This is a book I read earlier this year. I wanted to write a review at the time but never got around to it. Overall, I'd say this was a very strong debut for Stavely. The plot had good bits of action and mystery. The characters were likeable. Stavely only scratched the surface of his world, but I saw a lot of potential there. While I can't point to any one thing that was phenomenal in this book, the sum total of all its elements was a very enjoyable read.
This book is primarily from the perspectives of the children of an assassinated emperor. We have Valyn, who is training with an elite group of soldiers. His plot features some good action and a lot of mystery. We also have Kaden, who is the heir to the throne. He is training with a group of monks in a remote location. I won't spoil the reasons for his training, though. That's a revelation in the book. His plot is a bit slower at first, but it's also got a good amount of action and mystery.
Of the three children, Adare, the daughter, gets the least page time. However, her story is very interesting in its own right, and I'd expect we'll see more of her in the coming books. Don't take this lack of focus on her to mean there aren't good female characters in this book. There are actually quite a few, especially in Valyn's plot line. They just aren't POV characters.
Now, the Goodreads description of the book says it's for fans of George RR Martin and Douglas Hulick, which seems an odd suggestion because I wouldn't compare this book to either of them. It's difficult for me to pin down to whom exactly it does compare. Sure, there are some echoes of Martin's influence, but it's really nothing like A Game of Thrones. A closer comparison might be Daniel Abraham (though The Emperor's Blades is faster-paced than much of Abraham's work). The biggest reason I can't compare it to Martin is the characters. Stavely's characters are more along the lines of Brandon Sanderson characters. Your heroes are generally good people.
Who knows? Maybe I should just stop trying to compare it. This book stands well on its own. It uses a lot of familiar fantasy elements, but the combination of them feels entirely original.
Rating: 9/10
Thursday, September 18, 2014
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
First-person POV: Advantages and Disadvantages
This is the first in a series of posts on point of view.
Point of view is one of the writer's greatest tools, yet it is also one of the most abused. I can't count the number of times sloppy point of view has hindered my enjoyment of an otherwise good book. Now you're probably saying, "Come on. I know what point of view is. I learned all about first and third person in school."
Unfortunately, school doesn't prepare you for the realities of fiction writing. There's so much more to point of view than first and third person, and it's not something you just pick randomly. Every type of point of view has its advantages and disadvantages.
Let's take a deeper look.
FIRST-PERSON
On the surface, first-person is simple. You're writing it as if you're the character. This allows you to place the reader firmly in the head of that character. It also keeps you from engaging in one of the worst writing sins: headhopping.
However, first-person has its drawbacks. While you can write multiple first-person narrators in one book, it is not the most common of techniques, and it is very easy to get wrong. Those of you who've read Veronica Roth's Allegiant know what I mean. In the third book of the series, Roth moved from an effective one-narrator story to a two-narrator story. Unfortunately, I found that I had trouble telling the narrator's voices apart (even though they were of different genders). This detracted from the book.
This can be done well. For another YA example, you have The Scorpio Races by Maggie Stiefvater. Here, you have two separate first-person narrators, but it works. I had no trouble telling them apart.
So what's the moral here? Character voice is everything in first-person (whether you're doing one narrator or multiple).
In the case of one narrator, you want to make that narrator come to life through the way s/he narrates the story. The narrative itself is a huge part of characterization.
As an example of this, look at Jim Butcher's Dresden Files. Part of the appeal of those stories is Harry Dresden as the narrator. You get a sense of him as a character through the way he relates the story. If Butcher had written the series in third person, I'm not sure it would have found the success it has. People like the occasional sarcastic remark from Dresden.
For a similar style of narration, but with some differences, you might look at Kevin Hearne's Iron Druid Chronicles. He has a character and story that, in many ways, remind you of Dresden. However, when I read each series, I find the narration is different enough that I get a sense of distinct characters telling their story in the way they know best.
Now, character voice does play a role in third-person POV, especially in deep third (which I'll get to in another post). But it's not the same as first-person at least for me. There's a closeness in first that you just don't get in third (in most cases). This can be both an advantage and a disadvantage.
Let's take a look at some secondary-world fantasy examples:
Prince of Thorns by Mark Lawrence. In this, I found the first-person narration was a double-edged sword. On the one hand, I really didn't want to be in Jorg's head. It's a scary place. On the other, getting into his head and hearing the words in his voice helps many readers identify with a character they would normally find despicable. Jorg also has a bit of an intellectual side, so he occasionally gets into some poetic language. It seems fitting, though.
The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss. The majority of this story is in first-person POV from Kvothe's perspective. It's also a very different voice from Jorg's above. Kvothe is a much kinder, gentler narrator. While I loved the story, I never quite felt like it was really Kvothe telling it. It felt more like Rothfuss writing it from Kvothe's point of view. Maybe that's Kvothe's voice. It's just not a voice that really stood out to me.
And that's okay.
Too many people think the narrator's voice has to be intrusive, especially in first person. But an understated voice can be just as effective. The key is making sure it's the right voice for your character and the story you want to tell.
In short, first-person POV has a number of advantages. It helps keep you disciplined as a writer, sticking to one POV per scene.. It also allows for the narration itself to further characterization.
However, it can be difficult to get the narrator's voice right, especially if you're writing multiple narrators. And since I usually write with multiple POV characters, I prefer to stick with third person. If I ever come up with a story with just one narrator, though, don't be surprised if I choose first person. As I've said, there are distinct advantages.
Here's some other first-person secondary-world fantasy you might check out (not an exhaustive list):
The Chronicles of Amber by Roger Zelazny
Among Thieves by Douglas Hulick
Assassin's Apprentice by Robin Hobb
The Magic of Recluce by L.E. Modesitt Jr.
Cold Magic by Kate Elliott
The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms by N.K. Jemisin
The Black Company by Glen Cook
Heroes Die by Matthew Woodring Stover (it's partially in first, partially in third)
As you can probably gather from this list, first-person POV is not all that common in secondary-world fantasy. This is due, in part, to the epic nature of many secondary-world fantasies. The authors saw the potential pitfalls of multiple first-person narrators and chose the safer option of third person. That's not saying you can't write more POV characters in first person. It's just a risk as an author, and that's a choice you ultimately have to make.
Point of view is one of the writer's greatest tools, yet it is also one of the most abused. I can't count the number of times sloppy point of view has hindered my enjoyment of an otherwise good book. Now you're probably saying, "Come on. I know what point of view is. I learned all about first and third person in school."
Unfortunately, school doesn't prepare you for the realities of fiction writing. There's so much more to point of view than first and third person, and it's not something you just pick randomly. Every type of point of view has its advantages and disadvantages.
Let's take a deeper look.
FIRST-PERSON
On the surface, first-person is simple. You're writing it as if you're the character. This allows you to place the reader firmly in the head of that character. It also keeps you from engaging in one of the worst writing sins: headhopping.
However, first-person has its drawbacks. While you can write multiple first-person narrators in one book, it is not the most common of techniques, and it is very easy to get wrong. Those of you who've read Veronica Roth's Allegiant know what I mean. In the third book of the series, Roth moved from an effective one-narrator story to a two-narrator story. Unfortunately, I found that I had trouble telling the narrator's voices apart (even though they were of different genders). This detracted from the book.
This can be done well. For another YA example, you have The Scorpio Races by Maggie Stiefvater. Here, you have two separate first-person narrators, but it works. I had no trouble telling them apart.
So what's the moral here? Character voice is everything in first-person (whether you're doing one narrator or multiple).
In the case of one narrator, you want to make that narrator come to life through the way s/he narrates the story. The narrative itself is a huge part of characterization.
As an example of this, look at Jim Butcher's Dresden Files. Part of the appeal of those stories is Harry Dresden as the narrator. You get a sense of him as a character through the way he relates the story. If Butcher had written the series in third person, I'm not sure it would have found the success it has. People like the occasional sarcastic remark from Dresden.
For a similar style of narration, but with some differences, you might look at Kevin Hearne's Iron Druid Chronicles. He has a character and story that, in many ways, remind you of Dresden. However, when I read each series, I find the narration is different enough that I get a sense of distinct characters telling their story in the way they know best.
Now, character voice does play a role in third-person POV, especially in deep third (which I'll get to in another post). But it's not the same as first-person at least for me. There's a closeness in first that you just don't get in third (in most cases). This can be both an advantage and a disadvantage.
Let's take a look at some secondary-world fantasy examples:
Prince of Thorns by Mark Lawrence. In this, I found the first-person narration was a double-edged sword. On the one hand, I really didn't want to be in Jorg's head. It's a scary place. On the other, getting into his head and hearing the words in his voice helps many readers identify with a character they would normally find despicable. Jorg also has a bit of an intellectual side, so he occasionally gets into some poetic language. It seems fitting, though.
The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss. The majority of this story is in first-person POV from Kvothe's perspective. It's also a very different voice from Jorg's above. Kvothe is a much kinder, gentler narrator. While I loved the story, I never quite felt like it was really Kvothe telling it. It felt more like Rothfuss writing it from Kvothe's point of view. Maybe that's Kvothe's voice. It's just not a voice that really stood out to me.
And that's okay.
Too many people think the narrator's voice has to be intrusive, especially in first person. But an understated voice can be just as effective. The key is making sure it's the right voice for your character and the story you want to tell.
In short, first-person POV has a number of advantages. It helps keep you disciplined as a writer, sticking to one POV per scene.. It also allows for the narration itself to further characterization.
However, it can be difficult to get the narrator's voice right, especially if you're writing multiple narrators. And since I usually write with multiple POV characters, I prefer to stick with third person. If I ever come up with a story with just one narrator, though, don't be surprised if I choose first person. As I've said, there are distinct advantages.
Here's some other first-person secondary-world fantasy you might check out (not an exhaustive list):
The Chronicles of Amber by Roger Zelazny
Among Thieves by Douglas Hulick
Assassin's Apprentice by Robin Hobb
The Magic of Recluce by L.E. Modesitt Jr.
Cold Magic by Kate Elliott
The Hundred Thousand Kingdoms by N.K. Jemisin
The Black Company by Glen Cook
Heroes Die by Matthew Woodring Stover (it's partially in first, partially in third)
As you can probably gather from this list, first-person POV is not all that common in secondary-world fantasy. This is due, in part, to the epic nature of many secondary-world fantasies. The authors saw the potential pitfalls of multiple first-person narrators and chose the safer option of third person. That's not saying you can't write more POV characters in first person. It's just a risk as an author, and that's a choice you ultimately have to make.
Fantasy Reading List: Elantris by Brandon Sanderson
As I mentioned in my blog post yesterday, Elantris was the first Brandon Sanderson book I ever read. Since then, he has established himself as one of my favorite authors.
Why was I attracted to Elantris?
1. It was a standalone (and not terribly long).
2. The concept was really cool. I mean, who doesn't want to read about a fantasy city that draws on the legend of Atlantis, but does it in a completely novel way in a secondary world?
This novel is probably the least polished of Sanderson's efforts. You can tell this was early in his professional writing career. But it's a great book nonetheless. I was sucked in immediately by the first line of the prologue.
Elantris was beautiful, once.
This captured my attention because of the final word, separated skillfully by a comma to emphasize it. As I read, I immediately wanted to know why it wasn't beautiful anymore. This is an author doing his job. There's a mystery here, and that's one great way of showing tension.
When I got to the first chapter, I was immediately sucked into Raoden's story. Why? Because of this opening line:
Prince Raoden of Arelon awoke early that morning, completely unaware that he had been damned for all eternity.
This line, although it might be seen as a break in POV, truly grabbed my attention. I didn't even know who this prince was, but I already felt for him. Being damned for all eternity sucks. A lot. Anyone can feel empathy for a character in that situation. Not to mention, it adds mystery and gets the plot rolling. Working through mysteries is one of Sanderson's strengths as a writer.
Now, to the rest of the book:
It has been more than two years since I've read the book, so I won't go into incredible detail here. However, I will mention what Sanderson did well (and what he didn't).
The good:
1. Sanderson created likeable characters. Note that I said likeable. For many readers, Raoden and Sarene are not perhaps the most interesting characters. But I know I liked them, and I wanted to root for them.
2. The main antagonist, Hrathen. He is not perhaps as likeable as the other two main characters, but he makes up for it by being one of the best villains I've ever read. I won't give away too much of the plot, but I'd describe him as a great example of an anti-villain.
3. The setting. The city of Elantris is one of the most interesting settings I've ever read in fantasy, and it has really stuck with me. It's a city where people, taken by a mysterious transformation, are doomed to live out eternity looking hideously disfigured. Not only that, but for every injury they suffer, their pain remains, building until they go insane. It's a city without order, where gangs rule the day. It's this chaos that Raoden seeks to correct once he is exiled there.
4. The magic. As you'd expect from Brandon Sanderson, the magic system is intricate, interesting, and integral to the plot (how's that for alliteration and consonance!). I've forgotten some of the details, but I remember the magic, which you discover later in the book, as a great mystery to unravel. Just like the city of Elantris itself.
5. The mystery. As I mentioned above, mysteries abound in this one. The city of Elantris is a mystery. The magic is a mystery. The character of Hrathen is a mystery. Sanderson achieves a well-developed balance of mystery, intrigue, and action that keeps you reading despite occasional rough patches in the writing itself.
6. The action. Through much of the book, you don't see big battles, but there is one at the end, and it's awesome. That's one of Sanderson's strenghts.
The bad:
1. The writing isn't as clean as Sanderson's later work.
2. The pacing is, at times, a little slow (but not terribly so).
3. The "interesting factor" for two of the MCs, as mentioned above.
As you can see, I can't find much bad to say about this. Elantris is one of those books that has really stuck with me. I loved it when I read it, and I still love it now. It's not perfect, but it's a highly entertaining read that every fantasy reader should at least give a chance.
Rating: 9/10
Why was I attracted to Elantris?
1. It was a standalone (and not terribly long).
2. The concept was really cool. I mean, who doesn't want to read about a fantasy city that draws on the legend of Atlantis, but does it in a completely novel way in a secondary world?
This novel is probably the least polished of Sanderson's efforts. You can tell this was early in his professional writing career. But it's a great book nonetheless. I was sucked in immediately by the first line of the prologue.
Elantris was beautiful, once.
This captured my attention because of the final word, separated skillfully by a comma to emphasize it. As I read, I immediately wanted to know why it wasn't beautiful anymore. This is an author doing his job. There's a mystery here, and that's one great way of showing tension.
When I got to the first chapter, I was immediately sucked into Raoden's story. Why? Because of this opening line:
Prince Raoden of Arelon awoke early that morning, completely unaware that he had been damned for all eternity.
This line, although it might be seen as a break in POV, truly grabbed my attention. I didn't even know who this prince was, but I already felt for him. Being damned for all eternity sucks. A lot. Anyone can feel empathy for a character in that situation. Not to mention, it adds mystery and gets the plot rolling. Working through mysteries is one of Sanderson's strengths as a writer.
Now, to the rest of the book:
It has been more than two years since I've read the book, so I won't go into incredible detail here. However, I will mention what Sanderson did well (and what he didn't).
The good:
1. Sanderson created likeable characters. Note that I said likeable. For many readers, Raoden and Sarene are not perhaps the most interesting characters. But I know I liked them, and I wanted to root for them.
2. The main antagonist, Hrathen. He is not perhaps as likeable as the other two main characters, but he makes up for it by being one of the best villains I've ever read. I won't give away too much of the plot, but I'd describe him as a great example of an anti-villain.
3. The setting. The city of Elantris is one of the most interesting settings I've ever read in fantasy, and it has really stuck with me. It's a city where people, taken by a mysterious transformation, are doomed to live out eternity looking hideously disfigured. Not only that, but for every injury they suffer, their pain remains, building until they go insane. It's a city without order, where gangs rule the day. It's this chaos that Raoden seeks to correct once he is exiled there.
4. The magic. As you'd expect from Brandon Sanderson, the magic system is intricate, interesting, and integral to the plot (how's that for alliteration and consonance!). I've forgotten some of the details, but I remember the magic, which you discover later in the book, as a great mystery to unravel. Just like the city of Elantris itself.
5. The mystery. As I mentioned above, mysteries abound in this one. The city of Elantris is a mystery. The magic is a mystery. The character of Hrathen is a mystery. Sanderson achieves a well-developed balance of mystery, intrigue, and action that keeps you reading despite occasional rough patches in the writing itself.
6. The action. Through much of the book, you don't see big battles, but there is one at the end, and it's awesome. That's one of Sanderson's strenghts.
The bad:
1. The writing isn't as clean as Sanderson's later work.
2. The pacing is, at times, a little slow (but not terribly so).
3. The "interesting factor" for two of the MCs, as mentioned above.
As you can see, I can't find much bad to say about this. Elantris is one of those books that has really stuck with me. I loved it when I read it, and I still love it now. It's not perfect, but it's a highly entertaining read that every fantasy reader should at least give a chance.
Rating: 9/10
Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Why writers should read. A lot.
I have a confession to make. When I first started writing, I wasn't much of a reader. I had read and loved Harry Potter. Beyond that, though, I hadn't done much reading. I had fallen prey to the myth so many schools feed our children: reading is boring. Not a deliberate myth, but a persistent one. I read all these books I was supposed to like, and I found them mind-numbingly boring.
That, in part, was why I wanted to write. I wanted to do for other kids what J.K. Rowling did for me. That is, I wanted to write something exciting for kids to read instead of the boring stuff they had to read for school. Beyond Rowling, I had also read The Hobbit. So, with this limited amount of reading, I set out to write my first novel. It was pretty much a mish-mash of The Hobbit, Harry Potter, and Super Nintendo RPGs. Not only that, but the writing was bad. Really bad. This is something I've since reworked numerous times, finally arriving at something I can feel proud of.
For years, I continued as a writer. I improved, but not as much as I would have liked. My second project was a middle grade fantasy in which the Harry Potter influence was very apparent. I do plan to rework this, as there's a great story in there, but it still needs a lot of work.
Why were these stories not as good as I would have liked? Why was my writing not as smooth and polished as I would have liked? Because I wasn't reading enough. Too frequently, I sought my entertainment in video games. There's nothing wrong with that, even as a writer, but I should have found the time to read. Then, of course, I was so busy being a straight-A student through high school and college. I did a ton of reading for my classes. I didn't want to do more during my free time.
It wasn't until my senior year of college, after a failed attempt at querying one of my novels, that I realized I needed to change something. Looking back, I shudder to think that I queried something at that stage. It was no wonder I got nothing but no responses and form rejections. It simply wasn't ready. When I realized this, I set myself a task. I was going to read a lot. A difficult task, I thought at first, realizing how much I'd hated most of what I read for school.
There were few exceptions to this. The Hobbit. 1984. Brave New World. Most of the books I read for my science fiction class first-semester my senior year of college. That class, in part, gave me the belief that I did enjoy reading. I just had to choose carefully what I read. All my writing ideas fell within science fiction and fantasy (mostly fantasy), so I decided that was what I would read.
In my college library, I found authors like Terry Brooks and Jim Butcher. They were my real introductions to epic and urban fantasy, respectively. It was then that I realized how much I loved these stories, especially the epic fantasy. Soon I moved on to Robert Jordan and Tad Williams--stories that were similar to Brooks, but deeper and more complex. Then I found Brandon Sanderson. When I read Elantris, my love of fantasy was official.
Once I graduated and joined the ranks of unemployed college grads, I dedicated myself even more to reading. The authors I've discovered since then are so numerous there's no point mentioning them all (that would be a very long post). Through all this reading (I usually read well over 100 books a year), I've noticed another great thing. My writing has improved so much. The flow. The dialogue. The description. And especially the ideas. By reading so much more within the fantasy genre, I discovered the wide variety of stories out there, and I had a much greater well to draw from for my own ideas.
One of the key things I've discovered about reading is this. Don't get stuck reading too much of any one author at once. When I did this, I found too often that their writing styles were influencing my own. I've since made it a point to have multiple books going at once so that I never allow myself to be influenced too much by any one author. Through this, I've simply developed a feel for good writing, and my style has evolved. I'm sure there's still something of my original style in there, but it's much cleaner, much easier to read.
Today, I also realized an unexpected benefit of reading, which is what inspired this post.
I'm getting close to the querying stage for Lightweaver (though I might change its title to Sunweaver). I started researching agents today, and I realized something great when I was looking through their clients. I'm familiar with many of the books they represent. This gives me the ability to personalize my query, stating why my book fits in well with what they represent. Before I read widely, I had no idea who any of these authors were. I was completely unprepared to enter the publishing arena.
Yet another reason I shudder when I look back at the project I queried a few years ago.
Through this all, I've discovered that I really enjoy reading. In fact, if I were forced to give up either reading or writing, I would give up writing in a heartbeat. I wouldn't like it, but I could deal with it. However, there are simply too many great books out there to read.
Now, you might be asking what you should do if you don't find you love reading this much. You might find you're like me--that you only like a few types of books (fantasy, science fiction, and horror in my case). Maybe you just haven't discovered those books yet.
And don't be alarmed if you don't like some of the "great" stuff in whatever genre you read. You don't have to like it. You just have to find what you like within your genre, and that might even be the cheesy pulp you're not supposed to like. Don't feel ashamed if you like that kind of stuff. Everyone has different tastes. For example, I still like Terry Brooks. I know he isn't regarded all that highly in many fantasy circles, but I think his books are fun reads. On the other hand, I've found authors like George RR Martin, Steven Erikson, and Joe Abercrombie are more of a struggle for me. In the end, I like their books, but they're not my go-to fantasy. And that's okay.
This has probably rambled on long enough. In short, reading is the single most important thing you can do as an author. If you don't read a lot, you won't develop that feel for good prose, and you won't have as many ideas to draw from. Also, you won't know what's already been done to death in your genre. And, finally, you'll feel a lot better about things come querying time.
Good luck out there, fellow writers. Now get reading.
That, in part, was why I wanted to write. I wanted to do for other kids what J.K. Rowling did for me. That is, I wanted to write something exciting for kids to read instead of the boring stuff they had to read for school. Beyond Rowling, I had also read The Hobbit. So, with this limited amount of reading, I set out to write my first novel. It was pretty much a mish-mash of The Hobbit, Harry Potter, and Super Nintendo RPGs. Not only that, but the writing was bad. Really bad. This is something I've since reworked numerous times, finally arriving at something I can feel proud of.
For years, I continued as a writer. I improved, but not as much as I would have liked. My second project was a middle grade fantasy in which the Harry Potter influence was very apparent. I do plan to rework this, as there's a great story in there, but it still needs a lot of work.
Why were these stories not as good as I would have liked? Why was my writing not as smooth and polished as I would have liked? Because I wasn't reading enough. Too frequently, I sought my entertainment in video games. There's nothing wrong with that, even as a writer, but I should have found the time to read. Then, of course, I was so busy being a straight-A student through high school and college. I did a ton of reading for my classes. I didn't want to do more during my free time.
It wasn't until my senior year of college, after a failed attempt at querying one of my novels, that I realized I needed to change something. Looking back, I shudder to think that I queried something at that stage. It was no wonder I got nothing but no responses and form rejections. It simply wasn't ready. When I realized this, I set myself a task. I was going to read a lot. A difficult task, I thought at first, realizing how much I'd hated most of what I read for school.
There were few exceptions to this. The Hobbit. 1984. Brave New World. Most of the books I read for my science fiction class first-semester my senior year of college. That class, in part, gave me the belief that I did enjoy reading. I just had to choose carefully what I read. All my writing ideas fell within science fiction and fantasy (mostly fantasy), so I decided that was what I would read.
In my college library, I found authors like Terry Brooks and Jim Butcher. They were my real introductions to epic and urban fantasy, respectively. It was then that I realized how much I loved these stories, especially the epic fantasy. Soon I moved on to Robert Jordan and Tad Williams--stories that were similar to Brooks, but deeper and more complex. Then I found Brandon Sanderson. When I read Elantris, my love of fantasy was official.
Once I graduated and joined the ranks of unemployed college grads, I dedicated myself even more to reading. The authors I've discovered since then are so numerous there's no point mentioning them all (that would be a very long post). Through all this reading (I usually read well over 100 books a year), I've noticed another great thing. My writing has improved so much. The flow. The dialogue. The description. And especially the ideas. By reading so much more within the fantasy genre, I discovered the wide variety of stories out there, and I had a much greater well to draw from for my own ideas.
One of the key things I've discovered about reading is this. Don't get stuck reading too much of any one author at once. When I did this, I found too often that their writing styles were influencing my own. I've since made it a point to have multiple books going at once so that I never allow myself to be influenced too much by any one author. Through this, I've simply developed a feel for good writing, and my style has evolved. I'm sure there's still something of my original style in there, but it's much cleaner, much easier to read.
Today, I also realized an unexpected benefit of reading, which is what inspired this post.
I'm getting close to the querying stage for Lightweaver (though I might change its title to Sunweaver). I started researching agents today, and I realized something great when I was looking through their clients. I'm familiar with many of the books they represent. This gives me the ability to personalize my query, stating why my book fits in well with what they represent. Before I read widely, I had no idea who any of these authors were. I was completely unprepared to enter the publishing arena.
Yet another reason I shudder when I look back at the project I queried a few years ago.
Through this all, I've discovered that I really enjoy reading. In fact, if I were forced to give up either reading or writing, I would give up writing in a heartbeat. I wouldn't like it, but I could deal with it. However, there are simply too many great books out there to read.
Now, you might be asking what you should do if you don't find you love reading this much. You might find you're like me--that you only like a few types of books (fantasy, science fiction, and horror in my case). Maybe you just haven't discovered those books yet.
And don't be alarmed if you don't like some of the "great" stuff in whatever genre you read. You don't have to like it. You just have to find what you like within your genre, and that might even be the cheesy pulp you're not supposed to like. Don't feel ashamed if you like that kind of stuff. Everyone has different tastes. For example, I still like Terry Brooks. I know he isn't regarded all that highly in many fantasy circles, but I think his books are fun reads. On the other hand, I've found authors like George RR Martin, Steven Erikson, and Joe Abercrombie are more of a struggle for me. In the end, I like their books, but they're not my go-to fantasy. And that's okay.
This has probably rambled on long enough. In short, reading is the single most important thing you can do as an author. If you don't read a lot, you won't develop that feel for good prose, and you won't have as many ideas to draw from. Also, you won't know what's already been done to death in your genre. And, finally, you'll feel a lot better about things come querying time.
Good luck out there, fellow writers. Now get reading.
Monday, August 11, 2014
New project (tentatively titled The Watersong)
So today I started some of the pre-writing for another project. It's an epic fantasy I've called The Watersong (for the moment at least). It's named for one of the types of magic in the world, and the one that will feature most prominently in the story.
There are actually three types of magic. I'm not entirely clear on what they do just yet, but I'm in the process of figuring these things out.
This epic fantasy will feature lots of magic, action, and (eventually, or perhaps not-so-eventually, world-ending stakes). You know, basically what you've come to expect from epic fantasy. This idea has been sitting around in my head for a while. That's usually how I work with ideas. I allow them to simmer for a while.
I already know who my three point-of-view characters will be. I already know the three main nations that feature in the book's conflict. I even have some of the religious background worked out, as religion will play a large role in the story, with gods actually making appearances.
I think I'm most excited with the setting for the first book (yes, I intend it to be a series. Don't I always?). Most of the book will take place in a sub-tropical island empire consisting of many small islands. I have no problem with faux medieval Europe, but there's so much more you can do with fantasy.
Other parts of the book (and series) will take place in a more traditional fantasy setting and in a country consisting mostly of desert.
I can't tell you much about the plot, as I'm still in the process of figuring it out. However, I do hope that writing about this story will help me in sticking with it. We'll see.
There are actually three types of magic. I'm not entirely clear on what they do just yet, but I'm in the process of figuring these things out.
This epic fantasy will feature lots of magic, action, and (eventually, or perhaps not-so-eventually, world-ending stakes). You know, basically what you've come to expect from epic fantasy. This idea has been sitting around in my head for a while. That's usually how I work with ideas. I allow them to simmer for a while.
I already know who my three point-of-view characters will be. I already know the three main nations that feature in the book's conflict. I even have some of the religious background worked out, as religion will play a large role in the story, with gods actually making appearances.
I think I'm most excited with the setting for the first book (yes, I intend it to be a series. Don't I always?). Most of the book will take place in a sub-tropical island empire consisting of many small islands. I have no problem with faux medieval Europe, but there's so much more you can do with fantasy.
Other parts of the book (and series) will take place in a more traditional fantasy setting and in a country consisting mostly of desert.
I can't tell you much about the plot, as I'm still in the process of figuring it out. However, I do hope that writing about this story will help me in sticking with it. We'll see.
Sunday, August 10, 2014
Checking in.
So it's been a while since I've posted here. I really need to get better about that. Since the last time I posted, I finished my epic fantasy Lightweaver. Well, by finished, I mean I got through the first draft. I've been doing revisions on it, but there's still a lot more to go.
I've also been doing editing and revision work on my other epic fantasy, Empire of Chains. It's still a monster of a book at approximately 160,000 words. In terms of epic fantasy, that's not all that long, but it is a tough sell as a debut writer. Thankfully, Lightweaver is only about 105,000 words. It might see some additions, but I'll stay safely under 120,000 (I hope).
For the moment, I think I'm going to postpone work on my upper MG fantasy The Battle Stone. In fact, I'm all but certain that I'll be abandoning that book and going back to my original first Martin Mason book, The Man in the Crystal Prison. However, at this time, I don't feel in the right place to do work on that. In truth, I'm not certain MG is where I want to start. I love MG and YA fantasy, but I'm not sure I want to focus on it to begin my writing career.
I'd kind of like to follow the Brandon Sanderson model for a career. He started out with epic fantasy, then branched out into YA and MG. He's also one of my favorite writers and someone I'd love to emulate in my career. I love the way he takes some of fantasy's tired tropes and makes them seem fresh again, and he does it without all the Grimdark that's so prevalent these days.
I have no issue with the grittier side of fantasy. I just like to find the happy medium between optimitic and pessimistic. Believe me, I"ll throw horrible thing after horrible thing at my characters, but I like to give the reader some hope at the same time. Also, I'm not big on the move toward incredibly dishonorable protagonists. Flawed characters are great. Moral ambiguity is great. In fact, I'd argue these things are almost necessary. But some recent authors have taken this to an extreme, crafting main characters who are absolutely despicable, and I can only take so much of that at once.
Okay, so this post is rambling all over the place. I suppose I should also mention that I'm considering adding another page to this site, listing what I believe are some of the best fantasy books out there (and telling you why). That might actually work better than my sporadic reviews, though I could, of course, still do them. I need to post something after all.
I'd like to see this blog become something more than what it is right now. I'd like to see it become a good introduction to me and my work, as well as an informative place. Perhaps I'll write posts on various aspects of the writing process, especially as they pertain to fantasy.
Whatever I do, I'll try to be more active.
I've also been doing editing and revision work on my other epic fantasy, Empire of Chains. It's still a monster of a book at approximately 160,000 words. In terms of epic fantasy, that's not all that long, but it is a tough sell as a debut writer. Thankfully, Lightweaver is only about 105,000 words. It might see some additions, but I'll stay safely under 120,000 (I hope).
For the moment, I think I'm going to postpone work on my upper MG fantasy The Battle Stone. In fact, I'm all but certain that I'll be abandoning that book and going back to my original first Martin Mason book, The Man in the Crystal Prison. However, at this time, I don't feel in the right place to do work on that. In truth, I'm not certain MG is where I want to start. I love MG and YA fantasy, but I'm not sure I want to focus on it to begin my writing career.
I'd kind of like to follow the Brandon Sanderson model for a career. He started out with epic fantasy, then branched out into YA and MG. He's also one of my favorite writers and someone I'd love to emulate in my career. I love the way he takes some of fantasy's tired tropes and makes them seem fresh again, and he does it without all the Grimdark that's so prevalent these days.
I have no issue with the grittier side of fantasy. I just like to find the happy medium between optimitic and pessimistic. Believe me, I"ll throw horrible thing after horrible thing at my characters, but I like to give the reader some hope at the same time. Also, I'm not big on the move toward incredibly dishonorable protagonists. Flawed characters are great. Moral ambiguity is great. In fact, I'd argue these things are almost necessary. But some recent authors have taken this to an extreme, crafting main characters who are absolutely despicable, and I can only take so much of that at once.
Okay, so this post is rambling all over the place. I suppose I should also mention that I'm considering adding another page to this site, listing what I believe are some of the best fantasy books out there (and telling you why). That might actually work better than my sporadic reviews, though I could, of course, still do them. I need to post something after all.
I'd like to see this blog become something more than what it is right now. I'd like to see it become a good introduction to me and my work, as well as an informative place. Perhaps I'll write posts on various aspects of the writing process, especially as they pertain to fantasy.
Whatever I do, I'll try to be more active.
Sunday, April 20, 2014
Book Review: Blood Song
Well, it's been a while since I've posted, and even longer since I've done a book review. However, I recently finished a book that I thought was quite excellent: Blood Song, by Anthony Ryan.
Blood Song is an epic fantasy in the tradition of The Name of the Wind. The setup is a bit different, but there are certainly some similarities. In this, we start with a first-person, present day account by a historian who has met Vaelin Al'Sorna (our main character), who is about to face a battle to the death, which is intended as an execution because he killed the next-in-line to the throne of a country.
Once we're introduced to this timeline, we switch to a third-person narrative following Vaelin, from the moment he was dropped off at an Order of religious fighters to the moment the book begins. In between, we see all the things that have shaped Vaelin and get a taste of the interesting future set in store for him.
Much like Kvothe in The Name of the Wind, Vaelin is a larger-than-life character. The book follows his exploits, and a lot of interesting things happen during his time growing up with the Order. It's a strongly character-driven narrative with a sympathetic and compelling main character. There is also a fair amount of action, including some large-scale battles later on.
While this story didn't do anything particularly groundbreaking, something about it drew me in just like the narrative in The Name of the Wind. I think people looking for a similar story will find a lot to like here. There's enough about this one that separates it, though, making it a truly excellent book.
Blood Song was originally self-published, but it has since been picked up by major publishers. With good reason. It's a great story with a compelling main character and a world layered with mystery. It also stands alone for the most part. There's obviously more to come, but I came away from this book feeling like I read a satisfying story. Not to mention, the interesting stuff here actually happens in book 1. As much as I loved The Name of the Wind (and The Wise Man's Fear to a lesser extent), I found Rothfuss was teasing us by mentioning exploits that wouldn't happen until the third book.
There is none of that here. You get the complete story up to the point of the frame story, which I really enjoyed. That's also why I think I actually liked this more than The Name of the Wind. If you're looking for a good fantasy read, you should check this one out.
Rating: 9.5/10
For my review of Tower Lord (the followup to Blood Song), click here.
Blood Song is an epic fantasy in the tradition of The Name of the Wind. The setup is a bit different, but there are certainly some similarities. In this, we start with a first-person, present day account by a historian who has met Vaelin Al'Sorna (our main character), who is about to face a battle to the death, which is intended as an execution because he killed the next-in-line to the throne of a country.
Once we're introduced to this timeline, we switch to a third-person narrative following Vaelin, from the moment he was dropped off at an Order of religious fighters to the moment the book begins. In between, we see all the things that have shaped Vaelin and get a taste of the interesting future set in store for him.
Much like Kvothe in The Name of the Wind, Vaelin is a larger-than-life character. The book follows his exploits, and a lot of interesting things happen during his time growing up with the Order. It's a strongly character-driven narrative with a sympathetic and compelling main character. There is also a fair amount of action, including some large-scale battles later on.
While this story didn't do anything particularly groundbreaking, something about it drew me in just like the narrative in The Name of the Wind. I think people looking for a similar story will find a lot to like here. There's enough about this one that separates it, though, making it a truly excellent book.
Blood Song was originally self-published, but it has since been picked up by major publishers. With good reason. It's a great story with a compelling main character and a world layered with mystery. It also stands alone for the most part. There's obviously more to come, but I came away from this book feeling like I read a satisfying story. Not to mention, the interesting stuff here actually happens in book 1. As much as I loved The Name of the Wind (and The Wise Man's Fear to a lesser extent), I found Rothfuss was teasing us by mentioning exploits that wouldn't happen until the third book.
There is none of that here. You get the complete story up to the point of the frame story, which I really enjoyed. That's also why I think I actually liked this more than The Name of the Wind. If you're looking for a good fantasy read, you should check this one out.
Rating: 9.5/10
For my review of Tower Lord (the followup to Blood Song), click here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)