LACK OF CHARACTER

[Beyle]

LACK OF CHARACTER

Sean, here:

Re the lack of character in mystery/thriller genre, to me it seems that the Americn culture had been infantilized and monstrous summs of money have been used and made in accomplishing it, creating a comic book culture. Hollywood makes film after film based on comic books and they sell. A few years ago Yogi Berra (granted, a sweet guy)was the only person in America who would be seen readimg one on a bus(an old story about that). Now they and all their shabby equivilents are hugely embedded throughout the adult poplation.

It used to be said that only crimminals and children wanted instant gratification, now evryone wants explosions and massacres one after the other. Friends in the film industry, where many of the executives these days come from Ivy League schools,want the whole story dumped in the first act, leaving the writer nowhere to go. Aristotle twirling in his urn People who teach writing in all venues say their students are terribly ill-read and even border-line illiterate.

One last comment and then I'Ill get out of the park. Ignore the fashionable, the well-sold, try early LeCarre', Furst, Simenon, the latter Graham Greene's and a helluva lot more. Believe it or not, Blazac wrote several novels about one of the best arch-villains in literature.

Sorry, I've been a bit windy. I apologize, Sounding off keeps my hair from falling out.

[desertgrandma]

Welcome to MobileRead, Beyle

Take a moment, and click on the 'introduce yourself' link below, open a new thread, and join us.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by Beyle

LACK OF CHARACTER

Sean, here:

Re the lack of character in mystery/thriller genre, to me it seems that the Americn culture had been infantilized and monstrous summs of money have been used and made in accomplishing it, creating a comic book culture. Hollywood makes film after film based on comic books and they sell. A few years ago Yogi Berra (granted, a sweet guy)was the only person in America who would be seen readimg one on a bus(an old story about that). Now they and all their shabby equivilents are hugely embedded throughout the adult poplation.

It used to be said that only crimminals and children wanted instant gratification, now evryone wants explosions and massacres one after the other. Friends in the film industry, where many of the executives these days come from Ivy League schools,want the whole story dumped in the first act, leaving the writer nowhere to go. Aristotle twirling in his urn People who teach writing in all venues say their students are terribly ill-read and even border-line illiterate.

One last comment and then I'Ill get out of the park. Ignore the fashionable, the well-sold, try early LeCarre', Furst, Simenon, the latter Graham Greene's and a helluva lot more. Believe it or not, Blazac wrote several novels about one of the best arch-villains in literature.

Sorry, I've been a bit windy. I apologize, Sounding off keeps my hair from falling out.

Why blame comic books?

Yes, some of them are simple and poorly written, others are very complex and well written. It's just another medium, no different than prose or poetry, and with its own strengths and weaknesses.

Read Watchmen, Maus, Fables, Sandman. Brilliant work has been done in the form.

But welcome, anyway.

[Steven Lake]

You'll have good and bad writers in every genre. It's just a fact of life. Heck, I spent three years as the chief editor of my own site, and you wouldn't believe the amount of really scary stuff that passed across my desk in that time. Wow. I had some articles from some authors that was so outstanding I just stopped even bothering to edit their stuff because I never had to. Others, well, they kinda got the brush hog treatment, or were outright rejected. So yeah, what you see in the comic book world is no different than anywhere else.

[sportourer1]

Popular thrillers ahve become too plot centric so that the characters just ride the wave.

[sportourer1]

Gaming culture is partly to blame I suspect

[Worldwalker]

Thrillers have been around much longer than "gaming culture."

It's not gaming, or comic books, or whatever you personally don't participate in, that's to blame. It's the fact that a lot of people want a quick fix -- fast food is another example -- and don't want to settle down and tease that entertainment out of something long and involved.

For that matter, look at the original post in this thread. It's riddled with errors: misspellings, missing and incorrect punctuation, verb tense disagreement, and others. The poster didn't think it was worth taking the time to check his post and correct these. Never mind that log in his own eye; he had a mote in his neighbor's eye to point out.

People have been convinced that they are supposed to live in a state of constant excitement. Look at the all-pervasive advertising: even sliced bread is described as "exciting". That's possibly the most overused word in advertising. Everything is exciting; everyone should always be excited. There's no room in this fast-paced culture of excitement and multi-tasking for quiet contentment, or even simple relaxation.

Fast-paced, shallow stories -- whatever their medium -- are a symptom of that culture. People don't want thrillers because they play games or read comic books (both of which, by the way, can include stories much deeper and more complex than your average thriller). People want thrillers, and their equivalents in other media, because they want quick excitement. They're told they should be excited all the time. The culture around them encourages them to do many things in short bursts. And so they do.

(and they drive us WoW players crazy, because they beg for gold and gear, want to go on raids without studying strategies, and expect other people to take their damp little hands and lead them through quests, but that's another story entirely)

[sportourer1]

I have to agree, the number of people who have told me that my novel begins too slowly are legion. If it were a printed novel, I think the first violent clash of arms would take place on page 5/6. In those first pages the lead character is established and the histroical contex set but that is too slow for many modern readers - weird. As it is set in 1798 it must frustrate them that the central character has top travel at 7 miles an hour on a sailing boat.

[Lemurion]

Originally Posted by sportourer1

I have to agree, the number of people who have told me that my novel begins too slowly are legion. If it were a printed novel, I think the first violent clash of arms would take place on page 5/6. In those first pages the lead character is established and the histroical contex set but that is too slow for many modern readers - weird. As it is set in 1798 it must frustrate them that the central character has top travel at 7 miles an hour on a sailing boat.

Sadly, you're right. Four pages establishing character and context is too much for modern readers. To succeed with modern audiences it's much better to start with a character in conflict and use that conflict to illuminate both character and setting.

Please note I'm not saying you need violence on page one - I'm suggesting that you introduce a dramatic conflict and start ratcheting up the tension as early as possible.

In modern fiction it's best to give us a reason to care about the character before you've finished introducing them. It gives readers with short attention spans a reason to turn the page.

[Worldwalker]

Originally Posted by sportourer1

As it is set in 1798 it must frustrate them that the central character has top travel at 7 miles an hour on a sailing boat.

It doesn't matter if the central character is traveling 7 miles an hour on a sailing boat or 7 parsecs an hour on a superluminal spacecraft. What matters is how long that character is being presented to the reader, and what he's doing during that time. Do we learn that he wants to kill a rival right away, or do we learn every thought he has about his entire life? The sailboat fellow could be thinking about killing his rival on the other side of the bay in the next couple of pages, while the starship fellow could be thinking about his entire existence as he travels across the galaxy for most of the book.

It comes down to knowing your audience. If your audience wants immediate action, then you give them immediate action, whether it's in 1798 or 2798. If your audience wants a deep and comprehensive introduction to the character, you give them that introduction, again no matter what the setting of the story. If you don't want to write what that audience wants to read, you need to be writing for someone else, because your market isn't going to change for you; it's going to ignore you.

You can write a stone-age thriller, or a classic Russian novel set a thousand years in the future. The setting serves the story; it doesn't control it.

[ValSanders]

There is always a perception that things used to be better.

That being said, I think that it is probably true that a certain amount of the 'instant gratification culture' is present in books these days. You know what though?

That isn't anyone's fault but the people who buy books. Publishers can only sell what people will buy.

[sportourer1]

Too true but the people can be re-educated. The revolution will start with the breaking of Simon Cowell on a gun carriage and then the world can move on

[queentess]

Originally Posted by Worldwalker

People have been convinced that they are supposed to live in a state of constant excitement. Look at the all-pervasive advertising: even sliced bread is described as "exciting". That's possibly the most overused word in advertising. Everything is exciting; everyone should always be excited. There's no room in this fast-paced culture of excitement and multi-tasking for quiet contentment, or even simple relaxation.

I think the phrase you're looking for here is TOTALLY EXTREME!!!!

[queentess]

Originally Posted by Beyle

LACK OF CHARACTER
Re the lack of character in mystery/thriller genre, to me it seems that the Americn culture had been infantilized and monstrous summs of money have been used and made in accomplishing it, creating a comic book culture. Hollywood makes film after film based on comic books and they sell. A few years ago Yogi Berra (granted, a sweet guy)was the only person in America who would be seen readimg one on a bus(an old story about that). Now they and all their shabby equivilents are hugely embedded throughout the adult poplation.

So. Many. Spelling. Mistakes. ! I'm also failing to see why you think comic books are so terrible, aside from the fact that you apparently don't enjoy them. That does not mean they are poorly done, nor does it mean they are "infantile". Just another old geezer bemoaning "the way things used to be"... Back in my day, everyone gathered at grandma's house on Sundays while papa read Shakespeare out loud around a log fire! And we loved it! And we were given oranges for Christmas, and it was the most expensive gift we could afford! And we worked out in the fields from sunrise to sunset with no breaks! Get over yourself. Our advances in society have resulted in more leisure time, and *shock* people like to use that time for doing things they enjoy. Like reading books.

Originally Posted by sportourer1

I have to agree, the number of people who have told me that my novel begins too slowly are legion. If it were a printed novel, I think the first violent clash of arms would take place on page 5/6. In those first pages the lead character is established and the histroical contex set but that is too slow for many modern readers - weird. As it is set in 1798 it must frustrate them that the central character has top travel at 7 miles an hour on a sailing boat.

Yeah, no. Saying it "begins slowly" usually just means there's nothing to draw you into the story. It does not mean "I need fast-paced action immediately and throughout the entire book". Many books take time to build up characters, and that's expected and typically desired (depending on your audience). But there has to be some sort of point to the book, something that the characters are trying to achieve, and that should be revealed fairly early in the book.

Myself and many other people usually have a page limit, and if we're not pulled into the story by that page, we put down the book and never look back with regrets. For an unknown author, my limit is usually 50 pages; for an author I've enjoyed in the past, my rule of thumb is "The Stephen King 100" (named for the author who inspired the guideline).

Top speed of 7 mph won't matter if the story is engaging. If it's just "and they sat on the boat" for several pages, then yes, that's boring. But if the characters are talking and thinking and jumping around the boat to pull lines and move tillers... that's what people want to read.

[queentess]

Originally Posted by Lemurion

Sadly, you're right. Four pages establishing character and context is too much for modern readers. To succeed with modern audiences it's much better to start with a character in conflict and use that conflict to illuminate both character and setting.

Please note I'm not saying you need violence on page one - I'm suggesting that you introduce a dramatic conflict and start ratcheting up the tension as early as possible.

In modern fiction it's best to give us a reason to care about the character before you've finished introducing them. It gives readers with short attention spans a reason to turn the page.

I'd agree with this, but I think it's for different reasons than you do. I don't want to be completely "introduced" to a character and THEN have the conflict introduced. The entire book should be an introduction to the character! Don't tell me in the first few pages "he was an honest man, and he was nice to puppies and little old ladies"... instead, just toss me into the story and let me learn about the world and characters through their interaction with one another. How the character responds to other characters and situations will tell me more about him than any "introduction" ever could. In short: Show, don't tell.