Here’s
an interesting post on creating suspense, by Lee Child.

“How do you create suspense? I’m asked that question often …. But it’s a bad question. Its very form misleads writers and pushes them onto an unhelpful and overcomplicated track.”

Okay, that’s interesting. So what’s the right question?

According to Child, the right question is “How do you make your reader hungry to read more of your book?

And the answer, he asserts is very simple: “As novelists, we should ask or imply a question at the beginning of the story, and then we should delay the answer.”

And “Page to page, paragraph to paragraph, line to line — even within single sentences — imply a question first, and then answer it second. The reader learns to chase, and the momentum becomes unstoppable. … Someone killed someone else: who? You’ll find out at the end of the book. Something weird is happening: what? You’ll find out at the end of the book. Something has to be stopped: how? You’ll find out at the end of the book.”

And his conclusion? “Trusting such a simple system feels cheap and meretricious while you’re doing it. But it works. It’s all you need. Of course, attractive and sympathetic characters are nice to have; and elaborate and sinister entanglements are satisfying; and impossible-to-escape pits of despair are great. But they’re all luxuries. The basic narrative fuel is always the slow unveiling of the final answer.”

It’s an entertaining column, you should go ahead and click through and read it! Plus, this is, I think, a potentially extraordinarily helpful way to think about creating suspense. I like it! I kind of think maybe I’ll re-read Hambly’s MAGISTRATES OF HELL, which I just finished, with an eye to what’s going on in the book with implied (and explicit) questions and how that works to compell the reader to turn the page.

Please Feel Free to Share:

Although rather off topic.

This is a post over at Willow Bird Baking, which is currently my favorite food-related blog.

I like her tone and style, I like her stories about her young students. The pictures are nice and I think lots of her recipes are really appealing.

But the post I linked to in particular? That one . . . that one is a story of RAW DETERMINATION. Sort of. Enjoy!

Please Feel Free to Share:

After Tana French’s IN THE WOODS, what I wanted was something I could be absolutely sure I would love. And since NK Jemisin’s duology earned this review, not to mention this one, I was confident it would be a good choice.

It was. But it’s taken me a week or so to take a stab at putting my thoughts about this pair of books into words.

First, assuming you’ve read NK Jemisin’s first trilogy, the Hundred Thousand Kingdoms trilogy . . . let me say that this duology really doesn’t have the same feel. Instead of the very close first-person narrative, here we have a much more scattered third-person narrative. In THE KILLING MOON, we have three main pov protagonists: the Gatherer Ehiru, with whom we start and who felt to me like the primary protagonist until quite far into the book; Nijiri, his apprentice, who grows up the hard way during the course of the story; and Sunandi, from a neighboring country. Plus certain scenes are presented from yet other points of view: The Prince, Eninket, who starts off sympathetic before we realize that he’s actually, well, I don’t want to say ‘ruthless’ because that wouldn’t be strong enough. Also one of his generals, Niyes, briefly. And I’m sure there are others.

All these characters are handled well, but the effect of using a scattered third-person is that this duology feels slower to start than the Hundred Thousand Kingdoms trilogy. There you are drawn at once into close sympathy with the narrator; here you have to accommodate the shifting narrative. Plus the choice to use third person holds you at a slight distance from the characters. For me, this meant that the first quarter or third of the first book was not that engaging.

After that, well, I definitely did get drawn in! By the end, I cared very much about Ehiru and Nijiri and Sunandi. And about all the secondary characters, and the city of Gujaareh, and the country of Kisua. What I liked best about the main characters: none of them were perfect, all of them were different and complicated and felt like real people, all of them were very sympathetic, when they came into conflict with one another, it was for good reasons and they all learned to understand one another (pretty well, at least) by the end.

I was surprised to find that the first book stood very well alone. Events in the second book grow directly out of events in the first, but both books are surprisingly self-contained.

In THE SHADOWED SUN, Nijiri remains a minor character, so does Sunandi, and I was glad to see them both. And there’s a good scattering of other minor pov characters as well. But the main pov protagonists are the prince’s heir, Wanahomen, and the first woman healer-priest, Hanani. I had no trouble at all getting drawn into the second book, partly because I had already been drawn into the world, but partly because I loved Hanani a whole lot.

People are always talking about “strong female characters,” though what they mean by “strong” doesn’t always impress me very much; and the “first woman whatever” is a pretty common trope, of course. Jemisin handled Hanani and the society around her just perfectly. We get to see why women haven’t been allowed to be healer-priests (it’s not why you think) and why Hanani was an exception and the obstacles she runs into and the obstacles she doesn’t run into – all beautifully handled – and she does not become an honorary man even though she also does not accept a traditional woman’s role. My favorite thing in the whole second book is how Hanani at the end builds a life for herself that steps outside everyone’s expectations. Good for her!

The setting: everybody says this duology is set in an alternate fantasy world based on Ancient Egypt. Oh, come on. Sure, there’s a river that floods annually, creating a fertile region within a wider desert. Yes, we have a cosmopolitan and wealthy city set by this river. Details of clothing and jewelry and architecture may be similar. But there is no resemblance between the society of Gujaareh and the society of Ancient Egypt. None. Seriously, none whatsoever. So please, lighten up with the Egypt comparisons, people! What we plainly have here is a secondary world fantasy, and a very well done secondary world it is, but it’s nothing like Egypt. If you’re dying for a fantasy involving Egypt, how about LORD OF THE TWO LANDS by Judith Tarr? That’s a really good book. Or CLEOPATRA’S HEIR by Gillain Bradshaw, which is a historical novel rather than a fantasy and simply outstanding.

What we actually have in Gujaareh: a fabulous city, beautifully detailed, with a token secular ruler and a fascinating tripartite priesthood based on a unique and wonderfully-drawn religion. Plus a wider world around that city that is also well drawn and believable. What we have in this duology: a complex yet understandable and believable plot, with all the elements beautifully woven together. Wonderful characters. A beautiful and fascinating world. A satisfying conclusion to the first book, and an even more satisfying conclusion to the second. Highly recommended.

Please Feel Free to Share:

The bad news, and it’s bad enough, is that poor Adora lost her litter. She got pyo — pyometra, an infection of the uterus — and I had her spayed to protect her health. There are only two bright spots to this: first, I recognized what was happening immediately and her life was never in (much) danger. Pyo is potentially deadly, so that’s not something to take for granted! Dora was pretty miserable there for a week or so, but she’s recovering nicely now. And second, though about half the expenses of breeding her are a dead loss, the stud fee itself rolls forward; since she has a young ruby daughter to whom the Ringleader dogs are well suited, I can eventually use the stud fee that way. Presuming that Folly clears her health checks when she’s two. But she should, I’m not very worried about that, I have generations of clearances behind her!

The good news: Kenya, at least, is pregnant. Whew! Just had the ultrasound this morning. She has four puppies in there. If everything goes well, if they’re all okay — and you don’t have to tell ME that things can go wrong, good Lord, I’ve had PLENTY of experience with things going wrong — but if she DOES have four, that’ll be enough for me to keep one AND everybody who’s waiting can also have one. Here’s hoping they’re all girls — or at least three girls out of four — or anyway, please God, at least a couple of girls! She is due the day before my birthday. I can tell you, ALL I want for my birthday is four healthy, vigorous puppies. Girl puppies. Okay, okay, beautiful, well-marked girl puppies — I will get pickier and pickier once I see they’re all healthy!

Please Feel Free to Share:

I happened to notice this, and this and of course it’s always somehow entertaining to see a list of pet peeves, the same way it’s entertaining to read very negative reviews. Or maybe that’s just me?

Anyway, what’s interesting to me is how you can read a list of somebody else’s pet peeves, and even though you wouldn’t have specifically thought of ANY of those pet peeves, the moment you see them in print, you think, OH, YEAH, ME TOO. Or is that also just me?

So! Orphaned kids attached to prophecies — yep, that’s a trope I’m tired of, all right. Someday I want to write a novel in which there is a prophecy that is just wrong. Would that make readers mad, do you think, or do you think they would be amused and pleased to see a prophecy not come true?

Precocious kids and idiotic adults — check. It is just offensive to see parents presented as totally clueless in order to force their kids to save the day. The author ought to be able to come up with a better reason for the kids to save the day than “Well, their parents are just stupid as turnips.” A really neat kid-parent relationship can be a huge plus in a book. Or a movie, because in this context what comes to mind is Veronica Mars, where the writers did a fabulous job on the relationship between Veronica and her dad. That was one of my favorite aspects of the show.

Writers who think their main characters are just too dreamy for words — actually, this isn’t a pet peeve of mine. As long as the main character really is dreamy. If everybody is in awe of how cool the protagonist is, when she is in fact impulsive and childish and dumb as a post, I will hate that book. I’m thinking of Kim Harrison’s Rachal Morgan series here. Everybody is just all “Ooh, she’s so dreamy!” and I think she is SUCH an idiot.

Weird names: well, obviously this is not a pet peeve of mine, as you’re certainly aware if you’ve read my books. I see absolutely nothing wrong with any of the names presented as “too weird” in that linked post. For heaven’s sake, “Trevanion”? Are you kidding me? It’s easy to pronounce and it looks fine on the page. Who could have a problem with it?

And then in part two:

Book and series titles that are confusing: well, I don’t spend time worrying about this, but yes, I don’t like confusing series/book titles either.

Weird use of perfectly ordinary words: That only bothers me some of the time. “Gifting” probably wouldn’t bother me all that much. Well, it would now that Charlotte has ranted about it, but if I’d read the book without reading this pet peeve list, it probably wouldn’t have. And yet I can be a major stickler for correct word use. So a definite pet peeve for me is “alright.” Two words! TWO! WORDS! There is no such word as “alright”! How complicated can this be?

Okay, taking a deep breath and moving on:

Intrusive narrators: Sometimes I think that is clever and fun, though I agree that the technique is always going to have a distancing effect.

Prologues: I used to say that I hated all prologues. Well, now I’ve written two books with prologues, so I can’t exactly say that anymore, at least not with much fervor. (One of those books isn’t yet published, so don’t rack your mind wondering if you missed a prologue somewhere.) I can’t even say that I hate all unnecessary prologues, because frankly I’m not sure if there’s any such thing as a truly crucial prologue. Even so, I have reluctantly been forced to admit that some prologues actually add to the story rather than detracting from it, even if they’re not strictly necessary. So all I can say now is: I hate badly written unnecessary prologues. Which is still going to cover most of ’em, imo.

I like most epilogues, though, but not if they do violence to the preceding story, which I think happens now and then. I grant you, epilogues are a matter of personal taste. The epilogue which has annoyed me most in the recent past was the one for UNDER HEAVEN by Guy Gavial Kay. Loved the book! But at the end, I was all, “My God, man, just write a second book and put all this epilogue stuff in that one!”

None of these are my REAL pet peeve, though.

My REAL pet peeve is stupid or ineffectual characters. The examples that leap to mind for me, right at the moment, and meaning no offense here, but way too many characters — not just the protagonist, but nearly everybody else, too — in EON and EONA, by Alison Goodman, were deeply, unbelievably stupid about recognizing and countering the big bad guy, and I couldn’t stand it. Yes the worldbuilding was good; yes, I like the alternate China-esque setting, but good Lord above, people, you might consider taking measures to protect yourselves from the bad guy you know perfectly well is planning t kill you all. Gave those two books to the library the day I finished them.

And I know, I know, Juliet Marillier is a great writer, okay? And usually I love her books. Really. But WILDWOOD DANCING, her retelling of The Twelve Dancing Princesses? Jena is not all that stupid, but she is totally ineffectual. Everything falls apart around her and she just stands there wringing her hands. I wanted to shake her and shout, “You’re the protagonist! Do something clever!”

How about you? What absolutely drives you nuts in a novel?

Please Feel Free to Share:

Here’s a nice list. Of course I’m sure there’re many many such lists around, but I do like this one.

What I like about this list:

The categories. Best Prose, Best Non-Dystopian Novel, Most Lyrical, Best For Highly Literate Children, Best Page-Turner, Best Slow Read — among other categories. I like the way these categories let me pay more attention to the types of books which would appeal to me (Most Lyrical) and gloss over the ones that probably wouldn’t (Best Book About Mean Girls).

This list is not especially for SFF, but there are a lot of SFF titles. Besides, every now and then I do read a contemporary YA story — usually because Ana at The Book Smugglers recommends them highly and so I make an exception. (So far I’ve always been happy I did.) So I’m more inclined than I might have been a few years ago to pick up one or two of the contemporary titles that made ths list.

Anyway, I’ve heard of a lot of the recommended titles, but I’ve read exactly . . . wait for it . . . one of them. Just one.

And I didn’t even like it all that much (Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children).

I have one other book from this list on my TBR pile (The Raven Boys). Just one. I feel so behind on my reading now!

I have quite a few of these titles on my Amazon wishlist — which I use as a supplementary memory so I don’t forget about them — and this list includes several others that I’m interested in and ought to either buy or add to my wishlist. For example, Bitterblue by Cashore — I heard such different things about it, and I think it might really appeal to me, though actually I’m one of the few who wasn’t so terribly blown away by Graceling. I haven’t even read the second one in the series, what was it called, Fire?

I have heard all these fabulous things about Seraphina , which is a debut by Rachel Hartman, and even more fabulous things about Code Name Verity, which is by Elizabeth Wein, who I already know is an amazing writer. They’re both on my must-read list, but I haven’t actually got them yet. I just read a review of Under The Never Sky (at Bunbury in the Stacks) that makes me want to read that one. I’ve heard of For Darkness Shows the Stars, by Diana Peterfreund — it’s supposed to be a retelling of Jane Austin’s Persuasion. Doesn’t that sound like a must-try?

And there’s yet another mention of Frances Hardinge here, whom I’ve never read, but evidently I really must. She’s MG, which normally I’m not too inclined to try, but she’s starting to sound like another DWJ, the way people rave about her.

So many books, so little time!

And to add a note of urgency, I believe nominations for the Hugo close in mid-March. I wonder if this gives me enough of an excuse to go ahead and pick up at least a couple of the SFF titles?

Please Feel Free to Share:

You just can’t beat this one! If you didn’t happen to run across it before, you really must follow the link and read it now! Warning: It’s quite long. But it’s really funny!

I never actually saw Avatar, and frankly after reading this parody, I have no special desire to see it, either. But the parody is just priceless. Enjoy!

Please Feel Free to Share:

A parody of “The Hobbit.”

I didn’t really like the movie very much . . . for me, it was nothing like as good as “The Lord of the Rings.” It didn’t stick as closely to the book as I thought it should and Jackson changed details where he didn’t need to, in ways that hurt the story. IMO.

And that fighting retreat from the goblin lair was totally, ridiculously unbelievable.

Although I must admit that I was charmed all to pieces by the bunny sled. That made up for a lot.

But whether you liked the movie or not, I hope you will appreciate this parody!

Please Feel Free to Share:

To someone who has previously focused mainly on MG and YA fantasy?

Charlotte of Charlotte’s Library requests suggestions, and this is exactly the sort of thing that is likely to make me zip downstairs to my own personal library and start selecting fabulous books that might fit the bill.

Note that Charlotte is specifically requestion relatively recent books. That makes it harder! I have LOTS of suggestions for books published a decade or more ago. She also asks for books that “are strong on character, and the characters are smart, often witty, and (if they are central characters) likable. …. These books are strong on setting, with lots of lovely details about place, and/or fascinating twists of world building (such as alternate histories) that really make the territory of the book an undiscovered country.”

As it happens, I think that it’s very likely that readers who love current YA generally are likely to prefer stories that are strong on character. I don’t think you often get a YA novel that emphasizes plot, ideas, or worldbuilding over character. A focus on character is very important to YA. And the characters do need to be likeable, generally. No Joe Abercrombe antiheros here, no characters who start off okay but become corrupted, no bad guys winning. Sure, we get semi-sociopaths like the John Cleaver in I AM NOT A SERIAL KILLER, but then John is a very likeable sociopath who, during the course of the trilogy, actually carves out a niche for himself that is solidly on the good-guy side of things.

In addition the the books Charlotte lists in her post, I would add:

Barbara Hambly, particularly BRIDE OF THE RAT GOD, THOSE WHO HUNT THE NIGHT, STRANGER AT THE WEDDING, and DRAGONSBANE. I think if you don’t like those, you definitely aren’t going to fall in love with Hambly! Granted, these may not meet the “relatively current” criterion, but I think they are perfect. So is —

Doris Egan, the trilogy starting with GATE OF IVORY. Egan never wrote much, but this is a wonderful trilogy that never got the attention it deserved. And one more —

Gillian Bradshaw. In my opinion, anybody who loves fantasy should think of trying historicals, and in particular this author.

Who do you all think belongs on a list of “adult fantasy novels that would appeal to adult readers of YA”?

Please Feel Free to Share: