Is reading such a subjective point of view that there really is no such thing as a bad book? This is a simple thought I’ve had about an hour ago that I’m surprised found legs inside of my imagination. Is it the flow, strong deep characters, or the story itself?
An interesting analogy to this would be that Tom Green movie Freddie Got Fingered that came out years ago. Openly vilified by professionals and amateurs alike, for some reason, I ended up loving that movie possibly for all the reasons everyone else hated it. Which is strange, considering that I never really dug his television show. Anyways, I did a lot of soul searching on why exactly I loved this movie considering the vitriol it still receives to this day. And then it hit me. It was original. That’s why. It wasn’t a sequel, or based off a graphical novel, or an actual written novel. No, it was written and produced by Tom Green. A completely original work. And now that I look back, that’s the reason why.
As long as someone actually tries something different, then no matter how terrible the execution or content may be, at least the original creator is trying something different. And I can respect that.
So with that little rant being said, is it originality itself that makes a good story? Something that’s never been tried or thought of before? We can use another analogy if we want. That if a novel is structured the same way as a big blockbuster movie, would that make it a terrible book? What makes a good story? When I get some followers, then maybe I can get some opinions in here.