Reading/Writing Thoughts - AKA Ranting

[ninedaysaqueen]

So, I recently read an interesting article by Patricia C. Wrede (author of Dealing With Dragons) about the trouble with sequels, which you can read here. The portion that interests me the most is this...



The problem with sequels is that the writing and publishing process gives readers too much time to think.

Let me unpack that a little.

(...)

Speculation is fun; I engage in it myself quite frequently. The trouble is that it is exceedingly easy to become overly fond of one's speculations, especially if one happens to have a lively crowd of Internet companions who like the same sorts of characterization and plot twists. It's frighteningly easy to convince oneself that one has a pipeline into the author's mind, and that the sequel will be a better, shinier, spiffier version of whatever plot-and-character developments one's particular group of readers thinks is most likely.

Inevitably, when this happens, the result is that the actual Book 2 (or 3, or whatever) arrives, it's a disappointment to any and everyone who had constructed an alternate vision of who'd live and who'd die, who'd end up in a romance and who wouldn't, what the important plot-points were and which things were totally extraneous. Either the readers have guessed right and worked themselves up so far that no writer, living or dead, could possibly find words shiny and spiffy enough to live up to their mental construct, or (more often) the writer is going in a completely different direction and the readers are outraged that their lovingly-rationalized vision isn't going to play out the way they thought.


That is an interesting theory, I must say. Personally, I do think a reader has an expectation of a sequel and their ideal is not likely to match reality. The longer you have to wait, the more time you have to sub-consciously build up a perfect image that may never be realized.

However, let's first remind ourselves that there are, indeed, many bad sequels out there. Sequels that merely tell the first story over again, send the characters in bad OOC directions, contain plot concepts and twists that aren't as original or as engaging as the previous book.

An example of this is Eragon vs. Eldest by Christopher Paolini. The first book held my attention with it's intriguing characters and engaging plot. The second one bored me to tears with overdone descriptions, constant scene flipping, and a predictable plot. I read the second one right after the first, so there was no chance of me building up any expectations, nonetheless, my complete objective opinion was that the sequel was poor in comparison to the first book. (Apologizes to Inheritance fans, and I will give him a break and say he was younger than me when he wrote it... O_O)

An example in TV is Veronica Mars S1 vs. S2. Though S2 was by no means poor, the overall season arc was clumsy in comparison to the flawless, tight arc of S1. Too many red-herrings, too many angles thrown in merely to make the plot last a few more episodes. Again, I had the DVDs of all three season, so no expectations simmering in my hind brain.

However, there are many excellent book sequels and television seasons out there that are strangely rejected by once loyal fans. Wrede's theory seems the most likely here. I noticed this after the release of A Conspiracy of Kings by Megan Whalen Turner. I had some of those feelings myself. Four years is a long enough time to write your own version of the book in your head, and though the book was nothing like I'd expected, I still loved it when I took a deep breath and reminded myself that the book was not going to fulfill every wish I'd held in my heart for four years. That was an impossible expectation.

So, thoughts? Ever found yourself disliking something, simply because it wasn't what you'd expected?

And for part two...

Which you may skip, because it's another one of my rants about female characters. :)

Have you ever noticed that we expect different responses from female characters in a relationship? Particularly the leading lady? If there is an interloper in the ship, we expect the male character to be jealous (at least a little), or he doesn't care about his relationship, right? If the female character is jealous (even if she gets over it), we tend to call her a silly Mary Sue who needs to deal with her security issues already. XD *is mean*

If the male character is very devoted to his leading lady and would sail seas and climb mountains for her, we point out how much he must care about her, right? If the female character feels the same way, we call her a Mary Sue who needs to stop being a sap and get a life. *head-desk*

Sadly, my annoyingly good memory is reminding me that I've done this once or twice myself. And I'm not talking about Bella Swan (god no...). I draw the devotion line at jumping off cliffs for no apparent reason, but I'm sad to see some female characters raked over the coals and called a Mary Sue for no greater crime than being strongly devoted to their love interest. Rose Tyler from Doctor Who immediately comes to mind, because she did certain things like leave her family behind (which is something you do when you grow up anyhow).

Meanwhile male characters, such as Terence from The Squire's Tales by Gerald Morris, can act in ways that speak of great devotion to his leading lady, his king, and his country and be recognized positively for it.

Now, I don't mean to call anyone an anti-feminist or something equally ridiculous, or say that audiences never have expectations of male characters that are unfair. I merely have noticed an opinion that's all too easy to jump to, and I think is related to the significant amount of Mary Sues and sad female characters fans of TV and books tend to be exposed to over the years.

It's just somewhat disconcerting to me that I and seemingly other people tend to expect a higher level of emotional maturity and even emotional perfection from female characters, especially when compared to our expectations of male characters. Even to the point of allowing female characters no time whatsoever in the story to work through their character flaws and any emotional immaturity they may have, though we automatically do this in real life

Now, if the character never grows out of a serious character flaw, I can understand your issue with them. However, a character must start with flaws or there is no direction in which they can grow, yes? :)

Yes, you can now breath! I am done! Please, leave me some rants in response, lovely F-list!

*pokes Beth in particular* ;)

Comments

[earthstar-moon.livejournal.com]

Wrede has to be one of my favorite writers, I really need to read more of her articles.

I haven seen exactly what she means for the anime Slayers. Slayers had three season, took a break for about 10 years and then they decided to make a new season. I happen to enjoy the new season, but a lot Slayers fans don't like this season because a lot argue there isn't as much romance like in the original season. The problem with this was that there never that much romance in the original series, it's always been a adventure/comedy series. So, what made some fans convinced romance was a large element?

It's due to all the romance fanfics that were written between the ten years of the seasons. I think it caused a lot of fans to expect a lot more romance even though the series was never actually known for that.

As you said, there are great sequels and even some the surpass the original story, but it's certainly a tricky game in deciding how to write it.

[ninedaysaqueen.livejournal.com]

Mine too! :D

Totally agree. Reading FF is a tricky business, because you can start to incorporate it into your head-cannon and think that's the way the show or book series was all along. I always try to remind myself that FF is a personal ideal, and an author continuing the story in the path they originally intended is going to differ a lot from my image.

For example, I was originally expecting Gen to help Sophos a lot more in CoK, however I realize now that I'm was totally wrong, as that would have compromised Sophos's ability to grow as a character.

In other words, trust the author. As long as the story quality is good and the plot makes sense, I will trust an author enough to decide what is best for their own characters.

I didn't trust Megan when I read TT and that left me feeling a bit stupid! I hope I've learned! XD

Wrede's blog is quite good with lots of good writing advice. It's worth checking out!

[earthstar-moon.livejournal.com]

I love her advice and world building. I need to re-read that since I'm trying to do that for my original steampunk novel I'm trying to finish.

[booksrgood4u.livejournal.com]

I agree with, like, every single thing you just said. Personally, I do like having a little bit of anticipation before the next book, but I understand that you are, by that point expecting something amazing that you may or may not get. I am also a lukewarm Inheritance fan... I liked Eragon, hated Eldest, Brisingr was OK, and I am planning on reading Inheritance, only to see if Eragon and Arya wind up together. Also, with Harry Potter, the first, oh, maybe four books were great, but after that I felt like the author was just trying to fill up pages.

About the female charachters.....YOu make some great points. Something that also bothers me about female leads in alot of fantasy is that many of them seem to have a contempt for cooking and sewing and all those essential things that 'ordinary' women do. I do have a suggestion for a series that you might like. I don't know if you've ever read the Truth Series by Dawn Cook, but it is one of my favorites. Alissa, the main female charachter, is a farm girl whose mother suddenly sends her of to a magical school that Alissa, who doesn't beleive in magic, thinks is just a figment from one of her father's bedtime stories. On her way there, she meets a travelling minstrel, who is fleeing the news of the death of his entire family. They end up being snowed in at the fortress with the madman who murdered Alissa's father, and have to pull off quite the ruse to keep him from dicovering who her father was and killing her too. Anyway, ALissa has some charachter flaw that she needs to overcome throughout the series. And does get kind of jealous when she meets a girl from her love interest's past, also, her teacher (who she happens to call 'Useless'!) is very concerned that if she is forbidden to marry the man she loves, she will leave everything behind, all of her potential and power, and follow him. I find in reading reviews that most people either love Alissa or hate her, and their opinion of the series rides mostly on their impression of her. THe other thing that I should warn you is, well, please please please ignore the covers! They were recently reissued with horrible new covers that do not in anyway represent the content of the books. To quote Drashizu who is also a fan..."they frighten me." My icon comes from the original covers of the books. All I can say is that if I ever wrote a book, I would not allow such horrible covers to ruin everyone's impression of my book.

Was that a long enough rant?? It even had a book rec, which makes it better right?!

[1221bookworm.livejournal.com]

You make an interesting point about the length of time between books making your expectations higher. I can definetly see that happening, especially with aCoK. When I first read it, Gen came across as almost pathetic, becasue he came off as finally fitting in at the end of KoA. I was expecting to see the 2nd half of KoA with more Gen greatness (even though it clearly states it is about Sophos, - and I read the books immediately after each other). But the longer you have to wait, the more you have created what should come next. And I have to agree about Inheritance. I first read it becasue I wanted to see what a Homeschooled kid had written (because I'm Homeschooled, too), and found that even though it was outside my usual likes, I really enjoyed it. Now it seems to drag, and get a little bit preachy almost. I'm reading Inheritance only to see if Eragon gets together with Arya, (oh yeah, and if she finally gives him a good hard slap, which he has deserved from book 2!) (And you really want to know how right you are? Everyone was convinced this last book would be called "Shurtugal" because we were just waiting and waiting. And then they finally announced that it would be called "Inheritance" and it was a let down because "Shurtugal" would have been a much better title! Just my 2 cents :)

And one point you made above to earthstar_moon was really good: the more FF you read, the more you accept it as cannon. I find myself doing that with some Crown Duel by Sherwood Smith FF. I then I have to say, no wait, that wasnt' what really happened (after the book ended) that was just someone's idea.

[ninedaysaqueen.livejournal.com]

I'm a pretty lukewarm fan as well. To be fair, Tolkien tradition in which the Chosen One fights the Darkness (oww... capital letters) is not my cup-o-tea to start with. However, I enjoyed the first book regardless of my tastes, but the second just put me on snooze. I couldn't even finish, because I became so frustrated with trying to read what should have been two books published as one.

...is that many of them seem to have a contempt for cooking and sewing and all those essential things that 'ordinary' women do.

XD As if contempt of cooking and sewing were perquisites to being a feminist! Totally agree. Female characters of fantasy especially in the 80s and early 90s were ideals of tough feminists, in other words, women who were considered strong, because they acted more like men.

I will spare you my full rant, as I'm known on Sounis for having strong opinions about female characters, but I believe that trope comes from the women who were dissatisfied by the type of life that sort of thing represents. In other words, the actually were in contempt of the life of a stay at home wife. However, though many women would hate that sort of life, it's a life occupation that should be held in high respect, not slotted as the sort of thing "ordinary women" do. The point of the women's rights movement wasn't to destroy the occupations of the house wife, it was to give women a free choice and the same opportunities in society that men had.

Coming around the bend, I don't particularly like female characters who give up what's important to them solely for the sake of a guy, particularly when the girl is beguiled and the dude doesn't care. In society, it's general accepted that the woman will be dreaming of wedding bells by the third date, but the guy is just looking for--please excuse my crudeness--a lay. Though not completely untrue, it's very unwise to apply such a trope to ever pairing in fiction. It's also unwise to mistake devotion and commitment for beguilement. Independent women like Rose Tyler can be devoted without being a Mary Sue. Even so, many readers dislike, on site, female characters who are strongly devoted and committed to their love, yet male characters are often disliked for not being devoted enough! XD It's crazy!

From what your saying about Alissa, it sounds like magic isn't that important to her anyhow, but her relationship is, so that actually alludes to a complex and interesting character. Just added First Truth to my TBR list, I will check it out! :D

Book recs make everything better!

[beth-shulman.livejournal.com]

HIII

I think sequels are the make-it-or-break-it books, actually. As in, if an author writes a decent book with a cliffhanger, or the first of a planned series, there's an automatic tendency in the reader to hold off on finalizing an opinion until reading the second book - because the story isn't finished yet, and that's a constant niggling factor.

And therefore the success of the second book becomes so much more important. The first book had to intrigue the reader to the point that they pick up book 2; the second has to justify all that waiting. I think that's the crux of the matter - there's that element of "don't make me wait for so long and then waste my time".

Then again, if the sequel is good, there's probably more of an extreme positive reaction to it - from relief that it was worth the wait, in addition to the literary merit.

Ultimately, no one reads in a vacuum. I like ACoK a lot more than most books published last year. But to me it will never quite fit in with the series because it doesn't fit my perception of what her story is about. And so the merit pales a bit as a result.

On part II: YES. I have some Thoughts about that being true in real life as well, but I still want to think about that.

[booksrgood4u.livejournal.com]

You don't have to spare me your rant...I'd probably just add to it, like I'm about to do now! Thank you for saying what you did about stay-at-home wives and mothers. My mom stayed at home with me and 1221bookworm and homeschooled us, and she has come under alot of fire from people who she considered friends who think that her life is somehow inferior because she does not work outside the home. There are not enough people who will come out and say, like you did, that those women should be held in high respect.

About Alissa, her magic is actually pretty important to her, however, she grew up in a very isolated environment, being ostracized in her village because of her parents background. Because of this, the friends that she does and have and her relationships are extremely important to her. I read a review once that described the series as looking at love in many different ways: romantic love for the man she eventually marries, how that love is different than the her love for her other suitor who she does not marry, her love for her teacher who she comes to see as a father figure, and her love for a friend who she absolutely, posistively refuses to marry even though her teacher wants her to, but instead loves him as a brother.

Of course, this is not to say that she is blindly devoted to her friends, and at one point she is betrayed by one of them. Alissa is a very strong-minded individual, sometimes appearing to be downright stubborn, but that is one of the things she has to learn to deal with, and to me, those flaws in her character make her easier to relate to, because, like me, she isn't perfect. I hope you enjoy the book, the supporting characters are all great, it has a lot of elements of fun mixed into the storyline. Let me know what you think when you read it!

[chubbyleng.livejournal.com]

Hmm... interesting rant about female characters. I actually find that I'm not any more judgmental of a female lead than the male lead, and there are a set of characteristics that I just find off-putting regardless of gender.

It's funny you mention that most people will criticize a girl for getting jealous. It may be true, but I find that I've never actually done that before! When I read over that, the first thing that came to my mind was "Sabriel", because there was a scene in there where she thought Touchstone was getting it on with a random maid in the next room, and she becomes all bothered but doesn't know why. Hehe, it was an EPIC scene in my head, and still remains as one of the funniest 'romantic' scenes I've ever read.

Hmm... I'm trying to think of more examples. But I don't think it's a certain pet peeve of mine. At least if I criticize a girl for getting jealous, it usually means there are other things that have bothered me even before that.

Don't worry too much about feminists. I consider myself one too, but I wouldn't hesitate calling out unfair things happening to males. I mean there are tons of books where the main character was considered a prime example of a "strong woman", but all they really are are men in women's body. It's as if a woman can only be strong if they embody traditionally male traits. It's frustrating to me, because I know that if the character had been male, the things that he'd be doing in the book would be considered as 'bad' or 'wrong'. But make it a woman, and everyone's sticking it in the feminist shelf.

And that was one of my first qualms about KoA too, where we see Attolia slap Gen just because she was angry. I thought that was pretty abusive too, because Gen's injured, and that nobody pointed it out because she happened to be a woman. So it must be okay. But switch the roles, and I won't be surprised if there was a louder outcry.

"It's just somewhat disconcerting to me that I and seemingly other people tend to expect a higher level of emotional maturity and even emotional perfection from female characters."

Maybe so. I find that too, especially when reading reviews in Amazon or Goodreads. You read one response and the character's too this, and you read the next response and the character's too that. For me though, my expectations don't just pertain to females. Males too. (That's why I'm so picky with books. If I can't connect with the main characters, I'd just put it down.) I guess I should give an example... I know that there are many fans of "Finnikin of the Rock" by Melina Marchetta, but I just found Finnikin to be so unbearable. And yes, I do agree that there should be space for character development, but if I don't start seeing at least some degree of change or realization by the first half of the book, I'd usually just give up. I pretty much think Finnikin's like a boy version of Fire (by Kristin Cashore). Haha. I know many people will disagree vehemently with me, but since I don't want to hijack your comments page with my own ranting, I'll save all my reasons for later. Most of it is just subjective though.

I think one of the best examples I can give for a character who is initially flawed but grows to be a much better person is Anidori from "Goose Girl". I found that she was just so helpless, naive and passive... well, and sort of a crybaby. At first. But her development was so shockingly huge, and the way she grows right up until the very last page was just beautiful.

Anidori's my favorite character in all the books I've read. Ever. Haha. I think you can tell. ^__~

[ninedaysaqueen.livejournal.com]

Yup. :) Male characters can also be subject to unfair tropes and stereotypes as well. Like I said, if a male character never gets jealous, it's assumed he doesn't care about his relationship. It also seems to be more acceptable for a female character to be interested in another guy if she thinks her relationship with another love interest is not going to happen. It's also more acceptable for a women to try to make a guy jealous by pretending to be interested in someone else. With either gender, I dislike this trope, because you don't actually do that to someone you truly care about.

For some reason, scenes in which the girl is jealous bothers me, mostly because I often find it OOC and I don't like cliche cat-fights. My favorite scene of that kind is from Leverage, when Parker was jealous of a girl who liked Hardison. She expressed this by breaking a beer bottle with her bare hands! XD Which was so IC for her, and that might be why I don't usually like those scenes. If I feel that the female character's reaction doesn't actually suit them. A male character's reactions tend to make more sense for the individual character.

I probably notice unfair female character tropes more because I'm a girl, and I do agree with you about Gen and the slapping scene. That was until I remembered she was acting as a queen and not as his wife, and he didn't dodge because he was accepting her reproach. Queen Elizabeth also smacked people as a public representation of her dislike of their actions. Kings would do the same, and female leaders often imitated this in order to appear more male.

Either way, violence from males towards females automatically rises outcries because we associate it with domestic violence. It tends to bother us less with women towards men, because guys can usually defend themselves. Also, as my mother used to tell me, before the 70s the socially accepted method for telling a guy you weren't interested was to smack them. (As I'm watching Life on Mars, I'm starting to understand why.) Regardless, violences it never an appropriate response, unless your defending yourself from a physical assault. I accept the scene in KoA, because of the time and place and what it represents, if it were set in modern times...? Not so much.

I mean there are tons of books where the main character was considered a prime example of a "strong woman," but all they really are are men in women's body.

THIS. THIS. THIS.

That sums up a lot of my feelings about certain books like the Alanna series. I also dislike the trope that says that girls who are more traditionally girly can't be independent and tough too.

Good point about Anidori. She lived a very shelter life at the start of the book, and how she developed and grew was a very important part of the book.

[chubbyleng.livejournal.com]

" It also seems to be more acceptable for a female character to be interested in another guy if she thinks her relationship with another love interest is not going to happen."

Ugh, personally I really dislike that. At least first make it clear that the guy knows she's not interested anymore. You know what I really dislike in books? Love triangles! I know it's almost unavoidable, but even though I don't usually read books where romance is a big aspect of the plot, it still kind of annoys me. First, most of the time it's just there to make readers aware of how awesome the main character is and how she is so ignorant about this awesomeness that she actually doesn't realize she's made at least 2 guys fall in love with her. I mean... honestly? And I always feel bad for the person who is left behind. It doesn't matter if he's just some loser on the sidewalk, because it always seems as if he cares about her genuinely.

Yeah, I agree with you. If you care about somebody, jealousy shouldn't be something you want them to feel. Even if you feel neglected. There are so many other ways for you to make him want you.

Ah, I hate catfights too! They're so... cringe-worthy. Especially all the shouting and raving and hair pulling. I don't want to be reading a Maury Pauvich episode, you know. Yeah, it's hard to get characters to act "in character" when there are feelings involved that are associated with romance. Especially since there's been a surge of the 'tough-chick' roles, and it's harder to write about them falling in love without getting all mushy. At least, that's how I think it is.

See, sometimes I do wish I knew more about history. It'll help a great deal when analyzing fantasy books. Hehe. But what actually made me realize the importance of that scene was when I was reading a post in Sounis about how unhealthy their relationship was. There was someone, I can't remember who, who said that Attolia slapped him not because he changed her orders (which is what I assumed at first), but because he took her guilt and basically rubbed it on her face. That was one of the moments when I realized how brilliant MWT was, hehe. There's one meaning to what she writes if you just read it as is, but if you think a little bit, there's always more meaning.

I agree. I find it strange that many people feel like it's acceptable to slap a guy. I'd think it's kind of humiliating for them. I always feel bad when I see shows where if a guy is "stupid", he gets smacked over the head or something.

Oh, Alanna series. See, I always feel like I'm missing so much of the fantasy genre by not reading Tamora Pierce (or Harry Potter, for that matter... and Lord of The Rings... and Hunger Games
-__-), but every time I decide I'm going to read them, there comes a book out of nowhere that seems just a tad bit more interesting. And before I know it, I just never get around to reading them. Are they good? I know that Alanna was in the Fantasy Showdown too.

"I also dislike the trope that says that girls who are more traditionally girly can't be independent and tough too."

Yeah, me too. Or girls who are religious can't be feminists. But there's a limit to being "girly" for me. Like everyone else, I can mostly identify with characters who are most like myself, so if the girl is squealing over a bunch of boys walking by, caking her face with make-up and thinking about shopping 24/7, I just kind of... lose interest. Hmm, I just realized something. Other than Sophos, I don't think I've read a main character who was good at math.