Into the Fire

If you read novels with a technical mindset, you will find a multitude of flaws. I covered this topic in a past post entitled “The problem with reading . . .”

You will identify the standards posted by professionals, claimed by self-editing books, and given as instructions in books on writing fiction. If you read enough of the books and posts, you will learn how you’re expected to write your novels. It’s certainly not a secret what is expected by today’s publishers via their editors and pub boards and consequently literary agents.

Only no one can do it “perfectly”. Who can write the perfect novel? So, the point is if you’re reading with a technical eye instead of the viewpoint to enjoy the story, there will come some point where you are disappointed. (Get the point?) Whether or not you can bypass that disappointment factor because overall you enjoyed the story remains to be seen. Subjectively speaking or not, if you adhere to the current standards of publishing, you will notice immediately if the first five pages drove you fast and furiously into the story. Or not.

Now this approach makes perfect sense for mysteries, adventure/thrillers, even some sci-fi or fantasy stories. Actually it even makes sense for the “lits” or romantic suspense. Establishing conflict quickly is important. However, the drum of romance is a bit different. The heartbeat of romance is character driven and the beat is steady but builds. Yes, of course, you can jam the conflict in there on the first five pages but then you’re stuck with a story that rat-a-tat-tats like a nail gun into the lives and situations of its characters without the opportunities to invest in the emotion of the story.

Now I know a lot of you who might stop by here could care less about romance novels, and, although I write what I call non-traditional romance, I read more in the thriller and mystery categories. Before you stop reading because I’ve delved into “romance”, what I’m really attempting to point out here is that the particular style and genre of a novel often determines how it develops.

Here’s what I have against the current standards. They assume that everyone reads and appreciates the same styles, formats, and structures for novels. These are how the professionals measure the probability of a work being published. It is assumed that no one is willing to go beyond the first, say, 20 pages before they’ll give up on a novel if it hasn’t moved quickly and shoved them into intense conflict, that the average reader recognizes the difference between “showing” and “telling” without it being pointed out to them, and that these readers will resent the use of “was” in excess of a certain amount of usage as opposed to action verbs being substituted at every opportunity, and not to mention the sting of using adverbs.

I acknowledge that there are plenty of readers in the fiction reading public who are impatient and want immediate engagement. Whatever the reasons for wanting a book to take off fast and carry them into quick tension, the fact remains it’s a matter of taste and opinion.

As a reader, I like all options. Slow or fast starting, lingering and meandering, furious and breathtaking, a combination of all tempos and tactics—I prefer to read those books who don’t adhere so strictly to today’s standards—the ones where you don’t instantly attach the formula used to put the story into the prescribed/recommended format so that even when the stories differ dramatically, they “feel” the same.

Regardless of my opinion, most agents and editors in today’s CBA market are looking for the same things. Not the same stories but stories which are adaptable to this expected format and standard. And although the desire for “fresh voices” is repeated by all, those stories which cannot squeeze into the accepted and easily adaptable norm usually don’t make it very far in the acquisition process.

Technically speaking as a reader, you will either recognize and appreciate all the applied rules by a writer or you will recognize those places which adhered to the formula and maybe wish they’d been able to try a little something different.

Lord of all Creation, thank you for the multitude of ways to communicate, to tell stories, to write them, to bring make believe to life on pages. Thank you for the motivation to write. Thank you for stories to tell. Thank you for it all. May my small contributions bring you glory somehow and pleasure and blessing. In the Name of Jesus, Amen.

*PLEASE PRAY FOR KRISTY DYKES*