Gilligan's Island Syndrome and authors

On the Horseclans thread, somebody made a comment that the books began to follow a predictable pattern. I've seen this with other authors. For example, Dean Koontz. I got tired of reading Koontz when I figured out most of his books were:

Couple, usually with kids, gets unexpectedly involved in some type of supernatural or superscientific trouble. They are frequently from out of town. Lots of bystanders get killed until the protagonists figure out the Achilles heal of the bad guy(s).

Terry Goodkind's books started to do something similar. Ultimate badguy discovers a NEW weapon/spell/power/servant that is totally capable of wiping out everything. The protagonist will discover some new skill or ability he didn't know he had to save the day. Oh, and the protagonist's significant other will get in mortal danger.

What other authors tend to fall into this trap (call it the Gilligan's Island syndrome)?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

P.D. James. Mystery writer who breaks the cardinal rules of mysteries - she withholds key information in every book I've read in order to blindside the reader about halfway through with a clue that renders the previous part of the book largely irrelevant. The most egregious case was where her detective was vacationing and happened to randomly chance upon a series of crimes in the area - the blindsider in this case was that he was never on vacation at all, he was sent to investigate a situation that he already knew the who the criminals were and what they were up to. The only mystery came from the author intentionally holding back key information.

Ten years later, and I'm still pissed.
 

IMO, all successful mystery and thriller authors fall into trends, my enjoyment of the author just depends on my tolerence for the trends. Harry Potter books follow a formula and Rowling uses the same literary/plot devices in her books, but I still enjoy them, even though if I spend time over analyzing them I can accurately predict what will occur.
 

I think Digital M@'s got a point there. But there are times when the formula is more obvious than others. For example, I really enjoyed PD James's mysteries and didn't find her actual mystery formula too obvious. Instead I got tired of her Inspector Dalgleish mysteries because I found the lead character too relentlessly depressing - I just wanted to shout at him, "Okay, so your wife died, get over it already!" ;)

OTOH, I couldn't even finish either Terry Goodkind's or Robert Jordan's books because the formula seemed to be more important than the characters. That's when an author's formula becomes a problem for me. If an author tries to fit the formula to the characters I can usually still enjoy it, but when they try to fit the characters to the formula I lose interest.
 



It occurs to me that even the worst formula abusers seem to be...popular. I guess the stereotype is the Harlequin romance. How many different ways can you tell the same story? Many, many people seem predisposed to familiar patterns in their reading.
 

L.E. Modesitt, Jr.

1) Hero does not want to be a hero, but is forced into it, because it has to be done. You as the reader know this because the hero will say as much to anyone who is not an enemy or completely beneath his notice, and when speaking to enemies or those completely beneath his notice (or whenever he is alone) will be thinking it.

2) Hero gets special powers, far and away more powerful than anyone on his side. Eventually, far and away more powerful than anyone on any side. Sometimes, the hero gets even MORE special powers (so we have three stages of killing machine, uber-magic/super-science killing machine, and, let's face it, GOD).

These special powers are to be used for 1) Killing people, 2) Sneaking around (when the hero doesn't want to deal with bad guys or peons at the moment) and 3) Eavesdropping (where the reader can then hear about how great the the peons think the hero is). More minor uses include movement and healing.

3) Hero is usually also a much better physical combatant than anyone else, ever. You can tell this because lots of people will try to kill the hero. And usually, early on before the hero gets mindboggling powers, the hero has to kill them physically. Luckily the hero is either an unarmed martial arts expert, a sword master, a crack shot with a gun, or some combination of the three. (The exception I can think of is the Soprano Sorceress. The poor woman has to rely upon magic to kill thousands and thousands of people and on allied soldiers to protect her physically).

4) The hero is modest about all these things. The hero often refuses the title of "hero". This is the only time when the hero will lie.

5) Hero is otherwise pathalogically vs. actual lying, but will often "lie by omission", telling what is strictly the truth, but leaving a lot of stuff out and allowing enemies (and allies) misinterpret the information. This is because the hero is ethical. :)

6) The hero will kill a LOT of people. I mean a living boatload. Lowering continents into the ocean or destroying entire planets, if necessary. Whole races may die, in order to preserve even more people. This is to show that the hero sometimes has to be ruthless, in order to to the right thing. Frequently, problems arise when other non-heroes refuse to do the right thing, because they are lazy, stupid, or just unwilling to sacrifice themselves. Fortunately, the hero will sacrifice them anyway, all for the greater good. :)

7) The hero will end up either being uber-ruler (very rare), or simply retiring back to a quiet domestic life, because all of this killing weighs upon the hero's conscience. We know this because the hero will tell his/her loved ones this, and will think it a lot. This is because the hero is ethical. :)

8) The hero is usually environmentally friendly, and not afraid to be preachy about it. I mean, when the hero is busy killing people, of course.

9) Often, the novels will show other character P.O.V.'s. Usually this is the enemies underestimating the hero (until near the end of the book, when some of the surviving enemies realize they have underestimated the hero and say as much), or allies saying "Wow! Thank god we have this hero around, because otherwise we would all be dead!"

Reading one of his novels is relaxing; like popcorn for the mind. I don't have to think -- I am just carried along on the slowly winding lazy river of the well-worn plot, to a happy conclusion. All enemies dead, and hero having a quiet happy life.
 


Piers Anthony is a VERY formulaic writer. Thats what eventually killed off my interest in his books. His books at least within a series tend to all be written with the same sequence of events. He just plugs in different characters and changes the exact events.

I'm not sure I'd call Robert Jordan formulaic though. He seems to be trying very hard to break new grounds by having nothing happen in as many pages as possible. You could fit the entire Elric of Melnibone saga in his last book, yet more happens in one chapter of the Elric stories than in that entire novel.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top