Morphing Blog Topics

I think I’ve mentioned before that I have a scrap sheet of paper by my desk with the blog topics I come up with for the month.  Whenever I get an idea, I write it down so I won’t forget it.  However, just how faithful my post remains to the original idea is questionable.

When I write a blog topic down, I usually have a pretty specific idea about how I want to handle it.  However, days, sometimes weeks, often go by before I get a chance to sit down and write on the topic.  At that point, unless I was very specific in my note, I find myself improvising a bit, using the topic idea as a jumping off point, but usually straying a little from what I’d originally envisioned(that I now can’t remember).  It got me wondering just what some of my blog posts would look like if I’d sat down and written them at the moment I thought them up.  Of course, that’s not practical since I have this weird thing called “a life,” and my time isn’t always readily available.  Such a shame, for who knows how much stuff has morphed beyond what was originally intended.

Longer Books

I was looking at my bookshelves recently and noticed, once again, how each book in the Harry Potter series got longer.  The Sorcerer’s Stone and The Chamber ofSecrets are fairly short in length, but the books start getting longer once we get to The Prisoner of Azkaban, exploding with The Order of The Phoenix.  Basically, as JK Rowling’s books got more and more popular, as seen by enormous sales, she was given freedom to include more of her vision in the novels.  She’d proven her talents and draw, so she wasn’t as subject to some snarky editor cleaving out large parts of what we’d all love to read.

Editing is essential in our work, but I wonder just how much gets left out that the reader would enjoy.  We tend to trim based on what we think the audience would tolerate, and, truth be told, there are some tomes that need to be cut.  But every so often, you run across a gem that you want so much more of, and that’s where the freedom to tell more comes in.  Still, it seems like readers would only tolerate that kind of stuff once they know and approve of the author.  So it becomes a catch-22 – the reader wants to know you’re good, but once they know, they seem to wish you could go back and write more in what they’ve already read(and approved of).  I’m sure we all have authors and stories we wish had told us more.

Dedicated Writing Time

I love to write.  Given that I’ve published five novels, that point should be obvious.  However, what I’ve discovered is that just finding time to write is difficult.

As some of you know, I spent 24 years in the Army.  Now you may ask how I found time to write several novels while in the military, and the answer is pretty simple – when you’re not doing combat related stuff on deployment, you have almost nothing else to do with what little free time you have beyond eating and sleeping.  There are no games to go to, no kids’ plays to attend, and no road trips to take.  I could’ve sat around and stared at the ceiling of whatever building I was housed in, or I could take time to write a few words.

Back in the real world, on the other hand, there are lots of distractions.  My appreciation for those who have full time jobs and still manage to write new stuff has grown considerably.  My new pace for publishing is likely to slow considerably, and I wasn’t publishing at a blistering pace to begin with.  So if y’all want to see more of my work on a more regular/faster basis, then help put me in a financial position to do this full time.  😜

Small Research

I’ve spoken before about the research I’ve done for some of my books, but I recently came to the revelation that the amount of research done is often only done in support of a small portion of the story.  While readers come to fiction for…well…fiction, one cannot go too out there and must remain somewhat grounded in the realm of the real world.  That means medical terminology must make sense, and laws need to work the way they’re supposed to.

This means that research is important, no matter how small the portion of the story you are working on.  As I was working on my newest novel, there’s a portion of the book where the main characters are trying to figure out how to erase the memories of some prisoners they have.  Knowing that just going into pseudo-technobabble would be immediately seen through by most readers – sci-fi readers tend to be fairly well-grounded in their knowledge, at least on the surface – I had to research how memories are formed and what is involved in their storage from short term to long term memory.  It was a minor part of a small portion of the story, but it still took an hour to gain enough of an understanding of in order to sound credible.  And this isn’t the first time such a thing has happened.

If a writer just wants to put out garbage, then research is unnecessary.  However, readers with even an ounce of sophistication will figure it out and put your book away as unworthy of their time.  That’s a recipe for a short career.  So research as you can, making educated assertions into the unknown when there’s no other choice.  Of course, being verbose as we are, we also need to incorporate that research into organic story points rather than just try to demonstrate how much we’ve learned, and that can be a challenge unto itself given our egos.

Don't Scratch The Sequel Itch

When I find a story I enjoy, I want to gobble up every single bit about it I can.  After all, there is so much shit out there, when you find something good, you want more.  And more.  And more.

But what if there isn’t any more?

It took until I became a writer myself before I understood that not everything needs to be expanded, that not every book needs to continue.  As I was looking back through TheDamned Trilogy, I remember wanting more from that universe.  Did humanity ever come into conflict with The Weave?  Did the Amplitur stay in their box?  Was there an Earth Confederation kind of thing for us to find our place among the other races?  And, dammit, why didn’t the author write that for me?

Well, maybe there was no more to write.  The story wrapped up decently enough, and although I’m sure Alan Dean Foster could’ve come up with more stuff, if he felt he’d said all he needed to, anything further would’ve felt forced.

This is one of the problems with sequels.  Authors tend to write with a specific set of storyline principles in mind.  There’s usually a beginning, a middle, and an end.  However, if something sells, those involved in making money want to pile on more in hopes of making even more money.  The lure of the dollar is powerful, so that’s how we end up with garbage like Thrawn(look, I love me some Timothy Zahn, but taking the mystery out of Grand Admiral Thrawn just about ruined the character).

It may be tough, but I think it’s up to writers to know when to say no to the audience.  Yes, we might be able to make more money, and yes, we want to be nice to our readers by giving them more of what they want, but we risk watering down our creation and retroactively making stuff stupid.  I’d rather leave the reader itching for just a little bit more than to overstay my welcome and have him or her throw something of mine down in disgust, never to pick it up again.

Lacking Agents

Watching the recent cancel culture kerfuffles, I am more glad than ever that I failed to secure an agent or traditional publisher.  What it seems like nowadays is that acceptance within the traditional publishing world is not based on being able to write well, but on holding the correct views.  If I had an agent, would I be able to keep him or her based on my not toeing the line on every far-left view on the political spectrum.

I’m not saying liberal views are a bad thing, just as I’m saying that conservatives views aren’t a bad thing.  I think being able to have a reasonable conversation – something that is harder and harder to do these days – is a healthy and fun thing.  Unfortunately, if you stray from the approved line of groupthink, you can find yourself expelled from polite society.

Some may ask why I pick on the Left so much.  Is it because I’m a far-Right extremist who has a yard full of Trump 2020 signs?  Not at all(I don’t think I’ve ever put a political sign in my yard, and people might be amused to find out what I did put out were I so inclined).  I simply go after the far-Left because they’re the ones who are ascendant in the culture now.  Think about it – when was the last time you saw a conservative, or even a moderate, extolled in today’s society in a public way by the dominant culture?  While Ben Shapiro and Kevin Sorbo have their niche, that’s exactly what it is – a niche.  Just look at what happened to Gina Carano when she dared express a view that’s not even particularly controversial in most conservative circles.

All of this translates into how people have to react with their public face.  Now I personally hate this bullshit.  I believe you should always remain true to who you are regardless of whether it’s public or private(yes, use discretion, like not cussing up a storm at a t-ball game, but don’t hide who you are just because you are not in your home).  Regardless of whichever side of the political spectrum I sat on, I’m certain I would run afoul of approved opinions at some point, and I’d find myself on the outs with my agent and my publisher, and that I’d be blackballed throughout the traditional industry(which is yet another reason the consolidation of what was once a diverse and manifold field of publishers into five big ones is cause for concern for the industry).

No one – no writer, no actor, no artist, no garbageman - should have to walk on eggshells just to keep his or her job.  I’m not talking about blatant racists or sexists saying stuff that every reasonable person understands to be beyond the pale, but rather ordinary people expressing what are, whether some like it or not, mainstream views in a society that used to be much more fine with dissent.  With an agent, I’d be worried about saying one wrong thing, and even if the agent didn’t care, some woke-scold looking for offense might, and would then shriek like a harpy until I got dropped.  No, much better to be independent and not subject to the whims of the woke-scolds than to surrender one’s independence and dignity just to sell a book.

Words Don't Do Justice

Words are, obviously, the way we writers make our living.  We try so hard to paint a picture that our readers can see, relate to, and understand.  Unfortunately, there are times when words just aren’t enough.

Think back to any major event of your life, one that was so encompassing and involved so much emotion that it changed you forever.  Now think about how you were able to describe it to others.  Did your words truly capture what you went through?

I’ve hit this situation numerous times throughout my life, from my daughter’s premature birth to the role I played in multiple combat deployments, there have been a lot of time where the story just couldn’t convey what was going on.  How do you describe the heart palpitations you got from that bullet that hit a tree you were in front of just three seconds earlier?  How do you capture the fear you felt looking at your newborn child struggling to maintain her heartrate and breathing?

Some of this has to rely on the reader being able to properly understand and sympathize through visualization, but even that’s limited based on personal viewpoint and experience.  It can be very frustrating for a writer to work his or her experiences into a story to give it a better feel, only to discover that the work only gets about 25% of the meaning across because interposing words and feelings is lacking.
(side note – the closest I’ve come to making this process truly work was with Salvation Day while describing what Mike Faulkner was going through with his child and wife’s deaths, and even that didn’t fully re-create the experience(fictional though they may be))

I’d be curious to know what books or stories you feel were able to adequately convey the fullness of such an emotionally transformative event.

Rules Unrevealed

There’s an old saying when writing – show, don’t tell.  It’s an aphorism for painting a vivid enough picture that the reader can picture what you’re trying to tell him or her without spelling it out in excruciating detail.  It is meant to engage the imagination and allow for discovery.

This is a scenario I’m playing out with regards to my newest novel.  This novel is a sci-fi/fantasy mashup.  Part of fantasy is magic, but magic needs rules or else it can simply be an easy out for an author looking to resolve a situation.  Therefore I’ve written ten rules for the use of magic, and the storyline must be consistent with these rules.

However, I don’t plan to just list out these rules for the audience.  What I want is for the reader to figure out these rules along the way.  I believe it adds a bit of mystery while also providing a framework around which to build the story.  I’m honestly curious how many readers will pick out the rules, and if they’ll be able to get all of them.  Also, since writing can produce surprises in narrative, will readers discover unintentional rules of magic I write into the story without realizing it.

What do you think?  Is it more fun to discover implied elements as you read, or does that distract from enjoyment of the story?

Building Unfamiliar Worlds

Some books can get away with taking a great deal for granted.  If you’re writing a novel about World War II, you can make assumptions that your audience is familiar with who the Allies and the Axis are, that they get the general military technology of the time, and that they understand the general areas of battle.  Getting more specific, even writing a generic sci-fi novel allows for some assumptions.  While you might have to delve into how you achieve FTL travel or why you chose particle beam lasers versus rail guns, most sci-fi readers get that there will be spaceships and aliens and time travel.

However, as I’ve gotten into writing my new sci-fi/fantasy mashup novel, I’ve found that I have to spend a little more time than usual building the world.  After all, these two types of settings – fantasy and science fiction – are usually diametrically opposed.  The presence of science usually negates the presence of magic, and vice-versa.  Beyond that, I’ve discovered that I need to give more context to my world so that the reader will know not only why the science fiction elements are present, but why they interact with the world they discover.  Moreover, I have to establish why the various realms of my fantasy world react to both the new presence of a spacefaring race and to each other, given that the world is not unified(no realm in fantasy is…nor should it be).  So I have to establish why the dwarves hate the elves, and how the demons factor into how each kingdom plays off of one another.

It's both fun and tedious.  It’s fun in that I’m really enjoying creating the realms and figuring out how magic and science interact, and why they would have to do so.  Tedious in that it’s going to take a while to get into the main story, and the novel is likely to be so much larger than any other I’ve created.  Jumping right into why a spaceship from Earth is exploring the galaxy, and why it interacts with a diverse group of fantasy realm creatures in the way it does.  If I just put them in place and had a new war with demons break out, folks would quite rightly scratch their heads and wonder why they should care, but by establishing the unfamiliarity of the visitors to both traveling between stars and knowledge of magic(on a world where they weren’t expecting to find any intelligent life in the first place), I can draw readers in to giving a shit about why things are happening.  Basically, the entire thing revolves around uncertainty, which I feel would be the case when visiting a new world, magic available or not.

Of course, beyond the uncertainty, one of the biggest things I’m working on is why folks should care about any of these characters.  I worry I might be building up one realm to be a little too arrogant, making them ripe for readers to want to see them fall, so I’ll have to scale back on that as I continue to write.  It’s just gonna take time…which was the point of this post to begin with…

Nice vs Honest

As I’ve mentioned previously, I’ve begun work on my next novel.  As I finish each chapter, I send it out to the half dozen or so beta readers that have graciously agreed to read and critique my work.  The problem is that they’re…too nice.

Don’t get me wrong – everyone likes to hear how wonderful they are.  Anyone who says otherwise is either a liar or a sociopath.  So it’s great for folks to say I have talent or they’re really enjoying the book.  However, at this stage, that’s not what I’m looking for.  What I want is brutal honesty about what needs to be fixed.

Look, as the author, I don’t have to act on any criticism I get.  I can evaluate it and decide if it has merit.  Sometimes it does, and sometimes it doesn’t.  I have a thick skin, so you can’t say something that will cause me great angst.

I think the problem is that most folks don’t have thick skin.  Most folks don’t like to put themselves out there and risk critique, so they tip-toe around criticism instead of giving it to me straight.  I think they’re afraid I’ll get upset or break ties with them and never send more.  That’s not how I work.  My ego isn’t so fragile that it can’t withstand criticism.  In fact, any writer that cannot take critiques of his or her work will not last long in this business.  Reading tastes are incredibly subjective, and not everyone will like what you wrote, no matter how well you write it.  And if you crumple when corrected, you will not know how to improve.  Folks who don’t get better tend to wither in this business(maybe while wondering why no one is buying their stuff).

It’s really frustrating.  I’ve gotten exactly one session of somewhat real critiques, and that was on the rules of magic that are an inherent part of the story…and those are not going to be written down in the novel(they’re implied and should be discoverable to the reader).  Most of those critiques centered around how they’d want magic used rather than consistency, but at least it got a lively discussion going.  I wish I could get more of that at this stage.  Later, after I’m published, then people can tell me I’m awesome(and preferably publicly).

Comment Engagement - Don't

We all want to be liked.  As a writer, when I get a positive review, it makes me feel good.  I think you’d have to be a robot to not feel something when people comment on your work, so although I’ve been accused of being robot-like at times, I do like it when someone says something nice about what I poured my heart into.  Of course, not all reviews are positive, or even nice, which leads me to my biggest piece of advice when you find criticism about your novels…

…DON’T ENGAGE!

That’s right – let it be.  If you wade into the realm of comments on your work, you are inevitably going to find stuff that isn’t what you hoped(and that’s okay).  Unless the person commenting was an old high school bully, none of the criticism is personal.  These people don’t know you, so why would it bother you if they said something negative?

There are multiple negative comments on both my Amazon pages and in the posts on other blogs that advertise my books(I won’t give specific examples…that would be engaging).  I’m grateful that there are many more positive comments than negative.  Either way, engaging on reviews or musings about your work is counterproductive.  You aren’t going to change that person’s mind, the feud will likely escalate(lots of people get off on that kind of stuff), and you’ll come off, at best, looking petty.  And when that happens, I guarantee your brand and work will suffer.  Think about it – have you ever known any novelist that gained readers by getting into a pissing match with someone?

Book Star Reviews

Do you pay attention to the star average for books?  What influences it?

I will sometimes see if a book has a decent average of ratings, but the size of the sample will also influence how seriously I take those ratings.  A five star or one star review with two ratings means little to me.  However, as numbers increase, does a pattern emerge?

Schism has a 4.3 star average on Amazon and a 4.22 star average on Goodreads.  It also has several reviews that, while not approaching something like The Shining or WorldWar Z, has still managed to maintain consistency.  Although there have been a few folks who have rated it poorly, most reviews are either four or five stars, which is positive to me.

How many reviews create a baseline for you to take the average seriously?  And what do you look for in those reviews?

Punked?

Did I get punked?  There was a comment last month from an unknown user who implied that he may have been Alan Dean Foster.  Part of me wants to believe that given that I’m a huge Alan Dean Foster fan, and part of me wants to be realistic and say that I’m probably a little too small-time to draw his notice.

I let the fantasy take hold for a day, and then I let it go.  Still, such fantasies can be fun at times, like the Youtube videos of celebrities meeting their celebrity idols(yes, it’s reaching to even pretend to be a celebrity, but allow me that much for my fantasy of the moment  😉 ).