Being a Better Writer: Being a Better Reader · 3:16am Jul 25th, 2014
Well, as I type this, I unfortunately cannot say that I have reached the end of my physical journey. In fact, as I type this I am still residing where I have been all this week: I've been trying to fly standby, and the only two flights out of my hometown have been full, full, full. So I'm still here. Almost a week past my expected return point.
Oh well. At least I'm at home with family, and I have access to a computer. Which means I can write. And in that vein, I've been able to finish another journey. This afternoon, the last of the side stories to Rise was linked to the alpha readers. Ooh-rah!
Which means after I finish writing out this blog post, I will be able to sit down and—after almost a year of planning—start writing the first opening chapters of "The Dusk Guard Saga: Beyond the Borderlands." Alpha readers get ready ... because it is coming. And it's going to be epic (totally an accurate and realistic use of that word, there, as well, since it actually IS an Epic).
So, this week's topic: Being a Better Reader.
As we might guess from the title, this topic doesn't just have to apply to writers. Being a better reader is something that most of us just take for granted, or hold to a flat, level interpretation, that interpretation being what our elementary-school educators would have called it: additional reading comprehension, moving up the grade levels, etc.
But learning to be a better reader in the context I wish to talk about isn't about comprehension of words or whether the book you're reading has chapters. And it isn't in the context of looking for themes and using various classes of criticism, either—though such things are certainly helpful. No, what I'm referring to is the kind of reader that works with what they are reading and works to approach the book from the authors own angle.
See, all to often it can become easy to—to be perfectly honest—become a bit of a literary snob when we're reading a lot of books. We start judging books on all sorts of criteria: how well they are written, how the characters act, the complexity of the plot, etc.
The problem starts when we begin judging a book on pretenses that the book is not written for or by, and begin to misjudge a well-written work because we've become too smart for our own good. Let me give an example.
For person X, it might be common knowledge that in order to safely shut down (and I'm coming up with this completely off the top of my head) an oil drilling rig, you have to execute a series of operations in a sequence of steps. They know that in order to prevent a catastrophic and dangerous explosion, these steps need to be done in a precise order.
Now suppose this person reads a book in which the heroes are on an oil drilling rig, go to shut it down, and do everything out of sequence. Person X, disgusted that the sequence that the author should have known about was not, declares the book to be not quite as good and sets the book down. Unfortunately for person X, not ten pages later, the effect of the incorrect steps is felt when the oil rig begins to—just as it should—explode in true action-adventure escape fashion.
The problem here is that the reader assumed themselves too smart for the book and outwitted themselves. And we see this happen with readers. They become so convinced that they understand what's coming (or perhaps know better than the characters) that they dismiss the author because of it, not realizing that correct or not, what they should be doing is giving themselves a pat on the back and continuing reading.
Another example: A common complain on low reviews of mystery novels (even the greats) is that the main characters are just not intelligent enough, because the case was clearly obvious. And while yes, the reader might have figured it out before the characters have, this is usually not because the mystery was too obvious or simple (though, in deference, this can be the case), but because the reader isn't approaching the book on its own terms. A book is like a movie. We are introduced to a cast of characters, select scenes and events—all chosen to highlight areas of interest, areas that we should already be looking at. One of the tenants of writing is that everything you write needs to have a purpose in the story, be it to establish scene or otherwise. With this focus, from our point of view things will be fairly obvious. No author writes in a scene that doesn't wind up being central to the plot. It either is a misdirection, a red herring, or—in some way—part of the main plot.
But from the characters point of view, things aren't that way. There's no "mystical narration" guiding them from scene to scene, drawing their attention to items of interest. To them, their day is more than just a collection of key scenes; it's a 24-hour period with all sorts of events, related and not, jumbled together. We have the advantage of being able to sift through only the important stuff.
When we consider this, and look at the work on the merits of the character, suddenly a little leniency becomes a little more vital. It's not that the main character isn't intelligent, it's that we ourselves are cheating.
Now, is there a line between poor plotting/writing/research and our own selves building false expectations? Yes, there is. But that's why as readers, we need to do better at realizing what those lines were. I don't find it unreasonable that the show The Walking Dead ruined itself for me when out of a dozen characters trapped in a department store, absolutely zero objected to one of them stating that there was "nothing to block to doors with" because there were a dozen characters present, and one of them should have been able to make the connection between department store and barricades. One character making the same call, however? Especially if it were a soccer mom or a cubicle dweller? I'd find that a lot more believable.
Being a better reader means we must approach a book on the terms of the book itself. It means forgetting, for a moment, that we're readers sitting far away in a comfortable chair or under the florescent lights of our boring night job. It means putting ourselves in the characters shoes, putting ourselves in that scene, and then remembering that this character is not us. That's why we need to cut authors some slack sometimes. Yes, there are poorly written books, or cases where the author didn't do the research, but sometimes there are also cases where the author did do the research and is purposefully putting something out there that is wrong, either to disguise something, be an unstable narrator, catch your attention, or any number of other things. This is why I continue on for a ways even when I'm tempted to turn away from a rough spot in a book—because it may in fact be a case of the author purposefully playing with things.
Of course, as writers, we need to be thinking about this too. The best writers will think about this in advance and take this kind of situation into consideration. It's not enough to be considering what our characters know. We have to consider what our readers know as well, in addition to what they might think and consider. I had to do this all through writing "Rise," and all through writing Dead Silver. As good writers, it is enough that we make sure everything works within our work. But as great writers, we also need to be keeping track of what our readers may be thinking, and when. This isn't an easy task, and thankfully, you don't have to be thinking about this to be a good writer. But it's something that can help you continue to be good and perhaps move towards great.
So, what can you do? Well, as a reader, be more conscious of what you're reading and the context of the world and characters. As a writer, pay attention to the same when you read, but also think about how certain scenes and ideas affect you. What tricks and techniques can you learn from your own experiences you have while reading someone else's work. What does how you or your friends react to a particular technique or story tell you about your own readers will react to a similar event in your own story?
This is the kind of thing that's tricky for us to think about, because it takes an effort to do, and we're all going to see what we're trying to look at through a slightly different lens.
But even then, working on our skills as readers can be just as beneficial to our path as a writer as putting the words down on paper can.
No writing prompt this week. Instead read something you hadn't before and keep at it when you'd be tempted to quit the first few times, asking yourself why that is, and what your own writing can do to avoid the same mistakes.
Good luck, all! And see you next week!
Just finished, and I agree with this completely!
~Make Life an Adventure~
Mr. Flare
Great advice. This is something I could probably improve on. I typically have very little tolerance for stupidity in stories I read (and in real life too, to be honest). So I'm sure that I do end up judging characters unnecessarily harsh sometimes.
Still, I've promised myself that when I do finally get around to writing a story, my characters will be subject to a fairly strict "no idiots" policy.
Oh, the irony. That's the kind of thing that would make me put down a book if I saw it anywhere near the first few chapters, since typically editors who don't catch an error like that will miss other, smaller ones which, by the law of averages, I'll see, and get annoyed by.
Hmm... I guess it could be a clever way of reinforcing what you've said, but if so, it went right over my head until I stopped to think for a moment.
Anyway, I agree completely. It's why I've made it a rule to give something a few chapters to keep me before putting it down.
And this is why I try to read something completely before praising or bashing it. There are only a few instances so far where I have had to stop reading a story. Most prominent so far is War and Peace, where I got lost without context and bored of the writing, and the Wheel of Time series, where I lost all sense of empathy for, what, over 90% of the cast. Feels so great when you can bash or praise a story with someone. "I knew it!" - a common quote.
I didn't really become a "bad" reader until I started trying to write stories myself. After that, and my immense dissatisfaction with my own progress, I'd go back to older stories I'd already read and become pretty disgusted over seeing a lot of the same mistakes I myself was making.
I'm a pretty messed up guy. I already put forth what is probably an unhealthy amount of psychological effort into losing myself in the narrative, and seeing things from the characters' point of view.
Sometimes, though, a story really is every bit as bad as that sinking pit in your stomach makes you think.
2314680 Matrim Cauthon was pretty much the only character I felt any degree of empathy for in the WoT series. Mostly just because he was the most likable one.
But my memory's a bit rusty. It's been a few years since I read the books, and I never did finish the series. I wonder how I'd feel about the characters nowadays. (I don't see myself liking Rand...well, ever.)
An interesting topic, and one I hadn't considered in this way before. It does remind me of something, though, which is the seemingly universal tendency to laugh at the failings of characters in horror stories while forgetting all the various creature comforts and advantages we as consumers of said stories have that make planning perfectly logical responses so much easier.
Also, I have begun preparing myself for the sequel proper to Rise. My body will be ready.
2314680 2314950
WoT is actually one of the few series where I felt the characters really paid off for me. A large degree of them were unlikeable in the beginning—they were young, stupid, and inexperienced. But then as the series moved on and they got their comeuppances, grew, and developed, they got a little more tolerable (and in some cases became awesome).
Except Mat. He starts out kind of cool and never stops getting funnier and crazier.
2314069
Whoops! Fixed!
2316656
That said, as the skill of the protagonist (or numbers thereof) goes up, my suspension of disbelief goes down.
2318121 Phew. If you'd thought 'quite' was the right word, I mighta had to... UNFOLLOW
Because that totally matters in the slightest.
Mat sounds like a really close friend of mine. That friend's name is Matt.
...I might need to read this series.
It also sounds like a great study in character design. Maybe I could learn! Hah. I'll still never be a very good writer.
2318121 True. The more crazily competent a protagonist is the crazier the story needs to be to match, IMO.
In fact, while we're on the subject can I request you do a column on how characters do not and should not need incredible power/skill sets to be interesting? It's something I notice particularly with the pony fandom and action-adventure fics especially. Given your pedigree here I think you're one of the best qualified folks on the site to do a column on it.
2318121 To be honest, a large part of my hangups with the WoT series is the pacing. How many books, how many hundreds of thousands (maybe even millions) of words did we have to wait for a certain protagonist to stop hating himself as he moped about like an angst-ridden teenager glued to a bench in the mall, glaring at passersby and contemplating another repeat visit to a curio shop that specialized in black clothing, zippers, and spiky wristbands? When said protagonist finally pulled his head out and kicked his angst in its rump, I'm fairly certain I actually shouted, "Finally!"
Probably with a few modifying expletives, knowing me.
Then again, it's been a few years since I read the books. I figure part of being a "good reader" should always be revisiting old favorites or things that might not have been your cup o' tea in the past. I actually kinda wonder how I'd view the characters in the WoT series nowadays.
Except for Rand. Seriously, screw him and his black fingernail polish.
2318127 If you've read one affable, roguish charmer that's also incredibly capable, you've read 'em all.
'Cept for Mat. He does it in style. And you should definitely give The Wheel of Time series a look. I may gripe about some aspects of it, but it's still one of my favorite series outside of anything written by Brandon Sanderson.
2318408
Added to the list. Not only can I do it. but I can throw some nice examples in with it to cover the line of reasoning!
2318127
Character design ... maybe, maybe not. I would argue that it's certainly much better at world and culture design than character design, at least until Sanderson took over the series and brought his capabilities to play.
2320132
I will be honest, the WoT does have plenty of weaknesses, and Rand's dual-identity issues, along with some other things, really do get dragging at a few points early on. Then we get into some stuff in book six and seven that brings his quasi PTSD to the forefront, which can make it better or worse depending on the read.
WoT is definitely a "Your Mileage May Vary" series.
2321130 Sorry, not character design -- I meant character evolution. That is, how characters change and learn over time. My bad.
I'm not good with literary terms.
2321130 *quietly squees with happiness*