Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
OK, I am missing one main thing
TL;DRed?
What is that?
Great points on the characters.
Yes, Tom is passive and that’s somewhat on purpose. He’s completely out of his element, trying to adjust and crazy people just keep making assumptions about him based on his appearance and perceived power and acting on those incorrect assumptions. Tom is a reader, he’s not used to being an actor, and he’s 16 (almost 17) most teens in real life are rather passive, unless they are rebelling against something. As he gets his legs under him, gets his confidence he will grow to be more active, remember DoA is actually one very long book, broken up into three (or more) parts. To see character evolution, the “coming of age” you have to follow the whole narrative arc. If it’s a coming of age story and the character “comes of age” in the first third of the book, what happens in the last two thirds?
I point out, here, but this starts showing up in the book, Tom has a number misconceptions about how things really work in Astlan. His idealism and “can’t we just get along; good guys don’t cheat” needs some tempering, it’s a process of growing up to face reality.
Rupert does drive a lot of stuff, he’s the one that has emotional connections to Jenn and the world, he’s got the earnestness and drive of a preteen. Rupert is even more idealistic than Tom, but he’s also been subject to a lot more cruelty and hardship. Those two factors are what drive him forward now that he feels he has Tom and Tizzy to back him.
As far as disobeying/disrespecting Jenn etc. Have you met a 10 to 12 year old recently? That’s what they sort of do. They can be brats.
Of course thinking more on this passivity issue, the one thing I really hate about the modern teen female protagonist (e.g. Twig Light, etc) all the female characters seem to do is stand around and react to the actions of the male characters. Hate that. And of course, as you point out, that’s what Tom’s doing.
Ouch!
🙂
It won’t change in second edition because I want to keep the story the same, just clean up the errors and tighten the text, no rewriting of history.
One thing to keep in mind though on the proactive rescue of Jenn. Tom doesn’t/didn’t at that time particularly like Jenn. She was in the summoning circle and is directly responsible for killing his body and trapping him in the Abyss. And she was treating him with a lot of hostility. I have to put my Tom hat on and ask “Why should I be expected to go out and risk my butt for this woman who is responsible for screwing up my life?”
His goal was to get Rupert to safety, to take care of the one person not afraid of him. Everything else was a distraction to his drudgery. He also had no real interest in the squabbles of his accursed master and another accursed master who were pitting demons vs demons. However, he stuck around to get Rupert to safety and because it was more interesting that sitting in a cave.
The argument I would make is that, for most of book 1, he has no ‘stake’ in the game, other than this kid that he likes.
On the boat, he hung back because he was on the edge of popping into demon form at any minute, shape changing was new, and he was afraid of popping back to demon form and freaking everyone out.
But I think one thing I am trying to do is paint a different version of good guys vs bad guys. Not all heroes are perfect, not all villains are dastardly. Sometimes the protagonist doesn’t do what the reader wants them to do, or what’s in the best interest of the story. All characters should do what makes the most sense for them, not necessarily a story archetype.
In fantasy, we have too many perfect heroes and too many perfect anti-heroes (bad boy protagonists) but in real life, heroics and anti-heroics are often complex and situational. So I was going for something like that…but I may not have (or had 20+ years ago) the writing skill to achieve what I want technically.
Anyway this will eventually change..but I have to admit, for the first part of book ii, Tom will be up to his old “non”-tricks and relies pretty heavily on his ‘crew’ for what to do…but that will change…eventually…
Anyway, it’s very good food for thought and stuff to work on. Thanks!
Thanks
It’s meant to cater to Book Junkies.
When I started it, and much of the time I wrote it I was sort of burnt out on Fantasy/SF feeling that I’d read it all and I was just starting to see the same things over and over again. I mean, how many times can Terry Brooks rewrite Tolkein? Or so and so.
So I wrote it for myself and people like me. And that’s who Tom is. He’s a kid who’s been reading a book a day or more of Fantasy and SF and so has a lot of preconceptions of what it would be like to be in a Fantasy World. My [b][i]initial[/i][/b] conceit was, “what happens when you put a fantasy reader/expert into a fantasy world? surely they can handle things better than Thomas Covenant or all these other average non-fantasy junkies thrust into these worlds?”
When I first started writing, this was a very select crowd of readers, but I’ve sort of been surprised how much this crowd has grown over the years and how many people that would have not been in the crowd are now at least conversant enough in the lingo and archetypes as to still be able to read it and get it.
Now, I just want you to keep:
[quote]Also, just remember. I had said it before somewhere here: reality is boring. I think you shouldn’t put too much reality in your work. Work for complex and situational but never the banal.[/quote]
In mind as you shoot arrows at my inaccurate bards. :d/
Not immediately, but I’ve been thinking a lot about “Tales of the Demon Bard” and his history and also what Antefalken knows and doesn’t know about history.
he’s a bard, so he knows a lot of history, but how much has he experienced? Or happened during his lifetime?
We know, for example, that he composed the the Battle of Vizenheim, so presumably he was there.
But would he have been around, or known about, the last time the Rod surrounded Freehold to stop a demonic invasion in 1226, 768 years ago, apparently not. 🙂
Well, they aren’t sages, but they repeat history.
You need to go back a bit more in time I think. Bards, as a particular example celtic bards are the carriers and holders of oral history.
It is they who sing the songs that tell people their history.
There is a reason they call Shakespeare “The Bard” because, yes, he entertains people with commedies and tragedies, but equally important were the history plays such as Richard III. For a public that is either largely illiterate, or if literate, than seriously lacking in reading material, plays and before that bards were how people learned history. Shakespeare is not sung, but it is poetry. So when they call this playwright, “the bard” they are hearkening back to an older tradition of Welsh, Irish, Scottish etc bards that were keepers of history.
Poetry and song are important in illiterate cultures because poetry is much easier to memorize than prose. If you look at early literature it’s almost all poetry and this is because it had to be memorized and recited and passed on from generation to generation. It wasn’t until after the printing press that we started getting a lot of prose (other than the bible of course)
So whether you call the person a bard, troubador, balladeer or minstral is I think somewhat historically and culturally dependent. I.e. which culture and when are we talking about.
Yes, Antefalken does actually make money penning theme songs and paens to demon lords, but he also composes ballads and sings them to entertain and inform people.
So anyway, beyond that in Astlan, bard is something of a generic term that wraps up a rather wide “set of professions” just as there are different types of animages, wizards, druids etc, there are different types of bards. I will be going into this starting in book ii but spinning out more in later books. We will see a lot more of bards in future works (include Tales of the Demon Bard)
There are, you should note, btw, “Spell Singers” or “Bardic Wizards” which are sonic oriented mana wielders.
Exactly!
That’s why I said Spell Singer. Now, it’s not exactly the same, but on a genre level it is comparable.
There are a couple different schools of bardic magic some involve “singing runes” and/or certain intonations/frequencies of voice and instrument.
Not going to go into the full detail here, it might be in the Library…but I am not sure I’ve posted it.
The thing you need to keep in mind, this book and Astlan is not based on the medieval world, it’s based on the stereotypical/idealized fantasy world.
I.e. bards/troubadours/minstrels whatever they might have been on earth are not the basis for these bards.
Bards in Astlan are based on a combination of
1) Tabletop RPG bards: D&D, Arduin, Tunnels & Tolls, Swords & Sorcery, ICE, and most importantly: ANIMUS ‘THE GAME YOU’VE BEEN TRAINING YOUR ENTIRE LIFE FOR
2) Book bards: Spell Singer and maybe half a dozen other ones.
3) Movies/Pop Culture
4) Some actual historical figuresI’m not really aware of any video game bards…so I’m not going to include that. Oooh Guitar Hero meets World of Warcraft! Or Guitar Hero meets Diablo IV
I am not sure I get your distinction between medieval world and fantasy world.
Middle Earth is a fantasy world and it’s based on medieval earth…most fantasy worlds are.
What I’m saying is that I’m basing it on fantasy worlds based on already inaccurate medieval worlds or something to that affect.
1) There is another bard showing up in book ii, technically he was in Book 0–the story that happened before this book, before Tom showed up. He was in prison in Oorstemoth until recently, along with some companions.
2) How do you know you haven’t met a bard will magical powers already, who just didn’t happen to use them? :-k
3) Tales of the Demon Bard will focus on all sorts of bards and related people. Bard schools etc.I agree, bards certainly don’t have to have witnessed the events; some do, but I would guess that a lot are taken either from rehashing other stories/songs and or from reading what actual sages have written. But I am pretty sure a big part is plagiarism from other bards….
General question on Cover Art:
Do you prefer Scenes, Montages, Single figure (or multiple figure with not much background), Symbol/Abstract?
Some of this has been answered by some but particularly on the scene/montage/character(s) thing I am curious.
Scenes are generally my gut choice.
I’m a sucker for a Darrell K Sweet cover any day. I can spot them a mile away and am drawn like a butterfly.
Same for Michael Whelan
unfortunately such big name artists only work with publishers and are incredibly expensive….but that’s my favorite sort of cover.
As you are all pointing out, there are lines and gradations in all of this.
I don’t mind attacks against characters or plots. It’s more the personal attacks that I think are inappropriate. I haven’t really gotten that many if any, I’ve just seen others attacked.
Actually two of my favorite ‘negative’ reviews are from amazon.uk for DoA: ITA
[url=http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B00JCJ9X3A/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1]A-UK Reviews[/url]
The first two from Carl and Julie a couple days apart.
Both readers absolutely hated Rupert and want him dead.
I have no idea solid reason why–there are arguments but I have trouble agreeing with them–but I find it great they have so much passion that they want a character that I felt was pretty sympathetic killed.
So yes, negative review…but I really loved the reviews, because they were very personal, yet pretty objective for those readers and very specific about what they liked and didn’t like.
Overall I think a lot of it is tone. These two came off as very earnest and sincere to me.
But on the for the reader thing: The more precised and detailed a review is, i.e. more constructive like, the more it informs other readers. Don’t just say the whole thing was yuck. Tell us more specifically, was it pacing? character development? If the reviewer has other reviews, then the new reader can check those out and see how the reviewers taste matches their own.
As Modfoxii says, what one person hates, another might like so I think the better one explains ones criticism, for example with examples, the more useful it is to the other readers and the writer.
Rosver in regards to Antefalken you say:
[quote]Well, he is 700 years old. Still that does not illiminate the problem of the half demon parency and the pain it would cause.[/quote]
Do you remember where this is? or if you surmise, what led you to this? While it sounds reasonable, I can’t figure out where this is written and I need to pindown some dates and times.
Thanks
GoodReads Negative….
Yes, very entertaining unless you are the author being stomped on. And yes, some works really deserve (at least internal/private) derision but…there is another person on the other side.
However, I think better to get stomped at GoodReads than Amazon, which has a wider/larger effect on sales.
And I think you get more open reviews at GoodReads because people feel that it is more removed/independent from the author, thus more impersonal.
As readers, I think many readers (I know me) assume that the author is some distant figure who will never see the review. Because traditionally, they wouldn’t have and because they generally never respond.
So this leads to the well known Internet Anonymity Say Anything You Would Never Say To Their Face syndrome. Well known to troll chasers of almost any site.
In the Fandom universe in which I grew up, authors were not people, they were essentially these divine entities that would deign to provide us entertainment and amusement while filling us with new insights and sharing their wisdom and vision, gracing us with new ideas and new ways of thinking and looking at the universe.
They were far removed from us mortals.
And it was very hard to communicate with them, you had to go through the “Priests” (publishing house) and hope your snail mail got to them, and then, because snail mail is a pain, probably almost never heard back.
Further we’ve been trained by popular culture that such creatives (authors, musicians, artists) are immune to the criticism of lesser mortals, they are all “Artists” and “auteurs”
There is thus an assumption, that authors never read reviews and never see these really nasty things.
And today that’s only true if they are dead, or very very old school.
On GoodReads, if an author’s page or reference to that author says “GoodReads Author” you can be sure that the author owns that page and is reading it and will see any and all reviews and criticism. It’s not something setup by the publisher. The author is there, they are reading.
They most likely won’t respond though. It is very well known in the author community that you NEVER respond to negative reviews, because you end up getting petty and it really looks bad and you just end up ticking off a wider audience, nothing good ever comes from it.
And you don’t respond to good reviews, because if you respond to one good review, but not another, the person you didn’t respond to may feel slighted.
And while that may not be your intention, for many authors it’s unavoidable because you don’t see the review right away, or if you are big, there are just too many to respond to and you never get writing done on the next book….But my point is, and I find this true for all sites with author/artist feedback (e.g. deviantart.com) you have to remember that there is another person on the other side. So constructive, helpful feedback is what they want (like what you give, Rosver–that’s great stuff) but outright trashing or “this sucks” can actually be hurtful.
So my policy as a reviewer is to never say anything that I wouldn’t say to the person if they were sitting across the table from me. If I don’t want to get punched in the face, I won’t type it on the feedback.
You have good points, but what I am saying is that there is a difference between an objective bad review and one that is just mean, spiteful and insulting.
And I am NOT saying that you are not saying this as well. I’m just expanding my point.
Objective critical reviews are exactly what authors want. They are more useful than all the gushing reviews in the world.
It’s called “Constructive Criticism” not “Bashing”
And that’s the difference. And it’s a big difference. You don’t have to like a book to review it, and certainly point out what you feel are shortcomings, faults and failings. Just don’t start calling the author a dumbass or an idiot, or saying things that are outright insulting.
It’s much like political discourse today. Everyone feels they have to shout, scream and insult in order to get their point across. Goodreads should be a collegial environment that is a safe place to discuss books and literature for both readers and authors. It should not be the battlefield for a flame war.
And to be honest, they will ban people that are too mean, so they have to come back later.
Now, to be fair, if the author is writing some nasty polemic of hateful trash, then they deserve what they get. But if it’s a sincere effort to provide entertainment to others, then there’s no reason to be mean. Just give clear objections and warnings to the other users so that they can decide whether or not to read.
Also if it’s crass commercialism designed to grab a buck and cheat people, then OK, but just be confident that is really the case and it’s not just that the author is incompetent.
–On to author interaction.
Reviews are not the place for author interaction. They are reviews intended to help other readers find something interesting to read/and or an opportunity to provide constructive feedback to the author.
Goodreads has “Ask the author”, Amazon has author discussion forums, these are the best place to interact with authors. I think you will find that most independent authors use these tools because they are very interested in having a relationship with their users. Since they don’t have a marketing and PR team, nor the budget or resources to setup book signings all over the country, these user interaction sites are their best tool.
Big authors, say like GRRM, have the problem that they can’t respond to every fan request/question, just because there are so many. I’m not saying this is an excuse for no interaction, but if we ever want them to finish the stupid next book (And again I mean GRRM!!!!), they can’t respond to everyone, they sort of have to read and do more broad form response.
Now for me, none of those were enough. I’m a fanboy. I want a way to interact with readers the way I want to interact with authors…so I have this thing plus facebook, tumblr (not used much), Amazon Forums and Goodreads that I monitor and respond to as much as I can.
Unfortunately not all authors are as wired as I am, but that is changing and will change with newer generations of authors that are more plugged in and technical. So they do the best they can.
I’m hoping to figure out how to make the 2nd edition a free upgrade…not yet sure how that works.
I know minor updates/changes get or can get propagated, not sure on a second edition…I should hope it would be. If they make it a hassle, I’ll try to figure out something…I want people who bought the first edition to get the second. Technically, their buying the first edition paid for the editing of the second edition…
Hi,
So the big hold up has been that about 2 weeks after book 1 was published I started a contract job downtown where I work in an office for about 9 hours plus travel. First time in about 12-13 years, traditionally I work remotely maybe a trip for a week a month or 1 to 2 days a week onsite.
This everyday thing killed my schedule on lots of fronts, but in particular book 2. (when working at home, I can mix up my schedule so if I get a strong urge to write, I write and then work later and vice versa…doesn’t work that way in an office–plus office burns you out).
That ends this month, so I hope to do a big push in Feb/March and wrap the book up. We shall see.
At this moment, I am working on the 2nd Edition of Book 1 as well. It is currently at an editor, getting a proper/professional editing. I am also trying to solicit new cover art…for it and Book 2.
Once Book 2 is done, it goes to Beta…no idea how long that will take, but let’s say a couple weeks, plus inclusion time/rewriting. Then it goes to editor. With Book 1 she wanted 6 weeks. Once that’s done another week or for formatting/kindlizing etc. (Deadtree galley process etc)
So…if I can finish it in March, figure April/May for Beta and Editing. Meaning June-ish for release.
Sorry it keeps getting longer but this weird “go to a job everyday” thing really threw off my schedule.
T-A-G
