Paranormal Romance & Urban Fantasy discussion

One problem I had with novels like Twilight and its copies was that I felt they had too much filler. Twilight Book 1 had a long middle where nothing much happened. Book 2, the part about Bella being miserable because Edward had left went on too long though it got exciting after that with the Volturi. Book 4, the part about how her fetus was killing her went on and on, though again it got interesting after that.

Fallen, Falling Under, Hush Hush – I thought all these would have been tighter and moved faster if up to twenty-five percent of the book had simply been cut away. And that would have made them more interesting.

Am I the only one that feels that way? it feels like a lot of readers don’t object to filler since romance novels don’t have to be heavy on action.

Indeed. I remember Twilight had a few scenes devoted to cooking that didn't appear to serve much purpose...

My rule of thumb is this: if it doesn't add to plot, characterization, world building, or the progression of the novel, then it probably doesn't need to be there.

But ultimately, it is up to the author whether or not scenes get cut.

I've felt that way, especially with the Laurell K Hamilton, (what's that popular vampire hunter??? Seriously just had a brain fart and can't remember). Anyway, I honestly couldn't read those books cause of the filler. She kept describing the clothes and the guns over and over. It was annoying.

Yvette wrote: "I've felt that way, especially with the Laurell K Hamilton, (what's that popular vampire hunter??? Seriously just had a brain fart and can't remember). Anyway, I honestly couldn't read those books ..."

Ah, Anita Blake. So many descriptions of hair, too!

I have a problem with filler if (regarding a first time read) I want to skip paragraphs. If the first time you're getting to know a book, and you just want to get it over with, that's bad filler.

There is good filler though. Filler that adds to a character's development. Sure it might not have much to do with the plot directly, but if it get's me inside the character and understand them on a better level, (and I don't want to skip it) then high five to the author.

Kiersten wrote: "I have a problem with filler if (regarding a first time read) I want to skip paragraphs. If the first time you're getting to know a book, and you just want to get it over with, that's bad filler.

..."

Gotta agree with you on that.

I think different readers would consider things filler than others. And some people like a lot of detail in books and others just want the book to just get on with the story. An author kind of has to write for all of them and then too, write in a way that is their style. I talk to friends and family about books often and we have a lot the same tastes, yet the writing in some that I love does not appeal to another and vice versa.

Terry (Ter05 TwiMoms/ MundieMoms) wrote: "I think different readers would consider things filler than others. And some people like a lot of detail in books and others just want the book to just get on with the story. An author kind of ha..."

Your exactly right. Everyone is different. I think it's about finding balance, but I find myself when I write getting boggled down with: "should I explain what she is wearing" "will they care if his hair is cut short now?". lol. It can be a pain in the behind. But in the end that's why writers try to use beta readers to look over the work and tell us when we are just babbling. :)
Sometimes however, I just go through a chapter that has nothing really in it cause I'm so excited about getting to a certain part. hehe. Then I have to go back and figure out what to add and what would just be filler.

Liz ^_^

Kiersten wrote: "I have a problem with filler if (regarding a first time read) I want to skip paragraphs. If the first time you're getting to know a book, and you just want to get it over with, that's bad filler.

..."
I have to agree with you! When you find yourself skipping through the filler it is just boring and shouldn't be there. I read 2 of the Laurel Hamilton books book couldn't finish the series because of this.

Vidya wrote: "One problem I had with novels like Twilight and its copies was that I felt they had too much filler. Twilight Book 1 had a long middle where nothing much happened. Book 2, the part about Bella bein..."

the Twilight series had a lot of filler. Way too much. I liked the series but the filler makes for a lot of boring spots.

there is filler that advances or clues you in to the character and then there is filler that just takes up pages. the Twilight series had lots and lots of filler, bad filler that just bores you (I do like the series & saw the movies). Some books are too descriptive or wordy and comes out as too much filler. I thought that some of the Anita books were better then others with the filler or wordiness. I thought that most of the book Bullet (or might have been the book Flirt) was filler and didn't advance the story (it was just sex and not much story). The last book (Hit List) was good, the filler advanced the story or character and was not a major part of the book.

The first book in the Vampire Queen series by Hill was like that. Too much filler and not enough plot. I have the whole series but have only read the first one because of that.

One thing that did impress me about Twilight is that I thought the VAMPIRE BASEBALL scene (sorry, it's so ridiculous I can't type it normally) would be all filler, but it was actually sort of relevant to the plot. There was a lot of other filler, though! I haven't read any of the other books mentioned in this thread but I agree with those who pointed out that different readers see different things as filler or important. Personally, I would say if something isn't important to character development, plot development, or the reader's suspension of disbelief, it's probably filler.

I agree, it all depends on if you care about the characters normal life. For example, the BDB has a LOT of filler and redundant descriptions, but I am more than okay with it because I fell attached to the characters and want to know every detail. Also, there are a lot of main characters, so the reminders can be helpful and they tend to build depth each time.
BUT....normally I hate it. The Anita Blake books have way too much filler and random conversations, 30 pages of going to dinner, just useless.
Authors should know when they are rambling and should step back and think: "Would I care about these details?"
OH, one last thing, I am not sure if some filler is due to contractual length...if so, make a more intricate story!

Hallo Everyone :)

Hmmmm . . . I agree totally about the Twilight Series 'fillers', but then I found almost everything Bella did or said pretty aggravating anyway. She was so 'Stepford' I think, deferring first to her father and then to Edward and always whining. But to be fair, I'm not the target market for the books.

I loved the first ten Anita Blake books, they were fast-paced, she was sassy, and the plots were inventive and gripping. But as the series moved on, the books got longer and the sex took up more and more pages, which meant the plots got thinner - until Anita barely had time to do any police work or raise any zombies because she was always in bed with her own version of a 'Partridge in a Pear Tree.' (As in one werelion, two wereleopards, three werewolves, four vampires etc!) I miss the old Anita. I suspect Ms Hamilton is 'uneditable' which can happen when an author gets well-known with a dedicated fan base. I thought both Bullet and Flirt were dreadful books, although I would like to read Hitman because I've been told it's more like the old Anita and it features Edward - who's such a brilliant character.

I love Sherrilyn Kenyon's Dark-Hunter Series. Not too much filler there IMHO - great plots, gorgeous hunky heroes - what's not to like :)

Berni wrote: "Hallo Everyone :)

Hmmmm . . . I agree totally about the Twilight Series 'fillers', but then I found almost everything Bella did or said pretty aggravating anyway. She was so 'Stepford' I think, de..."

I love your analysis!

Ha ha - thanks Terri :)

I guess I am not understanding what is everyone's concept of filler. When an author writes a story, there must be background information, scenery etc, not just conversation or sex scenes. Yes, I agree, sometimes the 'filler' is mundane, and on occasion, totally boring. But, as a reader, we always have the option of 'skipping' over those parts we do not like or care to read, again.

< a href="http://bodicerippers-shauni.blogspot.... Rippers

My idea of filler is when it's so obviously just that. I think there's a difference between building up the characters and scenes to simply waffling.

I think in any kind of romance, it's important for the readers to be reminded of the hunky hero's physique/humour etc., every now and again, in order to build up the attraction between him and the heroine, but I don't see that as filler. Filler tends to be when a certain pair of shoes are described again and again, or a hairstyle – and even when a heroine goes on and on about one thing – as in Bella's case. I think she talked about the 'hole in her stomach since Edward left' so many times, I thought I would scream.