While writing reviews for the books I read, I noticed something interesting. If I have read reviews prior to buying the book, by the time I get round to actually reading the book I usually have forgotten them, as well as the blurb, so I go in blind on most reads.
Inevitably, there will be some negative critiques of the books I love, and I am always curious about those. They have something in common. A reviewer will state something to the effect of: “This could have been a short story.” I asked myself why I didn’t notice this huge flaw. What’s wrong with me? Well, clearly, there isn’t. I enjoyed the book. What did I like that the other person didn’t?
Slow-paced doesn’t sound good, does it? Fast-paced sounds so
much better. Shouldn’t all stories aspire to be fast-paced? The Story Graph, a
review site independent of Amazon, maps books to moods including slow, medium
or slow pacing. It has been difficult for me to label a book as ‘slow’ – opting
cowardly for ‘medium’ – because of the negative undertone. But what does it
actually mean for a book to be slow-paced?
It does not mean ‘boring’. A rapid tempo doesn’t guarantee agripping plot. Spectacle aside, action scenes in movies can often be incredibly
dull. The impactfulness lies in how it affects characters I’m invested in. And
that is what a slower pace gives me; time to get to know the world and the
characters – especially if it has multiple POVs or multiple settings. A
slow-paced story allows for a deeper exploration of the characters’ emotions,
motivations, and relationships. It allows the reader to fully immerse
themselves in the world created by the author and to develop a strong
connection with the characters.
