# V. C. Andrews



## SparkyLT (Sep 28, 2008)

Her books are really predictable...there's a few characters (evil grandmother, shallow mother, weak father, brilliant\odd brother) you can count on being there, and you know what they're going to do. And, with the exception of the first series, they're not especially well-written.

But I read them anyway. :razz: Anyone else?


----------



## RomanticRose (Sep 28, 2008)

The only VC Andrews book I really liked and thought was well done was the stand-alone book, My Sweet Audrina.  In that novel, the characters actually developed and grew.  

The others are predictable with two dimensional characters and pretty much the same plot from series to series.


----------



## Stewart (Nov 17, 2008)

SparkyLT said:


> Her books are really predictable...there's a few characters (evil grandmother, shallow mother, weak father, brilliant\odd brother) you can count on being there, and you know what they're going to do.


She wrote so few, too. Her books are no doubt predictable because they all follow the same five book pattern



> And, with the exception of the first series, they're not especially well-written.


You are aware that, other than the first couple of series that Andrews died and her greedy estate employs a ghostwriter to churn out more predictable guff in her name. He's written more under her name than she ever managed.


----------



## SilkFX (Nov 30, 2008)

I admit that I only have experience with the books she wrote (as opposed to the ones written by the ghostwriter, Andrew Neiderman) but IMO her "best" book was _Petals on the Wind_, which was the sequel to the wildly successful _Flowers in the Attic. A_s far as I know that was the only book where, in fiction-writing terms, "place" was something other than a big gloomy house. Consequently it was the least claustrophobic and, after you get past the incest, the most interesting. (I know _Heaven _didn't take place in a big gloomy house but I don't remember it being that much more expansive than _Petals on the Wind _when it comes to "place.")

"Best" is in quotes above because her writing wasn't very good in general. Neiderman hasn't improved it, either, so I've heard. According to Wikipedia, 63 of the 72 books with her name on them were written by Neiderman. It would be insane except that _Flowers in the Attic_ still sells so strongly.


----------



## Kayleigh7 (Dec 1, 2008)

Unfortunately i've read many many of her books. they are pretty sick and twisted. a lot of incest. I also agree with the statement of them being poorly written.


----------

