Hi. So I've been reading your post and the comments below and thinking about them quite a bit for the past couple of ours. Maybe that's weird. I don't know. Anyway, I know you liked the encouragement more than the suggestions (though you'd prefer neither), and unfortunately what I'm going to post will be more of the latter (but I'll promise to try to be encouraging too). Now please don't get offended. I don't mean to be mean when I say this: You sound pretentious. It's your first book, get over yourself. I'm sorry. But I honestly think it's part of the problem. You think that you've created beautiful art, and that people don't like it because they can't appreciate beauty, they don't know how to "contemplate the dawn", and that your work is just too far above them for them to understand its genius. To understand your genius (because you read Shakespeare instead of Tolkien). I think you're too proud to accept the fact that maybe your writing isn't good. You tell yourself that people don't appreciate good writing. But here's the thing, just because you like your writing doesn't mean it's good. Now, to be clear, I'm not saying that your writing is awful, just that it might not be the greatness you expect it to be. I've read a bit of the sample of your book, and the main issue is the plot. Chapter 0 is just a bunch of elaborately descriptive fight scenes between nameless characters I don't care about. Chapter 1 starts with a fight between two nameless characters I don't care about. Oh, she can use fire. I stopped there. Here's what I've learned from my creative writing classes and listening to authors: Your first book will suck. Well, it probably will suck. In the same way I'm sure Michelangelo and Monet made a tons of shitty art before becoming the great artists that we know today. You've only written one book. I know that's a huge milestone, but it's still just one book, and already you're expecting it to be literature. Your writing will probably develop. Your style will change, and you'll probably look back years from now and hate the way you wrote today. What I want to tell you is that you need to keep writing. Don't spend 7 years on them, just start churning out books. They won't be great. And you shouldn't expect them to be. In time, they'll approve. Have people read your books. Maybe not your friends, because they'll be afraid to tear it to shreds. Find people who will hate your book, who will tell you everything that's wrong with it, so that you can make it better. Take their criticisms and learn from them. I think a lot of issues with new writers nowadays is that they want their work to be wholly their own. But you have to be open to collaboration. You have to be willing to let go of some things that just don't work, despite how much you might want them to. I guess my main point is that you need to stop believing your work is great because then you won't try to improve. It takes so much more to write than just simply bleeding.
Hey, neversparks. I see what you're saying, but I think you're getting the same misunderstanding that the other 'critics' got. I never claimed my first novel was fantastic and should have been a best seller. I stated my frustration over my friends not knowing what's supportive to a writer with the example of my book. The length it took was to show that the people close to me should appreciate the effort enough to look at it, something I wouldn't expect from regular readers. Also, I didn't mention this above, but they were the ones to instill that expectation in me. The authors mentioned and the statements over weaving verses punching and dawn verses ...uh...rap? ...is a statement on style. There's no point in telling an author to switch their style because it doesn't please everyone. It never will, and you can see below, it pleases many. It's not pretentious, it's about the very frustration all artists go through. If you didn't expect to succeed, it's still no easier to see yourself fail. The work wasn't a cry for help. I know what works as much as the next author, I just chose a path less traveled. And it's still beautiful nonetheless. I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the first bit of my book. I never expected to draw in %100 of readers, and it certainly sounds from your stopping point you weren't expecting it to be high fantasy. You might try reading it for fun as opposed to actively looking to form an opinion. You might find the journey-so to speak-is a bit more interesting that way.
Beautiful art that took seven years to perfect. Beautiful art that sold less than 100 copies. That brought me enough money to fill my tank. Once. Also, I wasn't so much suggesting that you change your style, rather that you shouldn't adhere to strongly to your current style because styles tend to develop as we write more. (I wasn't in any way suggesting that you should have punches. It's a novel, not a rap or a speech.) Which is why I brought up the time. I think it's better to write more than it is to keep editing and working on something we've already written. I think it's good to set something down for a little while and let it marinate before working on it again, when you can approach it more objectively and you're not as stuck on certain ideas that you had. Of course, you're free to think differently. I think I was just trying to say that you should keep writing, be open to what everyone says, always look for ways to improve, and don't place too many expectations on what you make. If you don't expect your work to be the best, then you haven't failed yet - it's still a work-in-progress.I wrote hard, and I created beautiful art.
This was sort of what I was referring to, mostly. I just felt like your expectations for you first book might've been a bit high.