in novels ? Many writer at least go through their own book at least 10 times or more but still contains huge number of plot holes. Why is it so? Not just writer, every book before release in market is read by agent, editors, publishers, friends etc etc. Even after going through with such microscopic attention, book still contain so many plot holes. It doesn't make sense to me. I recently re-read Deathly hallows (6th time) and i can't believe that even after reading DH so many times, i notice more and more plot holes . DH is just a example, nearly every book i have read have lots of plot holes. Why is it so?
I think it is less a matter of things being missed in reviews of the manuscript but a matter of not overcrowding a story to plug all the holes. To do so would make a good read just long and tedious in many instances. To that end, I think it is a balance of a moving story and plot cohesion. To keep the story moving, sometimes you need to not worry about all holes. Focus on the big points and make sure that any holes are small.
No, i am talking plot holes which are actually pretty bigger ones. Which many times Ruin story for me. First of all,my view as reader is that, if you can't defend plots properly then instead of continuing with plot holes it is better to think about new plot .
because the author has answers and simply forgot to write them down? Sometimes as a writer, I think I have written something in when I actually missed it, and even on a re-read through, the info is still assumed in the authors own mind, so is read when they read it, whether it is actually on the page or not. Or it could be some info was cut later to meet a word count, and info was thought redundant. Or maybe it just wasn't thought out too well, and author had a deadline to meet.
Author might miss it, but not other people who read the book before it get published like editor or Agent I don't understand what you mean by Deadline and Word count. Plz explain it.
It's like planning a perfect murder. There is always some detail that slips through, and a sufficiently detailed-oriented reader will find it. If you've ever visited a fan forum for any TV series or movie, you'll see people with nothing better to do than analyze every frame for inconsistencies, internal to the story or against the overall canon of the series. Some are serious logical flaws, but most are absurdly trivial. So yes, you will find plot holes. But for each one, you have to ask yourself. Is it an echoing plot chasm, or is it an infinitessimal nitpick?
word count is number of words in the novel. Every publisher sets word counts for their submissions, to give authors a guideline for how big they will print. A deadline is a time limit for writing. If they have a publisher waiting on them, they have to finish a book before a certain date. Sometimes a book will get rushed out.
I guess part of the answer depends on your definition of a 'plot hole'. There are sometimes things that are intentionally left unanswered or unexplored by an author. It may not be relevant to the main plot thread (or even subplots). It may be something to be taken up in future books in the series/with that character. It may be that the reader missed something or doesn't fully understand--and/or the author didn't take time to explain or didn't believe it was within the scope to explain. I can give an example from a contact from a reader of Flank Hawk to illustrate. (I apologize if some interpret this as self-promotion, but it is the best way I can explain my point). The reader said he enjoyed my novel, but found a few inconsistencies. For example, he said that the zombies were in an early scene described as having pus in some of the wounds (or something along that lines). The argument being that for pus to be present, there needs to be an active immune system. The reader believed that the zombies, being dead and with some of the flesh rotting, that no immune system was functioning. I replied, with basically what I will say here: That the way the magic runs, there is a remnant of the original immune system functioning. That's partly what keeps the mundane zombie lasting or existing longer than a couple weeks. However, the story is told from first person POV, and the main character, Krish, knows virtually nothing of the necromancy/magic that creates and sustains the zombies. So, what appears a plot hole, isn't. And really, even if Flank Hawk was written in third person limited or even omniscient, I am not sure for the scope and direction of the story, it would have been appropriate to go into such detail. And when I was writing the scene/description in question, I did actually consider the description, including pus with the mundane zombies. It was in preparation for the dormant souled zombies that appear later in the novel. I am currently unaware of any big plot holes in my first novel. My publisher didn't uncover/find any in the editing process. But, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if something wasn't a bit amiss somewhere. I am many things, but perfect isn't one of them. I can say that when there are revisions made in a novel, altering one thing or taking something out--or adding something in, causes ripple effects. Those ripples can infuse inconsistencies into a novel. That's for sure. I am often impressed how well some abridgments of novels turn out simply because of this (although, for the record, I avoid abridged novels whenever possible). Back to the topic: If there are many many major plot holes and, as a reader, you find it annoying to the point that you cannot enjoy the book, the thing to do is to find another author, or publisher, or maybe both. Because, in the end, the goal is to enjoy the read, not to be frustrated by it. Terry
To me, pus is just gross and would serve to make the zombies seem more vile if they were covered in it, regardless of whether it makes any sense. I wouldn't have really thought "oh wait how can they have pus if they are dead" even though I guess now that you mention it I know it is incorrect. I guess my whole philosophy on zombies is that they are scary because nobody really knows where they come from or much about them until its too late. I am much more of a Dawn of the Dead/Romero zombie fan and like the suspense and mystery and clues that are hidden. I'm just saying this as a reader or enjoyer of movies and not pretending to know much about writing. When I watch or read my mind seems to be looking for interpersonal relationships and what the writer seems to be saying about people or society, not so much the nitty-gritty stuff. The only exception being filming location goofs, I have a weird talent of noticing things like signs or identifying non-descript buildings and what city they are actually filming in. Maybe we are different. Some audience members are like me, others can't help but analyze it literally.
Well mistakes or plot holes in movies are understandable since they have approx. 120 minutes to include everything. Well with book is different, they don't need to constraint themselves much as compared to movie.
Typos are inevitable, I think. Maybe they shouldn't be, but if you have a 100,000 word novel and you have even 10 typos, that's an error rate of .01% (if I did my math correctly). About one typo every 20 to 25 pages, depending on font/size, page size, margins, etc. I especially agree with the author/blog in several aspects. After you've read your novel dozen's of times through various stages of writing/development, it becomes harder to catch errors. And the editing process does allow for the introduction of new errors--cutting, expanding or altering scenes and wording, for example. New/altered material allows for new typos. As an English teacher, I possibly catch more of the grammar and typo concerns that many readers. It's part of my everyday job. But even in that I am not perfect, and as such my writing sometimes reflects my imperfection. My editor and readers helped a lot, but my novel has a small number of typos too. And it frustrates me. How could I have miss that? is normally my response. Well, I obviously did. I am less forgiving of plot holes, major ones, but I just don't see that many in published works. Terry
