some level. But I'm curious as to whether that is what most people here like to read.

For those who have read Dostoevsky, i began with Notes from Underground and White Nights. Loved them both. Now Im in a dilemma, I want to buy a new book, this time im going for the big ones, which should i get first: The Idiot, Demons, or Brothers Karamazov? As people who have read Dostoevsky, can u tell me which u would recommend for me, in my case?

I've been seeing a lot of dislike for certain authors because of their own personal viewpoints. This is to the point where people are getting upset hearing about books by those authors or choose to absolutely, not read anything by them.

What are your thoughts on this?

Personally even if I disagree with the author's takes, I can separate the book from the author; especially if its a work of fiction.

Even its a work of nonfiction, I would still see a reason to read their book, since how then will you understand their viewpoints, they are trying to present, if you are not willing to read it.

However, the only reason I could see not being able to, is if they are literally pushing their viewpoints down onto you in the book themselves, instead of just presenting their thoughts; fiction or nonfiction wise.

I could also see it coming down to the question is an author able to seperate their own views from their story. And yes, I believe they can for sure. The thing is, do they want to. It is their story so they can do whatever they want. And if they do decide to push their own agenda, in their own works of fiction, and you don't agree with their takes, then that is completely understandable.

I ask because I've been seeing different definitions lately.

To me, Romantasy has meant "romantic fantasy," where there is a significant romantic subplot but the fantasy aspect is dominant and no HEA is necessarily expected. Contrariwise, I see "fantasy romance" as being romance-dominant in a fantasy setting, with the usual HEA expectation.

I've seen many others use it as I do, above, but lately have also seen people using Romantasy and "fantasy romance" interchangeably as primarily Romance.

What do all of you think when you see "Romantasy." Does it mean to you that it is primarily a Fantasy or a Romance?

EDIT:

Hey, cats...thanks for all of the responses. Looks like my definition is in the minority, which is consistent with what I saw on other social media (though there seems to be enough disagreement that I can see why there is sometimes confusion in discussions around Romantasy). Much appreciated!

Maybe it's because I read a lot or because I like specificity, but I tend to steer away from books that use " X title set in a different time/place" or "X title meets Y", especially if it's the first sentence in the description. What are y'alls thoughts?

This book is lowkey fantastic so far and it’s kind of killing me the way everyone wants others’ approval and to be appreciated but also to be independent from those two things and uh yeah

I can’t wait to see what happens to the family and I also really love how much is left up to the reader’s interpretation?? Like what I said above is what I am taking away from the first 26 pages but I feel like somebody else could read this and see something completely different and that’s so cool!! (I was introduced to Virginia Woolf via Mrs. Dalloway in AP Lit and took so much away from the group discussions)

It’s hard to have eloquent thoughts about eloquent books because whatever comes out of my own brain pales in comparison to what’s on the page. Anyway yeah ily Virginia Woolf thank you for existing and writing and sharing your world with us