Monthly Archives: April 2011

Why I write fantasy

Literary agent Rachelle Gardner recently ran a readership poll on her extremely popular blog and has now published the results. Of particular interest to me (and her, as it turns out) is that 26% of writerly survey respondents write science-fiction/fantasy (SFF), making it the most popular represented genre. The next most popular was general/’non-genre’ fiction (21%), followed by women’s fiction (12%). Supernatural/paranormal had its own genre category and came in 5th at 10%.

Since as an agent Ms Gardner represents just about any genre except SFF (and specialises in the Christian market) this is quite remarkable — and testament to the quality of her blog content. It also prompted her to speculate whether more writers are producing SFF than is reflected by market demand. A mini vox pop of sales seemed to support this hunch and the debate was thrown open to reader comments.

What followed was a lively discussion about the market for SFF and why so many people are writing it. Some ignorant people inevitably made some rather insulting comments about writing SFF, vis: it must be fun because you don’t have to do research or worry about verisimilitude (arrgh); SFF writers must be seeking to escape the real world due to the global financial crisis; assumptions that all fantasy is Tolkienesque; SFF writers must be trying to cash in on a perceived market and wouldn’t write it if they weren’t trying to sell a manuscript…

I confess I felt a little incensed on reading some of the comments, and although plenty of SFF writers jumped in to refute them, it has prompted me to reflect here on why I write fantasy and do some of my own refuting.

Actually, the reason I write fantasy is easy: it’s because I love to read it. It all comes down to ‘write what you love’.

There’s a strong element of ‘write what you know’ as well. I read a lot of fantasy and I connect with it, so it feels perfectly natural for me to write it. I think many people don’t understand that fantasy is largely about real stuff — characters just as real as any fictional character, with the same spectrum of emotions, faced with the same tough decisions, interacting with each other in the way humans do (note: the vast majority of fantasy characters are human).

Moreover, in just about every fantasy world there are reflections of our own. Urban fantasy is indeed set in a version of our own world; in the case of epic fantasy, which is usually set in a made-up world, elements of that world are often drawn from this world’s history and culture. To illustrate this, consider the classic fantasy trope of horse riding to get around. Or what is used for sources of illumination. Or food. Or materials. Not all these will appear as ‘familiar’ in every fantasy novel, but you can be certain that other reflections of our world will be present instead.

This is why the comment about ‘don’t have to do research’ really annoyed me. There is plenty of research that needs to be done so that all the little familiar details are accurate. These provide the foundation on which the fantastical world is based — and that’s when the hard work begins. Because the moment something is invented, or skewed, its ramifications for everything else must be determined. Magic always has a price, inventing creatures requires whole ecologies to be developed, and creating cultures and political histories opens up a can of worms that must be subdued and controlled.

I love it. Immersing myself in someone else’s richly realised world is delicious, like being an armchair tourist (except you actually wish you could go there). And creating my own world is thrilling and challenging. I can see why non-converts can be dismissive of fantasy as merely ’escapist’, but it’s an ignorant and narrow view. I read (and write) fantasy because it adds another layer to the journey of discovery. In addition to a conspiracy/mystery/family secret/relationship to be uncovered, there’s a whole world waiting to be revealed as well.

Even more significantly, in addition to adding texture and wonder, the fantastic world provides a canvass for the exploration of grand themes. Ultimately the imaginary world becomes the stomping ground of a cast of characters who are tested by love, betrayal, prejudice, greed, violence, guilt, hatred, rage along with everything else. Fantasy allows us to strip everything back to the bones and invent the perfect crucible into which we toss our characters to see what they’ll do.

It’s not about ‘escaping’ reality, but embracing it. Fantasy allows us to probe and examine the fundamental themes of life and consider what makes us human.

I totally understand that fantasy isn’t for everyone. But I hope I’ve provided some insight into why it’s hands-down my favourite genre. And, judging from the stats on Rachelle Gardner’s poll, I’m obviously not alone in that. It would be fabulous if one day fantasy/SFF could lose the literary stigma that plagues it to allow a wider audience to enjoy the wonders too.

Image:
Fantasy Art 3D Wallpapers, digital art pictures gallery. free computer desktop backgrounds.


Good advice

Last week I stumbled upon Anne R. Allen’s Blog and she has some incredibly sensible things to say about writers and blogging. Her series of posts on blogging (highlighted in her side bar) covers tips on content, search-engine optimisation, pitfalls to avoid . . . and how to attract readers. Highly recommended reading.

On the last point she emphasises the need to engage with the community by commenting regularly (and insightfully) on blogs that you read, thereby spiking interest and luring other readers over to your blog. Does this work, do you think? I’m not sure — it’s rare that I click-through to the blog of a commenter on someone else’s blog, and if I do it’s usually because I already recognise the name. I will keep it in mind though, and perhaps stop lurking so much… and bear in mind that such a strategy will only work if the content of my own blog is sufficiently engaging to keep readers coming back.

Anne’s blog also introduced me to the concept of ‘Slow Blogging’, which is essentially occasional but regular posting. Again it comes down to the fact that most writers should be spending time writing things other than blog posts (i.e. novels, if that’s your thing). This to me makes so much sense; it’s so easy to convince yourself that you should be posting every day or so in order to keep readers returning.

I am going to try this Slow Blogging scenario, which will probably mean weekly posts on Wednesdays, unless something comes up in between that I simply must discuss or voice. The focus will remain essentially a journal of my writing life, with occasional thoughts on industry hot topics.

Which brings me to one final post-worth-reading on Anne R. Allen’s blog that I wanted to mention, because it relates to my recent post on self-publishing and was in fact the post that drew me to her blog in the first place. Her post was written in response to the recent social media maelstrom and cyber-bullying that occurred when an indie author made some ill-considered responses to a less-than-glowing review of her ebook.

Anne poses three insightful questions to ask yourself before considering self-publishing:
1. Are you able to present a professional book in a professional way? (i.e. hire editors, designers, coders etc)
2. Are you emotionally ready for your close-up? (1.e. you’d better have very tough skin, because every book gets bad reviews, no matter how good it is)
3. Is you book really, truly ready?

Of these, I believe question number #2 resonated with me in particular. As Anne puts it:

There are some unspoken benefits to the old query-fail-query-fail-submission-fail-editorial meeting-fail, fail, fail system. It not only gives us numerous readers to help hone that book to perfection—it also teaches us to deal with rejection, failure and bad reviews. 


Thoughts on self-publishing

Everyone is talking about self-publishing at the moment. Authors and agents are blogging about it regularly, and I’ve stumbled upon several blogs and websites that provide resources and advice about how to format correctly, produce for different devices, design covers, distribute etc. What was considered once-upon-a-time (not so long ago) to be a daft and unprofessional move is now arguably a viable and accepted route to publication.

The main catalyst, obviously, is the rise of ebooks and the dramatic escalation in esales over the past couple of years. Presented with the vast number of titles on offer on sites such as Amazon – along with the star-rating system, ‘people also bought’ suggestions and wide variety of prices – readers browse and select ebooks (and indeed treebooks) far differently than they did when confined to the wares of a single book shop. This has removed one of the major obstacles that used to exist for self-publishing: distribution.

The conversation is particularly vibrant at the moment in the wake of the ‘eisler-hocking deals’, wherein mightily successful self-published paranormal author Amanda Hocking recently got herself an impressive US$2mil advance with traditional publisher St Martin’s Press for four new books; while at around the same time, thriller writer Barry Eisler turned down a US$500k deal from the same publisher (coincidentally, I understand) for two new books to follow a self-publishing route. There are discussions about their various reasons all over the Internet. See here for a discussion involving both authors, moderated by literary agent Ted Weinstein, and here and here for discussions between Barry Eisler and author Joe Konrath.

Put briefly, Hocking is seeking the stability and broad reach of a traditional publisher and the prospect of even greater exposure through treebooks. Eisler, on the other hand, has done the maths and determined that he can earn more money courtesy of better margins, given his already strong reader platform to ensure volume of sales.

As far as I can tell, the industry is sitting on the fence and saying they are both ‘right’. From a monetary point of view, ‘indie authors’ can make bigger margins on each ebook, while still undercutting authors from traditional publishing houses. Yet it has led to much discussion about the importance of marketing and platform for indie authors. For someone like Eisler, who already has a platform, it seems viable. But what about all the unknown authors out there? How do they build up a following and generate sales?

It is obviously possible, as exemplified by Amanda Hocking’s sales and the number of ‘Kindle writers’ (to coin another new term) that are emerging. By actively pursuing reader reviews and selecting an appropriate price-point, savvy indie authors can leverage the online distribution platforms (not to mention social media) to successfully market their books. I suspect, however, that this road is tougher and less reliable than via traditional routes.

The other aspect to consider of course is that of quality – of story, of writing, of editing, of design. There can be no doubt that traditional publishing houses add enormous value in these areas, and many argue that if a book’s not good enough to be selected by such a publisher, then it ought never be published at all. Well, maybe yes and maybe no…

I personally do subscribe to the belief that a book published by a traditional house has greater credibility. It has been worked over by professionals and selected for its great story. It’s the ‘real deal’ so to speak. But publishing is a business and the opportunities are limited. We don’t live in an ideal world where every worthwhile book is picked up. Where’s the harm in competent yet unpublished authors self-publishing their books? Consumers are not forced to buy them, so why not make them available for those who choose to read them — and good luck to the authors.

There is a hitch though, and this is that anyone can self-publish these days — anyone from the author whose book only just missed out on a contract, right down to the wannabe who can’t write a coherent sentence. And, short of downloading free samples, it can be hard to tell them apart. I fear this will continue to plague the credibility of self-published books for some time to come. Indie authors who engage professional editing and design services will be doing themselves a favour, particularly if they are hoping to forge a route into traditional publishing.

It is nevertheless hard to deny that the industry perception is starting to shift. You won’t find many industry observers that dismiss self-publishing outright, simply because of all the success stories. Readers and ebook buyers are having the final say. There certainly seems to be a sound business model for self-publishing, so long as the platform is there to generate sales.

A recent survey by agent Rachelle Gardner on her blog suggests, however, that most serious writers would still prefer the more traditional route to publication. She summarises the results of her poll here, and I have to say I agree with each of her ‘five reasons to pursue traditional publishing’.


How many points of view?

A hot topic at today’s pub writing session (in the gaps between writing) was point of view (POV) – specifically, how many points of view are optimum in a novel?

This is actually rather pertinent when it comes to ‘epic’ fantasy, in which genre it has become quite common to write from several character POVs, often up to eight or ten, in order to tell a story large in scope and complexity. The point was made, however, that in some cases such a large number of POV characters could be deemed to represent ‘laziness’ on the part of the author, who might be taking the simple option to convey information or character.

This proved to be a highly controversial statement (probably because it was made without all the qualifiers I’ve included above…) A lively discussion ensued!

My take on this is that generally fewer POV characters are preferable, primarily because as a reader I want to engage on a deep level with characters, which doesn’t tend to happen to the same extent when the POV is constantly changing. I want to go on a journey with the characters, discover things as they do. I think it’s fine for events to be happening off stage, events that we only hear about when the POV character does. In epic fantasy, where there could be wars or quests or other big stuff happening elsewhere, there’s a definite temptation to throw to a different POV character who can be the reader’s eyes and ears in that space. Ultimately it’s a matter of what is best for the story. Sometimes multiple narratives are part of the author’s grand vision.

The best example for multiple POVs I’ve come across is Robin Hobb’s Liveship Traders trilogy. In this series she writes from about six POVs and every single one is brilliantly rendered with depth and texture. Each POV character undergoes massive transformation and there’s a reason their individual stories are told. They’re not there merely to serve as narrative devices (which criticism of other nameless novels was at the heart of the earlier ‘laziness’ comment, I believe).

When I set out to write my current novel(s) I made the conscious decision to limit my POVs to two, mainly because I wanted to keep the story intimate. However, I’ve been contemplating adding a couple of POV characters to the second novel, which I’m about to commence. My reason is primarily to convey events that are geographically distant from my original two POV characters, but I also thought it would be interesting to tell the stories of an additional two or three characters. After today’s discussion I’m remembering my initial ambition and I guess I’m going to have to consider what will be best for the story!


Smashed avo

“Are you done with that?” says the waiter, eyeing the last two mouthfuls of smashed avocado and smoked salmon on multigrain toast, languishing on my plate. I look up from where I’m scribbling madly in my notebook and wave her away.

Really, she ought to know that the cutlery isn’t in the correct position to indicate I’ve finished. It’s splayed every-which-way, not neatly placed in parallel. Just because something occurred to me that I simply had to write down immediately. . . Nervously I examine my half-drunk coffee to make sure that hasn’t disappeared. Thank god.

Even when I’m on my own, I find it can be beneficial to get out of the house and down to a cafe with notebook (either tree or e) in hand. Change of scene, and all that. Today’s interlude took place at The Pound, Elsternwick, one of my usual haunts. Good coffee and good food, which is what every writer needs to unlock the creative flow.


Eona launch at Glenfern

Today I attended the launch of Eona by the lovely Alison Goodman. It’s the sequel to fantasy epic Eon, a tale of dragons and power and imperial politics set in a fantasy land inspired by medieval Chinese and Japanese mythologies.

I’m actually reading Eon (also known as The Two Pearls of Wisdom) at the moment, and can’t wait to sink my teeth into the sequel. I’ll have to wait, though . . . Eona is being published as The Necklace of the Gods in the UK, and I’ve decided to order that version instead. Except it isn’t out in that version for another 50 days! Oh, the pain we suffer to obtain a pseudo matching set (unfortunately, there will be no version that exactly matches my version of ‘Two Pearls’). 

The launch took place at the Victorian Gothic mansion Glenfern, a National Trust property in East St Kilda, now a Centre for Arts and Culture that is home to a resident Team of Pianists and nine Writers’ Studios, run by the Victorian Writers’ Centre. It’s a mansion I’ve driven past many times, always wondeirng what’s in there. And now I know! A brilliant venue for a book launch. Congratulations to Alison and I have no doubt Eona will go great guns.


That elusive ending

I have spent a vast chunk of today staring at the computer screen, trying to come up with an appropriate and satisfying ending to this novel. I think I’ve written (by which I mean retained) exactly 200 words.

I began the day well — up pre-dawn for a walk along Brighton/Elwood beach with a friend to get the juices pumping. (Lovely crescent moon and Venus rising.) Around lunchtime, I resorted to sitting in the sun with a coffee . . . and in the middle of the afternoon I tried yoga and meditation. Alas, none of these ploys helped.

Most of the final chapter is written; it’s just the final 300-400 words that keep slipping through my fingers. The complicating factor, I suppose, is that the novel has a sequel, which means that I need to a) consider where the next one starts, and b) ensure the ending is intriguing enough for a reader to want to read on — without first (figuratively) hurling it across the room in frustration. (A cliffhanger is out. I will never ever forget the frustration of finishing Stephen Donaldson’s Mirror of her Dreams, the one where Geraden disappears into a mirror, and having to wait an entire year for the sequel to be published.)

Don’t worry, I’ll get there. It’s as much about what feels right as making sure the bows are all tied. But I want to make sure the bows are all perfect, and of the right colour, before allowing myself to type those two short words . . .


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 469 other followers

%d bloggers like this: