Goodreads Sci-Fi/Fantasy Authors discussion
Writing and Publishing
>
Imposing boundaries on your own creative license
As always, a fascinating topic, George!I am not sure if this one fits, but I do not think I will ever write a rape scene. Those who have read my work say that I am very descriptive and realistic when it comes to my characters and their actions. That I really put my readers not only in the moment, but in the heads of the characters. The reason for this is that when I am writing, I mentally put myself in the mind of my character. Almost to the point of being classified as schizophrenic. I try and "feel" all of the emotions the character is experiencing as I write the scene. I think it is why I have so many fans who say they have cried/cringed/etc. at some of my more horrific scenes.
That being said, I have no interest in living inside the mind of a rapist. I have never raised a hand in anger or violence toward a woman, and I feel it is one of the worst crimes a man can do to the opposite sex. Mentally, I do not think I could handle the strain of living it, even fictitiously.
Blood and gore - bring it on. Torture - it hurts, and I am always in a strange mood when I am done writing a it, but I'll live. Rape - count me out.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
that is indeed another topic...and potentially not a pretty one.
Danielle,That is a wonderful sub-topic, and one that I speak on at great length in my creative writing classes. Here is my two cents, for what it's worth.
The number one reason I see for new writers to remain unpublished is that they look at their story from an "artistic" standpoint instead of from a business standpoint. This industry is about one thing... making money. The publishers want it, the agents want it, and I think you will find that even the most jaded artistic anti-materialistic writer wants it. So, when I talk and teach others about writing, I am always amazed to hear an unpublished writer say, "I will never change my stuff to please a publisher. I have too much artistic pride."
For that is a person who is going to find it hard to succeed in this industry. Yes, to succeed you have to tell a compelling story, create vibrant and dynamic characters, etc. But you have to do it in a way that someone is willing to pay you for.
You hit the nail on the head with your final statement. A writer's goal is to entertain. We are the monkeys who juggle, the bears who dance.
I have come up with one statement which seems to help new writers wrap their brains around this topic. "You are not, nor will you ever be successful if you write a story that is for your amusement alone. Writing professionally is not about you, the author. It is about them, the readers. Forget what you think is awesome and write what they think is awesome. If you can do that, you will be on your way to success."
If that statement makes me whorish, then step right up, sugar-pie. If you're willing to pay me what I need, I'll be your Huckleberry for the night.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
see...now that was precisely what I feared would happen if we travelled down that particular path.
An author should never write a story to please anyone but himself. He is his own first reader, and if he doesn't like the material he's writing it will show and the book will suck. It may be publisheable and in fact published but probably not worth reading. Book stores are full of that stuff.
I am not saying that an author should not enjoy what they write. You are correct, if an author is not a fan of their own story, it will show.I am saying an author must listen, grown and learn. To the readers, the industry, and the professionals who run this industry.
I am saying that if you let "artistic pride" get in the way, and always think that what you have written is the best it can ever be and that no one can tell you how to improve it, then you are writing to please yourself alone. And that is the pitfall I see so many unpublished writers fall into.
When my first novel was released, I thought I was king. Then I sat down with a N.Y. Times Best Selling Fantasy Author who said, "You know, you are not a real writer until you have published 1,000,000 words. Now, my first book was 140,000 words. So, I thought, Nah... I got this...
But, now that I have about 500,000 words published I think back, and you know what? That jerk was right. I feel I know only about 50% of what I need to know about being an author.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
I won't presume to speak for Maxwell, but I would think that he is not suggesting that you write simply to appease the consumption desires of the public or craft your fiction to the consripts of what is in vogue at any given moment...at least, I hope that's not what he's suggesting.For myself, I am unflinchingly intransigent when crafting my fiction...I take what I term the Pink Floyd approach to creative writing...this is my vision and the consumers' only input is that the may accept it for what it is...or not...
My simple maxim is that...if I don't like it, I'm not going to write it...irrespective of the potential payback.
I don't wish to disparage these monumental creative accomplishments, but from my perspective if I have to write horror offerings that are Twilight or Saw like to sell...I'm simply not going to do it.
If I have to craft Dungeon and Dragons style fantasy to have mass appeal, then I would rather pack my creative product into a steamer chest full of stones and sink it into the nearest water body.
Being mindful of advice...especially if filling the attic with cash is your ultimate objective...is always sound practice. Still, you have to live with the beast you've wrought and all the compensation in the world won't matter if you are displeased with your own creation.
I agree with you, George, about not writing something you don't like. I know the old maxim "Sex sells", but I'm not comfortable with writing graphic sex scenes so I simply don't incorporate them into my books. If that means I don't make loads of money, then so be it. But, at least I'm being true to my own visions and not just pandering to other people's tastes for the sake of the almighty dollar.I didn't write my book expecting to become a millionaire. I just wanted to share my imagination with others and hope that they enjoy it as much as I do.
Cash is good...don't get me wrong! But, it's not the end-all, be-all for me as an author.
This is not to say that both are mutually exclusive...it is possible to be wildly successful and stay true to your artistic vision...The aforementioned Pink Floyd are a perfect example of this concept. I have little doubt that controversial Steven Erikson has adhered to his vision and has crafted fantasy like no other I have ever read...and made a good buck doing it. really, the detail comes with intent...If you approach creative fiction from the 'tell-me-what-you-want-me-to-write-and-I'll-get to-it-approach', I find it difficult to have any respect for that approach to any kind of art...Yet, it does work...just look at the endless Stephanie Meyer clones that crowd the front section of every book store.
George,Your words for me are dead on. And all of you are correct. In re-reading my above post, I miss-represented what I wanted to say. So I will reiterate.
Since I teach and speak at a lot of writers conferences and fan conventions, I meet tons of unpublished writers, and befriend many of them. And what I see time and again from watching them attempt to break into the publishing industry and failing is their lack of a desire to grow in their skill of writing. They see the Pink Floyds of the world and say, "I am that good also. The world must bow to me and my ideology and I will not change my course."
But the truth is, Pink Floyd stuck to his creative guns yes. But, his creative guns were exactly what the industry wanted at that time.
The point of my above statement was not to say sell out and write what someone else wants you to write and do it just for the money. My point was that I feel new writers misinterpret the craft of writing with the craft of storytelling. Telling a compelling tale, and writing well are two completely different things. However, many new writers feel that the "style" in which they create a sentence or a paragraph is their "art" and are resistant to changing it.
Just as 2 + 2 = 4, and not 5, there are correct ways to put words on the page and incorrect ways. Almost every single writer I know who has been rejected for years is being rejected not for their story idea, but for the way in which they write their story. And even though they are told this every time they ask for a critique from their writers' group, fellow writers, etc. They refuse to change how they write. Because they fell it would be selling out. I say that learning how to write a sentence using correct grammar is not selling out, it is learning the craft. An artist who takes a class on how to mix paints better, or to learn a new brush stroke is not selling out, they are simply growing as an artist.
So, yes, write the story you feel is the right story for you to write. Love the story you are writing. If you are going to write professionally, however, understand that it has to be written in a style that the industry will accept. Do not get hung up on the "craft" of writing and feel that if you change it, you are killing your "artistic pride."
Hopefully that will resonate as a better way of saying what I meant... :)
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Initially, I wanted this to be a dialogue about self-imposed censorship...i.e. can we police ourselves as writers and spare the human centipede 2 type offering...I would have thought this would be a good discussion for authors...perhaps not.My last thought on approach to fiction in terms of artistic integrity is this...it is important to remember that there are two very distinct components of creative writing. Wordsmithery and the technical ability to fashion sentences in a compelling and (to some extent) grammatically correct fashion is one half of the equation. This part can be taught and learned. The other part...and the part that is commonly ignored on this site...is creativity. If you are devoid of imagination and incapable of conjuring themes and concepts, you can never aspire to be a truly great writer, irrespective of how well you manipulate the language...unless you write text books. This part cannot be taught...either you have an imagination...or you don't. Without an imagination, the best you can do is regurgitate another writer's product. As stated previously, it is still possible to make a good deal of cash doing exactly this. So many people on this site seem to be fixated on the concept of gramatical purity as a yardstick against which to measure talent and that is unfortunate. You cannot compensate for creative sterilty with slick metaphor or perfectly placed commas. I make grammatical errors...so does nearly everyone who posts on this site. The dark side of my nature derives a certain measure of perverse pleasure in misplacing the odd comma or making inappropriate use of a semi-colon...if only to hear the purists howl in indignation.
Hehe, sorry George for aiding to the runaway topic.I will try and steer us back.
Speaking on the topic of censorship, as a father of younger children, I am put off by the amount of sex and cursing in Y.A. literature these days. First I have an issue with it on the basis that the target market is Y.A. Second, and this is just a personal thing, I think it detracts from certain genres.
I am classified as an adult fantasy writer. I write on topics of an adult nature. However, in my main fantasy saga, I do not write any sex nor cussing. Not that I can't, and my target market is 17 to 50, but still. I do not think it adds to the experience. I just finished reading Joe Abercrombie's series. It was really good. However, he dropped the F-bomb on like every page. This was not offensive to me, but I will not let my boys read it. Plus, the F-bomb just does not scream high-fantasy to me. It seems out of character for the world he created.
And don't get me wrong. I am no prude. I have a graphic novel project in the works that is a dark cyber-punk future earth. It is full of cussing, sex and nudity. Yet across the cover are the words - For Mature Audiences Only. Comic book shops are not allowed to sell those books to anyone under 17. George R.R. Martin's Game of Thrones has no maturity warning, and anyone of any age can purchase it. Yet he has some amazingly descriptive sex scenes of not only the socially acceptable kind, but with incest and young teens. Now, Game of Thrones is not a Y.A. book, I am simply using it to say that novels are not earmarked with a maturity rating. But, if you are writing something and targeting the young adult market, directly soliciting youth in the 10 to 14 age range, I find it a poor choice. Though it is rampant in that market from what I have seen.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Interesting...like the oft-played grammatical card...another of the favorite goodreads echoed literary blugeoning planks is character...I've often wondered who the arbiter of 'real and unreal' characters might be? If you apply the concept of creative to the word fiction, wouldn't it logically follow that there would be no such thing as an 'unreal' character...perhaps one-dimensional...maybe superficial...even extravagant...but unreal? Don't quite get that moniker.I have no limits to the elements I will incorporate into a story...rape, torture...the Convering series and the forthcoming Land of Shades fantasy series has them all where they are pertinent to the story...however, no protagonist in a story I pen will commit or condone either of these acts...that is my boundary...
Danielle,First off... thank you! And secondly... thank you!
You said my point wonderfully... perhaps I should send you my blog posts for a re-write before I post them? lol, just kidding.
And you are also correct on your second point. However, I emotionally live through what I write. So, the rape thing is just something that I dread experiencing.
That being said... in one novel I have a character with a small POV part who is a pedophile. He is a man of great power with no consequences to his actions. I really wanted to show how horrible he was, but in writing his inner thoughts, I found if took a toll on my emotions. I lived through it, and for the most part the really bad stuff I simply allude to. But still, writing it took an emotional toll on me.
Recently, I wrote a short story for a Gen-Con anthology set in the same world. This story has a much larger scene with this same man and is about 16 years earlier in his career. To be true to the character, he had to do what he had to do. As I do not write graphic sex, I avoid the worst brunt of the issue. Still, I had to delve deeper into his mindset and it was not fun for me. It turned out well, and those who have read it cringe and feel soiled themselves, so I know I pulled it off. Still, emotionally, those characters are hard on me.
I had a character violently murder a small child in another story. A boy about the same age as my son. I get tons of email from people saying they cried like a baby during that scene. For me, I could not write for a week afterwards.
Will I one day have to write a rape scene? Perhaps. Will I be looking forward to it? Most definitely not!
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Now imagine, Maxwell, writing that same scene, except slyly insinuating that the murder was not really so bad...that maybe even the child deserved its fate...had you taken this perspective...you would have embraced the central concept of the Saw series (sadly, the biggest grossing horror franchise of all time, I think I read somewhere) and this is why I talk about boundaries and limits...not so much in what can be written about...but rather, the perspective from which it is written.
George,Actually, it was a really gripping scene that can only happen in Fantasy. The killer is actually one of my protagonists. The boy is one he loves beyond all else. The scene was written from the protagonists point of view. However, the protagonist is locked inside his own mind and all he can do is watch. A foreign entity has full control over his body and does the actual act. Though with the protagonists body. So, the protagonist is forced not only to watch, but to experience his own body doing the actual killing. And not only the physical act, but look into the eyes of the young child who does not understand why this is happening to him, and the betrayal that accompanied this act. Since I live the experience with him, it was a tough thing to write.
All in all, however, one of my best scenes.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
To clarify...there is a distinction between censorship and self-imposed creative constraint...one need only read this wiki description for human the human centipede 2..to grasp why boundaries are a good thing.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Huma...
How this could be construed as entertainment for anyone of sound mind is totally beyond me.
Oh, come on George. Like who hasn't masturbated with sandpaper wrapped around their penis?:)
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
On the OP topic, I don't write jerks. There's more than enough of them out there, so I just don't write them.Not to say there aren't bad guys (and I mean bad guys) in my books but they aren't into petty cruelty for it's own sake. If any of you are Firefly fans and remember the episode where the assassin came for River, that's the kind of bad guys I write. I prefer sociopaths to a$$holes.
As for plot elements, if they're needed I'll write them. I don't limit myself in that direction.
On the second level, I've met the "My artistic vision is pure, and I've sold three copies to my family types." A lot of the time that's an excuse for not bothering to learn how to write well. I've seen precisely one exquisitely written book of pure artistic work where I'm sure the reason it wasn't picked up by a trad publisher was the ending. It was a five star book until the last two pages when the author took his lit fic/nihilistic revenge on the reader by completely destroying the story he set up. Should he have altered his vision and changed the end? I'd say yes. He was so bent on making sure the book proved his point that the ending was almost impossible. (By which I don't mean difficult to read, I mean there physically wasn't time or opportunity for it to happen.)
However, it's been almost a year, and I'm still thinking about that one. Maybe that was the point.
to Danielle...a fun-loving exchange of ideas...divergent or otherwise...with intelligent people...that's it...or to see how other writers decide where to draw the line on content or presentation in their work...or if they have a line at all.There is an inherent danger in equating sales to quality of content...as I don't like to fix on books, let's take an example from my favorite stomping stone...the movies...the King's Speech might be lucky to realize a tenth of the gross take of say, Hangover 2...but I don't think that's a good barometer against which to measure the relative quality of both offerings. There seems to be an implicit verdict in this thread that if someone unflaggingly sticks to their creative guns and is not influenced by market trends, their work is, by extension, probably inherently flawed and poorly crafted.
George,Unfortunately, you are correct about the "implicit verdict." Yet, as with all stereotypes, there is a reason people in this industry believe the way they do.
Stereotypes are created because the majority of something (or at least the majority that is seen by the culture outside of theirs) is found to be a certain way.
The unfortunate thing is that every manuscript I have read from someone who said, "Oh my book is the best ever written. The only reason I keep getting rejected is because it is too (smart, funny, intelligent, etc.) and the industry is too stupid to realize I am a genius." has been found to be none of those things. I have found the reason for its rejection is because the author has no understanding of the fundamentals of the craft of writing. Their plot meanders, or they head-hop, or POV shift, or have author intrusions every other paragraph, or their characters are flat and 2D, or they start the book off with 30,000 words of telly information dump (because my world is awesome and it is important for you to know how my mythical gods created my mythical world millions of years ago even though none of it plays any part in my story,) or any number of things that an acquisitions editor looks at and says, "If I sign this, I will have to re-write the entire thing. OR... I could see if I can find something that will be a little less work on me in the pile of about 50,000 submissions sitting on my desk instead."
I am not making this up. I have actually read a post from a writer who said, "Don't submit your story to XYZ publishing house. I submitted them my AWESOME manuscript and they rejected it. So, obviously they are a scam."
The reason why the implicit verdict in this thread about someone who unflaggingly sticks to their creative guns and feel their work is, by extension, probably inherently flawed and poorly crafted is because, at least from what I have seen over the past 5 years of writing and teaching writing as my sole source of income, is that everyone who fits that stereotype has a manuscript that is inherently flawed and poorly crafted.
The biggest danger to this industry is that the only requirement for writing a book is the ability to power up a computer and open a word processing program. NO other industry is like that.
To become a lawyer, doctor, engineer, friggin' hamburger flipper, you have to get some training. Taking it closer to home, I will point you back to Danielle's post about an actor and his audience. That actor had to go to school to even be on that stage. He had to take bit parts, go to hours and hours of rehearsal, etc. etc. etc.
Which brings me full circle to my original posts. Don't confuse the craft of writing with your "artistic vision." Don't feel that when someone tells you that your story is not well written they are attacking your "artistic vision." And, don't feel you can't improve how you write. Because without a good understanding of the craft of writing, no one outside the 3 members of your family willing to purchase your book will ever read your "artistic vision."
I may have stated it wrong in my first post, but I still stick to what I meant. If you do not cater to what this industry is looking for (and I am not talking about plot, or story, or vision - I am talking about producing a product that is well crafted) you will find it increasingly harder to break into this industry. And the only way to produce something this industry is looking for is to change the way you are putting words on the paper. Not change your "artistic vision," but your understanding of the craft of writing.
***George, yes, I went back off topic... but it was your own fault with your last post. Sorry.***
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Again, the issue has split in two directions...I'm not suggestiong that you should heed no one's advice...or that the gurus in the publishing houses don't have their finger on the pulse of what we want to read...the issue was what you choose to write...not how competently you write it...harkening back the the King's Speech...accolades from the academy aside...every individual involved in this project probably understood that they were never going to set box office records, but they made the movie they wanted to make and not faster and even more furious 52. Artists who elect to write in different styles or genres do so (I hope) with the full expectation that they may have limited audiences and never garner the recognition their material may well deserve. Maxwell, you seem to want to focus on talent (or lack thereof), but I'm talking about intent...I am merely saying that I prefer artists who take the approach "I hope people will like what I've created.' over those who say "What can I create, that people will like." The distinction has nothing to do with talent and everything to do with approach to the art form.
George,In that, we could not agree more. A writer must write what they love.
It is the reason I write sci-fi and fantasy. I would suck as a romance novelist, even if I felt I could make good money at it, I would never go down that path.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
On this we are in total agreement...to me (again subjective) fantasy is the writer's genre...the true blank canvas unlike any other...People have often said to me, "You should write this kind of story...or that kind of story" Even If I was so inclined, I lack the sensibility necessary to write, say a hard-boiled detective novel (I guess this also speaks to recognizing your limitations as a writer).Just a last point on characterization...I've often seen creative writing ads offering to teach prospective writers about how to make their characters come alive, etc, etc. Of course, there is merit to this, but it really isn't necessary that every character in your novel be full-realized, vibrant contruct...If we look around our own lives, how many people do we know that would fit this bill...the world is full of two dimension and one dimensional people...or people who are effective but don't bristle with personality...or people who are simple (for the lack of a better word) in their views and tastes...shouldn't fiction reflect this as well to some extent...wouldn't creating novels full of Jack Sparrows be an incredibly contrived thing? The world is not necessarily shaped by people with big, bold and vivacious personalities so why do we expect this in our fiction?
I don't mean this to be combative..it's just an interesting (I think?) look at the mechanics of character creation in fiction.
George,I think you hit the nail on the head, just from the wrong angle.
But before I open that Pandora's box, let me say, yes. I love sci-fi, and more specifically, fantasy for that very reason. There are NO limitation save the writer's own creativity.
Now, to throw the fly in the ointment...
You are right that the world is full of two- and one-dimensional people. But, that is EXACTLY why you can NOT have them in fiction. Fiction is not about reality... it is about escaping reality. People do not read my books to say, "Wow! Look at how realistic the magic in his world is." They read them to retreat from their mundane 9 to 5 (not that there is such a thing as a 9 to 5 job anymore) existence.
No one wants to read about Bob the warrior who would "like" to go out and slay Jim the dragon, but he has already used up his vacation time and just can't afford to take the time off without pay. Plus his kid has dance recital and this is really just not a good time right now. Maybe next year. Yea, he is definitely going to plan on planning to try and slay the dragon next year.
NO! That is what we as a reader/movie watcher/etc. are trying to get away from. It has to be larger than life... and not just in sci-fi/fantasy/action adventure. It is the reason why in every chick-flick/bromance/dramady/etc., the main character does something that you the reader/viewer KNOWS is going to get them in trouble. But we WANT them to screw it up so we can watch them struggle to fix it.
As I have said more than once... we love our heroes and we love when they succeed. We just don't want them to succeed until they get the CRAP kicked out of them! That way, we can sit back at a safe distance and just have fun watching our heroes struggle with the situation, IMAGINE that it is us, but not have it actually BE us.
I think if you try and make entertainment into reality, you will lose the essence of what a fiction writer's job is... to entertain. I know I keep throwing this back to Danielle's post, but she really rocked it. An actor is not an actor if he is acting on a stage without any audience. He is just a guy in a silly costume. As a writer, I feel wholeheartedly that I am an actor. I play every roll, say every line, create ever prop and set every stage. I am the monkey who juggles, the bear wearing the tutu who dances.
Now, I am not saying is should not be realistic... just not reality. Think of it as reality skewed. Or better yet, reality on steroids.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Obviously, you have to have compelling characters or you'd fashion a vanillia yogurt story devoid of punch or attraction, but if every inhabitant in your novel is as flamboyant as Jack Sparrow your story will be ridiculous...even by fantasy standards. Not every character in a novel can be an argent beam of light...read Steven Erikson's last few books of the Malazan series and tell me that Tavore Paran dazzles like stars in the firmament...of course she doesn't...yet she is a driving force in the story. She is reticent and aloof and derives what creative power she has from an inexorable determination...not from being a preening peacock...While were on the subject...one of the characterizations I loath the most (and one that seems so unaccountably popular in today's fiction)is the wise-cracking, one-liner dropping protagonist who is ready with the witticism regardless of the situation they might be in. You can't say that they lack for flare or personality....but boy, are they annoying!
Well, I wouldn't say a lack of sparkly personality is the equivalent of a two dimensional character. A shut in xenophobe can be a three dimensional character, it's all about how well designed he is.I also wouldn't say all your characters need to be 3d.
But your main ones have to be, and I'd say the mark of a great writer is the ability to make the secondary characters look and feel alive without overwhelming the plot with non-main-character details.
But, really, we'll all forgive you if the waiter just drops off the food and we don't get any back story on him.
Hehe, Keryl,I could not have said it better.
Yes, I was referring to main characters and sub-main characters... not waiters.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Exactly Keryl...I know I'm belaboring this point, but I find this topic a fascinating one (because this is, in part, about creative mechanics, I thought more authors would chime in on this one...Goodreads still remains a mystery to me)...intent is everything. Before criticism is levelled about someone's writing ability, it is imperative that the critic grasp the writer's intent...I'll bring back good old Jack again, but if the writer intended to fashion a Jack Sparrow, but ended up with toaster strudel...then that writer has failed in that aspect of his creative mechanics...but if that same writer intended to write a toaster strudel personality then he hasn't failed so much as he's hasn't piqued your preference.Take certain works that raise tremendous debate in respect to their worth or quality...a lot of these things come down to personal and subjective perspective...Here's an example that may well make you chuckle at my expense, but so be it...if you take Black Swan and compare it to Sucker Punch...you'll see that both movies employ metaphor and allegory in exactly the same way, yet one is considered high art and the other is regarded as a joke...intent is an often neglected factor in the analysis of and criticism of art.
boy, don't we all sound like high-falutin' intellectual types...lol...George, get over yourself...
I followed you on everything but one...Is it Black Swan or Sucker Punch you think is regarded as a joke.
It's rhetorical of course... Sucker Punch was AWESOME!
:0)
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
I confess...liked 'em both...so much for ever being taken seriously again...
Maxwell wrote: "Hehe, Keryl,I could not have said it better.
Yes, I was referring to main characters and sub-main characters... not waiters.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-win..."
Yeah, you'd think that sort of thing would be a no-brainer, but apparently it's not.
Granted, I'm in the midst of a book with way, way, wayyyyy too many characters, and pretty much everyone who shows up on stage for any given length of time has had back story.
The thing that's really killing me on this one, is that if the author had limited himself to say, three or four of them (yes, he's got so many POV characters that dropping to three or four would be limiting himself) this book might have been good. A few of them are nicely rounded 3d characters.
Then we get to the villains and they all need mustaches to twirl. There's not an ounce of subtly in any of them, let alone common sense or decent dialog.
So, let me go a little further on my 3D character views: your villain must be as well rounded as your protagonist.
George wrote: "Exactly Keryl...I know I'm belaboring this point, but I find this topic a fascinating one (because this is, in part, about creative mechanics, I thought more authors would chime in on this one...Go..."I get what you're saying about intent. I think that's what troubles me most about the one artistic vision book I thought was written by someone who knew how to write.
Songs From the Other Side of The Wall felt like it had a sad ending tacked on because the author was just too hip for a happy one. But I don't know if that was his intent. I can't tell if he's just that jaded, or if he really didn't understand that the ending he wrote didn't work.
If I'm feeling really literary, I take the tack that his MC was just so far off the beaten path, that nothing she told us actually happened and it was all in her mind, just manufactured to give her an out. But was he really that good of a writer? There are hints that he might have been setting that up, but it's not certain.
I'm sure if he had written up a happy ending, he could have gotten that novel published pretty much anywhere.
Keryl,Actually, I teach a really short class on how to write the best villains...
Ready? Here ya go...
There are no villains.
If you had sat down with Hitler, he would not have said he was a villain. He saw himself as the good guy. Not the psychopathic, genocidal maniac that he really was...
I don't write villains. I write heroes that are just going about things in a way that others see as morally wrong.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Well... if you are gonna get all Nietzsche and Marquis de Sade on me... I'm out.I did not like either of those guys in Caddyshack! (or where those the two robots from the second transformers movie?)
:)
Actually, I will be the one playing ketchup now. I am off to Combat-Con where I will be speaking on violence in literature.... If this thread is still going come Monday, I may puke some more of my worthless words into it.
Til then, write every day and keep chasing the plot.
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
Maxwell wrote: "Keryl,Actually, I teach a really short class on how to write the best villains...
Ready? Here ya go...
There are no villains.
If you had sat down with Hitler, he would not have said he was a v..."
Yeah, that's the way I like mine. These guys are just... Well, they actually do believe what they're doing is for the good and all, but the author so obviously doesn't agree it just doesn't work out.
Danielle wrote: "Re: K., I don't write jerks.Don't rule even that out. Ever read the Flashman series by George MacDonald Fraser? It's a hoot. The "hero" is cowardly scumbag painted in the blackest humor. Jerks ..."
I get that. I like House for example, and he's more or less king of the jerks. But I just don't enjoy writing jerks, so I don't do it. I don't like reading them usually, either. If I wanted to be spending hours working on something I didn't like, I'd be back doing customer service for a long distance company.
Danielle wrote: "But you have to be true to your own literary vision, too. Otherwise, if you're writing purely for the market, you're a worker bee at best, 9 to 5 at heart, a slut at worst.And don't we all feel the creative arts require more of us than mere competency and commercialism? Don't we feel that creativity is something more holy? "
Not to pick on you directly, but you did the best job of summing this idea up.
In a word, no. I don't think there's anything crass or sluttish about doing a very good job of satisfying the wants and needs of the people around you. To me that's the height of honor. Especially for people like us, who are in the entertainment industry. People pay us to have a good time. Definitions of good time vary, and lucky for us most of the time we can give others a good time without having to violate our visions. (The guy who came up with the Human Centipede notwithstanding.)
A writer writes whatever pleases him, as much or as little. He can do whatever he wants. He's an artist. Creativity for it's own sake is his reward.
Authors are producers of a commodity: entertainment. If we expect to make a living at it, we need to pay attention to what we like to write, and what people like to read and try to make the two as close to each other as possible.
I'm an author. Writing stories is my job, and I love it passionately. But I never, ever forget that I'm making a product that people will buy. I never forget that they have certain expectations about this product. I'm not on any sort of holy mission, and I'm not into creativity for the sake of creativity. I'm in it to make people happy. To me, a happy reader is the ultimate endgame.
If that makes me a sluttish 9-5er, well, I'm an ethical one, and I'm having a lot of fun being slutty.
I've missed out on these last few exhanges...the concept that there are no villians?...this is a rather radical refutation of the holy trinity of basic human behavior - moral vs amoral vs immoral andd every combination and permutation in between...as history has demonstrated far too often, each group is all too capable of monstrous acts of evil...the first too groups are delusional while the last is merely self-aware and simply indifferent to its own odious nature. The first two groups do generally yield the most interesting antagonists.
I understood exactly what he means...I merely don't agree with a general treatment that portrays all antagonists in this light...while there are amoral people who lack the basic comprehension skills necessary to grasp the effects and impact of their actions...there are many who understand them all too well and are simply indifferent to the misery and suffering they cause...not everyone who is vile can lay claim to the feeble defense of self-delusion.I do think that the most dangerous form of evil does come from the delusional...look at our own sorry history for proof of this inherent truth...burning people at the stake in the name of virtue...this is far more terrifying because it can't be reasoned with or dissuaded...characters and real people who are immorally evil are often governed by some form of pragmatism and can possibly be circumvented...as written characters, they may lack the flare that often comes with zealous evil in the guise of false morality and delusion.
George,You have taken my post completely out of context. I did not say there are no villains, that there is not a moral vs amoral (good vs evil) etc. bond in almost every story.
I said if you want to write great villains, write your villains like heroes that are just going about things in a way that others see as morally wrong.
I can't tell you how many writers have shown me their manuscripts which I found to be well written, good plot structure and story, etc. yet had been rejected time and again, asking me why they were rejected. When I looked closer, I found that the villain was simply not believable. Sometimes the only poorly written thing in the entire piece. And when I asked them about their villain, what the character's motivations, likes, dislikes, dreams and aspirations were, my answer was... "What do you mean? They are "evil," silly. That is why they are the "bad guy." Didn't you read the scene in chapter three where I showed them kicking puppies as a child?"
I did not say there are no villains, I said if you want to write memorable villains, write them as if you truly believe they are the good guys. Because most villains do not see themselves as evil. They see the world as evil and they are simply giving what they get.
As to the question of sticking to your "artistic beliefs" or selling out and being "commercially successful," this thread has been floating in the back of my head all weekend. Coming back here and re-reading it has only strengthen a though of mine...
In all the above posts of people on the side of "you are a whore if you write commercially," I have to say simply that you are wrong. Wrong in your ideas, wrong in your statement, and wrong in your thinking.
Because, you are trying to put this into a tiny box. You are trying to make this topic out to be black and white. But not based off of any guideline other than your own biased opinion.
You say, "If you make a crappy sparkly vampire copy-cat story, and it sells, you are a whore and your only goal is making money. You don't have any "artistic pride" because you are just writing what you think sells."
But, there is no way for you to know that. What if that writer LOVES sparkly vampires and really believes that they have a UNIQUE take on the subject that, to them, is BETTER than the original that you accuse them of copying?
You sit at your computer, and point your "morally just artistic finger" at them and claim them a sell-out. But, you have no idea what they are doing, nor why.
I am a commercially successful author. Not a NYT best seller. But I have enough fans who purchase my work to allow me to be a writer full time. I LOVE what I write. I LOVE my stories. But I am constantly trying to improve my craft, listen to the industry and my fans, work diligently to produce a better product. Not for me, for the people who read my stuff. I have an obligation to THEM. THEY pay my mortgage. THEY put food on my table.
I apologize if the above sounds harsh. It is because this thread has made me take a harsh look at myself. I have never voiced my disdain for writers who write clones of crappy sparkly vampire tales, but silently I did. Silently, I cursed them for being sellouts. And, looking at some of the posts here has made me realize, who am I to judge them? What makes my opinion of what good literature is so mighty that I can condone their work as crappy? They have fans. And those fans ENJOY what is being fed to them, even if I do not.
Perhaps if you are dogging someone for being a "sellout" due to their success, it is not because that person is a whore... it might just be that you are simply jealous.
*I know I am smacking a hornet's nest with this post, perhaps I really should have sent it to Danielle and let her edit it before I hit post. :) *
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
now..now Maxwell...your losing your temper...Not once did I use the word whore or slut...and there is not real right or wrong in this approach...merely perspective and intent...I wish the industry shapers such as Stephanie Meyer all the best and don't begrudge them all of their wealth and notoriety...the clones...perhaps not so much, but if it makes them a living doing something they love...then that's cool too. As a personal preference, I prefer artists who blaze their own trail...but that's just me...nor did I ever call their work crappy...a word that has no place on this site anyway. If anything, the damning finger of 'crappy or poorly-crafted' has been levelled at those who want to write stories that are true to their own idea of what the genre should be. Market is king and you gotta go with that in the end...the front of my local bookstore is fraught with as you call them, sparkly vampire clones and they sell a ton...so if you see me as being snippy, it's just throwing pebbles at an elephants knees. As feathers are evidently being ruffled and tempers frayed...as always happens on this site during a good old discussion of divergent points of view...I will opt out...Actually, I did want to ask you about Dragon...as I recall during another thread, you mentioned how you use the suite...How long did it take to recognize your voice nuances...would you recommend it and which version do you use? If you are too rankled to respond, I'll understand.
See, that is why I hate blogs and email...You do not get to see the face or emotion of the writer.
If any of my words offended you or made you feel I was attacking you, please, please, please, accept my humblest apology. That was never my intent.
If you get to know me, you will find that I LOVE debate. Not, "angry, see things my way or I will yell louder until you do," arguments. But lively, "wow aren't we having fun discussing a topic in which we both have different takes on knowing that neither of us will ever really change the other's opinion, but it is really fun," debates.
I love this stuff and I am in no way offended or upset. Actually, in the last post I was a bit miffed, but not at anyone here... I was pissed at myself when I realized that "I" was just as guilty as those on the other side of the argument. I felt I was better than that, and to see that I wasn't, pissed me off at myself.
Please don't bow out on my account. I have no ill feelings what-so-ever.
As to Dragon dictation, I actually said that I did NOT use it. I have never even tried it. I can type faster than I can speak (and sometimes, especially when I am blogging, faster than I think - which lands me in hot water) so I think it would slow me down. Plus, I am a really weird writer...
When I am writing creatively, I write with my eyes closed. I am watching a movie in my head, and not really thinking about my hands. They are moving, putting words down on the screen in response to what I am seeing and feeling, but I am not really connected to them. I don't "think" about my hands. I "think" about my story.
I feel that Dragon dictation would not help in that, but force me to think about what I am saying. So, I have avoided even trying.
Besides, I average about 600 final draft words an hour, and write for about 6 hours a day. So, I am cool pushing out 3,000 to 4,000 final draft words a day.
Again, please accept my apology. These debates have really inspired me in many ways. They have forced me to think about what I do and believe when it comes to writing. Reinforcing some of what I thought was right, and causing me to doubt others.
I sit alone, in a small dark room, locked in a little metal cage. They only feed me once a day, and very little at that - just a small, family sized bag of Doritos and a six pack of red bull. They don't know this, but I was able to steel a WiFi single from a neighboring home. They don't take me out of my cage for exercise or anything, except to parade me around at events like Comic-con, Sony Fan Faire, Gen-Con, and the occasional book festival. This is the only human contact I get. If I lose this, I may finally succumb to the insane voices in my head.
The voices... oh, the relentless voices....
Maxwell Alexander Drake
Read the first five chapters of my award-winning fantasy saga at www.genesisofoblivion.com
I'll have to re-visit that thread...I don't know why I thought it was you...I still love the Antiquated paper and pen approach to first draft, but now I realize that I'm faced with the prospect of typing in nearly 700 pages of print...my typing skills are not equal to the task at my age...I can read faster than I can type and reasoned that this could well save me a good deal of frsutration and labor...I posted a thread on one of the author threads on this site and got no response...thanks anyway...I'll do some backtracking!!!
George,In my former life, I was a network engineer. More specifically, a HIPAA security specialist. So, I worked with a lot of doctors. That industry has used Dragon Dictation software for years and everyone I spoke to about it seemed to like it.
It's only $100, so it might just be worth it for you to buy it and use it. Even if it takes you a while to get it right, if you are not a keyboarder, that may be the best alternative for you I think.
seems like a logical investment and not a bad one even at the advanced suite price...as a shrewd type consumer (not really) I would like to have heard some feedback from someone who has used it a fair amount...good enough...sold on this one...how to train your dragon, it is.
George wrote: "I've missed out on these last few exhanges...the concept that there are no villians?...this is a rather radical refutation of the holy trinity of basic human behavior - moral vs amoral vs immoral a..."I think you missed what Maxwell was saying. Not that villains don't exist, but that no one considers themselves the bad guy. Everyone has a "good reason" or some other justification that makes what they do logical and moral within their own minds. Some sort of greater good always motivates even the scummiest of person, at least in his own head.
This is where we will have to respectfully disagree...there are people in the real world (and thus reflected somewhere in the fictional one as well) who are fully aware of their true nature and simply don't care...they do what they do because they want to and damn the consequences and misery they inflict on others...at any rate, it's okay to disagree. Not sure how I became the odd man out on this thread, but so be it...just out of curiousity though, can any of the other respondents say that the novels they've written were not actually the stories they intended to write, but rather stories they altered to suit what they thought would sell instead? Judging by the passion for the craft you've all demonstrated on this thread, I would doubt this was the case?
To get the discussion rolling...I'll throw in a few of my own self-imposed boundaries when crafting my fiction.
1. Torture...though I have never shied away from the inclusion of this topic as a thematic element...I am very particular about the context in which it is presented in the story.
2. Though not necessarily a constraint as such, I try to draw discernable distinctions between the moral and ethical boundaries of those characters who I have presented as the protagonists and those tapped to play the role of the story's villain.