The Tangled Web of Good Writing

I want to go back to the topic of good writing. Before the blog tour flurry and my response to the Washington Post comments, I was discussing what qualifies fiction as good. I reiterated my belief from long ago that story trumps all, then proceeded to look at some factors that help create a good story.

Interestingly, of the three things I identified as essential for a good story, only two dealt with the plot. The other involved a character. Of the four other factors I listed as possibly moving a story into the “good” category, one of those was also connected with the characters.

Clearly, if it is true that story trumps all, then characters are the face cards in the deck. In October of last year I spent some time looking at characters. If you’re interested, you can find those posts starting here.

Back in 2004, I attended the Mount Hermon Christian Writers Conference for the first time. Brandilyn Collins and Randy Ingermanson were the co-instructors for the fiction track. I remember they had a little by-play discussing whether or not a writer should start with a character or start with the plot. In the end, they agreed that the two are so intricately woven it is almost immaterial to talk about which came first. Sort of a chicken-or-egg discussion. (Of course, in my contrary way, I’m thinking, So, start with neither. Start with theme! )

Clearly, the better the reader connects with the protagonist, the more he will care about what happens to the character. One thing I’ve observed, the better writers make readers care for characters who are very different from themselves. So it isn’t by writing in characters like Average Joe or Josephine that make readers connect. It is something more.

I mentioned character voice in my discussion of what constitutes a good story, and I think that’s part of it. A character needs to sound like an individual. If characters all sound the same, it’s hard to think of them distinctly.

I came up against that in my writing. In Journey to Mithlimar, Book Two of The Lore of Efrathah, I have a section I wrote from the POV of a character who lives in Efrathah, as opposed to the previous section, written from the POV of Jim, a character from this world. I found myself getting the character names mixed up, and that made me realize I hadn’t created unique characters, each with his own voice, his own mannerisms, his own thought patterns.

If I the writer don’t hear my characters’ differences, or see them, it’s pretty certain, my readers won’t either.

It’s all in the details. What are the pet words this character has? Does he use rhetorical questions to make a point? (Ron in Harry Potter does that a lot). Is his vocabulary filled with forceful words? When he talks about himself, is he self-deprecating? Does he speak mostly in complete sentences or in fragments? Does he volunteer more information than the other characters are interested in hearing? Does he tell stories? Jokes? Is he good with small talk? (That’s a hard one because a dialogue killer is one filled with small talk.)

And ultimately, how is his voice different from character number two? If someone read the lines of dialogue, without speaker attributions and without inflections, would your readers know who was speaking which lines?

Character voice makes the characters seem real. Real characters are interesting. Interesting characters make readers want to find out what will happen to them. And there we have it—characters and plot intermingling.

Oh, what a tangled web fiction writers must weave!

A Look at a Non-Christian’s Complaint against Christian Fantasy

I want to wrap up the discussion of the comments generated by the Washington Post article about Christian fantasy.

First the comment:

One of the reasons I reject the notion of “Christian fantasy” is that so labeling it leads me to assume that it aims to preach to me and the fantasy will be only a pretext. I would avoid such books. I wonder how many good books that aren’t like that I might pass by because marketers know that simply calling something “Christian” will make it appeal to the “Left Behind” crowd. Doesn’t it annoy Christians that their religion is being turned into a for-profit industry, and that one of the side effects is a rapid increase in their self-imposed marginalization? (posted by Chip M)

Well, I bristle with Chip’s assumption—that because it is Christian it will preach. Why are all things Christian associated with 1) preaching or 2) making a buck? Ouch! But that’s the way this non-Christian views things labeled Christian.

What happened to saved sinners looking to rescue the perishing? The truth is, Chip and his ilk do not see Christians as those swimming the sea looking to cast life-preservers to the drowning. It is apparent the commenters to the Post article see Christians as 1) the opposition, if not the enemy; 2) ignorant fools; 3) out of touch with reality; 4) self-serving.

Are we those things?

Not Christians. Not true Christians. Unless we’re sinning.

Some who pretend to be Christians, maybe.

Christian businesses, maybe.

Churches? Maybe some.

And of course, Christian businesses such as the publishing industry, and churches are made up of Christians. So how does this happen, that Christians who care about the lost become invested in an organization that comes across, anyway, as being self-serving and opposed to the very people who need what we have and want to give?

In part, I have to think, we believers get caught up with the methods of the world. We think the way to get something done is to do it the way the world does it. In the US that means advertise. Market. So what do our churches do? Have you seen the ads in the Religion section of the newspaper? Or how about the signs outside some churches?

And of course when we actually have something “Christian” to sell, we market along with everyone else.

Is that wrong?

Some think so. Not everyone, obviously.

After all, don’t most publishers now expect authors to do a good share of book marketing?

I came across this quote from Gina Holmes at Novel Journey in response to the “Jesus junk” she saw at ICRS:

from Novel Journey July 24, 2007

One man’s trash is another’s treasure and all that. I thought some products were silly and I felt a bit icky with all that marketing of my faith, but God will judge the hearts of men, not I.

Maybe that’s the only place we can stand—squarely where God has us.

I do know, however, I want to do whatever I can to avoid coming across as the opposition when I connect with a non-Christian. I don’t want to be self-serving (like I can hardly wait to add another notch to my sinners-saved belt). I also don’t want to come across as an ignorant fool or as if I’m out of touch with reality.

Of course, not every non-believer is intelligent or wants to engage in actual dialogue. Some are content to shout “the Bible is fantasy” and run away.

But we don’t do the cause of Christ any credit when a non-Christian brings up global warming if we stick our fingers in our ears and chant, “six-day creation, six-day creation.” Or when they mention stem-cell research we intone “pro-life, pro-life.”

These are meaningful phrases, but I fear non-Christians hear nonsensical, mind-numbing repetition, similar to “ohm,” intended only to deaden all thought.

There must be another way.

Perhaps through story.

But of course, to get a story into the hands of readers, in particular, a Christian story into the hands of non-Christian readers—without being self-serving, ignorant, out of touch with reality, without coming across as the enemy—this takes careful crafting and intelligent marketing.

Those are things to strive for, to pray for.

The Anomalous Saturday Post—Leftover Clarification and News

In no way did I intend to imply that I agreed with the person who commented about the Post article when it comes it Wayne Thomas Batson’s books. I assumed Wayne had already seen the comment since he did a nice job of answering the ridicule—and that’s precisely what it was—by turning the tide with his gentle answer, into more thoughtful discussion. (Of course, shortly thereafter, the Post apparently disabled the comments box.)

I really believe Stephen’s article over at Spec Faith answers the criticism that Wayne’s stories—or Bryan’s, Donita’s, Sharon’s, any number of other fantasy writers—have written something derivative, especially derivative of Harry Potter.

It is not so!

The point I wanted to make yesterday is simply this—Christian fantasy writers have been writing fantasy before Harry Potter came out … just not publishing. Nothing remotely like Christian chick lit was published until Chick Lit became a big thing in the ABA. Christian suspense didn’t take off until long after police procedurals made it big and stayed in TV’s top ten.

I’m not advocating avant weird writing, however. I think that’s the absolutely wrong approach to take. Readers can tell when a writer is trying too hard to be cool.

I’ll tell you what I like. I like George Bryan Polivka and Harvest House coming out with a pirate series in The Trophy Chase Trilogy. I like Wayne Thomas Batson and Thomas Nelson coming out with his YA pirate series, Isle of Swords. These are examples of books that came out nearly simultaneously with the upsurge of interest in the culture about pirates.

Was this risky? Sure. I already know there will be questions about how a book with pirates can possibly be Christian. Not to mention that the subject is more male oriented and CBA panders to a segment of the female population.

This gives me hope, it really does.

In addition, I also believe it is better to be late to the party than never showing up at all, so the fact that some publishers are finally coming around to fantasy is a wonderful development. Leading the way, I’d have to say, is WaterBrook. Check out this article in the Salt Late Tribune (and note that WaterBrook, not NavPress, as the article says, publishes the DragonKeeper Chronicles). No, it’s not a re-do of the Post article. I expected that. A friend of mine in Atlanta told me that article ended up in an Atlanta paper. This one is from the Religious News Service and is possibly a reworking of their earlier article, but this one is much more positive and informative, to my way of thinking.

So here I am again, saying I wish … I wish … if only … if only … But God is not surprised by any of this. For whatever reason, Christian fiction has not yet had the impact on the culture that it could. God knows why. He hasn’t missed a beat, has not forgotten what mankind is like or what we need.

Perhaps He’s longed for us to cry out to Him and depend on Him. There was a lot of prayer … and praise … connected with the Fantasy Fiction Tour. A number of writers have agreed to pray for each other and for editors and agents.

Perhaps we Christian fantasy writers needed to be weaned from dependence on the onions and leeks of Egypt. Perhaps we needed to listen to God’s plan for taking Jericho. These are thoughts I can only apply to myself. And I must, trusting that God’s got it all figured out, even though it looks to me like we missed the boat, or that at least it was a little late sailing. My perspective is NOT the right one. God’s is!

Warmed Up Leftovers?

Usually after blog tours, I have this warm glow, having enjoyed the interaction—debate, discussion, agreement arising from the numerous posts and comments. I have to say, I am a little distracted this time. Troubled, even.

A week ago Wayne Thomas Batson appeared on Fox and Friends, seemingly a result of an article that appeared on the front page of the Washington Post. Mind you, that is not what is troubling me. It is the comments left in response to the Web version of the article. I’ve saved two I want to address.

Here’s the one for today:

No Magic? Please, to think that Mr. Batson writes anything other than what is magic with a didactic and simple-minded allusion to the myth of the Christ resurrection is ludicrous. Christians are indeed entitled to their popular pulp fiction and fantasy, but to pretend that it is somehow more spiritually edifying or morally superior is hilarious.

The reluctance to engage in real culture is the reason why evangelical Christians are left to imitate those with real talent. They employ the literary (and I hesitate to use that word here) trope and add Jesus and suddenly- it must be a miracle! - the book, the hip-hop or rap song or whatever it is they’re imitating is sanctified.

This way the faithful don’t really have to create, think or take any cultural risks. They, rather than being the salt of the earth, prefer to be merely the warmed leftovers.

Stephen Burnett has a wonderful post We Had It First, over at Spec Faith that gives an outstanding rebuttal to these points. However, I can’t help noticing that in the eyes of this non-Christian, evangelical Christians are all about imitating the culture.

I have to agree with the man (I neglected to copy the name), at least in part. Not that I think writers aren’t taking risks. It’s publishers who aren’t taking risks. Yes, it comes down to dollars and cents. If you have a blockbuster bringing in major money, you can afford to take a chance on something new and different. It’s a bit of a gamble, but if you lose, you have a source of income to cover the loss.

For a smaller company, can the CEO’s take such a chance?

I may be looking at this in too simplistic a way, but I tend to think our “Christian publishers” have opted to conduct business the way the world does rather than the risky way a Christian often needs to live life. Think about Abraham for a second. God tells him to move. Pull up stakes, leave your family, and go until I tell you to stop.

As if that wasn’t enough, He later told him to take his son to a mountain top and put him on an altar for a sacrifice.

How about the people of Israel, 600,000 strong marching across the desert, in the wake of a cloud—or a pillar of fire—stopping when it stopped and going when it went. Not easy to make long term plans, I’d think.

The point is, God puts His people in risky places at times so we depend completely on Him.

Has that element been completely stripped from Christian publishing?

I hope not.

I long for the day when Christian art once again leads the culture, rather than following five years behind.

CFBA Blog Tour—To Dance in the Desert

I first “met” Katy Popa on a discussion forum called Faith in Fiction.

It doesn’t take long when people interact regularly to get a flavor of what they’re about. With Katy, who writes as “Kathleen,” I was impressed with several things—her thoughtful comments, her peace-making ability, and her beautiful prose.

Much later I had the privilege of meeting her at the Mount Hermon Christian Writers’ Conference and found the on-line Katy and the in-person Katy to be one and the same.

The night we met was the night she found out her first novel To Dance in the Desert had found a home with RiverOak, an imprint of Cook Communications. Thing was, this was back in 2005, and the book wasn’t due out until 2007. To me that seemed like an eternity, and I can only imagine what it seemed like to Katy. But to look at her, you’d have never known she didn’t get news about contracts nearly every day of her life.

A year later we were in the same Gayle Roper mentoring clinic, so I had the privilege of reading Katy’s chapter we’d be critiquing and was impressed with her talent as a novelist.

This past spring, when we were both at Mount Hermon again, her first box of books arrived, and she got to see To Dance in the Desert for the first time. That’s when I got my autographed copy, too.

Because this was pleasure reading, I didn’t sit down to read To Dance in the Desert for some time. I took it with me to jury duty, but was called into a courtroom before I had done more than read that first chapter as it now appeared in the finished product.

After the short stint with the judicial system, I was back at the tasks with deadlines. Then along came the CFBA Blog Tour, highlighting To Dance in the Desert! Yea! No guilty feeling for reading a book I wanted to, not if I was doing it as part of a blog tour.

Well, I didn’t mean to get into that saga. Here’s my review.

The story. To Dance in the Desert is classified as general fiction. I think that is the euphemistic way of saying “literary.” Understand, this is not my genre … or, non-genre. General fiction means there really aren’t any conventions to adhere to. Literary fiction means characters are more often than not the focal point rather than the plot. These things are true of To Dance in the Desert.

But there is definitely a story here, one that opens with an intriguing incident that generates more and more questions, even as facts are sketched into place.

I’m not telling you much, am I. I don’t want to spoil it. This is a story about hurt, abandonment, fear, failure, joy, friendship, redemption, restoration. It’s about people’s lives, how they affect one another and how God uses it all. It is a story that needs to unfold, and if I tell you the short version, you’ll miss that experience. (For a very good story summary that doesn’t tell too much, check out Deena Peterson’s review.

Strengths. The story is intriguing. As I almost always do, I was reading to find out what happened. But it mattered because the characters were so real, so true, so interesting. Katy’s prose is beautiful. I can’t say enough how striking it is to read something that is such a pleasure.

I just opened the book at random—you can find wonderful passages on most any page—and here’s a sample:

“You see?” she shouted. “It’s not a safe world! People … people matter to you, and they come along, and they step on your soul! And they don’t mean to, they’re just not paying attention. But it hurts you just the same. And that,” she said as she poked the air with her finger, “that’s if you’re lucky! If you’re not, they squish you under their work boots.” She stomped the ground wihile Tom stood gaping at her. She twisted her foot back and forth and continued. “They grind it in, and they mean it to hurt, they hope it hurts long and hard, you know?”

It’s great writing. There are wonderful action sequences. I always felt like I was there watching what was going on. There were great descriptions, especially of the desert. The characterization and development was outstanding.

And the theme? This is the kind of book that makes you think. In fact, I was listening to a sermon on the radio today. About Jonah. The pastor, applying his point to today, said that people are not to come to us for salvation, they are to come to Jesus. We are to go to the people. And I thought of Jane from To Dance in the Desert. She had that “go to them” part down pretty well.

Weaknesses. If there is one, I didn’t see it.

Recommendation. A must read for anyone who loves literature. This book will win awards, or should.

CSFF Blog Tour – Fearless, Day 3

Well, I set myself up yesterday. I knew I was. Here we are, doing a blog tour to support Christian science fiction and fantasy and the authors and publishers venturing into the genre, and I post a “mixed review”?

Of course, I am referring to my review of Robin Parrish’s second novel, Fearless.

Here’s why I think it’s important that we, the participants in CSFF, give an honest appraisal of the books we feature in our tours. First, honest reviews make us credible. Our readers will not come to us with eye-rolling quick-trigger clicks, off to the next blog because they see it’s a tour and know what we’ll say even before we say it. Instead, they will give thoughtful consideration of our opinion, weigh it in light of other opinions we’ve expressed, and hopefully make a decision to choose some of the books for themselves because of something we’ve said.

Secondly, honest reviews help a book find its audience. I have to believe that authors and public relations people, seeing how a cross-section of fantasy fans reacts to the book, will discover something about who it is reaching. As will our blog readers.

That being said, I suppose turn-about’s fair play. If you’d like a go at my writing, I have a short story just published at the Sword Review. Feel free to post your review here in the comments section.

If you’d like to learn more about Robin, be sure to stop by his Web site where you’ll see a poster advertising his upcoming book signing at the Barnes and Nobel in High Point, North Carolina. For those of you living in the area, check out the date and time and pick up an autographed copy of his books.

I think you’ll want to. This is not hype nor insider information. It is simple deduction. Recently Robin made a business trip to LA. A writer comes to LA for … research? Perhaps. But what else is in LA? Would that be the movie industry? Don’t be surprised if the next superhero movie you see stars the Guardian.

Take time to see what others participating in the CSFF Blog Tour are saying about Fearless:

Trish Anderson Brandon Barr Wayne Thomas Batson Jim Black Justin Boyer</a Grace Bridges Amy Browning Jackie Castle Valerie Comer Karri Compton Frank Creed Lisa Cromwell CSFF Blog Tour Gene Curtis D. G. D. Davidson Merrie Destefano Jeff Draper April Erwin Linda Gilmore Beth Goddard Marcus Goodyear Russell Griffith Jill Hart Katie Hart Sherrie Hibbs Christopher Hopper Jason Joyner Karen Dawn King Tina Kulesa Lost Genre Guild Terri Main Rachel Marks Karen McSpadden Eve Nielsen John W. Otte John Ottinger Robin Parrish Lyn Perry Rachelle Cheryl Russel Hanna Sandvig Chawna Schroeder Mirtika Schultz James Somers Steve Trower Speculative Faith Jason Waguespac Daniel I. Weaver

CSFF Blog Tour – Fearless, Day 2

I wanted to lay some ground work yesterday for my review of Fearless, author Robin Parrish’s second novel in his Dominion Trilogy.

The Story. After a one page summary of Relentless, first in the trilogy, the action takes off. I had no real difficulty tracking what was happening, though at times when I was confused, I didn’t know if this was because I’d not read the first book, needed to be patient for Parrish to unfold a plot point, or something in the story was amiss.

Interestingly, when I read the Relentless summary to a writer friend, she commented that it reminded her of a comic book. And Fearless indeed proved to be a product of that media. As such, I am clearly not the target audience.

That being said, I can see the appeal for those who love the superhero comic. Action is king. The heros are unconquerable … but they still have internal battles that put them at greater risk, perhaps, than any physical assault.

In true trilogy fashion, as you might already suspect from yesterday’s post, Fearless ends with an unresolved problem, with the protagonist in worse circumstances than when the book started. It’s a perfect set-up for book three, Merciless, due out in 2008.

The Strengths. Clearly, Parrish is an innovative writer. He makes use of the superhero motif and creates a story with unanswered questions that keeps the reader wondering. In her review of the book yesterday, Terri Main discussed the ambiguity in Fearless. Point well-made, I think. Part of the suspense in the trilogy is a Harry-Potter-esque wonder—what part does evil play in the power the protagonist and friends wield?

Obviously there are interesting spiritual implications to the question, but Parrish is careful not to drag those out into the open, instead letting them play in the background which then allows the reader to ponder them un-deter… or not.

I have to believe Parrish has reached his intended audience with this story. The action, the suspense, the mystery, the supernatural power, the danger, the loss, the love. It’s all there, though explored no deeper than most comic-book stories. Characters have unique gifts and diverse backgrounds, but they are not treated with great depth. That’s OK, because they aren’t meant to outshine the action.

As I mentioned yesterday, Bethany House didn’t spare expense on this book. The cover is attractive, certainly. Launching Guardian, the comic book tie-in, is a great promotional enterprise. From the store catalogue I’ve seen, I’d conclude they didn’t hold back on advertising dollars either.

But that leads me to the inevitable part of a review.

The Weaknesses. I have great regard for Bethany House Publishing. In my thinking they have led the way in fiction. I don’t know about sales numbers (who does?), but BHP consistently puts out a fine list of fiction titles, many award-winners. Again this year, three (I think) of the Christy Award winners are Bethany books.

In addition, my top two books, other than fantasy, for 2006 were both put out by Bethany.

All that to say, I think my expectation is quite high. When I sit down to a book by a reputable author from a fine publisher, I have to say, I expect real quality. Not to mention, on the back cover, there is this quote right at the top: “I wish I possessed the pure, God-given talent and insight of Robin Parrish. He stands without question among the greatest writers of our generation.”

Why wouldn’t I have high expectations for a book like that?

Imagine my surprise when I stumbled on a number of writerly complaint—things writers tend to notice that average readers ignore. Things like confusing point of view, word repetition, sentence redundancy, awkward speaker attributions. Notice, these are all things a good edit can take care of.

I have to say though, there were other points that jarred me as a reader.

There are some I noticed as a SoCal reader—things like the red fire hydrant (they are yellow here), referencing L. A.’s surrounding countryside (there are only surrounding cities, no countryside, and fire fighters never try to protect “countryside” here; it’s lives and structures), and confusing crowd issues around freeway overpasses and busy streets. Again, however, most readers aren’t going to notice such things.

Unfortunately, there were other things I think careful readers will notice, pulling them from the story. There were several plot points that were left un-addressed. One such example was a criminal named Nick who was creating mayhem. The police closed in. Jump cut to Samuel and suddenly Nick is car-jacking Samuel. Unless this is a different criminal, just coincidentally also named Nick, there is no explanation how he avoided all those police closing in. However, the name coincidence is a possibility, because another Nick, this one an FBI agent, appears later in the story. If there are two characters named Nick, why not three?

Back to Samuel. For two pages readers follow this elderly man as he navigates the streets during a riot, then we learn he is not alone. His wife is in the passenger seat. Three pages more, and a chapter break later, we learn that his granddaughter is in the back seat. These characters appearing apparently out of the blue jarred me out of the story.

The problems that affected me most however, were word choices. Here’s a smattering: “burying the gun’s nozzle in her temple” (I suppose some people do call the muzzle of a gun a nozzle, but do you bury anything in bone?); “the fire consumed the building once more” (I thought once a thing was consumed, it was no longer in existence); “… felt like a logical extension of his self-presumed role at the old asylum” (I assume the word was meant to be self-assumed). There are sentence structure things, too, but you get the drift.

In my opinion, these are not things that a target reader will care about. After all, as I wrote last week, story trumps all. Robin has the kind of intriguing story that will sweep most readers right past these writerly glitches. My question is, though, whether a great publishing company like Bethany should put so much into grabbing attention for these books but not put in more for a cleaner read. I’m frankly a little baffled.

Recommendation. For fans of a distinctly imaginative story tied to the superhero genre prevalent in comic books and movies, I highly recommend this book, with a caution: don’t look too closely at the writing.

Other participants on the tour include these bloggers:
Trish Anderson Brandon Barr Wayne Thomas Batson Jim Black Justin Boyer</a Grace Bridges Amy Browning Jackie Castle Valerie Comer Karri Compton Frank Creed Lisa Cromwell CSFF Blog Tour Gene Curtis D. G. D. Davidson Merrie Destefano Jeff Draper April Erwin Linda Gilmore Beth Goddard Marcus Goodyear Russell Griffith Jill Hart Katie Hart Sherrie Hibbs Christopher Hopper Jason Joyner Karen Dawn King Tina Kulesa Lost Genre Guild Terri Main Rachel Marks Karen McSpadden Eve Nielsen John W. Otte John Ottinger Robin Parrish Lyn Perry Rachelle Cheryl Russel Hanna Sandvig Chawna Schroeder Mirtika Schultz James Somers Steve Trower Speculative Faith Jason Waguespac Daniel I. Weaver

CSFF Blog Tour – Fearless, Day 1

I realize why I typically don’t post my book review for the blog tours on Monday. Generally, because of my post over at Speculative Faith, I’m already posting here later than I like. Consequently, I don’t want to take the time a good review deserves.

I’m sorely tempted to break from that pattern, simply because I think my review of Fearless by Robin Parrish might be … different from the majority of reviews given by the other CSFF Blog Tour participants.

Lest I give you the wrong impression, Robin’s work, second in his Dominion Trilogy, is imaginative and innovative. He has seized on the opportunity to create a story with movie and comic book tie-ins. In fact, part of the promotion for Fearless is the launch of Guardian, available as a PDF file from Robin’s Web site.

One thing I particularly like about Fearless is that it is not a stand-alone. This may be a surprise to some, but I have long declared that readers are no different from television viewers who are willing to wait from one season to the next when their favorite series ends with a cliff-hanger. In fact, an ending leaving the protagonist in dire straits often drives the enthusiasm—the buzz, the hype—for the new season.

Books can be the same way. (Anyone doubting this must have been somewhere else this past weekend when all the Harry Potter parties accompanied the two-year wait for book 7 of Rowling’s popular series.)

All this, Robin understands. In case you missed what he said regarding the subject, here’s his comment a week ago to ACWoF’s July 11 post:

Personally, I love serialized stories. Don’t intend to use it as a story device every time I write (in fact, now that this behemoth is rounding the bend, I find myself longing for a strong, self-contained novel to write), but I do love it as a plot device for the very reason that Becky cited: it fills the mind with endless possibilities of wonder, of excitement, of “what if!?” It’s the ‘Lost’ conundrum, faced regularly by the writers of that series. Do we, the viewers (or readers, as the case may be) really want all the answers? Or do we want to savor that feeling of mystery?

Don’t get me wrong on this. I ABSOLUTELY think it’s all for naught if you ask questions forever and don’t have the compelling answers to back them up. And especially in serialized storytelling, I think it’s crucial for the reader to know that there IS a planned ending, when all the questions will be answered, all the mysteries will be revealed, and all of the plot points will be wrapped up. Otherwise you feel like you’re being strung along meaninglessly, and that’s DEATH to any story. That’s exactly what happened to ‘The X-Files’. There was never any pay-off.

If it helps anyone in particular to know… And I still have to keep my cards close to the vest here, because the biggest and best stuff is still to come… But The Dominion Trilogy will wrap up completely in Book 3. The ending was planned from the start; every unanswered question has an answer that’s worth waiting for; and Book 3 is the Main Event. It’s all the stuff you’ve been waiting for, and I think it’s really going to shock people when they get all the biggest answers.

After the last words of Book 3 are written, there will be no more of this story left to tell.

I for one am happy another author has embraced this method of storytelling. There are others, and with the success of these, publishers are bound to embrace the freshness of the approach and give it the recognition it is due, playing to it as a strength, not dodging it as a weakness.

But I’ll elaborate on that a bit more when I do my review.

In the meantime, you may wish to visit other bloggers discussing Fearless. Two did not appear on the original list which other bloggers will post. I’ve indicated those in bold type. We also seem to have a German blog which has jumped in and joined the tour. I don’t read German, but the format leads me to believe Travelstream is featuring Fearless along with these other bloggers:

Trish Anderson
Brandon Barr
Wayne Thomas Batson
Jim Black
Justin Boyer
Grace Bridges
Amy Browning
Jackie Castle
Valerie Comer
Karri Compton
Frank Creed
Lisa Cromwell
CSFF Blog Tour
Gene Curtis
D. G. D. Davidson
Merrie Destefano
Jeff Draper
April Erwin
Linda Gilmore
Beth Goddard
Marcus Goodyear
Andrea Graham
Russell Griffith
Jill Hart
Katie Hart
Sherrie Hibbs
Christopher Hopper
Jason Joyner
Karen
Dawn King
Tina Kulesa
Lost Genre Guild
Terri Main
Rachel Marks
Karen McSpadden
Eve Nielsen
John W. Otte
John Ottinger
Robin Parrish
Lyn Perry
Rachelle
Cheryl Russel
Hanna Sandvig
Chawna Schroeder
Mirtika Schultz
James Somers
Speculative Faith
Steve Trower
Jason Waguespac
Daniel I. Weaver

Fantasy News Follow-up; The Good Story cont.

Reports are in! Wayne Thomas Batson appeared on Fox and Friends this morning, and a number of ACFW authors who saw the segment said it was very good. I look forward to hearing Wayne’s take on the event when he finally gets home from the Tour That Would Not End.

If you’re interested, Christopher Hopper, author of The White Lion Chronicles, has posted the video.

Although the Fantasy Fiction Tour is now officially over, don’t forget there are still all those fantasy books releasing this summer. In particular, look for Donita Paul’s DragonFire, now available in a store near you!

- - -

So, on to The Good Story. It dawned on me as I continued my reading journey through Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire that good stories also have good subplots. Part of what makes the story captivating is the juggling act, wondering about Hermione’s sudden conviction about the slavery of house elves, worrying along with Harry about his godfather returning from hiding, suspecting Hagrid’s latest animal project will become more than the amusing sidelight it now is, hoping Malfoy gets the justice his bullying deserves, what brought Mad-Eye Moody to Hogwarts, and so on.

This kind of rich sub-plotting can only happen if each of the characters, the minor ones too, have been adequately developed. I suspect when doing a series, it is easier to produce stories for each of the characters. I also suspect this is why each of Rowling’s books became longer and longer.

At any rate, subplots offer further conflict, even as the main plot may be going through a change-of-pace respite.

So here’s what I’ve concluded so far: the essentials of a good story are the following:

1) Good stories surprise. They are not predictable.
2) Good stories have at least one character readers care about enough to root for.
3) Good stories have readers gripped by the danger—internal or external—and it intensifies rather than letting up.

In addition, good stories may also include humor, a detailed story world, unique character voices, and rich subplots.

Undoubtedly there are other facets involved in creating The Good Story. After next week’s blog tour, I may revisit the topic and see what else we uncover. After all, if story trumps all, as I believe, it would be worth a writer’s time to figure out what all that involves!

Fantasy News; Voice and the Good Story

I may have mentioned here that the Fantasy Fiction Tour had a reporter from the Washington Post covering the stops in Virginia and Washington DC. Well, it turn out it wasn’t in any way an article about the tour, though it was mentioned. Instead it was an article about Christian fantasy that digressed into a look at Christian fiction: “Christian Fantasy Genre Builds Niche Without Hogwarts, Muggles or Spells”.

I had to smile at this line:

The growth in Christian fantasy books is part of the recent escalation in sales of Christian fiction.

I hope acquisition editors are taking note.

Overall, the article was a favorable representation of Christian fantasy, with only a few items I found objectionable. One was the mention of chick lit as the latest trend in Christian fiction. Uh, no. Chick lit is entering the been-there-done-that phase. Also the mention of a book written by a Mormon as the first “Christian” fantasy to hit the NYT children’s best-seller list.

But here’s the really big news: Wayne Batson reports that his agent contacted him during his last book signing in New York to say that Fox News called, wanting Wayne to guest on Fox and Friends Friday morning at 8:45 EST [time updated according to Wayne's comment]. Well, I have to tell you, national recognition for Wayne’s books can’t hurt the Christian fantasy genre.

Please pray for Wayne, as he requests in his blog post. Along with recognition comes criticism, and I guess there has already been a fair amount of that in response to the Post article.

- - -

So just a word about what makes a story good.

I’m tempted to define good, at this point, simply because something that creates a thrill might not actually be good. Momentarily exciting, yes. But memorable? Powerful? Not so much. A truly good story, in my opinion, should create a thirst for more.

There have been a few books that make me sad when I see the last 50 pages or so flying by, simply because I do not want the reading experience to end. That’s what I mean by a “good story.”

However, I think many readers will define “good” by the thrill quotient. At one time, I did as well. After all, I was a fan of Nancy Drew mysteries. There was Danger and Intrigue, then triumph over the villain, despite improbable odds. In book after book after book after book. These were the quintessential formulaic stories. They gave readers a repeat thrill until such time as you grew weary of the redundancy, or discovered something truly good.

I fear, in the current cultural climate, readers aren’t looking for something truly good but “the next formula that is different from the one I’ve grown tired of.” Hence the high priority on “fresh.”

Don’t misunderstand. I think it is important to be creative, innovative, original. But sometimes when that essential element is in place, all else seems to fade to unimportance. Consequently, when an author stands up and says in a book title, God isn’t great, or claims through fiction the church covered up truth about Jesus, there is little thought for anything but the “freshness” of it.

The same happens among Christians, in my opinion, with books like … well, I was about to name a book I haven’t read. I probably shouldn’t. Suffice it to say that much of the talk about wanting “edgy” fiction is simply an expression of weariness. We want something new, cutting edge, relevant.

I’m not knocking new, remember. I reiterate once more: originality is an essential of the good story. But by itself, it does not constitute a good story.

Yesterday, I mentioned humor and a detailed world as two elements authors may use to create a good story in addition to the three essentials.

Another one, which I think Rowling does masterfully, is voice. For me, this is one of the hardest elements to explain. We understand it in verbal communication, of course. There are some people, for example, who phone and do not need to tell me who they are. I’d recognized their voice most anywhere, any time.

Why? Often they say little more than hello. But the tone, the inflection, the word choice (my sister says “Hi, Bec” ) are tips to the speaker.

In a good story, the author does the same thing for his characters. Each is different from the others. There is “something” that marks the characters’ speech so that Ron doesn’t sound like Hermione who doesn’t sound like Harry who doesn’t sound like Malfoy who doesn’t sound like Snape who … you get the picture.

This utilization of “voice” makes the characters come alive. It is much easier for readers to care about alive characters than their cartoonish counterparts. If “unique character voices” isn’t one of the essentials of a good story, it is certainly in the next tier, as far as I’m concerned.