Q&A with Josh Lanyon discussion
ARCHIVE BOM Discussions
>
March Read 2011: Finding Zach
Mod
Josh wrote: "Question: Do you believe Zach and David will stay together?"I think that had the book left you with the certainty that they were soul mates, of a genuinely special made-for-each-other kind of relationship, we wouldn't be as unsatisfied with the book. I don't feel as though I knew David or Zach very well at all, after completing the book, or even that they belonged together.
A really well written book gives you the confidence (even if you're wrong) that you know exactly what a major character would feel and do. This comes out of love, not hubris, but I feel I just *know* what Jake and Adrien would do or say in any given situation.
Mod
That's an interesting observation.
This comes out of love, not hubris, but I feel I just *know* what Jake and Adrien would do or say in any given situation.
Well, but in fairness that's a series versus one book.
I think it was shown that Zach & David knew each other very well before the kidnapping. They spent almost all their free time together. After the return, they've both changed significantly (obviously) but essentially what is Zach & David still remain. I think the separation that they undergo gives them enough time to decide if being together is what they really want. It gives Zach the space to grow from that 15 year old boy and allows him his moments of triumph separate from David. When they come together at the end, I feel they're on a more equal setting and therefore have more of a chance of remaining together.
Josh wrote: "Well, but in fairness that's a series versus one book. "True, but it's also a writer's skill, I feel. I know Nathan Doyle and Matthew Spain far better than I know Zach or David. And I use those as examples mostly because this forum would know them, I could just as easily point to something by Graham Greene or John Updike.
Mod
And yet, I don't think those sessions move the story at all and I ..."
That could have been very telling, yes!
Mod
That's a nice take on it.
Mod
True, but it's also a writer's skill, I feel. I know Nathan Doyle and Matthew Spain far better than I know Zach or David. And ..."
That's a pretty good point. I'm trying to think if I have a strong sense of the characters in FZ, and I think my feeling is that they're still very young and maturing.
Mod
I think the book ends optimistically so it does seem like Zach & David will stay together. I ..."
:-D
Mod
:-D
I'm a bit late, the time zone put me to bed.Lil' Grogan wrote: "Lol, I'm a romance reader. Some strange part of me is an optimist. Despite the stunted growth of both the characters, I want to believe in the face of quicksand."
Amen!
Someone mentioned Regularly Scheduled Life, a book I loved very much.. That's one of the few books that made me really wonder if the main characters will stay together. Finding Zach didn't leave me with that feeling, maybe because, as Yvonne said, they seemed to survive staying apart willingly for a while.
Mod
Lol, my pet peeve is the opposite, which happens far mor..."
Well, I think my pet peeve would be the same as yours should I be in your shoes. lol, if I ever write a book set in London (which I doubt will happen anyway), but should I do so, I'll make sure to have a Londoner proof it for me!
Mod
True, but it's also a writer's skill, I feel. I know Nathan Doyle and Matthew Spain far better than I know Zach o..."
I think I have to agree here. They are still young and maturing at the end of the book, and I don't really have a sense of what they would do in certain situations aside from what's in the book. ... When I look back at Adrien, yes, I know exactly what would happen. And, part of that is the fact that it's a series, but the other part is the character development was really well done.
I can say the same for something like The Ghost Wore Yellow Socks, if you want a single book to talk about, or even some of the series books where I've only read the first one, like Will and Taylor for example. I know them, after one book, better than I know Zack and David.
Speaking of Adrien though... Josh, you included his mother and the rest of his adopted family quite heavily throughout the series, and yes, his mother annoyed me very much the way she was annoying Adrien. BUT, there was a difference in the way I found her annoying and the way I found Jane annoying.
Jane could have been cut from the book and it might have been a better book (maybe-that could be debated on a hundred different levels), but Adrien's mom, no way. She was annoying, but she was great and she moved the plot along, unlike Jane. I don't know if that's exactly what I'm trying to say, but in the end Adrien's mother wins out, hands down, if we were to have a grudge match between the two for better m/m romance mothers. lol.
Mod
I'm really not sure about this. I think I was just glad to get to the end of the book and some form of an HFN ending. Unlike other books where I DO think about what happens after because I can't help myself, this one I put out of my mind rather quickly. I don't want to say I don't care, but in all honesty, I'm not really sure I do.
I agree though, with the thought that if he'd been older than 15 things would have been very different for both him and David, and maybe then I might have a better sense of whether or not they will stay together.
I think they do stay together. There was a willingness to "know" the other person for who they are and not what each perceived the other to be. I felt that for the most part, each misunderstanding was addressed quickly and head on. There wasn't a feeling that things were allowed to fester. David and Zach each forced each other to talk about what they were feeling. This, to me, shows that they are each invested in making the relationship work. Love doesn't necessarily conquer all, they're willing to fight for it.The author wrote a short story with the reporter as the protagonist... there's a mention of Zach; and by extension his relationship with David. It was nice to re-visit them; and the story had a nice twist to it.
Mod
I probably included just enough genuine weirdness in all my characters to make them believable. :-D
Mod
Yes, I definitely had the feeling they wanted it to work and would do everything in their power. Whether it would actually *be* in their power...that I wasn't sure.
Josh wrote:Yes, I definitely had the feeling they wanted it to work and would do everything in their power. Whether it would actually *be* in their power...that I wasn't sure. "I think it could be said of any couple of any story that had a premise so ambitious. Zach will be screwy for a long time. I don't think RS ever made it seem as if he was "cured". They both love each other, are together, are shown to want to be together... HEA.
If they get more story time in the future... what would it more of the same? For me, RS established that these two are a duo; I always finish a book assuming that they're going to remain together... is that naive (LOL)?
Mod
I think that's the natural response. Most readers who pick up a romance novel are hoping for a believable happy ending. The reader is willing to work with the writer toward that end, provided the writer doesn't make the odds insurmountable.
Mod
:-D
I know, I know!
Emanuela ~Zstyx~ wrote: "*cough*Paris*cough*"
:o)
:o)
Mod
As I found myself growing impatient with the story, I went and checked out what others had to say on various review sites, and I realized that I was very much in the minority. Even Dr. Sarah over at Dear Author was apparently taken with FZ. Not that I always agree with Dr. S., but she generally makes a convincing argument. In fact, she was so convincing about FZ that I feel like I must have read a different book!
So, while I was impressed by the ambition of the piece, and while the premise touched me, I found the writing itself -- primarily pacing, structure, and dialog -- to be too flawed for me to enjoy the story. But obviously a lot of readers found this believable and moving and even, in a couple of cases, riveting.
I think that demonstrates a couple of things -- the first being (as we all already know) reviewing is highly subjective. And the second -- that storytelling very often trumps writing, especially in the romance genre (because it deals primarily with emotional content). And that's something I really struggle with more and more. It's just very difficult for me to enjoy a good story if the writing isn't equally good. It didn't used to be this way, but it's what I mentioned before about the dentist unable to see the smile for the gum disease. It's really hard for me to relax and go with the story flow if the work is technically flawed.
(I guess we could argue that whether something is "technically flawed" is subjective too, though I find it less so, unless we're discussing stylistic elements.)
On the other hand, I'll be the first to admit that a technically perfect work without an engaging story is just as bad...so...
I guess my point is, I'm probably going to be unduly critical in these book of the month discussions, so nobody take it too-seriously.
Finding Zach didn't ultimately work for me, but it's clear that it did appeal to many readers.
Josh wrote: "that storytelling very often trumps writing, especially in the romance genre (because it deals primarily with emotional content)"Now, that gave me some kind of lightbulb moment. ;-)
And it explains a lot. A few years ago I joined an online group of exclusivly female romance novel readers. And from the very beginning I wondered why they would always give such incredible good marks to everything that was romance. My impression was that they mostly rate the idea of the story and did not add the execution of the idea to their votes. It feels like most of those readers were filling the gaps of the story or writign with their own imagination of how it should be.
Maybe that's similar here. Originally, I was prepared to like this story (or idea for a story)and rate it high. But then I started to stumble over traps in the execution.
Or maybe I'm just greedy to want both: the idea and good writing. :-)
I appreciate good writing and it amazes me, but for me the story comes first. I can forgive a so-so writing if the story is great, but a lame story written perfectly makes me even madder. I can't write reviews, what I write here on GR is what a book does to me.Even if there were some frustrating things in Finding Zach, it was hard for me to put the book down and that's always one of the ways I measure _my_ contentment with a book. It's not a sophisticated or smart method and it surely does nothing to determine the value of a book, but I've been asking for stories since when I was a child and I guess I never lost the sheer excitement of it. This basically means I am probably not even a reader, but a consumer of stories :)
Josh wrote: "Some final thoughts from me on Finding Zach. And the second -- that storytelling very often trumps writing, especially in the romance genre (because it deals primarily with emotional content). And that's something I really struggle with more and more.
I'm sure for you as a writer, it's disheartening to say this, but it's often true for the reader that storyline will trump writing, and not just in romance books.
As an example, I've read many John Grisham books perfectly aware that these are not the best written books, but I still enjoyed them. Grisham then surprised critics by writing a book called "A Painted House" which featured some of the best writing he has ever done. I read it and liked the book. But I cannot say that I liked it better than any of his more poorly written legal thrillers because I didn't.
As for Finding Zach, it didn't push any of my dislike buttons although it could have easily gone that way. I'm also reading this book from the perspective of a mother of a teen age son. So while others wanted to get wrung out by the story & cry great buckets of tears over it (and were disappointed when this didn't happen), I was very, very happy with the direction RS took with this. I have a feeling if RS had gone for a more technically perfect book, I would have ended up disliking it.
My impression of the book is I enjoyed reading it & it was a nice little optimistic love story. Maybe it's because when I read this, I think about all the real survivors & I want to believe in the possibility for their happy ending as well.
Josh wrote: "On the other hand, I'll be the first to admit that a technically perfect work without an engaging story is just as bad...so... ..."
I gave it a thought and I suppose I prefer a technically and stylistically good writing without much of a story to a badly written good content. Or at least the chances I would manage to finish the book are higher.
I gave it a thought and I suppose I prefer a technically and stylistically good writing without much of a story to a badly written good content. Or at least the chances I would manage to finish the book are higher.
That probably explains the diversity of opinions.I lean heavily on the side of writing quality versus basic content, although I don't think these are as unrelated as being discussed.
I feel a rush of pleasure at reading good writing. The cleanliness of sentences, their tightness, their flow around punctuation, their cadence, rhythm and weight all impact me like a delicious narcotic pushing endorphins round my body. Words put together unexpectedly, refreshingly make me dizzy and turned on. I can't separate the quality of the writing from the content of the story, though. What's being said is a significant component of that quality, not unlike a good figure under pretty clothes making the whole dazzling.
Beautiful, lyrical, intense writing brings me to my knees. I want, I want, I crave.
The impact of bad writing is visceral, too.
Ugly sentences irritate. Clumsy turns of phrase grate. Grammatical errors annoy like wretched pimples on a hapless teen. There is no forgiving overwriting, like a nagging woman who won't shut up, and other vices of their ilk. Wretchedness.
I have no statistical data to support this, but I can't help thinking people who write well are more likely to also have better stories. Ideally, the best authors are those well-read enough to have developed a sound ear for clean writing, are intelligent, observant and perceptive enough to write insightfully about the human experience, and happen to have enough of that magical, unknown ingredient of talent that allows them to be able to construct these pieces of art which drive me to such lust...
Speedwell's writing (words) was fine for me. I like her writing. I've read somewhere that in plot-driven books (as opposed to literary books), the writing should be "invisible". Which means that the readers should never pause either because the writing is bad or word choice too complicated that leave the readers puzzled.
Which is why a lot of literary books are boring while great thriller writers like John Grisham managed to draw us in although his books might not be technically perfect.
Mod
This is why I couldn't read Cut and Run, and why a few other books got tossed because while there was promise in the stories, they failed otherwise.
FZ doesn't quite fill this ... whatever it is. For the most part I found the actions and dialoge unrealistic, not so much gramatical and other errors, like too many dialoge tags or adverbs. Or weird info dumps. But yeah, hope that all makes sense.
Anna wrote: "Josh, I've noticed that I'm becoming the same way. For a long time I used to read for the story alone, probably because when I was younger I wrote that way too. But now that I'm trying to make my own writing publishable, I get annoyed when others don't seem to work just as hard at their writing too. This is why I couldn't read Cut and Run, and why a few other books got tossed because while there was promise in the stories, they failed otherwise. "
Oh, well said! I made the mistake of getting Cut & Run as an audiobook. Things you can gloss over in reading are excruciating in an audiobook, because every word is read at a deliberate pace. C&R did the "over-describing" thing, where every time a character picks up a fork or puts on a shirt is described, for no plot or character development purpose (by the way, Fair Game stood up well to the audiobook treatment). The plot was also quite repetitive. I think there were four rounds of the characters doing crappy police work and one of them getting hurt.
But many people love this book to death, and I even see why. The characters have something about them which is compelling, and so does their story. A good editor could have turned this into a book even us picky types would have really enjoyed.
And I feel the same way about Finding Zach. The characters and the story were compelling enough that a good editor could have fixed up most of the complaints here, and made this a good book.
An example of a false note I think no one else has mentioned: where David the artist invents the tracking device that ends up finding the camp where Zach is being held. Come on. Her editor should have saved the writer from this bit of WTF cutesyness.
Charming wrote: "An example of a false note I think no one else has mentioned: where David the artist invents the tracking device that ends up finding the camp where Zach is being held. Come on. "I think that fits with both of them being some kind of genius. ;-) Maybe that's the reason why David was able to design the chip. Or 'design' was meant in an artistically way? Don't know what was so ingenious about Zach and David but decided to read over it.
I'm sure it was corny but I liked the idea of David designing the tracking device that saved Zach's life. It not only showed that David was still thinking about Zach even after he was gone a couple years but gave the character something to hold onto so he wouldn't become too pathetic & guilty and gave him a more modern heroic quality. I think he was supposed to be an artistic computer genius. Plus so many people now use GPS devices when mountain climbing & hiking now. I think it's saved a few lives so it's not entirely unbelievable.
I decided to try out this Book of the Month Club starting with the March book choice and found that I enjoyed it tremendously. In another review I heard that someone didn't like the fact that the book skipped 2 years, but I think I'm happy that I didn't have to deal with the indepth trauma that Zach faced as he learned to survive and become "human" again. A good choice. I'm happy I read this one.
Wow, I'm so happy to find other people who didn't like Cut and Run. I thought I was the only one out there!
Mod
That has to be a main consideration if not the number one consideration in judging a book. As obsessed as I am with writing, it is the storytelling itself that gets people engaged and excited.
Mod
It sounds like you're equating technical merit with depressing or wrenching content?
Mod
I gave it a thought and I suppose I prefer a technic..."
Ideally, you do want both. That is the goal, and in theory books that don't achieve both, shouldn't be published. That said, a lot of m/m work is widely acknowledged to be technically flawed, but it still sells very, very well.
Mod
I'm tempted to think that's true. However what qualifies as a "better" story is going to vary so much for some readers.
There are enormously successful writers in this genre who are so technically bad I almost can't fathom it, but they are *genuinely* popular with readers. Which is a good reminder that when it comes to our storytelling requirements, a lot of people go for schmoop and sex -- and sentence structure be damned.
Mod
I'd say the single thing that probably colored my feelings about the story was the dialog. The dialog was basically place holder dialog. Most of the characters had the same voice, used the same phrasing, swore the same way, etc.
It's a problem for me because a -- probably my single favorite element in storytelling is the dialog between the characters, and b -- it jars my suspension of disbelief by keeping my critical eye focused on the technical rather than the entertaining.
Mod
I'd agree that clean, simple writing is the ideal for general fiction. Elements like structure and pacing *are* essentially invisible -- meaning you only notice them when they're not there.
It certainly wasn't the lack of stylistic curlicues which bothered me in FZ.
Mod
Dialog is really difficult. It's basically the single element that allows the really good writer to lope along ahead of the rest of the pack.
At the very least it has to move the story along, establish character, and illustrate relationships -- and it has to sound believable and genuine while still not being the repetitive, pointless, clumsy stuff of real dialog.
At it's best, it's entertaining all on its own. It makes the reader laugh or cry or hold their breath waiting for the next bit.
Mod
I think I automatically fixed that in my mind so that David, the computer nerd, was also an artist in his spare time. :-D
Mod
Absolutely. This is why aspiring writers don't need to agonize over some artificial literary ideal. A clean, simple, effective writing style will succeed beautifully. But things like strong dialog, intelligent plotting, logical structure...those things aren't stylistic fancyfoos. Those are the building blocks of good writing.
Mod
Good! Glad you enjoyed it!
Mod
I think I have to agree, that not being able to put a book down is a great way to measure how good it is. Sadly, I was able to put FZ down. I only kept reading because I paid for it and was reading it for this group.
Josh wrote: "Yvonne wrote: "I have a feeling if RS had gone for a more technically perfect book, I would have ended up disliking it...."It sounds like you're equating technical merit with depressing or wren..."
I'm not sure about this. For example, I think it was good to have a first person POV for Zach in the earlier scenes in the book. But I liked that she switched it to other POV's (some called this a mistake) because I wouldn't want to continue reading the entire story at that level of intensity. Sometimes a first person POV can be very suffocating and I think in this type of story it could get there. If you were writing a horror story where you want the reader to feel like like they're trapped in that cage with Zach & feeling every moment of terror with him it might work, but since this is a romance...
I think the skipping of the two years, as awkwardly as it was done, benefited the story. The fact that the mother was a secondary character and not very strongly done was not a detriment to me. The focus of the story was to be about Zach & David anyways. Not showing Zach's therapy kept the story from getting talky & preachy.
I've read many more depressing & heart wrenching non fiction & fiction stories than this so the point isn't really that I'm anti angst. However, I think the story required a balancing act to fit into a romantic storyline and I believe that's why these decisions were made.
Yvonne wrote: "I think the skipping of the two years, as awkwardly as it was done, benefited the story. The fact that the mother was a secondary character and not very strongly done was not a detriment to me. The focus of the story was to be about Zach & David anyways. Not showing Zach's therapy kept the story from getting talky & preachy.I've read many more depressing & heart wrenching non fiction & fiction stories than this so the point isn't really that I'm anti angst. However, I think the story required a balancing act to fit into a romantic storyline and I believe that's why these decisions were made."
You said it better than I attempted to write :) I kept deleting my response it made no sense...
The book was a nice mix of romance, angst and redemption for me. Another reader (a friend of mine) mentioned Amy Lane... Amy Lane is my Crying Queen! I love her with the passion of 10000 suns, but if she had written this book I would not have been able to function for awhile.... Here, there was enough to feel for what Zach has gone through, and root for him and David to have some happiness together.
For me, ultimately, this was a winner because I will definitely re-read it and I want to read more about these characters... even the mom ;)
What I love most about book discussion is learning how to write better myself. This is why aspiring writers don't need to agonize over some artificial literary ideal. A clean, simple, effective writing style will succeed beautifully.
And this is something I really need to keep in mind. I often agonize if my writing style is good enough. Perhaps because I come from The Silmarillion fandom where most writers have beautiful poetic style, even when they are writing action and sagas.
Q&A with Josh Lanyon
Books mentioned in this topic
The Silmarillion (other topics)Finding Zach (other topics)
Savior (other topics)
Finding Zach (other topics)
Certainly the intent is to analyze the work and not to criticize or hurt the writer -- we have a lot of writers here so in a way everything is always a learning process for us. Having the chance to discuss with readers and other writers is always useful even when the work under discussion is not your own.