Horrible Writing

''The weather beaten trail wound ahead into the dust racked climes of the baren land which dominates large portions of the Norgolian empire. Age worn hoof prints smothered by the sifting sands of time shone dully against the dust splattered crust of earth. The tireless sun cast its parching rays of incandescense from overhead, half way through its daily revolution. Small rodents scampered about, occupying themselves in the daily accomplishments of their dismal lives. Dust sprayed over three heaving mounts in blinding clouds, while they bore the burdonsome cargoes of their struggling overseers.'' -- The Eye of Argon, Jim Theis

Most art is considered subjective, but some writing we can all agree is terrible. (No, I'm not talking about Eragon.) Horrible writing is, in general terms, taken to include horrendously Urple Prose or else no descriptions at all, poor sentence construction, poor spelling, punctuation, and grammar, overuse of Olde English (especially abuse of the second person familiar), and excessive chatspeak. It can also include badly formatted stories where everything is lumped together into one undifferentiated mass. These are usually impossible to read.

In broader terms it can include bad characterisation, characters acting odd, plotholes, innaccurate geography, bizarre fight sequences, etc, etc, etc, and so forth.

The first kind of horrible writing is treatable: a good beta reader or even a half-decent spellchecker can salvage such a story. The second kind of horrible story is a little more difficult to bring back, since the horribleness is so heavily entrenched within the story. At some stages, it's too far to salvage and it would be easier to start anew.