In my final push to get Dragon Slayer up for pre-order this week, I stayed off Twitter for the most part. I hopped on, briefly, this morning, though, and this was the first thing in my feed. Twitter gives me hives, most of the time, but I liked this - I have mad respect for Ms. Stiefvater - and it was one of those good prompts that forces you to put your muddled thoughts into focus.
Why do I set aside books? As a reader, and as a writer.
Prior to owning a Kindle, when I only ever bought books in physical shops, I was the sort of reader who propped a shoulder against the shelf, and read at least three pages of any book in which I was interested. The first three pages are enough to tell me if I'm going to enjoy an author's writing style. It's led to some ribbing, and even some insults, but I just can't connect with any kind of book if I don't enjoy an author's voice. Awkward, or clunky, or repetitive writing turns me off faster than anything. If I like an author's voice, then my only other criteria is commitment to character.
Like every reader, I have genres and tropes that are favorites, but I read fiction for the character journeys. I want to have the sense that the author was committed to telling that character's story. The second it starts to read more like the author was most worried about servicing the genre, and the characters are falling by the wayside, I'm out.
Interestingly enough, this is the same motivation for writing - or shelving - a project.
The greatest two motivations for me as an author are curiosity, and the love of a challenge. It's important for me, always, that I want to see how things work out for a character. No matter how long it takes, no matter the work and research involved, I'm committed to a project so long as I care about unearthing a character's growth and motivations. When I stop being curious, I stop wanting to write. When it no longer feels like a challenge - when it feels like treading over ground already covered - I lose interest. And I especially dislike the idea that I'm only writing to fulfill a particular genre or trope's checklist points.
Generally, when I express this sort of thing, it's misinterpreted as me "dissing," or, "shitting on" a genre. This isn't true at all. It's just that writing is a slow, often unfulfilling process that takes a great amount of commitment; if I think my audience is reading for genre rather than character, I shut down. I stop caring. That's MY issue, and no one else's, but it's a fact, and something I have to work around. No two writers have the same process, and we have to be true to our own limitations.
It was so interesting to read this Twitter thread and see all the responses. Every reader - and writer - has such a different approach. It's one of the reasons why, when I recommend a book, I try to frame it as "I enjoyed this because." The idea that books are "good" or "bad," that there is a "right" and "wrong" approach to writing them is something I will always push back against. Art is so subjective, and I'm always going to encourage a discussion about it that acknowledges this.
Anyway, thanks to Ms. Stiefvater for giving me something to think about this morning.
What's your answer? Why do you set aside a book? Whether it's one you're reading...or one you're writing?
No comments:
Post a Comment