Q&A with Josh Lanyon discussion
note: This topic has been closed to new comments.
ARCHIVE (General Topics)
>
Writing Questions for Josh
KZ - it's hard to talk about a majority that is silent, so the only reliable data I have is sales numbers.
K.Z. wrote: "Heck, lately I've felt like a slouch because I don't write knitting-based stories! ;-)"Oh, good. I was wondering if it was just me...
Susinok wrote: "Some of those dislikes are so specific too. It is bizarre. You wonder if there is anything out there the pleases these people. (I doubt it.)"Well the thread is about personal turnoffs in writing, so people were sharing the things they personally don't like. It isn't like every dislike should be attributed to everyone on the thread.
Aleksandr wrote: "There are some people talking about how they are tired of the tropes and want original stuff, but when I look at my own catalogue, original does not sell. "Good point. For example I've seen a million complaints about "too much sex" but apparently books with more sex still sell better.
Yep. Exactly. So, in the end, write what you are passionate about and try to find the readers who click with you.
I think it's a mistake to approach the m/m audience as a comprehensive whole. There are distinct segments. There are overlaps, true, but each of those segments also want different things from a story so what flips their hell-no switch will vary wildly. And how well epubs handle what intrigues each segment can vary wildly as well. Those lacks are a chink that self-pubbers can exploit quite profitably.A lot of readers go for the more traditional romance stories. Some go for porn. Some go for kink (which isn't the same thing)...
The trick is identifying your target audience, your share of the wider m/m readership.
Mod
"Some of those dislikes are so specific too. It is bizarre. You wonder if there is anything out there the pleases these people."
I felt that way too when reading the M/M Romance group topic and the very detailed lists of the everyone's personal turnoffs in writing. Yes, I think bizarre really is the word to describe it. ;) Lists like that make me feel really uneasy on behalf of the authors in this genre.
Anyhoo, I would rather make a list of my personal turn ons in m/m writing. :)
Johanna wrote: "Anyhoo, I would rather make a list of my personal turn ons in m/m writing. :) ..."Now THAT's a good idea. :)
Mod
Exactly. And I suppose readers sense if a writer "stands behind" his/her story, his/her passion — or do they?
Tharayn wrote: "Now I'm really curious what they did list. I'm not a member of the group so I can't read the lists, but if they upset so many here..."Oh it's the usual crap. I don't like when a skinny guy tops, I don't like switching, I don't like...
I don't like guys with blue eyes. I don't like rodeo clowns... I don't like the Great Misunderstanding.
No not switching tops. Just switching. I was just condensing some of the items on the list and then exaggerated a bit for comic effect. For the most part I stay away from those threads since they all mostly devolve into something silly.
I have a particular squick about characters not using lube when they are having anal sex. I've put down stories and not gone back to them for that.
Oh, and if I see in the blurb or reviews that the romantic leads are kept apart for years because one thought the other cheated when he was out picking up drycleaning, but they never talked about it. Yeah, bad trope and no sale.
But I wouldn't assume that EVERYONE agrees or that it should never be written. Just glitches in my personal preferences.
I think in books, as in most things, you can tell when the person writing a story is engaged in the idea and when they are just following a formula to have something to sell. Sometimes the latter is still enjoyable, but it's usually not as overwhelmingly praised.
That probably helps explain the 50 Shades phenomenon. Whatever else it may have been, it was a labor of love for the author.
Oh, and if I see in the blurb or reviews that the romantic leads are kept apart for years because one thought the other cheated when he was out picking up drycleaning, but they never talked about it. Yeah, bad trope and no sale.
But I wouldn't assume that EVERYONE agrees or that it should never be written. Just glitches in my personal preferences.
I think in books, as in most things, you can tell when the person writing a story is engaged in the idea and when they are just following a formula to have something to sell. Sometimes the latter is still enjoyable, but it's usually not as overwhelmingly praised.
That probably helps explain the 50 Shades phenomenon. Whatever else it may have been, it was a labor of love for the author.
Susinok wrote: "...I don't like rodeo clowns... "This? Is justifiable. LOL
There are things I don't like and I may have contributed to that list, but I always say "never say never". As a RULE, I will pass by books with rodeo clowns (and guys named Pooter and Bug), BUT every now and then, an author makes it work. I'm not sure I have any HARD limits, but I look at those lists as just for fun, because as an author you'd go nuts if you try to please everyone. How could you please someone who only likes manly men and someone else who hates manly men and likes sylph-like twinks? You are screwed. So as has been said, write what turns your own crank and there are bound to be others out there who like it. If not? You had fun writing it hopefully.
Charming wrote: "For example I've seen a million complaints about "too much sex" but apparently books with more sex still sell better."Yes! This contradiction has befuddled me for years. But, as Aleks suggested, we've been hearing from the vocal minority, not the majority of m/m readers.
Tam wrote: "...and guys named Pooter and Bug...":-D Then don't read The Charioteer, Tam. I've never seen so many silly nicknames for grown men. (Yes, I know, they were common for that time and place. But still . . . *snicker*)
Cleon wrote: "Johanna wrote: "Anyhoo, I would rather make a list of my personal turn ons in m/m writing. :) ..."Now THAT's a good idea. :)"
+1 ...I like this idea a lot! I always find hearing someone's likes more inspirational than hearing their dislikes. Not that there's anything wrong with disliking something... No one is going to like all of anything - whether you're talking about fiction or not.
Charming wrote: "Good point. For example I've seen a million complaints about "too much sex" but apparently books with more sex still sell better. "I wonder if this isn't a little bit of shame talking. Everyone has looked down on romance readers for reading smut and trash. By saying "I don't like lots of sex" you are saying you aren't like those "other" readers. (While hiding your smut reading from others.) You are high minded and need plot, not porn. Whereas sometimes you just need some unadulterated (vs unadultery) boinking and a sex fest. If people said "hell yeah, I love reading hot sex" maybe there wouldn't be this outcry trying to prove that what we read is NOT smut or trash. And having a ton of hot sex in a book does not make it porn. Sure, sometimes it is purely erotica and has little to no plot, but the two are not mutually exclusive.
Okay, so turn ons include: Long walks on the beach... wait, no, j/k
* Seeing characters falling in love, not just being told that Pooter is the hottest guy Bug has ever seen and he's nice to animals so it must be love.
* Sex scenes that enlarge our understanding of the characters, not just their dicks.
* Secondary characters that are not cliches (I so dislike the overly meddling mother/sister/friend that barges in all the time)
* Parents who are caring, but not angelic.
* Well-behaved, yet imperfect children and teenagers (overly dramatic, whiny kids are real, but they annoy me in writing as much as RL)
* A good plot where the outcome is in doubt.
Anyone else?
* Seeing characters falling in love, not just being told that Pooter is the hottest guy Bug has ever seen and he's nice to animals so it must be love.
* Sex scenes that enlarge our understanding of the characters, not just their dicks.
* Secondary characters that are not cliches (I so dislike the overly meddling mother/sister/friend that barges in all the time)
* Parents who are caring, but not angelic.
* Well-behaved, yet imperfect children and teenagers (overly dramatic, whiny kids are real, but they annoy me in writing as much as RL)
* A good plot where the outcome is in doubt.
Anyone else?
Now I'm singing Barry Manilow. Damn you!I love women characters who are "normal" and nice. Sure, the odd bitch is good, but not all.
I like kissing scenes and anticipation.
I like broken stereotypes (sometimes I also like regular stereotypes).
I love flamboyant twinks.
I like toys and porn used in sex with a couple, rather than just by themselves. Being with someone shouldn't mean that they become your "EVERYTHING". You can still have fun with props.
I like guys with cats. :-)
Tam wrote: "I wonder if this isn't a little bit of shame talking. Everyone has looked down on romance readers for reading smut and trash. By saying "I don't like lots of sex" you are saying you aren't like those "other" readers. (While hiding your smut reading from others.) ..."Yaaaaay! I love you for this post. Sometimes I feel guilty for liking the smut part as much as I do. Not that a book has to have it in order for me to like it. <-- See, there I am explaining myself so I don't look too smut-needy... oh to heck with it... I like it. That is all. Carry on now...
Mod
Ooooh, STELLAR idea!I like:
*teh smexy and lots of it, but you gotta make me feel it
*broken heroes -- those who are struggling in the aftermath much more so than while the breaking is in progress (which tends to flip me right the hell out so if you're going to do that, don't rub my face in it)
*deeply flawed heroes. I like to hate them a little.
*elaborate world-building that is smoothly revealed as a sexy c'mon
*a story that isn't like a hundred other stories out there; show me something fresh or unique
*GOOD BASIC CRAFT
*shifters. truly, I can't get enough shifters, but good God Almighty, don't confuse a novelty gimmick with delivering something fresh and new.
*snappy prose. Not ponderous. If that picture can be painted in two sentences and you squander two pages to pad your wordcount, I won't be pleased.
Mod
I like to read well researched story with intelligent writing. The references to art and culture always feel like a bonus!
I like reading realistic sex scenes. I like to witness things being awkward at first and I like the fact that everything doesn't always go as planned in bed. I like to see characters developing through these scenes.
I like to read about the small gestures: caressing kisses, light touches... even glances and silences. I like to read about the random thoughts going through the character's mind during sex.
I like troubled characters who have ability to laugh at themselves. And I like the idea that there might be someone who has the ability to complete that troubled guy. Hope is a turn on for me.
I guess I like opposites mixing: tough and tender, warm and cold, safe and defenceless, light and dark...
I like humor — also in bed.
Kari wrote: "*shifters. truly, I can't get enough shifters, but good God Almighty, don't confuse a novelty gimmick with delivering something fresh and new."YES!
Johanna wrote: "Here are some of my turn ons:I like to read well researched story with intelligent writing. The references to art and culture always feel like a bonus!
I like reading realistic sex scenes. I lik..."
Find myself nodding to your list. Yes, yes, yes! ^_^
I like good, logical world building and real, flawed but lovable characters.Humour.
No underestimating of me as a reader, in other words, I can think for myself, you don't have to force feed me all the details.
I don't need sex, but when there is a scene it must be about the emotions and connection between the MCs and have bearing on the story.
It must be well written.
I like angst, but there has to be hope or redemption.
Peoples actions and thoughts must fit with the author's vision of them.
Some sweetness, I love sweetness and tenderness in the otherwise tough types.
Lou wrote: "When a man likes cats that's always make me see them in a favorable light."*sigh* It's one of the reasons I fell for my ex... He loved cats and was so good with them... (I found out later he wasn't as great as I thought--with cats, and just in general. Such is life?)
Mod
Takes way too much time and energy to get as enraged as they used to make..."
I'm a very bad blog follower. Basically I check in when someone points out an article I might enjoy. It really comes down to the time factor. My mornings are spent on email, Facebook, Goodreads, checking sales...and that's it. Then it's to work.
Mod
You can't view the M/M Romance group unless you're a member and I unsubscribed a while back. And since I can't see the discussions, I've never been persuaded to return. ;-)
Mod
Hm. This is interesting in that I still consider m/m and ebooks to be outside the mainstream. Way outside. Certainly according to my mainstream writing friends I am working in a No Man's Land. Truly. My mainsteam writing friends think I've had some kind of breakdown and offer to introduce me to their agents on a regular basis. :-D
So the idea that m/m is too...what? Corporate now? Too streamlined and generic is really intriguing. Not, I think, accurate, but intriguing. Most of the complaints I hear -- non-existent editing, amateur writing, derivative plots -- are a symptom of NOT being mainstream. I mean, say what you will, mainstream publishing puts out a consistent commercial product.
Yes, there are lousy books produced by mainstream, but they aren't lousy in the same way that so many indie books are.
Mod
You know, I never read those Top Reader Peeve type articles. They're not an accurate representation of anything. Why? Because -- we all forget this because we spend so much time on line -- the people who bother to respond to those questions are not an accurate sampling of the majority of readers.
Most of our readers DO NOT interact in social media. As big a deal as social media is, it is still only a fraction of the reading populace. And the more intensely someone interacts on line, the further away they are from the average reader.
We don't see this because we are obsessed with online interactions. But we are not average readers either.
Mod
Why do I let those get to me so much?
..."
And yet one of the major criticisms leveled at so much of m/m is that it reads like fan fiction. :-D
Anne wrote: "I like good, logical world building and real, flawed but lovable characters.Humour.
No underestimating of me as a reader, in other words, I can think for myself, you don't have to force feed me al..."
I really want to read the book y'all are building here - a subtle, sexy, tender story about a shapeshifter and the cat he loves.
Mod
I think it's a glutted market. I think it's that simple. Every week I see new authors who sound like every other author with new releases that sound like a million other releases.
And because the overall quality of m/m fiction is, frankly, mediocre, it's not surprising that readers notice that the stories they are paying to read in many cases are no better than the stories offered for free in fandom.
I think the answer is to move closer toward mainstream -- toward what is best about mainstream (professional quality editing, being the most obvious difference between the pros and the amateurs) -- rather than retreat toward what amounts to dilettantism.
Dev wrote: "I really want to read the book y'all are building here - a subtle, sexy, tender story about a shapeshifter and the cat he loves. "With witty dialogue, humour and a vibrator. :-)
Mod
ALL genre fiction is trope-heavy. Period.
To bitch about tropes in genre fiction is like complaining about all the math in science.
It's one thing to personally tire of a particular trope. It's another to complain that genre fiction is too full of tropes. Yeesh.
Tam wrote: "I wonder if this isn't a little bit of shame talking. Everyone has looked down on romance readers for reading smut and trash. By saying "I don't like lots of sex" you are saying you aren't like those "other" readers. (While hiding your smut reading from others.) You are high minded and need plot, not porn. Whereas sometimes you just need some unadulterated (vs unadultery) boinking and a sex fest."I disagree, dear Tam.
When I write in a review ''too much sex'' I usually mean ''too much meaningless sex''. This is just not appealing for me. In fact it is boring, I often skip the sex scenes then.
I don't have any problem at all to admit in public that sometimes I re-read some good sex scenes, *even* from other authors than Josh.
Mod
"Originality" is a catch-all phrase. I'd like to see someone dig down and actually explain what they mean by originality because, like Inigo Montoya, "I do not think that word means what you think it means." :-D
Antonella wrote: "When I write in a review ''too much sex'' I usually mean ''too much meaningless sex''. This is just not appealing for me. In fact it is boring, I often skip the sex scenes then."I agree, it definitely happens. But sometimes it seems there is a bit of an attitude that unless you poo-poo sex entirely, you're somehow bowing to a lowest common smut denominator. There are certainly books I've read where I've skimmed a large part of the sex, so that I could get to the point, the relationship. But too often the prevailing attitude seems to be one or the other. The good authors make both work together. And as has been said, smexy books sell better no matter what is said publicly.
Mod
I think "free" is the key there. You don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Mod
..."
I don't get the joke!
I like: - smart, competent MCs - if they do something dumb, it's for a reason. Good at their jobs.
- well-matched MCs who challenge each other and are impressive to each other, usually in different areas
- funniness. Best is witty repartee between characters and darkish yet droll internal voice by the narrator (see Victor Bayne). But situational humor is good too if it is clever - irony rather than slapstick
- at least some sex (yeah, I said it) though I do want any sex scenes to advance the story and characters and illuminate the relationship
- writing that shows the bond between the MCs - e.g. one trusting the other when they maybe shouldn't but they are right to.
- MCs who grow and push their own boundaries. If they are screwed up, they know it and are getting better (Victor Bayne again). If they are timid, they do something that is, for them brave. If they are assholes, they get better
- sub-genres - I usually like mysteries, scifi, paranormal, etc. better than contemporary. Contemporary that is funny works though.
Mod
Well the thread is about personal turn..."
True. And if you read those threads hoping for some insight into universal likes and dislikes, I think you'll go away feeling suicidal and with no particular insight.
Mod
Bingo!
Mod
Now THAT's a good idea. :)"
It's certainly as valid an exercise! More valid, in fact, given that people people are more inclined to express themselves on negatives than positives.
I guess it's the idea that you are more likely to move if you're sitting on a sharp rock then if you're sitting on a comfy pillow. :-D
Mod
Oh it's the usual crap. I don't like when a s..."
:-D :-D :-D
Josh wrote: "ALL genre fiction is trope-heavy. Period. To bitch about tropes in genre fiction is like complaining about all the math in science. "
Yep. ALL entertainment is full of tropes, really -
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php...
Mod
Oh, and if I see in the blurb or reviews that..."
One thing that drives me -- and I'm sure all the writers on the list -- nuts is when an example of lousy writing is offered up as "trope."
Dumbness is not a trope! :-(
Josh - might be the drugs talking (I threw out my back and am currently high as a kite - a redtailed one though - on Tramadol), but I adore you, your voice, your light-hearted way to speak reason. You are one of the voices of sanity in a genre that can get really horrid and shrill at times. (And I may contribute to the shrillness at times myself). You are awesome. :)Also, quick question, as I've just found some unexpected time to read by making myself bedridden for a few days, what was your story about the military dude saving his lover in Afghanistan? I'm just asking because my ability to concentrate is shod and that might not be the best moment to research a backlist.)
Uhm. Please continue. Drugged author is drugged.
This topic has been frozen by the moderator. No new comments can be posted.
Q&A with Josh Lanyon
Books mentioned in this topic
Alphabears: An ABC Book (other topics)Rag and Bone (other topics)
As Meat Loves Salt (other topics)
The Well of Loneliness (other topics)
The Selfish Gene (other topics)
More...
Authors mentioned in this topic
Julie Smith (other topics)Bernard Cornwell (other topics)
Robin McKinley (other topics)
Tove Jansson (other topics)
Astrid Lindgren (other topics)
More...
I'm a knitter, but really? Please don't!
Hey, where's Merman? :)