Do authors intentionally insert mistakes?

D

DaleA

New member
The my tinfoil hat slipped off and a conspiracy theory just hit me.

Maybe these action/adventure novels put these clunkers in their books on purpose just to wind us up and get publicity?

I have no trouble mentioning this book and giving it more publicity because Amazon made it a free book for Amazon Prime members with a Kindle.

The book is "Takeoff" by Joseph Reid.

Let me say the book's plot line is "preposterously absurd" (I borrowed that from an Amazon review because it exactly expressed my feelings.)

The author is being compared to Lee Child and John Sandford. Lee Child, I'll give you that because the plot is ALMOST as ridiculous as Child's clunker 61 Hours. (And I don't like Lee Child because he lies about gun control.) But I have read John Sandford's books and this guy (Joseph Reid) is no John Sandford.

After putting in several strained and pained gun references to establish his creds the author exposes himself for the poser he is and dumps this on us:

From behind her back, she drew a pistol. A Glock, exactly like Shen’s. She pointed it directly at my face.
“Your last chance, Senor Walker,” Peten said, cocking the hammer.
Click to expand...
Or, or, maybe like I said this is all part of a plot! (Where IS my hat? It's so shiny it shouldn't get lost...)
 
Take off your tinfoil hat and leave it off. Also, go ahead and leave your panic room. Leave your security blanket in the panic room as well. There is no conspiracy.

Many authors are just plain ignorant. I can't begin to tell you how many stories I have read where the authors referred to people snicking off the safety on their Glocks.

Lee Child has made several mistakes in his books as well.

Authors write about a lot of things. When you write a good story, you are going to cover a myriad of topics. You aren't going to be an expert in all of them or even necessarily familiar enough with all of them to get all their basic details correct.

It is sort of like when people point out gun mistakes in movies, such as guns present that weren't actually available at the time. I used to have a buddy who was a tire specialist and who did re-enactments. He was always looking at the tires on Jeeps in WWII and Korean War movies to see if the right tires were being used. Don't freak out or think there is some sort of tire conspiracy, but the tires being used are not always authentic or even authentic replicas.

I watched the first episode of Hollywood Weapons where the main guy, Terry Schappert is a former special forces dude, medic, sniper, combat specialist and in the first episode he talked about the hammer on a Glock striking the firing pin. Even the "experts" mess up. If you have Netflix, check out the first episode when he talks about "knucklehead science" and has a Glock that he is describing.
 
When you write a good story, you are going to cover a myriad of topics. You aren't going to be an expert in all of them or even necessarily familiar enough with all of them to get all their basic details correct.
Click to expand...

Maybe they aren't, but they should be expert enough to get real world details correct, even when writing fiction. It's called RESEARCH...sadly many authors just go with a good sounding phrase that is somehow related to the subject.

When you have real world things, and locations in your story, its just basic research to get easily verifiable details correct.

I can forgive, to a point, movies (and especially war movies) before CGI using what was available. With movies not only is there a budget, there is also a schedule. Not so the writer, or at least not in the same ways.

Sometimes it seems writers just have a bunch of gun terms and names in a hat and pick one or two out to use when the story involves a gun. Even famous writers have been essentially ignorant of the correct use of terms and names. Ian Fleming's 007 comes to mind. But then, he was English...:rolleyes:

If you're writing something that happens in the Empire State Bldg, it doesn't happen on the 115th floor. If you are driving a certain car, and you describe the shift pattern, it better be right. A 7.62NATO doesn't shoot "5.56 tumblers" (yes, I actually read that once in an action novel).

If read several excellent books where a pair of writers worked together, one doing the story and the other doing the "sets and props" to get things both correct, and consistant.

Call it research, or call it fact checking, its done all to seldom and all too poorly all too often these days. Especially by people who consider themselves journalists...or so it seems to me.

So,the next time the hero jumps in his 68 Corvette and fires up that 351 Cleveland V8, remember its not just guns that writers are idiots about.
 
Ever read Christine? Now a red special ordered Fury is a stretch but whatever, kinda goes with the story. But the book, it’s a 4 door. Color is something believable but not a trim package on a car that wasn’t available.

What about the guns in movies that never reload? Or the cars that only upshift? Anymore I ignore the mistakes, I’ll never enjoy it if I don’t.
 
How about a .460 Weatherby with a 20x scope shooting the golf ball off the tee from a boat 500yds out on Lake Michigan, "riding the recoil to never lose sight of the target in the scope"?

On the other hand, I've seen the USS MISSOURI do a "bootlegger turn" on my tv, so I suppose anything is possible..;)
 
It’s as easy as as this, did the author write it for dollars or passion? If it was dollars then it’s written for the hundreds of millions which would find nothing amiss...... on the other hand, there are we forum members that would instead find a miss.;-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Maybe they aren't, but they should be expert enough to get real world details correct, even when writing fiction.
Click to expand...

Everything is a detail in the real world. As I pointed out, it is tough to know everything about the real world.

You know, we can't even get gun people to get all the details correct, so expecting non-gun people to get all the gun details correct is pretty much unrealistic.

It is annoying, but that is reality.

Nobody fact checks everything. Even in books like the one where you described that you didn't notice anything wrong, there were likely things that were wrong, but because you didn't know enough about them, you missed them.
 
Why bother assigning to malice what can be explained by incompetence.

Not the only case of "cocked hammers" on Glocks I've run into.
 
I've had some constructive exchanges with authors who are clearly interested in getting firearm details correct. I've had some who obviously aren't interested in the details ignore my attempts to help them out.

I doubt that many of them are intentionally getting things wrong, but it's pretty clear that some just don't care.
 
I haven't read a lot of stories with guns in them but the movie errors are so persistent and so consistently wrong, it's like fingernails on a chalkboard to me. The worst, of course, being the semi-automatic handgun with the slide locked back that keeps clicking while the trigger is pulled. They get it wrong in every dang movie.

And a thousand others...........

--Wag--
 
I doubt that many of them are intentionally getting things wrong, but it's pretty clear that some just don't care.
Click to expand...

Some don't care, but I also get the impression that some are more interested in the overall story than some of the minutia. They are trying to set a tone as opposed to writing a technical treatise.
 
No author wants mistakes in their book. It's generally ignorance, oversight or just a simple mistake. Sometimes it could be the editor who makes changes.

Darn if I didn't make quite a few myself in my two books. At least I sent some corrections and updates to the publisher for the second book. For instant, I mentioned the Belton repeater flintlock of the Revolution and said there were none known to exist. Then I found out that the Royal Armoury in Leeds has two that were made for the British East India Company. Oppski.
 
I've always believed they call it "fiction" for a reason. I enjoy reading Sci-Fi and Steampunk because their weapons and plot-lines are known to be fictitious and absurd. While so many writers do try and stay as factual as they can, does it really matter to the person reading a free novel on their Kindle? If it did, there would be no mistakes or absurd plots.
 
When people don't do their research ....one of the all time favorite Sherlock Holmes stories is Silver Blaze about a missing race horse. But as readers pointed out at the time-and as Conan Doyle admitted-his description of English horse racing was waayy off.
Here's one I have seen on Bank of America ATMs recently. They have a salute to military families, it shows a Navy CPO in his blue uniform with his wife and children.
1. No insignia on his white saucer cap.
2. No rating/rank insignia on his left sleeve.
3. No campaign ribbons.
4. No hash marks.
 
Here's one I have seen on Bank of America ATMs recently. They have a salute to military families, it shows a Navy CPO in his blue uniform with his wife and children.
1. No insignia on his white saucer cap.
2. No rating/rank insignia on his left sleeve.
3. No campaign ribbons.
4. No hash marks.
Click to expand...

To me, that says its a basic uniform from stores/prop dept and the people are most likely models posed for the picture. Not an actual CPO in his uniform with his actual family.

Of course I could be wrong, but I think its likely a created shot for the ad campaign, not an actual family photo.
 
Double Naught Spy said:
Nobody fact checks everything. Even in books like the one where you described that you didn't notice anything wrong, there were likely things that were wrong, but because you didn't know enough about them, you missed them.
Click to expand...

That's the long and short of it, right there.

Imagine a book which contained detailed firearms, nautical, automotive scenes, plus some gratuitous physics equations and a description of a genetically engineered virus...

"We", the gun nuts would recognize and deride all the firearms errors and exaggerations and most of us would not even notice the missing or incorrect symbol in the Quantum Mechanics equation or sail boat details. Meanwhile, the Astrophysicist notices the equation but not the incorrect length reference of the sail boat, while the geneticist misses both of those, besides the automotive errors... and just can't wait to get on their favorite forum to talk about the "obvious" flaws in the description of the disease....
 
Based on the title, "Last of the Mohicans" by
James Fennimore Cooper, how come the
Mohicans are still around and I believe run
a casino or two?

And did two boy kings actually exist
in "The Man in the Iron Mask?"

And did not Hitler perish in a small
movie theater in Paris well before
the end of WWII?
 
If you are writing a complete work of fiction, you can do anything you want and "get away with it", especially if you cover it as set in an alternate history, dimension, etc.

If you're doing fictional characters and story in a real world setting, I think you ought to do whatever research is needed to get things right. Things like getting famous location descriptions correct (landmarks, street names, etc.).

The better you are at correctly describing the details of things that I do know about, the more I am inclined to accept the descriptions of things I don't know about as factual.

Like the credibility of a witness in court, if we catch you in a lie (or just a mistake) about one thing, your testimony about everything is suspect.

There are "levels" of accuracy, and are easiest to see in movies. You have actual historical events as accurately portrayed as practical/possible (such as Tora! Tora! Tora!)

Then you have movies that are "based on historical events" where some of the important historical things are accurate and there are other fictional characters and events add to that. And then there are movies "inspired by real events" where they can range from slight deviations of history to complete fabrications using only the names of historical figures and events.
 
Lee Child has made several mistakes in his books as well.

He makes *a lot* of mistakes. What do you expect of a Brit who writes about the American military and guns, when he has no experience w/ either one? I shook my head when in the first Reacher book, the main character went to an Army-Navy store to buy a killing knife. But instead of buying a K-Bar, he buys a cheap switchblade. Fail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top