I liked Amy's last post about taking time to reflect in the midst of the writing process, getting your bearings before barreling ahead to the end of your draft. I've been doing my own brand of reflection lately: the kind that comes when a draft is done (for the moment) and it's time to put it aside and take a break.
So what do I do during this break? It's time to read as much as possible. I've got a too-long list of books to read, and I'm always eager to hear suggestions, if you have any! I'm also eager to watch movies and television programs that might spark a little something in my imagination. I am contemplating another project, of which I have an intriguing opening (at least, it intrigues me) and an outline that's not quite working yet; it's suffering a murky middle. I need to read and watch and think a lot to help clear this problem up.
Taking a break is fun, rejuvenating. But I can get a little twitchy - why am I not writing? I've got SO MUCH to do, so little time to do it. I should get going, shouldn't I? But this non-writing time is part of the process, too. Best not to rush it.
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Monday, November 15, 2010
Sunday, July 11, 2010
What makes a book "good" or "bad"?
I apologize for another cross-post, but I am really curious about your thoughts on this. I'm afraid I'm a little bit rant-y on the subject - I'm not even really clear (as you will see) where I come down on this subject. Though in the end I think it's up to the reader. Here's the post:
I finally listened to the “Summer Reads for Kids” episode of On Point that aired earlier this month. Visit the website to listen to the interview: http://www.onpointradio.org/2010/07/summer-reads-for-kids. It’s a great discussion which raised a lot of questions for me.
The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins came up in discussion. Interviewee Pete Cowdin felt that, though he enjoyed it, he considered it a “guilty pleasure” but not necessarily a good book. Theoretically I can see his point (though admittedly I really enjoyed it) but does that mean that all guilty pleasure books are inherently bad?
Huge blockbusters influence the entire publishing industry – we’re wading through mountains of paranormal romance novels about girls dating vampires, werewolves, zombies, pixies, demons, etc. I get irritated at the huge stacks of Twilight in big bookstores while so many other books aren’t getting much attention, or even a space on the shelves. Big sales certainly does not mean good writing and exemplary literature. But what is the criteria of great literature? I have my own ideas of what works for me, but that doesn’t mean that I know what deserves to be labeled a good or bad book. And if readers are to make up their own minds, is there really any use in making this distinction?
The market influences writers, too. I can’t imagine that SO MANY authors just happened to be writing about vampires in time to jump on the Twilight bandwagon – not that I blame them for doing so. In the NPR interview, Esme Raji Codell expressed the sentiment that children should come first for the author, not the marketplace. I agree: if every writer catered to the whims of the marketplace then publishing would stagnate – there would be no growth, no freshness. But if our readers are salivating for more indulgent, guilty-pleasure stories, how bad is it for us to indulge that desire if that is what we truly want to write?
I finally listened to the “Summer Reads for Kids” episode of On Point that aired earlier this month. Visit the website to listen to the interview: http://www.onpointradio.org/2010/07/summer-reads-for-kids. It’s a great discussion which raised a lot of questions for me.
The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins came up in discussion. Interviewee Pete Cowdin felt that, though he enjoyed it, he considered it a “guilty pleasure” but not necessarily a good book. Theoretically I can see his point (though admittedly I really enjoyed it) but does that mean that all guilty pleasure books are inherently bad?
Huge blockbusters influence the entire publishing industry – we’re wading through mountains of paranormal romance novels about girls dating vampires, werewolves, zombies, pixies, demons, etc. I get irritated at the huge stacks of Twilight in big bookstores while so many other books aren’t getting much attention, or even a space on the shelves. Big sales certainly does not mean good writing and exemplary literature. But what is the criteria of great literature? I have my own ideas of what works for me, but that doesn’t mean that I know what deserves to be labeled a good or bad book. And if readers are to make up their own minds, is there really any use in making this distinction?
The market influences writers, too. I can’t imagine that SO MANY authors just happened to be writing about vampires in time to jump on the Twilight bandwagon – not that I blame them for doing so. In the NPR interview, Esme Raji Codell expressed the sentiment that children should come first for the author, not the marketplace. I agree: if every writer catered to the whims of the marketplace then publishing would stagnate – there would be no growth, no freshness. But if our readers are salivating for more indulgent, guilty-pleasure stories, how bad is it for us to indulge that desire if that is what we truly want to write?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
