![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
megwritesMaybe saying "crazy" lady is too harsh. I don't know that I'd exactly get called the Bastion of Sanity myself or anything.
Still, the way that author Laurell K. Hamilton talks about her personal craft of writing while discussing "negative fans", makes me raise an eyebrow.
Caveat lector: I am in NO way insulting Ms. Hamilton's way of writing. I'm not saying that there is only one good way of writing. I am saying that her style differs from mine, and in the difference, I find something that makes me think.
In the post, LKH is talking about her characters and says, "My characters are real to me in a way that makes me miss them. For God's sake, I'll be in the mall and see something, and go, "Oh, it's the perfect gift for (fill in the blank)." I've been in line with the present in my hand, before I go, "Wait, these are make believe people. I can't buy them a Christmas present."
There, I had a moment of "Oooooooooooooooookay, then. Isn't that special?". She goes on to talk about writers who see characters as a means to an end, and writers who are less attached to their characters. And it's obvious from her tone that the idea is distasteful to her.
However, the idea of being this attached to one or more of your own characters strikes me as being extreme.
When I'm writing a character, I hear their voice. I visualize what they look like. I understand them, but at no point do I invite them into my non-writing life. Now, this isn't to say that I don't get moments of inspiration where characters "talk" to me at random points in the day. It isn't to say that I don't think of my characters when I see something. But never is it the same way that I'd see something and think of my mother or sister or grandfather or best friend.
Maybe this is a fault of mine, maybe a strength.
LKH says that the appearance of another character "caught [her], and Anita by surprise". As though Anita is a completely separate entity capable of having feelings of her own. Now, by design, those feelings are always in agreement with LKH. Anita is surprised when she is surprised. Anita is annoyed by the ardeur when LKH is annoyed by the ardeur. I can't precisely say why this feels awkward to me, but it does.
However, LKH has many bestselling books to her name and legions of fans.
Still, I don't know that I could ever write like that. I've always felt like it is a necessity to be able to kill off your darlings, slay your sacred cows, and do absolutely brutal things that are contrary to what you'd desire. I think there is a necessary distance that needs to be between an author and a character.
Because frankly? I don't know that most people would enjoy my company. I certainly don't think that my inner thoughts and feelings and desires would be of any great consequences to them. I also don't imagine that my experiences are universal.
So, I have to think outside of myself. I have to have the ability to think and write and work with experiences that aren't mine, and find a way to make those experiences every bit as appealing, believable, and genuine as my own. I don't know that I could do that if I was so invested in the characters that I couldn't let them grow and become radically different.
I find it interesting that LKH says that the character of Belle Morte surprised her and Anita - and it is clear that Belle Morte is not a character that LKH is as intimately invested in as she is Anita. The operative word being *surprised*. Belle Morte did something that LKH wasn't expecting.
I would dare to wager that Anita the character will never surprise LKH, and if the character cannot surprise the author then I find it hard to believe it will surprise the reader. LKH does say in the entry that the books have pushed her out of her comfort zone, but that isn't the same thing.
Lots of things are uncomfortable. New shoes are uncomfortable, but not surprising. Having your eyebrows waxed is uncomfortable, but not surprising.
The best fiction is about the surprise, and I don't just mean plot-wise. The surprise is what gives fiction its shine. The surprise is the thing that makes a story special, what attracts a reader.
I feel that, if you want to be surprised, you have to be willing to step back and let things be written. Even if it isn't what you wanted. After all, sometimes not getting what you want is the best way to get something even better.
Still, the way that author Laurell K. Hamilton talks about her personal craft of writing while discussing "negative fans", makes me raise an eyebrow.
Caveat lector: I am in NO way insulting Ms. Hamilton's way of writing. I'm not saying that there is only one good way of writing. I am saying that her style differs from mine, and in the difference, I find something that makes me think.
In the post, LKH is talking about her characters and says, "My characters are real to me in a way that makes me miss them. For God's sake, I'll be in the mall and see something, and go, "Oh, it's the perfect gift for (fill in the blank)." I've been in line with the present in my hand, before I go, "Wait, these are make believe people. I can't buy them a Christmas present."
There, I had a moment of "Oooooooooooooooookay, then. Isn't that special?". She goes on to talk about writers who see characters as a means to an end, and writers who are less attached to their characters. And it's obvious from her tone that the idea is distasteful to her.
However, the idea of being this attached to one or more of your own characters strikes me as being extreme.
When I'm writing a character, I hear their voice. I visualize what they look like. I understand them, but at no point do I invite them into my non-writing life. Now, this isn't to say that I don't get moments of inspiration where characters "talk" to me at random points in the day. It isn't to say that I don't think of my characters when I see something. But never is it the same way that I'd see something and think of my mother or sister or grandfather or best friend.
Maybe this is a fault of mine, maybe a strength.
LKH says that the appearance of another character "caught [her], and Anita by surprise". As though Anita is a completely separate entity capable of having feelings of her own. Now, by design, those feelings are always in agreement with LKH. Anita is surprised when she is surprised. Anita is annoyed by the ardeur when LKH is annoyed by the ardeur. I can't precisely say why this feels awkward to me, but it does.
However, LKH has many bestselling books to her name and legions of fans.
Still, I don't know that I could ever write like that. I've always felt like it is a necessity to be able to kill off your darlings, slay your sacred cows, and do absolutely brutal things that are contrary to what you'd desire. I think there is a necessary distance that needs to be between an author and a character.
Because frankly? I don't know that most people would enjoy my company. I certainly don't think that my inner thoughts and feelings and desires would be of any great consequences to them. I also don't imagine that my experiences are universal.
So, I have to think outside of myself. I have to have the ability to think and write and work with experiences that aren't mine, and find a way to make those experiences every bit as appealing, believable, and genuine as my own. I don't know that I could do that if I was so invested in the characters that I couldn't let them grow and become radically different.
I find it interesting that LKH says that the character of Belle Morte surprised her and Anita - and it is clear that Belle Morte is not a character that LKH is as intimately invested in as she is Anita. The operative word being *surprised*. Belle Morte did something that LKH wasn't expecting.
I would dare to wager that Anita the character will never surprise LKH, and if the character cannot surprise the author then I find it hard to believe it will surprise the reader. LKH does say in the entry that the books have pushed her out of her comfort zone, but that isn't the same thing.
Lots of things are uncomfortable. New shoes are uncomfortable, but not surprising. Having your eyebrows waxed is uncomfortable, but not surprising.
The best fiction is about the surprise, and I don't just mean plot-wise. The surprise is what gives fiction its shine. The surprise is the thing that makes a story special, what attracts a reader.
I feel that, if you want to be surprised, you have to be willing to step back and let things be written. Even if it isn't what you wanted. After all, sometimes not getting what you want is the best way to get something even better.
no subject
Date: 2007-01-23 08:14 am (UTC)I think both of you just have different styles of writing and creating, and both of them are "right" if you will.
Perhaps sometimes she doesn't feel so close to her characters and that will make it an interesting situation for her to deal with.
I agree with the points you make, as usual, but I don't necessarily think that it's a bad thing to be closely connected to what you create.
BUT it is necessary to be aware that you're very close and to be able to step back and have distance sometimes...
Just my two cents! ;D