Step One
I had been writing fantasy and science fiction for years before it finally dawned on me that if I was really serious about it I really ought to understand its roots. This was some time in my late 20s, right before the birth of my first child. For many years I threw myself into an exploration of great or influential (occasionally both) and frequently obscure fantasy fiction from the mothers and fathers of fantasy. I dove deep, and by the time I came up for air I had learned an awful lot. I do recommend understanding the ground on which we stand so that writers can better understand how to move forward.
However, I recently realized that while I was reading all that old stuff– some of which was cool, a little of which I loved so much I moved it to my favorites list, and a lot of which was turgid or simply not my cuppa — I was NOT reading a whole generation of literature that had a tremendous influence on a lot of my peers writing today. For instance, I missed out on the whole Robert Jordan thing. By the time I was through with my scholarly investigations, word was out that Jordan had begun to stretch those middle volumes, so I never dipped in.It might be that I would have gotten hooked enough that I’d be frantically reading the Sanderson/Jordan volumes like many of the rest of you.
Me, I still like books that feel like a movie in length. However, I don’t think that’s what the fantasy book buying public wants these days. They want a book that feels like a miniseries. You have only to look at the bestselling adult fantasy series to see this. Almost all of them are weighty tomes. Now that I’m looking at the evidence it’s incredibly obvious. It was made even more obvious to me at Worldcon 2012, when I was manning the Black Gate booth. A woman dropped by to look at the thick, gorgeous editions of the magazine, each featuring a colorful and striking cover.
“What’s this?” She asked, obviously attracted by the heft and professional look of the mag. When I told her that it was a collection of short stories she immediately sat it down. “I only like big fantasy novels that I can really lose myself in,” she said, then thanked me and walked off. It wasn’t the first time I’d heard something like that, but it was the first time it really stuck with me.
If I am to make a career of this whole thing, I need to find a way to provide what the audience wants while at the same time pleasing my own storytelling muse (if I’m not enjoying what I’m writing, I have a hard time believing it can be any good). Step one has been reading a lot of the most popular fantasy series so I can see how true masters of their craft can spin long yarns. I’ve been taking a lot of notes…
newest »
Weasel, I tend to agree about LoTR and a whole lot about the padded big fat fantasy genre. I'm a little surprised by your reaction to Locke Lamora, though, because I think Lynch is among those few who can write long without padding -- he knows structure and pacing better than almost any other big name working today. I do, however, applaud this statement: "I want to read about characters doing stuff, not geography, architecture, or magic systems." Likewise I don't like to read three viewpoint characters and find only one of their story arcs interesting.
joolz wrote: "It's a question every author has to sort out for himself, at some point: who am I writing for, the reader, or myself? And how far am I willing to go to satisfy them?Well put, and absolutely true. You can't just be completely self-indulgent unless you happen to be one of those rare people who's tastes are somehow completely in tune with what the public wants. The public seems to have wanted greats like The Beatles and the Harry Potter novels, but they seem also to have become obsessed with lesser lights (fill in the blank with your most despised musical or literary artist).
If you're not true to your own vision, I don't think you will succeed, so it is a fine line.
People's aversion to short stories may also stem from the fact that a whole lot of folks cannot write short fiction to save their souls. In many ways a short story is more difficult to write than a novel length book.There is a tendency for writers, especially beginning writers, to equate short stories with the initial process of becoming a writer. They think they must master the short story, get published in some magazines or anthologies, and then they can move on to writing novels. Most of the time it doesn't work that way. They're two different art forms and require the development of different skills.
Read Peter S. Beagle. He's one of the few writers I've found who can skillfully handle short stories, novellas and full-blown novels. He also hasn't jumped on the doorstop bandwagon - I applaud him.
You make good points. Without the availability of markets to sell shorts stories to, there is less reason for people to try their hand at crafting one. As a result, their skills at choosing a few excellent words to tell a story never develop. I'm curious why the markets died though - was it due to lack of sales because the quality of the stories were poor, the specialized nature of most magazines, or some other factor(s)?
If there is too much fat in people's writing these days, the editors must be held accountable as well. Either they're not doing their jobs, or they're purposely encouraging overdone story telling. It's obvious, in the case of certain authors, that as they become well known and sought after, their books get edited down less and less.
I don't understand about the multiple POV thing either, but I've heard from people who are suspicious of first person POV. Some even say such things as "How can there be any suspense if we know the narrator will survive?"Well, what about the other characters, or learning how the mystery unveils, or seeing HOW the characters get through? When you sit down with a Sherlock Holmes story, or watch an episode of Star Trek, or read a James Bond novel, you can be fairly sure that Watson, Bond, and Kirk will survive. Does that eliminate the tension? It's a silly argument.
Personally, my preference would be to write a series of standalones with recurring characters. That's what I've written so far. But I'm not sure the vast majority of fantasy readers want that today.
I do wish I understood better why the short story market was so dead. I've said before, and will say again, that as busy as we all are, you'd think that people would find time to read short stories. But that's not the way it is. I think most of the people reading the short story zines right now are writers wanting to get published in those zines...
I think you're right -- it does seem like first person will be simpler than it truly is. You really have to live in that character and take on a persona if you're going to pull it off, unless the character is exactly like you are. And then you have to allow them to grow and change, because it would be dull if they remained static. Visibility is surely a problem. There is just SO MUCH stuff out there now that it becomes white noise. I have no idea how to break through it -- reviews don't seem to do the trick, even from prestigious places.
I will probably be exploring e-stories in the near(ish) future myself.
Howard Andrew Jones's Blog
- Howard Andrew Jones's profile
- 368 followers
I love long books, but much prefer concise, polished little volumes. In the end, in my case, I don't think so much of my preferences that I can wholly ignore the wishes of the people I write for—the ones who live outside my own head.
You can write for both, but where the preferences of one conflict with the philosophy of the other, I submit to the reader, however wrong it feels.
It's an opportunity to subvert something. Which...
*grin*