Thursday, August 9, 2018

That's All Folks (for Now)

Well, that's it for Rise of Azraea, Book II. The last of the epilogue went up at 7:00 am this morning. Both Books I & II are now available to read for free, in their entirety, on this blog.

I'm glad the timing worked out the way it did; I needed a break so that I can focus on getting my dissertation ready to defend on September 14th. Roughly concurrent with my defense prep, I have another research paper to finish on compersion and jealousy.

After that, I'm not sure. I have a long list of projects at this point:
- Audio record RoA1 and RoA2
- Provide feedback on Pigs of Kaidan, an unpublished novel.
- Heavily revise Wild Justice
- Consider some Wild Justice short stories
- Finish first draft of Nemesis
- Outline sequel to Wild Justice/Nemesis
- Convert RoA2 blog posts into a publishable document, edit it, and put it on Amazon.
- Assemble the hodgepodge of scenes I've written for RoA3 into something resembling an outline, and then actually write RoA3.

7 comments:

  1. Alright. I had my coffee, the heat wave is done with; the weekend is imminent ... time to comment!

    Thanks for writing and posting this. And for bothering with proofreading and other pesky things (or just being able to write without adding a billion typos, whichever).

    So, now that I'm done with the pretending to be a normal, polite person, let's get to the ranting portion of the comment ...

    Actually, there's really only two new things to say. I think largely I just stand by what I complained about last time—like the too easy challenges, that I would've liked to have seen more depth in terms of character development and so on. I'm not going into that again.

    On the mundane sort of problems, there's also one or two smaller areas where I think a bit of polish could be applied before publishing—for example, in one of those quote/tidbit things you once make a comparison using hunters as an example of lazy people. I got what you wanted to say, but it just came across as very forced; they are typically associated with a lot of things but certainly not with laziness and definitely not before rifles.
    And a bunch of small oversights; like the formatting for one paragraph somewhere was broken and I think once or twice a sentence had an adverb doubled and so on.

    But, well, those are a matter of going over things again, or really not all that important; no real problem.

    Onto the really subjective stuff ^^;

    You wrote a bit about the final battle and plans and luck and improvisation. And I technically agree with it; although I also don't: the protagonist makes plans, the antagonist also makes plans. It's obvious that neither plan could work to perfection as it's impossible to perfectly predict what anyone will do. Having things go into a completely random direction is usually unsatisfying, I agree. Having everything work out perfectly however is equally unsatisfying, unless it feels warranted.

    That's why we have such great rivalries as Moriarty vs Holmes (well, not so much in the originals perhaps). Or, in a wider scope, stuff like Weber's Manticore vs the Republic. Sometimes Honor surprises her enemies. Sometimes her enemies surprise her. Most of the time they surprise each other in some ways.

    But while I maintain that everything was too easy and how the final battle (and the confrontation at the castle) played out was part of that, I wouldn't per se say it did much to dampen my enjoyment of the story.

    And that's down to how the tone of the story felt to me. In Baru Cormorant, the heroine also tries to free her country. But it's gritty, and dark; with barely any clear lines drawn. Once somebody gets captured, you expect Very Bad Things(tm) to happen. You expect betrayals, and deaths, and twists … and a heavy price by everybody involved to pay for the heroine to achieve her goals. If she even manages to achieve them!

    Great novel, but nothing at all like this one.

    Those are just not the concerns I had when reading this. Dragon is evil, it's going down, no doubt. And Azraea and Co are all good and they are all going to survive and most likely without anything too bad happening to them. Although it's not all sunshine and flowers, it feels kinda "wish fulfilment"-ish (and I don't mean that negatively) in that a bunch of heroes just go to kick ass and incidentally also getting to rule a country at the end of it. It was a bit of escapism for me; "it'd be nice if the world were like that" sort of thing.

    I don't always need some super-depressing grimdark stuff. I can read the news for that. Sometimes I just want the heroes to win.

    The one thing that does not fit into that view of the novel is the Gnomen Empire. You kinda try to argue for them being decent enough people, but I can't help but view them as the US meddling in other countries at its worst, and at the point of them being prepared to blow up the city I put them firmly in the "evil" territory; a view you don't agree with, presumably.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ... So frankly Azraea's decision at the end soured the novel for me. The heroes don't win. The evil ones won. It's a bit of a "well, the cake was a lie" moment. In Baru Cormorant, that sort of compromise wouldn't have had me bat an eye—heck, it might have felt too positive for the series. But here? Urk.

      And it's just so important to feel satisfied with how stuff ends.

      So that's one thing, and then there's Epilogue 3, which I prefer to pretend doesn't exist. Sexually-threatening chauvinist male antagonist out of nowhere? Nope, nope, nope. Don't want, don't care; been there too many times. Much as it's often satisfying when they finally get what they deserve it's just so … like, how often do you have a sexually-threatening female antagonist when you have a male protagonist? They exist, of course, but you don't have to suffer them in like, literally, every series …

      So that's that ;)

      Good luck with your other projects and publishing this one and also your real-life stuff; mustn't forget about that pesky part of life, of course. Thanks again for posting the story o7

      Delete
  2. I was hoping you’d have a final review – it’s more feedback than I get from anyone else, and greatly appreciated.

    “Thanks for writing and posting this. And for bothering with proofreading and other pesky things (or just being able to write without adding a billion typos, whichever).“
    Definitely proofreading. When I write a first draft it’s pretty horrendous.

    “On the mundane sort of problems, there's also one or two smaller areas where I think a bit of polish could be applied before publishing—for example, in one of those quote/tidbit things you once make a comparison using hunters as an example of lazy people. I got what you wanted to say, but it just came across as very forced; they are typically associated with a lot of things but certainly not with laziness and definitely not before rifles.”

    I do disagree, at least so far as how Kaira would see it. Hunting is about killing, but lacks the glory and degree of risk one braves in warfare. Kaira would have initially seen it as a means-to-an-end (getting food) but not as something especially brag-worthy (not compared to going axe to axe with someone on blood soaked battlefield, anyway). Part of her character development, though, was embracing a more pragmatic view of the world, where results (who you kill) matter more than the means (how you kill them). In the context of real world military history/folklore, the armies guided by a philosophy of heroism get the accolades (think Greeks vs. Trojans in the Iliad), but the armies led by hunters are the ones that get things done. Baron Richthoffen’s success in WWI partly had to do with his hunter mentality, and the foundation of the U.S. Military’s approach to warfare is embodied in the phrase, “Good hunting”. That’s what I was trying to go for – using traps, ambush tactics, and superior technology, hunters succeed by working smarter (and safer) than their prey.

    “And a bunch of small oversights; like the formatting for one paragraph somewhere was broken and I think once or twice a sentence had an adverb doubled and so on.”

    The paragraph thing irritates the heck out of me, as I tried to fix it many times, but to no avail. Blogger’s text input doesn’t actually have indents – either via rulers or tabs – so that formatting has to be carried over from Word, which (for some reason) it doesn’t do consistently.

    ReplyDelete
  3. “You wrote a bit about the final battle and plans and luck and improvisation. And I technically agree with it; although I also don't: the protagonist makes plans, the antagonist also makes plans. It's obvious that neither plan could work to perfection as it's impossible to perfectly predict what anyone will do. Having things go into a completely random direction is usually unsatisfying, I agree. Having everything work out perfectly however is equally unsatisfying, unless it feels warranted.”

    I had hoped that Syliva’s decision to make herself queen and raise an army would be a sufficient curveball for the heroes to deal with, but that worked better when this was the last third of the first book. As a separate book, that disruption in the plan happens so early in the story that the heroes can easily plan around it, and it doesn’t at all contribute to the dramatic tension in the long run, sadly.

    “That's why we have such great rivalries as Moriarty vs Holmes (well, not so much in the originals perhaps). Or, in a wider scope, stuff like Weber's Manticore vs the Republic. Sometimes Honor surprises her enemies. Sometimes her enemies surprise her. Most of the time they surprise each other in some ways."

    Although I knew Vander’s entrance would ruffle some feathers, I’m hoping that he’ll shape up a lot more like Azraea’s Moriarity, where Syliva did not. Syliva was Caelia’s enemy, while Vander is Azraea’s enemy. He’s smarter than Syliva, and his motivations are going to be a bit more complicated.

    “Those are just not the concerns I had when reading this. Dragon is evil, it's going down, no doubt. And Azraea and Co are all good and they are all going to survive and most likely without anything too bad happening to them. Although it's not all sunshine and flowers, it feels kinda "wish fulfilment"-ish (and I don't mean that negatively) in that a bunch of heroes just go to kick ass and incidentally also getting to rule a country at the end of it. It was a bit of escapism for me; "it'd be nice if the world were like that" sort of thing… I don't always need some super-depressing grimdark stuff. I can read the news for that. Sometimes I just want the heroes to win.”

    That’s 100% what I was going for. Many of the problems have real world parallels, but I thought people would appreciate an escapist story in which relatable problems were not insurmountable (although killing Syliva only started things along that track).

    “The one thing that does not fit into that view of the novel is the Gnomen Empire. You kinda try to argue for them being decent enough people, but I can't help but view them as the US meddling in other countries at its worst, and at the point of them being prepared to blow up the city I put them firmly in the "evil" territory; a view you don't agree with, presumably.”

    It didn’t occur to me that any of the readers would feel that way, but I’m kind of glad that you do. I hope that it makes Vaerla’s concerns (and those of other individuals to be introduced) a bit more relatable, and Azraea’s decision-making process a bit less infallible. I do disagree that the Gnomans are solidly evil – the decision to destroy Kingstown was a last resort for Verax, and made based on the belief that his responsibility to protect citizens of the empire outweighed his desire to protect citizens of a foreign country, so if anything I consider Verax and the Empire he serves to be firmly in the ‘Lawful Neutral’ territory. Its intervention in Caelia’s politics is indeed inspired by the U.S.’s historic meddling in other countries (and generally the meddling of every superpower in other countries’ affairs) as well as its proclivity for ‘liberating’ them, though I hope that in the end that dynamic comes out representing our international policy both at its worst and at its best. I’m definitely looking forward to introducing ‘Thessaly’, her son, and unpacking Verax’s relationship with them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. “So that's one thing, and then there's Epilogue 3, which I prefer to pretend doesn't exist. Sexually-threatening chauvinist male antagonist out of nowhere? Nope, nope, nope. Don't want, don't care; been there too many times. Much as it's often satisfying when they finally get what they deserve it's just so … like, how often do you have a sexually-threatening female antagonist when you have a male protagonist? They exist, of course, but you don't have to suffer them in like, literally, every series …”

    I guessed that’s how people would feel about a stalkery vampire ex, but hopefully Vander will surprise people when he actually gets to do his thing. Vander plays up the chauvinist masculine sexual domination thing in that scene because he knows it will push Azraea’s buttons, and Azraea makes it very clear that she’s already reached a point in her life where she won’t be pushed around that easily. The woman-finding-her-power-to-give-abusive-man-the-boot was a cliché character arc I really didn’t want to do – especially after Azraea just spent several weeks fighting a small war. That’s part of the reason I had her castrate him almost right off the bat, to send the message that that ship has sailed, and the doubts and emotional conflict Azraea will feel when dealing with him will come from a very different place.

    And since the direct approach is no longer going to work now that Azraea’s found her power, Vander’s mindset and approach to things in Book III is actually going to be more feminine (heavily inspired by a friend’s abusive exwife, actually). It won’t be a stretch for Vander to think that way; the one man Azraea’s ever really loved was certainly not a macho lughead. Ultimately, Vander’s most harmful actions will be focused on relational attacks rather than direct violence. He could (maybe) assault and kill Azraea anytime he wanted to, but he doesn’t want to, and Azraea knows he doesn’t want to – it’s antithetical to his obsession.

    And quite unlike Syliva, his obsession is not going to be derived from a fixation on power and sadism. It’s going to have less to do with chauvinism and a desire to control ‘his woman’ and more to do with a mortal fear of abandonment by someone he simultaneously loves and hates. His backstory actually borrows some ideas from Forbidden Planet and The Monkey’s Paw, brought together in a way that I hope is fairly novel. Once that’s out there, I imagine some readers will be divided on whether his feelings toward her are really all that unreasonable.

    BUT that’s not going to be apparent until the third book (which is a long way off) gets going.

    That’s part of the reason I thought about trimming off the end and making it the intro to the next book – I was already concerned his campy melodramatic entrance at the end of Book II would leave some people dissatisfied. At the same time, though, waiting until Book III to introduce him seemed like it would feel more forced, and I liked the symmetry with the ending of Book I – which if you’ll recall has Azraea reflecting somewhat cryptically on her relationship with Vander.

    So, like I said, hopefully Vander will surprise people. I very much want him to be someone that the reader could believe that Azraea genuinely loved at one point, and that guy has to have a (somewhat) interesting story to tell.

    ReplyDelete
  5. "I was hoping you’d have a final review – it’s more feedback than I get from anyone else, and greatly appreciated."
    Do you just mean here? Or overall? Because then I'd consider joining some type of writing group or one of those write-feedback-forums. Or a Discord groups, or real life stuff ... whatever. I personally feel it really helps. Well. It's also really helps in never finishing anything since writing anything that can't be improved upon is difficult. But getting fresh perspective on whatever you are doing is obviously still worth it.

    Either way I enjoy talking about what I read so no problem ;)

    Hunting: I got the idea behind the comparison; I'm not saying it's wrong. Hunting is about gaining energy (food) so obviously the entire point of hunting strategies is to minimize energy expenditure (being lazy); to maximise net energy gain. So basically the example says "be the spider, don't be the stupid leopard chasing a gazelle and maybe not even catching it".
    I'm just saying that when it's used as a word - "let's hunt that guy!" the immediate picture is not one of laziness. It's one of action. Even if, cleverly, they mean establishing road blocks and TV ads and don't actually physically run after whomever they are hunting.
    Really, it's just the "hunt = lazy" part that read a bit oddly to me.
    But maybe that's just me.

    Formatting: who doesn't hate it? Of course, once converted to an ebook, people will use different software on different screen-sizes on different hardware using different settings so it'll inevitably be all messed up anyway.

    Plans and anti-plans: I wouldn't say Sylvia didn't work entirely; the fact that she did things and wasn't just sitting in her castle like the worst of antagonists is notable; it's just not quite enough. Or rather, it's those moments that directly involve personal action that just feel a bit too contrived – I don't really have any suggestion how else they could be done, but those are the sort of thing that realistically are least easily predictable, yet are so pivotal to how the hero's plot works out and they seemingly always do so perfectly.
    (compared to for example the direction from which Sylvia would probably approach their trap. Geography would give them a good idea, so it makes sense to plan for that)

    Gnomen: the issue I see is simply that even if you managed to convince me that nuking foreign people would be OK under certain circumstances – an end justifies the means approach, I suppose; sort of like nuking Japan in WWII (although even that much just clashes with the feel-goodness of the novel ^^;) you are never, ever going to convince me that a multi-national/ethnic empire is in any shape or form a (by modern standards) good idea.
    There's literally no example in history where it was (I'm a bit exaggerating, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth for example wasn't that bad … until it was) and while I'm willing to stretch my belief for a fantasy novel it just doesn't stretch that far.

    And again this just, for me, doesn't fit with the feel-good stuff. I have frankly no idea how others would feel about this, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Vander: it's always a problem when critiquing in-progress stuff; you just don't know where the author is going, ultimately. I'd probably have ranted about MuvLuv being a stereotypical highschool romance too, before it suddenly turned into an alien-invasion thing where everyone died (completely random example).
      But I'm not sure I'd even give that book a chance to get to some twists if book 3 started out with this scene.
      I do try to keep in mind that sometimes I'm wrong with my expectations. Like in KB Wager's Behind the Throne – that read to me like the worst sort of "rogue princess – bodyguard" romance, and I nearly dropped it then and there. Turns out her bodyguard is gay.

      But, most of the time, that sort of twist doesn't happen. And then I'm just not motivated into going into something in the dubious hope of it maybe not being what I suspect it is. And almost inevitably getting disappointed.

      (I don't know why the comment system wanted my message split; according to Libre Office it counts at ~4000 of 4096 so it should have been short enough, but apparently blogspot is of a different opinion, tsk)

      Delete