What would you write if not your current genre?

I write science fiction and the occasional fantasy, but if I weren't so invested in those genres, I'd write historical fiction.  Why?  Several reasons:

1) Research.  I like doing it.  And I do get to do a lot of it for certain stories now.  The main difference is that for science fiction, most of my research is on science.  I do research other cultures, eras in history, etc., as they fit the story, but since most of my stories are either in the future or in fictional worlds, I'm free to twist such things as much as I like.  With historical fiction, it'd be an interesting challenge to write within the confines of the world:  how people behaved, how they thought, how they interacted with each other, and what sorts of things were available to them.  I suspect my main issue would still be research porn and balance; I tend to research certain aspects of a topic too heavily and infodump heavily on them, while leaving holes where other aspects could use some support.  It usually takes me a couple of drafts to disseminate what is too much and identify and build up what is too little.

2) Personal interest.  When I'm not reading or watching SF or fantasy, I'm usually reading the classics or watching a period piece.  Right now I'm reading one of those SF books where technology has regressed so much that it reads somewhat like a period piece, and I've just finished season 2 of The Tudors.  I am going to miss the heck out of Anne Boleyn.

3) Escapism.  I like reading and writing SF and fantasy because they are different from real life.  This provides not only escapism, but a compelling platform to explore the human experience.  When you change the circumstances of a world, you can better illuminate what will always be universal in people.  Historical fiction allows that same opportunity; the trappings are different, but we can still identify with the motives, emotions, hopes, and fears of the characters, and through that process, become more familiar with our own.

What about you?  What would you write, if not your current genre?

An unexpected effect of unusual monikers

In certain segments of the reading population, there is a little bit of amused condescension or annoyance with certain tropes of name-creation that are popular in fantasy and science fiction.  Many readers are a little bemused by writers who insert apostrophes or certain letters or too many syllables, but it does little more than provoke a giggle and is generally regarded as a bit silly.

But as a book I am reading right now shows, sometimes odd enough names can actually impede the reading experience.

In this book, the characters speak a form of English that has evolved in pronunciation, but supposedly not in spelling--yet all the character names are spelled oddly.  After the first several, I was able to determine a pattern to it, and figured out that they are all bastardized European names.  My theory is that the author took the original names, pronounced them with bad French accents, then tried to spell them phonetically except for replacing half the vowels with y.  Perhaps the author thought this looked cool.  Perhaps he was trying to illustrate how the pronunciation of the language has shifted through the names, since everything else is spelled normally.  I don't know.

But in numerous instances, it has stopped my reading cold.    My eyes traced over the names as if they were any other word, and then backtracked because I had no idea what I had just read.  With most of the names, my eyes adjusted, but there are a few egregious examples that trip me up nearly every time.  Needless to say, this kind of distraction prevents me from digesting the larger story and disrupts the seamless and engrossing reading experience all writers hope to provide.

So that's another thing you might want to keep in mind when you're naming:  that name may be unique and you may think that spelling is awesome, but it may trip your readers up and distract them from what's really important--your story.

Don't let the rules get you down

Don't let that smile turn into a frown... Sokka.

I'm always a bit bemused when I see writers protest about rules and guidelines stifling their creativity, and so they want to break them.

Cool.  Some rules should be broken.  But I don't think the rules are always the real problem.  I think the real issues are usually mindset and experience.  Learning to write within certain parameters is a vital exercise for any writer, especially one seeking traditional publication.

I understand the fear.  I remember the passion with which I wrote my first stories and novel.  I was free and uninhibited and wrote whatever appealed to my heart.  I didn't worry so much about whether my prose was too purple or whether I was head-hopping or anything else.  And though I do still quite like my first novel, a little more practice revealed to me that some passages were overwrought; that the story could be stronger told from one perspective at a time, even if that character didn't know everything I did; that some of the writing was weaker even if it was passionate.

As I gained more experience and began worrying about craft and the rules, there was a period where it was stifling.  I worried too much about how I was telling the story, whether it would please publishers, whether I could do something or get away with it.  I silenced ideas for fear they wouldn't fit into an established mold, and didn't experiment out of concern it would all be changed back anyway.  I feared my own voice would be rejected, so I should start learning to speak in some other voice that people wanted.  But it wasn't me, and it created many messes where the way I wanted to write butted up against the way I thought I should write.

But with more practice, I've begun coming out of that phase.  (Only "begun" because there are still moments where I worry too much about rules or publishers instead of focusing on getting the story out and fixing  problems later.)  However, working within that box for a time has improved my craft.  I can see a huge difference between the first drafts of my last two books.  In the first of the two, one of the issues was that I was throwing things everywhere to see where they would stick with little regard for the wisdom underlying many of the more commonly-touted rules of writing.  (Another was that my writer-brain apparently just stopped working in that portion of grad school, because I don't have any excuses for some of the crap I wrote.)  In the latest, things are more streamlined and well-composed, but even where I follow convention, my passion still comes through.  It may be a little more understated in places, but sometimes a slow burn is better than an inferno.

You see, once you understand the rules, you can utilize them to channel your passion.  Once you know the edges of the box, you can push against them.  You can break them with confidence and expertise, making direct hits instead of flailing.  That'll make your rebellion more effective.  That will be the truly crazy thing.  And if you can learn to be creative no matter how many "limits" are thrown at you in the form of rules or guidelines, then you're not really limited, are you?  You can't be stopped.  You go, writer person.

So next time you fear the rules are keeping you down, consider whether that feeling might be part of a natural progression.  Mine seems to have taken me from naive inexperience (first book) to trying to follow every rule too closely (second and third books) to messy rebellion (fourth book) to, I hope, a better synthesis of creativity and good writing.

Some quick notes this week!

• Not writing-related at all, but it is occupying-my-brain-related:  My best friend is getting married this weekend!  And I'm a maid of honor!  So I am both excited and plotting things!
  
• Currently starting my first pass at revisions on book #5, the one with aliens and a dual storyline.  I've already finished the smaller storyline.  I didn't cut as many words as I'd hoped, mostly because I rewrote as many passages as I reduced.  While it's not much shorter, I do think it's stronger!  I'll hope it's not too much trouble to cut the remaining words from the other storyline, which is much longer.  My revision notes are already pretty long, but there seem to be equal amounts of "eliminate this" and "add this", so my hope is it will all work out OK.  After this, I'll go revise book #4, which my beta trashed, and then I'll do a second pass at book #5.  Somewhere in there I'll plot book #6.  So many ideas everywhere.
  
• It's amazing how much a good knowledge of local geography can add to a story.  This has struck me this past week as I've been watching Arrested Development and taking in all the Orange County-ness it's imbued with.  I've only set a story in a real local setting once before, and both of those novels were trunked, but my familiarity with Los Angeles and southern California did lend them authenticity.  I'm not sure yet if I'll set book #6 in a real place or not.  In either case, the story will take place in the future, so I'll have to extrapolate a bit, but...research trip! 
  
  And while I'm at it, I should take a "research trip" to Cambodia so I can better extrapolate that setting when I do book #4 revisions again. :-P

Have a good week, everyone!