When something is never fully explained in a book, does it really grind your gears?

To an extent it can get a little aggravating.

I understand if it's a mystery for the audience, meant as it was written but I've noticed some writers are so blinded when they write, only focused in the smallest details that they completely miss the large explanations.

Even I've caught myself doing it. I zone completely into the tiniest things and more effective information is left in the dust.

This is why people should keep developing their plans before they automatically start writing away.

The example you gave would probably irk me as well. It's vital to the story and literally provides a chair for the rest of the events to fall in. It's almost like creating a romance and having two people fight for each other and in the end we never find out why in the world they couldn't be together.

It can really knock off a story.

=P

I completely agree with you as the long as the information wasn't meant to be a mystery.

It depends on what it is that isn't explained. An ambiguous ending is fine. But if it's something like an explanation to something in the plot that doesn't quite make sense (like how a vampire can impregnate a human...) then it really gets on my nerves.

Edit: I have an example, now. I just finished The Chronicles of Narnia. The one thing that really annoyed me (aside from the writing) was how Aslan told Peter, Susan, Lucy, and Edmund at one point or another, that they could never come back to Narnia. I wanted to know why. I also wanted to know why they couldn't come back, of their own accord. And it really annoyed me that some of the reasons for things in the book was just because Aslan said. That's no explanation, at all!

It depends, really. Sometimes, I like it when an author is like "It happened, cool, let's move on." It gives me that whirlwind, oh-shoot feeling. It really makes me worry if it's a situation like in The Road (I'm still at three pages! I don't know anything yet!) because I like the characters. I wonder "was it a sickness?" or "was it a war?" and it gives me this feeling of impending doom AND childlike hope.

But, if the author throws something in to make their job easier, as we see a lot of the time around the first chapter postings on Y!A, then I can't stand it. "Then her parents are murdered so she lives with her boyfriend." You just don't want to expand on the conflict of the story. Why were they killed? Why wouldn't she live with an aunt or something? Why would his parents allow that?

It's not much, and I'm not really even sure if it answers your question, but... Yeah. Haha. :)

It depends on the story. Sometimes I appreciate that openness as freedom for your imagination, there's something almost romantic about not knowing.

On the other hand, it can drive you crazy, point in case Gone with the Wind.

*Spoiler alert*

I hate that Margaret Mitchell left it open about whether or not Scarlett would get back with Rhett, the story reached fever pitch and then ended. That's maddening!

I only like to guess when there's a mystery. Story background is important to me. I don't want it to be forced or dumped into a prologue. I do like enough information to understand why the characters are in the situation they are in and why they are reacting the way they are. It doesn't have to be up front, but at some point I'd like to know how and why.

On one hand I think it's a great technique that writers use -- letting readers use their imagination instead of telling them exactly what happens/happened.

But I have to admit it makes me frustrated. I know it's better for me to come up with my own interpretations -- and I do come up with them -- but there's a part of me that's just like, "What happened???!!!???? You're the author -- explain it to me!!!!" (The voice in my head uses a lot of punctuation. Perhaps I'm a twelve year old girl at heart. Which isn't really that far-fetched. But going on...)

So while I recognize it as a smart move -- and sometimes the mark of a great author -- I do get frustrated.

I hope this answered your question :D

No. Most of the time it's irrelevant (as in The Road) and people who dwell on it are the ones who annoy me. They remind me of the Lost fans who need every episode they just watched re-explained to them in very simple words.

yes and what also annoys me is when you read a really good book, but the ending is really anti climatic and bad... like "it was just a dream" or something equally as bad. i think it's just lazy.

yes. when i read The Road, i feel so confused.

From what I understand of the Road, the reason the guy doesn't get into it, is because it doesn't matter! It's not as important as you think and he probably didn't want readers distracted from his theme by fears of "What if the volcano under yellow stone errupted? What then?"