A little bit about writing speed and reading

[msagara]

There has been some discussion on LJ recently about the speed at which books are written, or the speed at which one expects books to be written, and the question of professionalism and quality with regards to writing speed.

So I thought I'd have a little rant about that. Because it's the internet, and I can :D.

Speaking as a reader, I don't care how long it took you to write your book. I have your book in hand, I read it, I either love it or I don't love it, and while I'm reading it, I could not care less how long it took you to write it.

I couldn't care less whether or not you wrote it standing on your head and eating marmite.

I only care about what I have in my hands, a cover wrapped in some form around words on the page (because I'm a luddite and I really don't enjoy reading fiction on the machine at which I'm shackled when I do work as a way of relaxing). I am a greedy reader, yes, and if I loved your book beyond all reason I will rush out and try to find more books -- but I don't actually care if you wrote those books ten years ago. I don't care what you did to self-promote them. I don't care what you did to get an agent, or what your agent offered you in the way of advice. I don't care what you did to get them published. I may cringe at the cover, but that's so out of your hands, that I can reasonably say I don't care about the cover with regards to you, the author.

There are authors I enjoy who seem to put out four books a year. There are authors I enjoy who cannot manage to put out one book a year. I don't have a calendar in hand, and the only thing that matters is when the book is in said hands, I can read it. Did I cry when Patrick Rothfuss announced that his book would be delayed? Maybe. Do I look longingly at the Connie Willis books on our store shelves and pine at a distance because there are no new ones? Maybe. Do I hold this against the authors in any way? No. I want the books they write, and I am overjoyed when I get them. I don't immediately think they are grossly unprofessional because I do not get them quickly.

I also have no way of knowing, while I am deep in the throes of book-love, which authors are making a living at writing, and which ones aren't -- because it doesn't matter to me as a reader. The books were written, the books were published, and the books were devoured by my little avaricious reader-self. The rest of the attendant clutter is kibble.

I understand that making a living can necessitate a number of things, for writers, and all of these things are of import--to them. I understand that these are amazingly intense concerns, because I have them as well. I even wibble about them here, from time to time, because it's my LJ and they're on my mind.

But confusing my concerns as a writer with my concerns as a reader is something that I don't do. There are books that feel interchangeable, and I read these for fun and light entertainment, although I admit I often confuse them in the muddle of my brain (and attribute the titles to the wrong authors because I am sometimes stupid like that); there are books that no one but the author could possibly write (anything by John Crowley comes to mind instantly). I am happy for both; I do not privilege one over the other because I don't have to; as a reader, both are there, and I pick up the one that suits my mood and my needs at the time.

And as a reader, what I want from the authors I read is that they write their books. Telling other authors how to write their books is not actually something that is relevant to me as a reader, and I am the end consumer in a chain.

Comments

[twiegand.livejournal.com]

A-men.

[sksperry.livejournal.com]

I find, as a reader, that I rarely notice things like POV change, or whether it's omnicient or not, or whether they used -- instead of..., or any of a multitude of sins writers are often accused of, unless it's very poorly done.

As a writer, however...well to be honest, I still rarely notice it in other's work. I only become paranoid when it's my own. *g*

[barbarienne.livejournal.com]

You said it. The reading public doesn't give a crap if you are Nora Roberts, who turns out a zillion books a year, all of which are instant bestsellers, or if you are Harper Lee, who only ever wrote one book.

I believe every author has a "natural pace" that works for them. Some authors spill words onto the page. If they are lucky, those words will be in generally good order from the get-go, at least most of the time. Other writers have to fight the devil, Jesus, and the Incredible Hulk for every keystroke.

Yes, not putting butt in chair is not going to get a book finished. OTOH, putting butt in chair and fighting for hours with the work is not pleasant.

And in the end, the readers really can't tell the difference. The only time they can tell is when an author is writing off their natural pace. Sometimes authors who are one-book-a-year step up to three-books-a-year and it shows.

[touchstone.livejournal.com]

Obviously, I'm not offended by writers who take a year or two between books...either they need that time to get the book to where they feel it's done, or they have things other than writing going on in their life (gasp!), or whatever. No problem.

Now, the speed at which new books in a series will come out does sometimes affect my buying decisions. If you just released book 2 in a trilogy, and I know it's going to be two years before book 3...it does increase the chance I'll wait for paperback to actually buy it :) For standalones (or, perhaps oddly, installment in /long/ series where each volume tends to be a complete story) that's less of a consideration.

[rosefox]

I only care when I've been waiting for-bloody-ever for the next book in a series, and I certainly wouldn't call a slow writer unprofessional. I am quite capable of not interpreting "I am impatient" as "you are just dragging this out to spite me" or "you can't write". If the author couldn't write, I wouldn't be impatient for the next book!

[kateelliott.livejournal.com]

as a reader, what I want from the authors I read is that they write their books.

SO agreed. In a slightly different context (an interview for Fantasy Book Critic to be posted sometime in the next week I think) I just said pretty much the same thing.

[owldaughter.livejournal.com]

Hear, hear!

[ginny-t.livejournal.com]

Hear! Hear!

[jennifer-j-s.livejournal.com]

Well said. I think that being a writer can sometimes get in the way of my reading experience, though, mostly if something happens just for plot's sake. A well-written character will always beguile.

[agrimony.livejournal.com]

It's mizkit's fault that I read this. But it's also because I have loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooved your 'CAST IN _______' books. (I think maybe there were not enough o's in there to emphasize this point enough.) Beyond the fact that they have a really great unique setting that is somehow both modern and historical feeling at the same time (which they do, and which I love!), they also have /excellent/ pacing. And Kit will tell you, I'm a pacing fetishist. (Not really, but it amuses her to say so and I do find pacing very important in a book).

Of course, most of the stuff I love to read has great pacing, which only makes it easier to devour quickly. That's fine when I've only caught the person several years into their series and they've got several books out I need to catch up on... but then I catch up. And, I'm afraid I have to admit, that I am a greedy, impatient reader. I /want/. I want the next book. I want it now. I don't want it to be a sacrifice of quality, but I do wish most stringently that the authors I love could figure out how to bend time so that they could both write the book to the same quality that I have come to adore... and so that they can do so by next week.

I can't say that I don't care when it takes two+ years for the next book to come out (and I don't think authors really want me to not care, because that's a sign that you can take or leave the books one way or the other -- did that make sense?), but I... grudgingly understand. :) I know there's more involved than just the speed at which someone can churn out a novel. I know there are a lot of elements completely out of the author's control, what with their not being, you know, gods and whatnot. (Very short sighted of them, by the way.)

I wish I could say that I've never arrogantly spouted off that 'I could do it better' opinion after struggling through a particularly disappointing book, but I'd be lying. Luckily, I don't know any of those authors personally. :)

Anyway, I'm probably way off topic here and way, way too wordy besides. But your post just struck something in my and I couldn't keep my big yap shut.

Thank you for the great books.

[sqrrlsrant.livejournal.com]

Speaking as a reader, I don't care how long it took you to write your book. I have your book in hand, I read it, I either love it or I don't love it, and while I'm reading it, I could not care less how long it took you to write it.

It's something you probably already know, but still I'm compelled to point it out: that's how we fans of the West novels feel. Sure, it may take you a (long) while to get them in our greedy little hands, and sure, it may be that one book has turned into two...three...four...but the wait is always worthwhile.

I've always felt (even before having it confirmed here and on the list) that you knew where you were going with your story. No matter the time between publications, no matter if a part of the story morphed into multiple books - I knew that those stories needed that length of time and that span of books to be told properly and I know that, eventually, we'll get to the climax of the tales and having multiple series tie into the end just makes the experience that much more complete and satisfying.

By contrast, I stopped reading Robert Jordan because I felt that, while he had an endgame in mind, he didn't know how to get there and each new book in the series felt more like an extended "um" (if that makes any sense) than a real addition to the story line. Your books all have a purpose and add to the storytelling experience; his felt like he was floundering for his story and not finding it, which left me feeling somewhat betrayed as a reader/consumer. I love books and will wait impatiently as long as necessary *coughStevenKing'sDarkTowercough* to consume them, but to continue reading material by a particular author I need to feel that the wait is worthwhile.

Well...that's the end of that tangent.
The other Michelle

[deire.livejournal.com]

Here via Jim Hines and taking the liberty of friending. Please let me know if there is any issue.

[controuble.livejournal.com]

Jim Hines sent me :)
Adding to friend list (since you said it's fine to lurk).

[groblek.livejournal.com]

Well said, you've summed up my thoughts as a reader wonderfully. Certainly, in my perfect world, there'd be a new book by any of my favorite authors as soon as I want to read one, but in all honestly, I don't care how long it takes/how it's done/whatever as long as I enjoy the final product.

[amber-fool.livejournal.com]

(commenting on this a month after the fact because some how I missed it when you posted it, and I was looking through back posts for one to link a friend to)

I agree with most people here - I mean, you're the author! And each author is their own species, with their own gestational period. I think an important thing is having SOME kind of dialog with your readers. Let them know what you're working on. I'm always impatient for the next book if it's a series or author I love, but I enjoy the waiting. The Harry Potter books were a public expression of something that, for me, is standard for ANY book I've been waiting for. Meet with other fans, talk about the book, reread past books in the series, and wait like a kid before Christmas. You know it's coming if you're patient. And you can get things set ahead of time so you can take the time on release day to sit down and read it all at once.

The only time this becomes a problem is when you have a trilogy that is firmly established in that format, and you get to the end of the second one, leaving cliffhangers right and left, and then...stop. Disappear for a while, then start working on other projects. It's like suddenly, Christmas isn't coming any more. You'll get Easter or Halloween, but it's not the same. Melanie Rawn's Exiles trilogy has been like that for me. I understand there was a long hiatus from writing (for health reasons, I think), but even once she returned to writing, there seems to be no hope of a conclusion on the horizon, more than 10 years after the second book. And that's when it starts to really be a problem for me. I am patient, but only if I know it's coming (even putting a general number on it would work: 'I'm working on it, and given my general writing speed, it'll be published in 2010', with 2010 being an over-estimate, so I'm not getting myself excited early, but if it shows up early, it's even better!).