I like this piece a lot. It is an argument for returning writing to a passion and vision that will connect with some readers, but maybe not all. Such thinking is the antithesis of blockbuster books and the pitiful attempts of AI at writing.
Thanks for this, Monica. As a reader, and sometimes as a watcher of films and streaming series, I am boooooored with the predictable arcs and plots and pinches. (My least favorite: when the big reveal toward or at the climax ends up being the revelation of a fact or story that the narrator and/or lead character has known the entire time.)
I understand how these things function. I get that structure matters. I'm a small-town newspaper writer and columnist now; I've got the 800-word article down pat. When I wrote short stories (and got most of them published) I didn't feel the need for structure. Writing short fiction was like writing a poem; it wrote itself.
Now I'm attempting a novel. I want structure, sure, but I don't want the cornball same old thing. I love the fantasy genre for YA or middle readers, some of the adult stuff too. But so many of these books and films insist on an over-the-top, Hollywood, downright dumb climax. My brain and emotional system click out when the battle is too ridiculous or the orchestral swells too manipulative. Do readers and viewers insist on this? Or do publishers and producers just imagine that their audiences want this?
I believe it comes down to marketing...? Not sure! That's my understanding.
At larger publishing houses there's a group of people that make up the marketing board and their job is to sort out how to market a book. A book might be great fun, but unmarketable for some reason...I'm not part of any marketing board, so my understanding is only based on how it has been reported back to me, in relation to various novels...and some say that a big house essentially has "slots" that they're trying to fit work into, to tell them how to promote and sell each novel or self-help book, or war history.
For a few years way back I was a mortgage underwriter, and as an underwriter we relied on people who put together loan packages to find "comps." We could only loan on a house if it was like another house, and the value could be quantified by comparison, so the bank could see the relative sales and investment value. The loan sales and processing team would adjust for differences--more or fewer bathrooms, a larger lot...--while relying on a fundamental sameness to show the house was worth a loan....
I like this piece a lot. It is an argument for returning writing to a passion and vision that will connect with some readers, but maybe not all. Such thinking is the antithesis of blockbuster books and the pitiful attempts of AI at writing.
Thank you! I appreciate your reply! Xo
Thanks for this, Monica. As a reader, and sometimes as a watcher of films and streaming series, I am boooooored with the predictable arcs and plots and pinches. (My least favorite: when the big reveal toward or at the climax ends up being the revelation of a fact or story that the narrator and/or lead character has known the entire time.)
I understand how these things function. I get that structure matters. I'm a small-town newspaper writer and columnist now; I've got the 800-word article down pat. When I wrote short stories (and got most of them published) I didn't feel the need for structure. Writing short fiction was like writing a poem; it wrote itself.
Now I'm attempting a novel. I want structure, sure, but I don't want the cornball same old thing. I love the fantasy genre for YA or middle readers, some of the adult stuff too. But so many of these books and films insist on an over-the-top, Hollywood, downright dumb climax. My brain and emotional system click out when the battle is too ridiculous or the orchestral swells too manipulative. Do readers and viewers insist on this? Or do publishers and producers just imagine that their audiences want this?
I believe it comes down to marketing...? Not sure! That's my understanding.
At larger publishing houses there's a group of people that make up the marketing board and their job is to sort out how to market a book. A book might be great fun, but unmarketable for some reason...I'm not part of any marketing board, so my understanding is only based on how it has been reported back to me, in relation to various novels...and some say that a big house essentially has "slots" that they're trying to fit work into, to tell them how to promote and sell each novel or self-help book, or war history.
For a few years way back I was a mortgage underwriter, and as an underwriter we relied on people who put together loan packages to find "comps." We could only loan on a house if it was like another house, and the value could be quantified by comparison, so the bank could see the relative sales and investment value. The loan sales and processing team would adjust for differences--more or fewer bathrooms, a larger lot...--while relying on a fundamental sameness to show the house was worth a loan....