Running Out Of Room

Last time, I spoke of the problem of turning convention on its head, but it occurred to me that doing so requires said convention.  What happens when our favorite stories hit a brick wall because there's no more material to lean on?

That, of course, was one of the biggest problems with Game of Thrones.  Sure, George RR Martin was there to "guide" the show's writers, but he also left them(and everyone else) hanging without any new source material.  The first five seasons of Game of Thrones did so well in part because it was guided by source material that provided a road map.  Unfortunately, Martin has taken his sweet time writing the last two books - The Winds of Winter and A Dream of Spring - so the depth of his guidance was limited.

I think this problem is two-fold.  First, most shows should be weary in the future about running with a series that has no conclusion(or is at least not so far ahead that they'll hit that proverbial wall).  The Walking Dead may be wandering recently, but that's more due to straying from source material rather than running out of it.  Future series should demand plenty of material before even beginning.  The second part of this is the responsibility it places on writers to...well...write more source material.  Martin has fed quite well off of the original success of his work, but he doesn't seem to feel any duty to provide more.  All well and good if the story is already at a natural conclusion, but a bit of douchebaggery if the story has a more clearly defined arc.

Although the Game of Thrones writers definitely rushed their work near the end, it's hard to blame them since they didn't have much more than Martin's word to go on.  This is akin to a problem I've outlined previously about hitting that wall when I try writing beyond my outline.  At that point, work loses depth and things start to feel forced.  That was the feel of Season 8 of Game of Thrones - the writers still knew where they wanted to end up, but they lacked the background to get there in a meaningful manner.  Martin could've helped by putting out his stuff long before now, but he has never seemed truly motivated to do so.  Yes, it's his work and, therefore, his pace, but there comes a point at which other people are relying on you, so knuckle down.

Had this been simply been a novel, that would've been one thing.  However, with a show now on, and that show having deadlines, Martin's laid back attitude looks a touch more selfish now.  People - real people with real jobs - depended on him, and he let them down.  If any of us are ever in a position similar to his, I hope we'll remember that our obligations go beyond just writing a book.

Flipping Convention

As writers, we need to often strike a balance between doing what the audience expects and being unpredictable.  We don't want to be too predictable, for the audience quickly grows bored and moves on, but if we shake things up too radically, audiences will get mad.  They'll then not only move on, but they'll curse your name until their last breath.

What made me think of this was the recent ending of Game of Thrones.  Some people liked it, but let's be honest - most people didn't.  That's because the show built up certain expectations in our mind, only to shatter them in the final episode.  Part of this was due to the rushed way the ending felt, as if they were sprinting to the end and skipping over all of the plot and character development they'd spent years creating.  However, part of this was due to the way the characters culminated

**SPOILERS AHEAD...IF YOU HAVEN'T YET WATCHED IT, STOP NOW**
(Also, smack yourself for claiming to be a fan while not watching the show for more than a month)

The show was played to be mostly about Daenrys Targeryen and Jon Snow.  Both came from modest beginnings to command respect across the world, and surely one of them would rule the Seven Kingdoms from the Iron Throne.  However, Daenrys went crazy, barbequed the capital, and then Jon Snow, her erstwhile lover(and nephew!), stabbed her in the heart in order to prevent her madness from consuming Westeros.  In the end, Brandon Stark came out of nowhere to become King.

A lot of people were upset by Daenrys turn to the dark side.  Given how much we rooted for her when she freed the slaves of Essos and surrounded herself with wise advisors, that's certainly understandable.  I will say that there were hints of her madness earlier, though, that made it at least plausible for her to turn out like her father.  And I believe that her turn may have been forgivable by most fans had it led to Jon Snow becoming King in her place.  But when the show set these two up for so long, only to throw in a character that was tangential at best, a good number of fans screamed WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK ARE YOU DOING?!?!  Bran was that kid in high school who did nothing on the group project but got recognized by the teacher after the presentation, and although people sympathized with him for being crippled, no one thought, "Gee, he'd be a really good King, and I was looking forward to his rule."  Even his presentation on screen was boring, little more than a series of blandly delivered one-liners that they tried passing off as wisdom and insight.

This kind of unpredictability is what makes audiences curse you.  It's Luke Skywalker joining the dark side, Rudolph being eaten by the Abominable Snowman, or Professor Quirrell being made Headmaster of Hogwarts.  It upends expectations so much that it pisses people off.  I know that sometimes we writers like to throw people for a loop, if for no other reason than to keep them on their toes, but this comes off as elitist dickery specifically designed to annoy as many people as possible.

It's okay, even encouraged, to be unpredictable, but it still needs to fit somewhat within the story and come off as something audiences would accept, even if it wasn't the way they would've ended the story.  Going off on a strange side tangent just for the sake of unpredictability makes readers wonder why they stuck with you, and is that really something we should be going for?

Revising

Like most writers, the part of my job I enjoy the most is the actual writing.  I enjoy brainstorming a lot as well, and it's a close second to writing, but putting my ideas down on paper is the thing that really gets my juices flowing.  After writing and brainstorming, editing and proofreading are okay, but they're kind of boring.  At the end of the list of things associated with creating a novel, revision is probably last on my list.

That's because it feels like not only so much more work, but because it also feels like a destructive process that can easily get out of control.  I'm not talking about taking out a section or making a few happy-to-glad changes.  To me, revision is about wholesale rewriting of work that I've already finished.  It's going back in, finding what doesn't work, and making it work.  Moreover, it means that all the stuff after the part you've identified for revision might also have to be revised to accommodate your changes.

I know a lot of this sounds like whining, but I'm loathe to rewrite a book I've already toiled on, even if I know it's necessary to better craft the story.  Part of that is laziness, and part of that is a feeling of waste after putting in so many hours of work.  After all, we put our hearts and souls into what we've written, and nobody likes to discover that what they wrote no longer works.  Revising may be necessary, but it can also be soul-crushing.

Further, at least for me, revision is hard.  That's because I already know where I want the story to go, and changing it in the way that most revision requires throws me off and feels uncomfortable.  It's like starting a trip to a place you know you are supposed to go but changing the route part of the way in.  You start doubting yourself - will this way get me there as quickly?  Will there be any more roadblocks I wasn't ready for?  What if I get lost?  This all contributes to a feeling of discomfort.

None of this is to say that revision isn't usually required, only that it's hard and can be discouraging.  This is one of the reasons I don't think you should revise while writing your first draft unless you are able to tell it has really gone off course.  In any case, the solution is still the same - put what you're writing in a drawer and leave it alone for at least four months(preferably six to eight).  That will allow your passions to cool and give you a more objective look at your work when you pick it back up.  Picking it back up will likely even rekindle such passions since you'll now be able to tell which new directions the work needs to go in

Remember, this is only about when you need to make pretty hefty changes rather than minor revisions.  If you're changing a paragraph or adding a line or two of dialogue, I don't even consider that true revision.  To me, that's editing.  Unfortunately, more is sometimes required, and as dispiriting as that might be, if you want to be a better writer, you just have to knuckle down and do it, hopefully with more zeal that I've given the impression of here.

It's Okay To Be A Bad Writer

One of the biggest reasons I hear from so many about why they won't write that great story they have in their head is that they say they don't write real well.  It's taken as an act of faith that poor skill in writing disqualifies people from ever even trying.  Well, I'm here to tell you that's it's okay to be a bad writer.

Notice that I said writer, and not published author.  I'll go more into the distinction in a minute, but suffice to say that no one starts off with the skills of the best.  Even the best don't start off with the skills of the best.  Yes, some have more natural talent than others, but unless you're a prodigy - the literary version of Mozart - no one writes well when they start.

So how do all of these great writers become great authors?  They write.  And they write.  And then they write some more.  More than that, they accept that their writing will be shitty for a while, and they'll accept criticism from folks who will be honest and tell them when their writing is shitty.  They'll take that criticism and go back into what they wrote to try and fix it.  They'll spend countless hours working and reworking stuff until it gets better(Stephen King once noted it takes about 10,000 hours to master any craft, including writing).  Plus, a great deal of what they wrote won't even see the light of day.

That last part is important, because above I noted that you should accept being a bad writer but not a bad published author.  Yes, even the best will have something bad slip through the cracks every so often, but most good writers will trash something they know is bad before they'll allow it to be seen by their audience.  And that's hard.  It's hard because we put so much into what we write that throwing it away feels like quitting, but we have to understand that it wasn't quitting - it was practice.

I've got some bad stuff in my drawer.  Awful, terrible stuff that would destroy people's faith in my abilities as a writer.  At the time I thought some of it was great, while I knew some would need work.  With a more practiced eye, I can tell how bad it is.  But I don't get down on myself.  Instead, I say, "That crappy stuff helped me learn how to better craft a story."

Those afraid to write because they're afraid of looking bad need to accept that they'll write badly...until they learn enough to write well.  Like anything else worth doing, it takes a long time to get good.  Problem is that most people don't want to put in that work and want to go from nobody to superstar overnight.  Accept the hard work and know that with that development, things will get better...even your writing.

Can You Hear What I Hear?

I know this won't be a long post, but I have to ask - are audio books really a thing?

I've seen more than a few of my fellow authors talk about their audio book offerings, and there are even a few services out there to turn your book into an audio book.  Maybe I'm completely out of touch, but do lots of people really listen to audio books?  The only time I ever did this was on a cross-country trip from North Carolina to California, and I found myself bored out of my skull.

Admittedly, my books were on cassette tape(yes, I'm really that old), but they didn't capture my attention the way a real book does...and that might be a touch dangerous driving down the interstate at 70mph.  I like reading because I can envision my own world and imagine the voices, but an audio book tightens that window.

Perhaps I'm being too elitist here.  After all, I enjoy a few podcasts on a long trip, and I can't explain why they're fine but audio books aren't.  I'm searching for words here, so somebody...anybody...help me understand why people like them...or IF people like them.  I haven't seen too many listening, but maybe I'm missing the hordes.

Free Exposure

Anyone out there who is a writer, I'm asking for your help.  I'm also asking to help you.  I want all of you to send me whatever publicity materials exist for you.  Want to do a guest post?  Hit me up.  Want to let others know about your latest novel?  Let me help you.

I want to do this for a couple of reasons.  First, it makes my life less busy since I only have to repost someone else's work.  Maybe strange to admit that, but at least I'm honest.  Second, we're a community, and communities help each other.  I receive no harm in publicizing a writer I like.  In fact, I hope we can expand our communities and extend our reach to as many as possible.

So let me help you.  What do you want me to publicize?  You can either comment here or email me at RussDMeyer@gmail.com.  I look forward to hearing from you!

Critical Response

We all want to be liked.  Even the roughest among us has an innate need to be liked, or at least not disliked.  That's what makes being a writer so difficult at times - we have to put our work out there for others to read and critique, and not everyone will fall down singing hosannas of praise to our work.  Some, in fact, will be quite mean about what they say.  This is simply a part of the business of writing.

I've sold only a few books.  Most of those reviewing my work have been complimentary, but not everybody.  I won't go into the critiques themselves because it's not a great thing for business to try and refute those who are nasty to you and your work.  Some people are nasty just to be nasty.  Some people just won't like what you wrote.  It's hard to determine either way sometimes, and it doesn't matter.  Everyone's got an opinion, and you won't care for all of them.

Part of getting over the bruise to your ego is looking at the critiques that were less than flattering and seeing if there is substance to them.  As noted above, some people live to tear down others, but some give good feedback, even if they didn't like your work.  I'd say to treat them the way you would treat beta-readers - do they have a point, and is there a trend?  If either exists, try to incorporate it into your next book so you can get better.  Shouldn't that be something we all want?

And while I've often said that we shouldn't get too caught up in those who praise us, no matter how good it feels, don't just shrug that part off either.  Many critiques by folks who liked your stuff will give you nuggets to move forward with.  Yes, we need to fix the bad, but we also need to know what's good so we can continue to do what worked, and how will we know what worked if we aren't told?  Anonymous critiques, or critiques by those who don't know you, are often the best because you know you're getting the unvarnished truth about how they feel.  Sure, your family and best friend may be giving you honest feedback, but let's face it - they (probably) love you and don't want to hurt your feelings, so they'll emphasize the good and downplay the bad.  Great stuff, but not the most productive if you want to get better.

It's hard to toss aside your ego, but try.  The more you wade into criticism, the thicker skin you'll grow(assuming you aren't biting back).  That thick skin is a necessary part of being a writer since not only is it near impossible to escape criticism, but acceptance of it can only make you stronger.

Popularity Versus The Mob

As writers, we often have to strike a balance, and nowhere does that come into play more than in listening to the audience.  The audience provides us with folks to buy our work, so without them, we can't do this for a living.  That said, if we do nothing but cower before our readers, then we might as well not be writing in the first place, for we'll never have an idea all our own.

I write my stories based on what I want to read.  I also like for people to be engaged with what I write, so the audience's feedback is important.  However, it sometimes requires a jaundiced eye to see what is good, and pervasive, feedback, and what is a loudmouthed mob that's only looking to stir up trouble.

The first point to remember when dealing with such stuff is that the audience isn't writing the novel.  As I've said many times, I value feedback and use beta-readers to see if my writing can be improved, but I'm looking for trends or things that strike me as good tips rather than handing my writing over to someone else(one of the reasons I despise professional editors).  A mob, on the other hand, will come in, usually at something you've written that offended them, and demand you change something for them.  Maybe you wrote something they found out-of-touch, or maybe you just offended modern political sensibilities, but the outrage mob will do all they can to bully you into a) changing what you wrote, and b) cowering before them while muttering a groveling apology.  Let me make something perfectly clear - NEVER DO THIS!

From what I've seen, mobs are never satiated.  Giving in to one only reinforces the mob's power, and they won't truly forgive you anyway.  Instead, they'll crow about the scalp they collected.  So don't ever give in to them.  It's tougher than it looks, but it'll be far better over the long run.  Amelie Wen Zhao gave in to these woke-scolds, and her work sufferd, to say nothing of us really not hearing from her again.  Some folks ignore these mobs.  Larry Correia, on the other hand, not only has not taken their advice, but he's taken them on ruthlessly.  As a result, his audience admires him more.

Now I'm not saying to seek out confrontation with the mob.  To do so would be unnecessarily aggressive and counterproductive, and unless you're a sadist with a taste for that kind of stuff, it'd be a waste of time.  However, don't back down in the face of the shrieking mafia.  Not only will they never let it go, but you'll find yourself shackled to them for the rest of your career.  Let it be your career, not the half-hearted cowardly reaction of those afraid that people don't like them.

It's okay to listen.  It's not okay to be a weenie.  Choose wisely.

What The Font?

Every so often, I'll use a different font.  I do so in order to try and convey the mood of that part of the story, or just to convey a character's tone of voice.  Sometimes I'll do a part in italics, and sometimes I'll use bold to highlight something important.

I've been criticized for this by a few people.  One person told me it was a gimmick and that readers would roll their eyes at my artsy-fartsy attempt to be nouveau.  Another said that not only would most publishers not take kindly to such disparity in the work, but a number of conversion programs to get my work into "printable" fashion would be unable to handle such an overload.  Regarding the first charge, I don't go traditional, so that critique doesn't matter much to me.  Regarding the second...he was right.  Putting in several different fonts, especially the crazier ones I prefer at times(Parchment, Bradley Hand ITC, and Goudy Stout) has proven either more costly to add in or downright impossible as the formatter didn't have them available.  That has proven frustrating as I try to get my readers the original vision of my work.

So why do I even try doing such nonsense?  Because there are certain things that the written word simply doesn't convey very well.  Yes, ours is a written medium, but most readers translate that writing into a movie of some kind in their head.  Some fonts better convey the tone the author is going for.  For example, Bradley Hand ITC is a very scratchy feeling font, so it goes well with a more visceral voice.  Parchment is regal, so the tone it conveys is one of haughtiness and authority.  Using these fonts give the reader a better sense of what is going on sometimes than just writing, "The demon's rumbly voice was primal."  For that matter, using the font allows me to leave out certain descriptors, like the voice belonging to a demon, and lets the reader pick up on that on his or her own.

Perhaps I'm just too caught up in my own pretension in font usage, but I really do feel that, when used properly and sparingly(sparingly being the key word...using them too often will irritate the reader), they can give more depth to the tone than simple descriptors can.  What do you think?

Feuding

I have a strong personality.  I also have strong opinions about some stuff and am not shy about sharing those opinions in certain circles(I try not to do that here since my job dealing with the audience is to entertain through my stories rather than piss off half of my potential fanbase by talking politics or religion).  That said, I've been known to come into conflicts with others, and it that has alienated a few folks I once considered friends.

One of my writing mentors and I got into it a while back, and he hasn't spoken to me since.  Our argument was nothing new - we usually sparred back and forth over issues of the day, and jabbing each other was part of our relationship.  However, in today's toxic political climate, people get heated over what they perceive as personal attacks since everything political now seems personal.  This writer likes to think of himself as a "deep" thinker, broody and moody and able to give snarky insight on everything.  So when he and I got into it on an issue, he went his usual snarky route...and I countered.  I've often said that when someone gets condescending or belittling, I promise I can be a bigger prick than anyone.  So I decided to give back as good, if not better, than what I got.  And he couldn't handle it.

His position seemed to be that not only was his opinion correct, but no one with a moral character could possibly disagree with him.  Oh, and he was allowed to get sarcastic, but best him in it, and he'd take his ball and go home.  When he made a social media post that he later admitted he wrote with me in mind, I told him it was nice to know I was living rent-free in his head...and then I proceeded to list, point by point, just how wrong I thought he was on the issue.  Also, I couldn't put him as a character in any of my novels since he comes off as such a cliché that no one would believe he was real or had any depth beyond an internet forum.

That was all it took.  He claimed that my "fuse" with him was two years long and that I'd finally crossed the line.  In reality, he wants to lord his opinion over others and gets all butt-hurt when folks are at least as snarky in return and don't tremble before him.  He wants to live in an echo chamber where everyone occasionally mumbles how smart he is, with the few dissenting opinions properly cowed when he gets on his moral soapbox.  So he blocked me and we haven't spoken since.

The thing is that I still like most of his writing.  I have a few of his books on my shelf, and I go to them when I need a laugh(yes, they're humor books - I'm not being a total jerk and just laughing at him).  Also, I will forever treasure the advice he gave a newbie like myself when I first started out and was trying to feel my way into this business.  He has a kind heart that I think gets overcome by his passion, which may be a great thing to have as a writer, but not so much if you want to expand beyond your inner circle.  He continues to write, and I truly do wish him the best in it.  However, I'm not going to beg to be anyone's friend.

So why did I write this?  Not really sure.  Maybe just to get it off my chest.  Maybe to let everyone who reads this blog - both of you - know that we all come into conflict with others at times, even those who were once mentors.  No life is free of conflict, and even writers, or maybe especially writers, who have strong personalities will clash.  At the very least, understand that such clashing does not diminish who you are, and you shouldn't prostrate yourself before anyone just because you admire their work.  People are people, and those people don't always play well together.

Indie Book Database

Thanks to a fellow intrepid author, I came across a new website - Indie Book Database.  Please check them out, as they now feature my novels!

Yes, this is a short post, but this was pretty recent, so I needed to get it out as soon as I could.  After all, it's not everyday you get free advertising.

Works In Progress

Now that I'm back, I'm sure my legions of adoring fans are wondering what I'm working on, right?  While I haven't been blogging, I have been working on some stuff for publication, starting with editing Schism.  I realize that the linked post in the title there says that Schism is complete, but as I went back, I discovered it's not quite as complete as I might've liked.

For those who don't know what Schism is, it's a novel about a 2nd American Civil War, this one based on the red/blue model.  The more I worked on editing it, the more it seemed not only applicable to today's polarized climate, but it seems prescient.  I'm not trying to pat myself on the back, but reading the "news" and "blog" posts in the novel, I was having some real trouble distinguishing between that and the real world, especially in the buildup.  We're so polarized, and we're so toxic, that this thing may end up as a history textbook before everything is finished.  One wrong word is enough nowadays to start an argument, and people who've been friends for years cut each other off over political differences(I've personally experienced this with a fellow writer I once admired, and whose writing I still enjoy).

While the first three acts of Schism are now edited and complete, I have to do something with the fourth act - it's simply too rushed to give a satisfying ending.  What I need to do is split it into two acts, beef it up a bit, and then see how it plays out.  The first three acts set up a post-civil war America, but the fourth just settles everything in one fell swoop, and I don't like that, so I'm going to give more on what an America in the aftermath of a second civil war would look like.

I'm also about to start the next novel after Salvation Day.  I know I originally said I was going to work more on the sequel to Akeldama, but I'm more inspired right now to tackle the former rather than the latter.  Plus, it's my writing anyways, so that's just the way it is.  I promise to return to Akeldama's sequel soon enough, but I feel the other one trying to ooze its way out of me, so I figured I should write it or watch myself slowly go insane.  I've chosen option #1.

I'm also getting more and more involved in the writer community.  It's hard to get noticed without engaging, so that's what I've decided to do.  It has been quite a rollercoaster, but I'm grateful for the folks who've stopped by my blog to check it out - I hope it doesn't disappoint.

Don't Call It A Comeback

Okay, let's try this blogging things again.  Sorry I haven't been around recently, but life has been in transition.  I just retired from the US Military after 24 years, and I'm starting a new job.  I'm also trying to sell my house and move to Tennessee to fulfill a promise I made to my wife when I married her(follow me through the Army, and we'll go wherever you want at the end).  So, I've been a bit busy.

However, not so busy that I couldn't have done some blogging.  I've discovered there's real truth to needing to make things a habit, as well as how hard it is to get back into that habit once it's gone.  So I'm going to sit down and try to do a few blog posts a day until I've got a full month's worth.  I'm fortunate because my new job allows me to work from home, and although I have stuff to accomplish, I should be able to get some writing and some blogging going.  I also promise to start responding to comments again.  When I logged back in, I saw that there were several folks that made a comment I didn't reply to.  My apologies - I'll try to get better.

I wish I could promise I won't slack off again, but I can't yet say that.  I want to, but I know me, and I have to really be back into something before I can say that with certainty.  I'll still give it my best shot.

All that said, you'll have to wait until my next post to find out what I've been working on.  ;-)