Aug. 24th, 2006

olmue: (Default)
My oldest son (8) loves to read, and I mean some pretty hefty books at a pretty hefty page-per-day rate. Moving to a country where he doesn’t speak the language is definitely a trial for him. I took him to the local bookstore (three lovely floors full of people, no matter what the weather or time of day, with strollers, umbrellas, even dogs, and the smell of BOOKS from floor to ceiling—yum!) and we bought the longest children’s book in English we could find. Septimus Heap: Magyk, by Angie Sage. The chapter illustrations were lovely, and my son read the book at least four times in a row, and enjoyed it, minus a few caveats (“Mom, there are too many capital letters in this book.”) Then I read it. I smiled at the humor and it was okay, but it really showed me why a limited point of view is a good thing.

1) It gives the reader a clear idea of who to cheer for. The series is called Septimus Heap, but the main character for most of the story (I think, anyway) was a 12-year-old girl. Septimus is wandering in the story, too, but I didn’t get the feeling he was the main character by any means. Which means I felt the title promised me something the book didn’t deliver.

2) It makes it easier to keep track of all of the characters. Harry Potter has a zillion characters, but nobody seems to have trouble keeping track of them. We keep them straight because we know what their relation is to Harry, the focal character. Notice that with very few exceptions (the opening chapter to a couple of books), the reader only sees what Harry does.

3) It provides a filter for the actions of the story. Again, I’ve been focusing on fixing problems with my own book, most notably, helping the reader form an earlier, stronger emotional attachment to my main character. Agent Rachel Vater has commented on this topic on her blog, too. She wants to know what’s at stake right up front. Sometimes books take a movie camera approach, which works great in a movie that includes scary music and interesting camera angles, but not so great in a book. I need to know, not only the facts, but why they matter.

4) It ups the tension. Tension comes from incompleteness. Characters want what they don’t have. Characters almost make it, but fail. Characters need information they don’t have. When the reader doesn’t have all the information, s/he will read on to find out that information. Simple.

Sure, omnicient viewpoint books are all over the place. Some of them get big money. I’ve noticed a trend lately for bigshot adult writers to try their hand at writing children’s books. The prose is usually good, and so is the plotting, but more often than not, they feel soulless to me, precisely because they spend far too much time in too many people’s heads, especially the heads of adult characters. Kids have a lot less power than adults. In a book, this means the kid characters have an inherent incompleteness, an inherent tension. An adult character can just go fix a problem; a kid may not be able to do that so easily. I’m not saying adult characters don’t have problems and tensions, too. I am saying that too much focus on adult characters with power saps the tension of the story.

So limit your characters. Go ahead. Do it. Even if you limit your story to two focal characters, it will make a stronger book.
olmue: (Default)
Books I'm looking forward to reading:

Diana Wynne Jones, The Pinhoe Egg (Oct 2006). I thought the last Chrestomanci book was entertaining, but a little lightweight. I'm hoping for more on this one, since it clocks in around 500 pages.

Gail Carson Levine, Fairest. Another long book from someone I already enjoy reading.

Shannon Hale, River Secrets. I've really enjoyed her books, I was delighted when Princess Academy got a Newbery Honor (a book with a plot and characters and a good story that wasn't depressing--wow!). I'm impressed by her web site/blog (www.squeetus.com); she comes across as both friendly and professional. Plus, I'm always interested in the small collection of LDS women/moms who write for the national market.

Stephenie Meyer, New Moon. How could anyone read the first chapter of this book (www.stepheniemeyer.com) and NOT be dying to read more?? I loved Twilight and have been stalking my local bookstore for the sequel. Plus, we have the same alma mater (see end comment on above book).

Megan Whalen Turner, King of Attolia. I liked her other books, but was left wondering how Gen and Attolia would make their relationship work. I didn't see why he loved her. I hear this book addresses that very question. Of course, it took so long for my library to get it that I moved before my hold was filled. (Unfortunately, an international move isn't the time to be buying hardback.)

Andrew Clements, Things Hoped For. I loved Things Not Seen--what a creative book! The main character was very sympathetic, probably because of the limited POV.

Jasper Fforde, The Fourth Bear. I love his bizarre, literary world and can only wish for more.

Pratchett, Terry, Wintersmith (28 Sept 2006). One of the few authors for grownup that I read. I love his satire, and since I've moved to Uberwald, I have to keep up with the news.

Winspeare, Jacqueline, Messenger of Truth. I like the historical aspect of her books, and of course I keep hoping Simon will recover from his brain injury. Probably not, but he was so well-drawn in the first book that I can't help hoping he'll come back.

Profile

olmue: (Default)
olmue

April 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
9101112131415
161718192021 22
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 26th, 2025 10:49 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios