We all have our favorite writers. We read their work and gloss over the odd clunky sentence or weird use of the English language. When the story or style engages us, readers tend to be very forgiving.
Listening to the recent episode of the Horror Writers Podcast, Stephen King’s pet sematary was discussed and one thing that struck me was how the book wasn’t perfectly written. I agreed wholly with this and felt are better books by King out there but Pet Sematary is a fantastic book regardless of it’s short comings. King is an idol of mine and others but for all his unique and vast talent he’s still human. He’s fallible. He’s not perfect. Reflecting on other books by King and other authors I love to read like Straub, Koontz or Barker, I can recall times when I’ve been underwhelmed by them but for some reason I seem to forget these passing moments.
I’m certainly not saying that I’ll suddenly become a critic and critique every price of prose to within and inch of it’s life but I do want to think of these authors and their works in a more humble light. I want to see the mistakes, learn from them or try to understand how they fit in the grander scheme of the work. Maybe they were meant to be there or maybe they add an element I haven’t managed to comprehend. Either way I want to see the work as fallible.
So as a writer should the aim be perfection of prose or getting a damn good story down in words?
Do you consider any writing to be a work of perfection or close to it?