![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I liked quite a bit about Havemercy (in particular, the role-play sensitivity training exercises for the Dragon Corps, which was very nicely done), but it also has its problems. Chiefly, plot (but also gender), and my issues with this tie in with an in-progress email I’ve been failing to send to ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
alecaustin about writing fanfic vs writing original fic. It’s probably unfair to make Havemercy bear the brunt of my criticisms, but it was a useful focus; I will try to use it as an example rather than as an exemplar.
My argument in my unfinished email is about how writers think about stories, and that in the main a lot of fanfic writers start with the characters (and hopefully a situation) whereas original fic writers usually start with the situation (and hopefully the characters). I'm not sure how much of this is personal style – personally I skew much harder towards the start-with-an-idea side (probably why I find writing fanfic very difficult) – and how much is what they're writing, as you can't write a lot of fanfic about original characters and expect an audience. I think you can write a good story with a heavy bias towards one side or the other, but I think the approaches have different risks in terms of (potential) failure.
I think (and I’d be happy to hear differing opinions) that writers who start with character, whether they're writing original or fanfic, can run into problems with dropping plot & setting *or* falling so far in love with their characters that the characters distort the story and the author fails to realise they have not given the reader any actual reason to like their moody long-suffering protagonist (I have this second problem with Felix in Sarah Monette’s Melusine, Alec in Ellen Kushner’s Swordpoint, Hannibal Lecter in everything Thomas Harris has gone near after Red Dragon, and pirates in pretty much everything). I think writers who start with ideas can end up with default or cardboard characters, or a very mechanical research-heavy story (fond memories of reading Peter Hamilton space operas. Not.)
A lot of what I’ve seen come out in genre (especially fantasy and YA) seems to come from the character-driven side of the spectrum. Much of this, particularly trilogies, seems to be lacking in adequate plot, and what there is is obvious and reactive, where “reactive” for my purposes means that events wait for the characters to be ready for them; yes, characters should drive events, but the converse is also true, and all too often other characters conveniently fail to act or interfere. In Havemercy there are many sources of potential tension, action and complication that are just ignored or left hanging, which is frustrating for me and bad for the book, because it makes the characters look stupid or lazy, and slows down the pacing so that these faults become even more apparent.
( Havemercy. )
alecaustin about writing fanfic vs writing original fic. It’s probably unfair to make Havemercy bear the brunt of my criticisms, but it was a useful focus; I will try to use it as an example rather than as an exemplar.My argument in my unfinished email is about how writers think about stories, and that in the main a lot of fanfic writers start with the characters (and hopefully a situation) whereas original fic writers usually start with the situation (and hopefully the characters). I'm not sure how much of this is personal style – personally I skew much harder towards the start-with-an-idea side (probably why I find writing fanfic very difficult) – and how much is what they're writing, as you can't write a lot of fanfic about original characters and expect an audience. I think you can write a good story with a heavy bias towards one side or the other, but I think the approaches have different risks in terms of (potential) failure.
I think (and I’d be happy to hear differing opinions) that writers who start with character, whether they're writing original or fanfic, can run into problems with dropping plot & setting *or* falling so far in love with their characters that the characters distort the story and the author fails to realise they have not given the reader any actual reason to like their moody long-suffering protagonist (I have this second problem with Felix in Sarah Monette’s Melusine, Alec in Ellen Kushner’s Swordpoint, Hannibal Lecter in everything Thomas Harris has gone near after Red Dragon, and pirates in pretty much everything). I think writers who start with ideas can end up with default or cardboard characters, or a very mechanical research-heavy story (fond memories of reading Peter Hamilton space operas. Not.)
A lot of what I’ve seen come out in genre (especially fantasy and YA) seems to come from the character-driven side of the spectrum. Much of this, particularly trilogies, seems to be lacking in adequate plot, and what there is is obvious and reactive, where “reactive” for my purposes means that events wait for the characters to be ready for them; yes, characters should drive events, but the converse is also true, and all too often other characters conveniently fail to act or interfere. In Havemercy there are many sources of potential tension, action and complication that are just ignored or left hanging, which is frustrating for me and bad for the book, because it makes the characters look stupid or lazy, and slows down the pacing so that these faults become even more apparent.
( Havemercy. )
