I'm terrible at being consistent. I'm one of those "put the fires out as they light" kind of people, which means I'm usually running in several directions at any given time with no idea what I'm going to do when I get there. I am not the person you want to ask to plan a large event. I'll show up ten minutes before the party starts with a couple of pizzas, some two liters of soda, a cake that says "Happy Birthday Ethel", and a mass text message to everyone I know asking them if they want to stop by for Bobby's birthday party. I am the definition of "phoning it in."
But it kind of makes me mad when some of my favorite authors do the same thing.
Recently I've read several books by authors I rely on, and they've been, well, pretty lame. And when I say "lame" I don't mean that I've read them in one sitting only to find the world's worst cliffhanger (although that also irks). No, I mean the book has sat on a shelf half-read for over a month because either the writing, the characters, or the storyline are so boring that I start to nod off every time I read a page. It's a tragedy, and I want it to stop.
One of the reasons I get an author's follow up is because I feel like I can depend on it to be good. That's the covenant of repeat business. You give me a good product, I will continue to buy said product. No one wants to plunk down twenty bucks for a "meh" book, and one of the reasons people don't try new authors (not me, I love debuts) is because they are spending money on an old favorite. But what do you do when the old favorite disappoints? To me, it's actually more irritating than when a debut isn't the greatest, because there's an expectation of something there that never develops. With a debut, there's no expectation, or at least not as strong of one.
It's depressing when I have a book with a bookmark gathering dust.
Does it bother you when a favorite author's book doesn't move you? More importantly, do you continue to buy their books, or find something else to read?