Out and about

[ksmith]

Took out the bike this morning. A shade over 7 miles, over neighborhood streets and roads through the local marina and state park. Saw a chipmunk for the first time in a while--we used to have quite a few living around the house because Dad used to feed them, but they're gone now. Could have been lack of food, though I tend to blame the increase in the number of feral cats.

Also saw sandpipers. Played "Spot the Jaguar" down by the marina, a game usually reserved for train rides into Chicago. That version is very simple--you just watch out the window at each train stop, and look for Jags in the commuter lots and nearby intersections. As one passes through the North Shore towns--Glencoe, Kenilworth, Winnetka, etc.--that level loses its challenge, and we go to the next level, namely "Spot the Rolls." If you manage to spot one, you have to go to the next level, which is "Spot the Bentley." Over the years, I have managed to spot a Rolls. I think I may have seen a Bentley as well, but non-car person that I am, I may have confused it with a Rolls.

ANYway, spotted 2 Jaguar sedans at the marina.

Still a little dodgy on the timing and degree of gear-shifting, but getting better.

It's supposed to be sweltering today. It's already hot--83F (23C), and expected to hit the mid-90s (35C-ish). Humid. NO rain in sight. *phfft*

Current book: Elizabeth Kostova's THE HISTORIAN. Enjoying it so far, although it's a slow starter. Atmosphere-dependent, but I'm enjoying the descriptions of Eastern European and Middle Eastern cities and towns. The main complaint I have so far is one I've seen in reviews, namely that there are 3 POVS, and it is sometimes hard to tell whose head you're in at the start of a scene. Maybe that's just the way it is--without headers as signposts or some other indicator, the reader just needs to take a moment to figure it out.

One thing I'm pondering. THE HISTORIAN is horror, at least imho, that was marketed to a mainstream audience. JONATHAN STRANGE & MR. NORRELL is fantasy that's being steered the same way. Granted, I'm still in the middle of one and have yet to read the other, but from all I've read and seen, they're both fairly leisurely-paced books. No real point at this point, except that leisurely isn't a term I think of when I think of pacing.

Comments

[ccfinlay.livejournal.com]

The main complaint I have so far is one I've seen in reviews, namely that there are 3 POVS, and it is sometimes hard to tell whose head you're in at the start of a scene. Maybe that's just the way it is--without headers as signposts or some other indicator, the reader just needs to take a moment to figure it out.

Nah. There are pretty easy ways for an author to make it clear which POV you're in without resorting to headers. Lois McMaster Bujold's multiple POV books, for example, don't use headers or other signposts, and yet there's never any doubt who's POV it is from the first sentence, or at most first paragraph, of the scene.

There can be thematic, structural, or narrative reasons for leaving the POV unclear -- one thinks of the unclear POV in the duel that ends Guy Gavriel Kay's Lions of Al'Rassan as an example of all three. But since there are trade-offs, it ought to add something to the story rather than frustrate the reader. Even though Kay's choice makes perfect sense thematically, in particular, I heard readers say they threw the book at the wall at that point and decided never to read Kay again.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

One issue I see is that all three characters spend most of their time in the same places--libraries, flats, the same cities. They have the same backgrounds, are all academics, and are battling the same bogey. As the story is unfurling, they are all feeling threatened at the same time, and the deaths that take place at this point in the book are very similar. This may be the intent of the author, to show the same types of characters meeting the same threats over a span of three generations. If so, I would think you would need to make the effort to differentiate character a little more. As an aside, two POVs are middle aged men, but one is a woman who ages over the course of the story from teenage to adult, so there should be more opportunity to differentiate. But as I said, I am still in the first 1/4 of the book, and the woman had lost her mother at a young age and was raised in a rarified academic environment. I can see her attaining the patina of maturity at an early age.

One problem could be that I read this book in spurts, usually at night when my attention span is not at its best. I could be missing things. Some books are not meant to be read in spurts.

I confess that I had this same problem with Stephen Fry's THE LIAR. I loved this book, but the story timeshifted between the protag's public school days and his adult life, and I sometimes had to stop and figure out which head I was in. I've seen this in BritLit. It's sometimes worse in romance novels, where I've seen POV shifts within the same scene. Maybe I lack flexibility, but that bugs me.

I can sense the growing dread, though. Letting out the dog at 1am hasn't provoked this level of creeps since my first viewing of "Hush". Overall, I'm enjoying TH, but it's not a waltz among the flowers.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

In other words, the characters speak with very similar voices. This realization hit me after I posted my comment, of course.

[torrilin.livejournal.com]

For the POV thing, in romance it's sloppy writing, or very careful braided viewpoint because they want you to identify with both main characters. My general judgement is if you can figure out what is going on and really care about both mains and don't get confused, it's the latter. If you want to toss the book against the wall, it's the former. Romance is very much about the story of how two people fall in love, and while you *can* tell that story from one point of view, these days it's unusual. Dunno how realistic it is... in real life you only ever know your side.

As far as pacing goes, I tend to prefer faster pacing. I grew up reading short stories, both in anthologies and in magazines, and once I shifted to novels it was mostly the very short golden age SF. Those all share the trait of a very fast pace. For a long time, Alexei Panshin's Rite of Passage was my benchmark for "slow" pacing. I've gradually gained appreciation for slower, but there are times where something slow will just drive me up the wall. And not in a good way.

Jani I think doesn't know the meaning of slow even if it hit her over the head with a 2*4.

[kristine-smith.livejournal.com]

Jani I think doesn't know the meaning of slow even if it hit her over the head with a 2*4.

That's reassuring because when I've been laboring over the same chapter for well over a week, I lose perspective. I assume the pace is glacial bordering on geological. Then I read the pages later and realize that maybe things aren't quite that bad.

Writing a leisurely-paced book runs counter to so much I've been taught about writing, be it novels, or genre, or plain adventure. If the midden doesn't hit the windmill in the first chapter, I mean really, what the hell are you waiting for? I often lost patience with one beloved writer because as much as I liked her books, it seemed as though nothing much happened in the first 5 chapters. If I put down one of her books at that point, I had no interest in picking it up again. But if I made it into Chapter 6, it was a whole 'nother story.

Maybe I'm doomed to genre mindset. Maybe this mindset will prevent me from attempting truly breakthrough fiction because I'm more concerned about hitting all the genre marks, whether they be mystery, adventure, or whatever. Maybe not knowing that (insert fave genre here) is supposed to follow a certain prescribed pattern offers a better chance.

Knowing which rules you're breaking, or not. No clue at this point as to which may be the better path.