when reading novels I mainly consider two things when deciding whether I should continue:
the quality of writing (loosely coincides with an objective judgement, it is an intuitive, aesthetic evaluation)
the substance
some books i've been reading recently:
a storm of swords - george rr martin
full access to substance because the quality of writing maintains consistency, and does not overextend into literary dimension
lonesome dove - larry mcmurtry
in many respects, very similar to point on martin. I adore certain aspects of this setting, but want concentration; perhaps a smaller scope...
standard western tropes are uninteresting to me
the elementary particles - michel houellebecq
i am grateful I found this author, though I'm unsure I'll continue reading him. His prose, translated, has proper directness and seems more profound than martin and mcmurtry. His societal standing as "pop-literary" is unsurprising. His use of explicit scientific explanation is very effective; however, his consistent descriptions of the sexual exploits of certain characters becomes depressingly mundane
not that kind of girl - lena dunham
I stopped reading this after 30 pages. Not at all difficult to read; unsurprising content considering her tv show. substance-wise entirely unrewarding
the power of the dog - don winslow
I stopped after several pages. reading < Art thinks,"..." > is like getting poked in the eye
the moviegoer - walker percy
I put this on my toilet; the first few pages are absolute excellence
go tell it on the mountain - james baldwin
the best book here, by several lengths. wonderful prose combined with a genuine, human exploration