• Welcome to the Fantasy Writing Forums. Register Now to join us!

Jaded with the whole Fantasy/Sci-fi genre

I'd compare many modern book releases to modern entertainment on television.

With Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime and network/cable available for choosing what to watch, I've discovered that I simply don't care to keep up with all television shows that I might watch. There's a certain comfort and lackadaisical approach in watching something that isn't incredibly interesting but is familiar. So something like Marvel's Agents of Shield once intrigued me and interested me, but now I find the idea of flipping over to it to be boring. IF one night out of general boredom I turned to it to catch up on the current season, I'd probably enjoy an hour or two–a couple episodes–but I have a vast array of choices available to me, and the decision to pick it specifically has no force behind it. So there are many different shows like this for me, and I'm falling way behind in watching them. And I don't care.

One common feature behind these shows is their formulaic approach. The formula may be something a wide variety of shows share, or it may be a formula that is specific to that series but repeated throughout a run. Occasionally, the formula is comforting, an idle entertainment. But I also keep adding new television shows (historically speaking, old and new, but new to me) because by gosh I'm tired of the old formulas and I want something I haven't seen before. Naturally, this search for the new is another reason for falling behind in keeping up with the old.

There are some television shows that are truly great, hiding in the mix, with their own personality. As time passes, they are being added to the string of notches I've made, and this makes me feel as if the pool of great "new" shows is shrinking.

To tie this anecdotal experience to modern book releases:

An awful lot of those releases do seem to be formulaic. The names and settings have changed but....meh. I will still pick up a new release in a series I am following, but the time frame between these new releases is usually longer than the time that passes between seasons of a television series. (And honestly, there aren't many ongoing book series I am following.)

A lot of what's being pushed out may be intended for those who haven't yet grown bored with those formulas. So people are still buying. There will always be new crops of readers who will find something "new" for them, and there are longtime readers who enjoy casual entertainment and comfort in the old formulas.

The only sort of advice I can give is a suggestion. It's old hat, really. If something you want to see isn't being written, then write it. Heck, I wonder if a sort of iconoclastic rage could motivate in this regard: To hell with the formulas, let's break them! But easier said than done.
 
C

Chessie

Guest
This is precisely the reason why voice is the main focus of everything I do. Some writers are really good at creating amazing characters. Others develop these intricate worlds that make you believe you're really there. And there are those that are great at several things at once. If there's anything I die doing in this life, it'll be writing, and if I can hone my voice to the point that it's strong and evokes rapid emotion then I'll consider that a success.
 

Steerpike

Felis amatus
Moderator
The "rules" are largely directed to popular, mainstream, commercial fiction, which (I'd argue) is also rather generic. If that's what you want to write, the rules are a good guide.
 
The rules issue is part of the reason why I've been ignoring the "How To Write" stuff. At least so far as books, interviews, and podcasts go.

I have the beginning and the end of the story and the main plot points, I just have a real hard time just sitting down and typing it all out. It's like writer's paralysis or something. I don't know how to describe it.
 
C

Chessie

Guest
The rules issue is part of the reason why I've been ignoring the "How To Write" stuff. At least so far as books, interviews, and podcasts go.

I have the beginning and the end of the story and the main plot points, I just have a real hard time just sitting down and typing it all out. It's like writer's paralysis or something. I don't know how to describe it.

Totally hear you on that. Once we have the basic concepts down and are more adept at storytelling, it's hard not to let the default artist take over.
 

ThinkerX

Myth Weaver
The rules issue is part of the reason why I've been ignoring the "How To Write" stuff. At least so far as books, interviews, and podcasts go.

I have the beginning and the end of the story and the main plot points, I just have a real hard time just sitting down and typing it all out. It's like writer's paralysis or something. I don't know how to describe it.

I can relate to this. Currently at a standstill on my WIP because of it...or maybe because what I keep telling myself is a series of novellas might be more accurately described as a single continuous story, one I have been tapping away at daily (or close to daily) since last April. Even more irksome, just four or five chapters (12-15K to go).

As to the style thing, well, I use ProWritingAid and Grammarly to find and fix 'technical' issues. And sometimes, they absolutely loath my way of stating things. Often, I can see their justification, and tweak things a bit. Other times...no. 'Sticky Sentences' are especially annoying to deal with, as what PWA terms 'sticky sentences' are often the quickest or most natural way of putting something. 'Who are you?' counts as a sticky sentence, for example, as does 'Where have you been?' And despite it being utterly obsolete, both programs are hung up on prepositions at the end of sentences. Those, I usually ignore outright.

Another thing I have noted is that the older authors tended to have impressive vocabularies, much more so than is normally seen in todays fiction.
 
I can relate to this. Currently at a standstill on my WIP because of it...or maybe because what I keep telling myself is a series of novellas might be more accurately described as a single continuous story, one I have been tapping away at daily (or close to daily) since last April. Even more irksome, just four or five chapters (12-15K to go).

As to the style thing, well, I use ProWritingAid and Grammarly to find and fix 'technical' issues. And sometimes, they absolutely loath my way of stating things. Often, I can see their justification, and tweak things a bit. Other times...no. 'Sticky Sentences' are especially annoying to deal with, as what PWA terms 'sticky sentences' are often the quickest or most natural way of putting something. 'Who are you?' counts as a sticky sentence, for example, as does 'Where have you been?' And despite it being utterly obsolete, both programs are hung up on prepositions at the end of sentences. Those, I usually ignore outright.

Another thing I have noted is that the older authors tended to have impressive vocabularies, much more so than is normally seen in todays fiction.

I think that in general they had a far better grasp of the language and how to use it effectively. The mastery of the craft seems to be missing in a lot of mainstream consumer culture, and art in general in the modern age. Movies and TV are just as bad. I guess as long as the path of least resistance is turning a profit, then there is no reason to try harder.
 
Last edited:

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
I'll speak up for the present. I would say that the quality of television writing is far superior to what was available back in the 1960s and 1970s. Although there's a good deal of dross in the land of movies, overall I'd argue that the field is much deeper and richer than the allegedly good old days. If you look at the *usual* Hollywood movies of the 1930s, for example, most of it was really formulaic, superficial and downright dull. The good stuff was great. The same is true today.

But we write novels and short stories around here. What about those.

Again, same. Part of the perception the present has about the past stems from the way in which documents survive; more specifically, how awareness of documents survives. Bad novels tend not to get reprinted. The physical copies go into attics and boxes and get forgotten and then get thrown out. Good novels get reprinted. They populate library shelves. They sit in bookcases in the family room, where they get examined by curious young people. In brief, they survive.

So, when we survey a batch of books, we see these old ones that are really great. We see new ones that are mostly bad, some mediocre and a handful of good ones, because they've not been winnowed by time. This does not reflect the Decline of Western Civilization, it reflects the process of creating our archeological record. Nobody knows the trash the Greeks wrote because the trash has not persisted.

This is another reason why my reading list is populated mainly by classics. The sum of humanity has harrowed those fields, and I don't even like to rake. I read newer stuff from time to time, but when I'm disappointed I do not despair. I realize I'm dipping into a jar of licorice jelly beans looking for a chocolate.
 

Russ

Istar
I find it bizarre when people complain about not being able to find new and original voices and work. They are everywhere, to my mind, more than ever. I think people who can't find novel or original work are not looking in the right places or hard enough.

For some folks, their mood might go down and they might become hard to please or burned out, but in many cases that might be their problem not the market's.
 

Russ

Istar
Her work is boring. WHY!?!? It's because the greater powers that be, those in charge of everything writing and literature, say:

-don't use contractions
-don't use adverbs
-don't use italics
-don't use ellipses

...etc!

I think blaming these alleged "rules" for one's discontent with mainstream fiction is missing the mark.

I was at a panel with top editors and agents last July and the number one thing they were looking for was unique voices. Number one.

And if minor house editing differences like the use of italics and ellipses makes you despair about the modern market...you are in trouble.

Comparing an absolute classic like Uncle Tom's Cabin (as others have pointed out) to the general market these days is simply an unreasonable comparison. There is great voice and originality out there. Have you read Mieville? Iles? Hopkinson? Schrader?
 
C

Chessie

Guest
Yes, that's what they say, that they want unique voices, but then they ask you to rewrite your story X number of times to fit their tastes and their needs. We'll always disagree about this, Russ, and that's totally ok.

But where did I compare Uncle Tom's Cabin to contemporary fiction? Because all I said about it was that I had downloaded it on my Kindle. :D
 

Russ

Istar
Yes, that's what they say, that they want unique voices, but then they ask you to rewrite your story X number of times to fit their tastes and their needs. We'll always disagree about this, Russ, and that's totally ok.

Is that what editors at traditional houses have been asking you to do? Really?

But where did I compare Uncle Tom's Cabin to contemporary fiction? Because all I said about it was that I had downloaded it on my Kindle. :D

Actually you went a tad further than that. You suggested that older stories might be better stories because they use eclipses and contractions or some such. My argument (already expressed by others) is that you cannot compare the gems that have survived for a century or so, with the average book of today.

The truth is that there is more variety available among fiction today than perhaps ever before IN HISTORY. Sure there are people who write formulaically and some markets want that kind of material. There are more books being published by women, people of colour, LBGT authors, and about more diverse subjects the fiction field than at any other time. How people can say that there is not variety available out there is completely beyond me.
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
First, let's try to veer away from ad hominem conversations. Those rarely are edifying for the rest of us.

>How people can say that there is not variety available out there is completely beyond me.

And yet they say it. Many people say it, in many different areas, not just for fiction. Are they all dunderheads? I prefer to think they are not.

I think we must begin with granting the validity of people's own experience, rather than saying they are not trying hard enough. I find it difficult to discover great new authors, too. So, in fact, do agents. If 70% of everything published is cr*p, imagine what those poor slush pile readers experience.

It would be great if somehow we could find the gems without having to dig through the dirt. Here, too, I believe we have it better than did our forebears. One challenge in finding "good" books is in agreeing upon what constitutes "good". In the past, all we had were a handful of critics in New York and London to tell us that. Now we have communities.

To Miskatonic and others, I suggest investing some time in Goodreads or similar service. I know there are others, but Goodreads is the one to which I belong, so I know how it works. There are hundreds of communities there. You will have to invest some time, joining each in turn, until you find one or more that suits you. You can even start your own. Jaded Fantasy Readers! Once you find a community of like-minded people, *their* recommendations can steer you far better than can strolling down the halls of Amazon.

In towns larger than mine (which is most of America), try joining a book club. Really, all you're after is a handful of fellow travelers. Once you discover them, you have gold. After all, who cares what is good in modern literature? What matters is what in modern literature you enjoy. All the rest can join the pile of the Vast Unread.
 
C

Chessie

Guest
Actually, Russ, I agree with you 100% about modern fiction having more diverse ideas.

What I referred to in my response was author voice, and how, in my opinion--because that's all that it is--an opinion--is that author voice in modern fiction has grown bland. Just my 2 cents but if you have some suggestion on books we can all investigate that are strong in author voice, by all means share the list with us. :)
 
There are more books being published by women, people of colour, LBGT authors, and about more diverse subjects the fiction field than at any other time. How people can say that there is not variety available out there is completely beyond me.

Nothing of what you've mentioned here is a guarantee of quality. There is a wide variety of mediocrity. That's for certain.
 

Russ

Istar
Is that what editors at traditional houses have been asking you to do? Really?

Actually this was far too harsh on my part and I apologize for that.

My concern about your comment could have been far better articulated. Chess said this:

Yes, that's what they say, that they want unique voices, but then they ask you to rewrite your story X number of times to fit their tastes and their needs. We'll always disagree about this, Russ, and that's totally ok

To me this factually runs contra to what has been going on in traditional publishing for at least 10-15 years. IF you had told me this thirty years ago I might have been able to buy into it, but today I can't.

The thing I consistently hear from authors, editors and agents and have been hearing for over a decade now is that traditional publishers are not offering nearly enough editorial guidance and development for their newer authors. Editors are overworked and the truth is that most of them do not have time to work with authors to make them better. With the advent of the word processor and e mail submissions they are drowning in submissions and their business model no longer seems to include finding talented new writers and working with them through their growing pains until they are good enough to be profitable. They now expect manuscripts to be very close to publishable when they arrive. There is a lot more pressure on the first time author to produce close to publisher work than there was years ago. Many very experienced writers also are not getting as much editorial input and guidance as they want.

While there may be some small publishers who are helping writers develop here and there, the current reality is that people are not at all being asked to write and re-write their manuscripts, they are being asked to deliver virtually ready to publish works up front.
 

Russ

Istar
Nothing of what you've mentioned here is a guarantee of quality. There is a wide variety of mediocrity. That's for certain.

There is ALWAYS a large degree of mediocrity.

However, from a high level point of view, I believe that the inclusion of women and other traditionally excluded groups gives us access to a much larger and more unique talent pool for writing than ever before. I see no reason to conclude that women, people of colour, etc will produce proportionately less literary genius' than any other group.
 

Russ

Istar
First, let's try to veer away from ad hominem conversations. Those rarely are edifying for the rest of us.

I agree, and I took the opportunity to apologize and articulate my concern about her comments in a better fashion.

And yet they say it. Many people say it, in many different areas, not just for fiction. Are they all dunderheads? I prefer to think they are not.

This approach doesn't help matters at all. This simply means then that you prefer to think that the people who say there is
plenty of variety out there are dunderheads. Don't see where that gets us.


I think we must begin with granting the validity of people's own experience, rather than saying they are not trying hard enough. I find it difficult to discover great new authors, too. So, in fact, do agents. If 70% of everything published is cr*p, imagine what those poor slush pile readers experience.

I think we need to recognize that what some people feel is not a good representation of objective reality. The idea that just because someone experiences something that that experience have some "validity" is not just incorrect, but downright intellectual abdication and dangerous.
 

skip.knox

toujours gai, archie
Moderator
>I think we need to recognize that what some people feel is not a good representation of objective reality

We have a fundamental divergence in how we perceive good. I won't try to dissuade anyone on this point, but I'll make reference to Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance for an excellent exploration of what "quality" means (the author was speaking specifically about quality as an aspect of writing).
 

Russ

Istar
>I think we need to recognize that what some people feel is not a good representation of objective reality

We have a fundamental divergence in how we perceive good. I won't try to dissuade anyone on this point, but I'll make reference to Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance for an excellent exploration of what "quality" means (the author was speaking specifically about quality as an aspect of writing).


Great book. Quite enjoyed about 30 years ago.

Funny coincidence, I was watching a movie the other night and they used the term "dunderheads." Had not heard it in years.
 
Top