I'm taking Thursday and Friday off this week to try to get some order to the new house. Right now, we're constantly stumbling over boxes and searching for things that turn out to be nowhere near where we thought they were. I will, of course, continue to work on the sequel (over two pages again today...but then again my plan to get up fifteen minutes earlier didn't work) and my outline for the mystery project. After all, my birthday (and deadline) is less than a month away. So, I'll likely be internet-less until Monday.
Anybody else out there read Linda Fairstein's books? I think they're great. They're police procedurals that remind me of early Patricia Cornwell. I just finished the latest one last night, Entombed. My only complaint is that the URST (an abbreviation for unresolved sexual tension that I picked up from reading gossip columns about television shows, I think) between the main character Alexandra Cooper and the detective she works with, Mike Chapman, is driving me crazy. It's so subtle, sometimes I wonder if I'm imagining it. But then another character, usually one of Alex's friends will call her on her very close friendship with Mike and she'll deny any deeper feelings toward him. And yet...there are all these little hints. I guess what I want to know is...Is this going somewhere? I don't mind if it isn't--I like the stories anyway. But I don't want to get all emotionally invested in this potential relationship, only to have nothing EVER happen or to have one of them finally say, it would never work (even though we're clearly the best of friends and wildly attracted to one another) because it would destroy our friendship. And for the other person to accept it, just like that. Arrrrggggh. I'm absolutely certain that all of this ambiguity is intentional because the characters themselves are very gun-shy when it comes to relationships and because once you write that relationship into being it might take away a very nice source of tension. A'la Moonlighting once David and Maddie hooked up. But please, please, Ms. Fairstein, give me a hint about which way this going to go.
In the meantime, you know I'm going to keep eagerly anticipating the books, hoping for more clues...which is probably exactly what *they* want me to do.
I'm so easily manipulated, especially when it comes to "romance against the odds" or "romance against better judgement." You know, getting involved with someone you work with, a vampire slayer getting involved with a vampire(s), someone much younger falling for someone who's much older, falling in love with someone from another species... Good stuff : )
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Very interesting...
I have a similar thing going on in my current W.I.P. Two "friends" whose relationship has "undercurrents." My writing partner has pointed out that to her anyway, the attraction is obvious. (Of course, she's privy to a lot of backstory.)
I'm a big fan of friends who become lovers, but I don't want these two characters to go there anytime soon.
So I'm left wondering, should I water down the attraction even more? Will it drive readers crazy or will it give them a reason to read more?
Very interesting...
Hope some of your life is now out of boxes.
Hi Pat!
I think that kind of "will they or won't they" thing can be done very well and works to keep readers interested. But I think there's a limit to some readers' patience for it. I've heard of other readers who won't read Janet Evanovich's books any more because she'll never have Stephanie decide between Joe and Ranger. It'll always be hanging out there.
So, I think some ambiguity is good, especially in a series. But when it's dragging out five, six books without a decision one way or the other, or even some back and forth movement, it can drive some people crazy. Like me, apparently. : ) (Though I still love Evanovich..so, go figure.)
Zara and Caelan have the start of a relationship in The Silver Spoon. But there are troubles, lots of them, ahead. Both of them have changing to do, if it's ever going to work between them...and that's just personality-wise, let alone the whole physical/metaphysical stuff. So, there's some ambiguity about where their relationship is headed and whether it will work. In my opinion, at least.
The best advice I ever heard about writing a series is from Diana Gabaldon, I believe. You never know for sure that your series will be continued beyond the first book, so try to end in a place where your readers will be okay with the ending. They won't feel cheated or left hanging.
Don't know if any of my rambling helps, but that's my two cents, anyway! : )
Two cents noted and appreciated.
I'm trying to make each novel as "stand-alone" as possible, and writing the second as though the first is just backstory. Backstory that only I am privy to.
I love J. Evanovich, but I do think some of her latest books don't have the energy of the first 4 or 5. The Morelli/Ranger triangle is part of the problem, but an even bigger issue, IMO, is that she's overworking a schtick. Seems a danger anytime a series goes beyond six books or so.
I imagine it's a problem with any series with no definite stopping point. How to keep things fresh while still keeping the style and flavor that attracted fans in the first place.
>So, there's some ambiguity about where their relationship is headed and whether it will work.
So like hurry up and write the book already. Wink, wink
Characters always do things that take you by surprise...and when that happens...let them.
Post a Comment