Wordperfect Alchemist

I've been ruminating recently on the subject of titles.  A title is a story's first hook--even before a reader claps eyes on your first sentence, he's going to see the title, and that constitute's his real first impression of the story (whether he/she be an editor or a consumer).  So naturally it's important and worth some thought.

Of course, there's few things more frustrating than having a killer opening, a tense middle, and a crescendo of an ending, then being stumped as to what phrase to type above the whole thing.  I've been there before.  On other occasions an awesome phrase will come exploding into my head and I'll have to write a story to match it.  My unpublished Shabak story "Black Water" is one example of that.  I've even got titles mapepd out for books I won't write for years, if ever.

I think a great title does three things:

1.) It hooks the reader's attention.  Create a powerful image, suggest awesome content, or present the reader with an interesting juxtaposition.  Or just have something cool.  For fantasy stories, it's probably better to avoid generic words like "king", "dragon", "dream", "magic", etc.  "The King's Dragon" or "The Dream Sword" isn't particularly arresting.  The exception is if you're really putting some new twist on the word's usage or making some allusion; I think Naomi Novik's novel His Majesty's Dragon is well-titled (and it's a great book too).  A similar consideration applies to SF stories: "The Stars my Dream" isn't as attention-catching as something like Dune or Speaker for the Dead.

2.) It conveys information about the book/story's content.  Again, I'll use His Majesty's Dragon.  It tells a reader that the story will involve dragons, but it also hints at the setting in Regency England and the fact that, not only is it about dragons, it's about dragons in the Napoleanic Wars.  The title should generally give the reader some indication of what kind of story they can expect--action, romance, psychological drama, etc.

3.) It hints at theme.  His Majesty's Dragon hints at the themes of loyalty, honor, and duty which underlie the story.  Dune emphasizes the barren landscape of Arrakis.  E. E. Knight's Dragon Champion establishes what the overall arc of AuRon's life is: that of a champion, conquering a series of obstacles to emerge victorious.  Dragon Avenger indicates that--surprise!--the book centers around a revenge story.  Those are also examples of titles which are attention grabbing but use "dragon". . .hm. . .some life left there, maybe.

I'm going to quick try one of my titles at those three categories. . .a semi-Bronze-Age heroic fantasy I call Harpy Slayer.

1.) I think it's attention grabbing.  Sure would grab my attention ;).

2.) It's about a hero slaying harpies, and it also contains plenty of battles.  I think both of those are sufficiently captured by Harpy Slayer, yes?

3.) Hm. . .probably weakest here.  I think what it _does_ do is center attention on my hero, Tarsok, whose conflicts, courage, and choices lie at the book's heart.  I also think the idea of him as a "slayer" is important to the book's overall thrust.  Tarsok would definitely consider himself a slayer.

So, I'm going to risk a jaunt on the borders of egotism and say that I think Harpy Slayer is a fairly good title.  Feel free to disagree :).

In conclusion, I present a list of titles I really like.  Make of them what you will.

Dune (Frank Herbert)
His Majesty's Dragon (Naomi Novik)
Speaker for the Dead (Orson Scott Card)
Life of Pi (Yann Martel)
The Gallows Thief (Bernard Cornwell)
Over Sea, Under Stone (Susan Cooper)
Mistborn: The Final Empire (Bradon Sanderson)
The Lies of Locke Lamora (Scott Lynch)--a great thematic title!
Dragon Champion/Avenger/Outcast (E. E. Knight)
"Wings in the Night" (Robert E. Howard)
The Devil's Novice (Ellis Peters)
The Hound of the Baskervilles (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle)

Feel free to post some of your own!

Recently I've taken to using a booksharing site called GoodReads.  It's pretty cool--create a profile, add books from a massive database (SIX WITH FLINTEYE is in there), write reviews of said books for all your buddies to see!  Well. . .if you have any buddies using it.  I've got several friends from highschool roaming about there.

You need to set up an account to view anything, but if you're so inclined, plug in a search for Sean Stiennon and have a look at some of the stuff I have read, will read, or am reading!  I've got brief reviews for a lot of 'em.

At 11:55 this morning, I handed in my Calculus final, and I was free.  Free until the first week of September, in fact.  I’m not working or studying abroad or anything crazy like that, so that gives me about 3½ months to write, read, watch, play, hang out with friends + family, and generally live it up.

Yes, I’ll admit, I’m bragging.

Anyway, I thought I’d post a few of my goals for the summer, especially writing-related ones.  Then we can see how well I do when September rolls around.

WRITING GOALS:

Complete revisions, proofreading, synopsis, etc. of Harpy Slayer so that the manuscript is ready to go out to publishers

Outline and complete a draft of The Forked Road (probably 100-120k)

Finish Part 1 of Memory Wipe

Write a short story (yeah, yeah, this one’s fairly modest–I’ve just got an idea which needs to be given form)

Begin planning/outlining for next novel, probably a Shabak book

READING GOALS:

Finish all/most of the books I own but haven’t read

Finish Don Quixote (about 250 pages to go, unabridged) and possibly start reading Les Miserables.

Read more broadly than just fantasy/SF

As is probably apparent, my main plan with writing is to try and write/complete as many novel manuscripts as I can–I’m increasingly disillusioned with the short story market, and I honestly probably enjoy writing novels more.  It’s also the better path to being widely published and paid, which is my ultimate goal.

So...here’s hoping for a glorious summer!

Every so often I see lists of "Things I never, ever, want to see again in fantasy", most recently from James Enge and Steve Goble.  They're interesting to read, and I generally agree with a lot on them.  Common culprits include rag-tag bands of merry companions out to conquer the Dark Duke Bad through sheer pluck and good looks, sexy vampires, blunt barbarians, omnipotent wizards, and secret princesses behind every Puff the Magic Dragon.  I'm basically against all of the above.

Thing is, such lists make me realize that I really don't have one of my own.  I attribute this partially the fact that I've only had a few years in which I've really read a lot of fantasy, and I've spent a lot of that time with unusual stuff like the Tim Powers and Paula Volsky (i.e., stuff that doesn't follow a standard fantasy template).  I've read one (1) Terry Brooks novel and four (4) Salvatore books (the original Icewind Dale trilogy and the first Dark Elf book).  I just don't seem to have read enough of the right (wrong?) books to have gotten particularly irritated by anything (in terms of generalties, mind--I probably won't read any more Salvatore for the immediate future because they were starting to irritate me).

Usually, if I don't pick up a book with "Now, Max'x'y must set off with his rag-tag band of quirky companions to wield the Lamp of Light against the Shadow of Darkness" scribed on the back is because I think it indicates a lack of creativity on the part of the author.  If it were:

"Texas Ted and his merry posse of rodeo clowns must set off across the scorching Sahara desert, seeking the Golden Saddle with which to wrangle the Black Bull who done took over Ted's range.  Along the way they face Arab bandits, entire cities where neither love nor money will buy a good beer, and some of the ornierist steers this side of Wyoming."

I might consider it, because that shows some creativity.  Or even something more *cough* traditional, like:

"Ten years ago, four warrior brothers swore that they would would drink only water, eat only raw food, and sleep only on hard ground until they had located the bones of their long-vanished father.  Now, they discover that, before his death, he may have held the key to defeating the Cold One whose power is slowly despoiling their once lush homeland...and that both it and his remains lie deep within the Heart of Shadows, a land that has been overrun by demonic powers for over a thousand years."

I guess the difference for me is creativity and good writing.  Going by reading experience alone, there's not too much I'm personally sick of, although I take it on hearsay that most vampire novels are lame re-treads or that many high fantasies are boring quest tales, and I factor that into my reading choices.  Titles like "The Sword of Light" or "The Dragon Wizard" also turn me off somewhat.  I will note, though, that one of my favorite series (The Noble Dead books by Barb and J.C. Hendee) are about a pair of vampire slayers, one of whom is a half-elf.  And I love 'em.  They're well-written, exciting, and creative.  I also enjoy some fat fantasy, like Tad Williams' Memory, Sorrow, and Thorn and Shadowmarch series.

Bad writing and lack of creativity are what bother me.

Actually, though, I lied.  Here's a brief list of things that particularly irritate me in fiction:

1.) Unconvincing changes of heart.  This is a big problem for a lot of religious fiction, along with any "Evil warlord sees the light and becomes a hero" tale.  Both can be great if done well, with insight and depth that take into account how dramatic these shifts are.  All too often it happens in one glorious vision or conversation by the fireside.

2.) Heroes who are no different than the bad guys, but...well...they're heros!  By this I mean: A murder, revenge killing, mutilation of enemy corpses, slaughter of prisoners, etc. is what it is, whether it's your plucky hero or the evil hordes who do it.  I've read books where the two sides do exactly the same thing, but for some reason it's heroic or courageous when the guys in white hats do it.

3.) Female characters who are just there for the sake of fanservice.

4.) Invincible heroes.  By this I mean not super-tough heroes who can take on twenty warriors and win, but those who can do it without trying, getting tired, or showing any other ill side-effects.

5.) Characters who make wisecracks that are neither wise nor cracklin'.

6.) Villains who hardly even try to win.

I recently attempted to read Trading in Danger by Elizabeth Moon.  To get to the point, I got about halfway through before I realized that would honestly rather start catching up on my history reading than wade through another page.  That's saying a lot, given this semester's history textbook.

I've heard good things about Moon's other work--particularly her Deed of Paksenarrion books--so I'll probably give her another shot in the future.  But it's been quite a while since i've been this disappointed by a book.  I do sometimes fail to finish a book I've started, but it's rarely because of complete lack of interest in the story, characters, world, prose, you name it.  I'll leave plot summary to my dear friend Amazon.

Anyway, in brief, here's why I thought the book was a complete failure.  I only read 150 pages, so correct me if anything changes in the second 150.

1.) Characters?  What characters?  Who needs characters when you can have floating collections of name/rank/resume?  Moon didn't even bother to give most of her characters recongizable quirks, interesting hobbies, senses of humor, or anything.  The heronie struck me as "Young Woman C: Spunky and Independant, but Self-doubting", taken direct from the shelves.  Her family isn't any better: Nagging mother, fond but patronizing father, teasing older bro, cranky old aunt, etc.  None of them have anything to distinguish themselves from faceless mannequins with their traits written in large, red letters across their chests.  Ky's crew is the same.  When the "tell us about yourselves" scene comes, the newcomers deliver resumes and little else.

2.) No description.  I only had any notion what the heroine looked like b/c of the cover illustration.  No one in this book is given any physical description, which contributes to the "faceless mannequin" syndrome described above.  Settings are given minimal description.  Our heroine travels, but every planet is more bland and uninteresting than the last.  Her ship is a collection of blank corridors.

3.) Bland events.  Even when the big civil war breaks out, it's described in hopelessly general terms which serve to deprive it of any possible interest it might have carried.  Economic and political manuevers are equally bland.  They happen, but there's nothing about them to engage the reader's interest.

4.) No action.  'Nuff said.

5.) The writing style was smooth, but it wasn't interesting.  Part of this is probably Moon's absolute refusal to describe anything which might make the book's events anything more than plot chunks floating in a gray mist.

Eh...you get the idea.  Honestly, I can't think of anything really positive to say about it.  I do like the idea of a great story centered around merchant activity, but this wasn't it.

Like I said, everything I've heard tells me that this book can't represent anything close to par for Moon.  I fully intend to read her Deed of Paksenarrion books.  But...I just might wait a while until the taste of this one fades.

 And he stoppeth one of three.
"By thy long grey beard and glittering eye,
Now wherefore stopp'st thou me?

I don't make a habit of reading poetry--probably in part because I haven't done it often enough to gain the habit--but there's one I've memorized chunks of and return to at least once a year: Coleridge's Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner.

Summarizing the plot (yes, a poem with a plot!) would probably just a waste of breath, so I'll just tell you that it's a tale of damnation and redemption on the world's treacherous seas, framed as a story told by an old man to a young wedding guest.  The verse is excellent, as far as I can tell, and it's also chock full of powerful imagery that impresses me every time I read it.

Another quote:

About, about, in reel and rout
The death-fires danced at night;
The water, like a witch's oils,
Burnt green, and blue and white.

It's relatively short and not inordinately difficult to follow--Coleridge actually included explanatory notes alongside the text, which are included in most print editions.  You'll find it in any compilation of his work.

Or you can read it online.

As an aside, Coleridge is a supporting character in Tim Powers' The Anubis Gates, which I also highly recommend.