Brief Thoughts on Fantasy Writers

I set a schedule for myself to start at 6:30 a.m., but of course I've been online all morning checking out the blogs. Really gotta stop this habit. I'm two hours behind.

I've been thinking a bit, in brief interludes between practicing and composing and teaching (I have some time on my hands right now), about fantasy writers who really know their history. You can feel it as you read. Gene Wolfe is a good example of this in his Book of the New Sun (at least the first half; I haven't gotten around to reading the second half yet). But the MC, Severian, is an apprentice in the Torturers' Guild. The detail with which he infuses this guild and the world surrounding it is rather astounding. Many fantasy writers tend to gloss over the small details in the hopes the reader won't notice. The result being of course that you can't imagine the world the writer tried to build. Somehow the supernatural elements become the only thing holding the story together. But with Wolfe, the supernatural takes a backseat to Severian's story. You accept the supernatural along with everything else. He's one of those writers who can make you believe in the supernatural. (He's also one of those writers who makes me want to impale myself on my pen.)

But in reading the first half of this series, I almost felt as if I was reading a slice of history—one that was so real that so-called accurate history, with its absence of witchcraft and the supernatural, is some bastardized account of what really happened back in the good ol' days. And you can tell Wolfe has read a lot. It's just something that wafts off the pages.

Neil Gaiman and Rowling are another two I can tell really know their history, mythic and otherwise. I'm looking forward to reading John Crowley's Aegypt series, too.

But now that I'm going back to school, I'm fighting guilt when I read. It feels too luxurious to read fiction. I have some blogs I use for my teaching, and I don't post to those nearly enough, so I'm trying to refresh myself on music history and so forth (interesting reads in themselves). Just trying to use this time to prepare as much as I can.

One thing I notice when I read music history now is that I absorb a lot more regarding time and place and the political/historical situations surrounding the development of music. I think this is because of my interlude into reading so much in the last four years.

So what about you? Do you notice that your favorite writers are sort of unpaid historians as well? (Not that a few of these writers don't make up for that in their royalty checks . . . )

Oops

My apologies for deleting my last post. Here's the link that touched it off—JK Rowling's address to Harvard graduates regarding the fringe benefits of failure. My post basically said it's difficult for me to see the benefits of failure when right now I feel like I'm one big ball of F.A.I.L. Was feeling sorry for myself and deleted the post later in embarrassment. Though it is still on RSS feeds. Ah well. Live and learn.

Those of you who saw, feel free to comment or not. From now on I will leave up whatever I'm stupid enough to post in the first place, embarrassing or not.

Except pictures. If I ever post more . . . well, they may not last, despite that old saying.

On Writing

My job is two hours and fifteen minutes from where I live. It used to be three. No, I didn't move closer, and the job site sure as hell didn't move closer to me. I just found a better route home, is all. (The way the trains and buses meet up, getting home used to take three hours.)

So during the week I'm little more than a zombie who works, sleeps, and eats. I don't do anything interesting during the week. And I pretty much hate it.

Weekends I write. I do try to write on the train, but in the mornings, I'm too exhausted (I leave by 6 a.m.). At night, I just want to read on the way home.

I just read through a story I recently wrote. I thought I would wince—I usually find reading my first drafts painful—but I found myself pleasantly surprised. My story-telling skills leave something to be desired, but I liked much of the word content.

I have a whole philosophy on writing, you see. I believe there are good storytellers, and then there are good writers. Dostoevsky, for example, was an excellent writer, but a horrible storyteller. JK Rowling is a frocking great storyteller, but her writing is so-so.

There are very few writers who can do both. Stephen King is one, although his writing can be uneven. Neil Gaiman is another. I think he's both a great writer and a great storyteller. Gene Wolfe, a writer who makes the rest of us want to impale ourselves on our pens, is both a great writer and a great storyteller. You remember the words and the story.

For me, right now, I think I'm a pretty good writer and a beginning storyteller. Which means I'm a rather lousy storyteller. I think I need to analyze more when I read, instead of letting things just soak in. Osmosis is fine. Photosynthesis is fine. But I think I've been avoiding analysis. No, I have been avoiding analysis.

So. Gotta go do some analysis. Also, my computer is getting wanky—a sign I need to shut down for the night.

Good night, and good luck.