Nathan Wall's Blog
September 11, 2015
Evolution of Angels Excerpt
Hershiser’s head dangled from side to side. Sweat-drenched hair covered his battered face as he was dragged through the halls of the torch-lit fortress. His feet slid along the stone floor while his one unswollen eye counted the cracks in the numerous rocks. The slow but steady clicking of chains demanded his attention. He lifted his head in time to see the large wooden double doors swing toward him.
Once the doors were completely open, he was carried into a grand circular chamber. The repeated noise of hundreds of collective feet stomping on the ground caused his heartbeat to quicken. As he was carried to the center of the room he looked up to see the full moon perched on the black backdrop, shining furiously through a dome window. His eyes ran down the cylindrical room, scanning the three levels of onlookers who waved their fists in the air, and landed on Kirk whose armor had receded completely.
“Kirk,” Hershiser hacked, unable to move his jaw. He attempted to crawl toward his comrade, but a large foot stepped between them. He looked up and the towering Cyclops snarled in reply. A pink light washed over the room, encouraging the owners of the hundreds of stomping feet to lift their voices with loud cheers.
The man from the boat stood at the steps of a throne. Seated in the massive gold and stone chair was a woman: Princess Maya. Her crimson hair draped down the side of her face covering her eye and cheek on the right, and was tucked behind her left ear on the other side. Her dress, inordinately long, sprawled all the way down the five steps away from her seat. It was slit along the right leg, exposing her olive skin. Her eyes were dark, but as she looked at Hershiser he noticed the slight orange glow around the pupils.
She stood, grabbing the sides of her form-fitting dress and flapped it, creating the cracking sound of a whip. Those who cheered before fell silent. A muscular gladiator dressed only in a loincloth knelt down on the steps before her, raising his hand to help her down the stairs. She reached the cobbled floor. Her spiked black boots made a distinct clacking noise as she approached Hershiser.
“What have you done with our Lord?” Maya asked, with a firm, yet alluring voice. He wanted to respond to her question—to give her a pleasing answer, but he didn’t know what she was talking about. She knelt beside him, exposing her smooth thigh, and grabbed him by the face. “Answer me.”
“I’ll help you find him.” He tried to grab her dress and pull her close, just hoping to smell her hair, but she pushed him away. He didn’t know why she spurned him nor did he know why he cared. He just wanted her attention. The song in her voice aroused him. “Please, I’ll do anything.”
“I find your begging to be pathetic.” She walked over to Kirk. Her fingers massaged his face, making Hershiser’s blood boil.
Maya’s lips pressed against Kirk’s, and her tongue slithered down his throat. His body convulsed as his genetically altered sandy blonde hair turned into a jet-black mess. His eyes reverted to their original color, and his cheekbones and squared jaw morphed into a fat round face. She stood, pushing off of Kirk’s aching chest, and walked toward the throne. The half-naked gladiator once again bowed.
“Another impostor posing in our great Lord’s armor,” she said, sliding her long lacy gloves onto her hands. She spun around and sat on her throne. “Kill them both.”
“No. I can be of service.” Hershiser stood, using all his strength, and ran toward the steps of the throne. He flung himself to the floor, his face down, and held his hands together. As if betrayed by a friend, his heart split in half. He pleaded with her. “I will do as you say.”
“Will you?” She grinned, leaning forward and rubbing her chin. Her legs crossed and the chamber let out a collective gasp of enlightenment. Hershiser looked up, nodding. She spoke. “Bring me the impostor’s head. Prove your allegiance and I will let you be one of us.”
Hershiser nodded, limping over to the half-naked gladiator and taking a sword. He slowly meandered over toward Kirk who was awakening from the transformation back to his normal self. Kirk slowly rose and drove his elbow into Hershiser’s arm, attempting to stop him from swinging the sword. The two men locked up, but Hershiser quickly gained the upper hand. His arm wrapped around Kirk’s neck, squeezing. He flung Kirk to the ground and knelt over him, dealing fist after to fist into the face.
Maya laughed and Hershiser looked up, allowing Kirk to roll backwards and drive a heel into Hershiser’s sternum. Kirk lunged for the sword, but Hershiser kicked it out of the way. He grabbed Kirk by the ankle and twisted it quickly with a snap.
Kirk screamed, raking his fingernails across the ground. Several broke off. Hershiser dealt three quick blows to the kidney. He slammed Kirk into the base of one of the large columns that climbed through each floor of the massive chamber. He yanked Kirk by the hair and repeatedly slammed his head into the large stone beam. Once his enemy passed out, Hershiser walked over to the sword and picked it up. He plodded back toward Kirk and slammed the blade into his neck, face, chest, and finally, jaw as his errant swipes failed to sever the head.
Building up the anger to try one last time, his sixth swipe went clean through Kirk’s jaw, severing the head and lodging the blade into the stone column. Hershiser grabbed the head by the hair and lifted it, much to the applause and delight of those who looked on.
“Are you ready to share your secrets?” Maya asked, leaning forward.
Hershiser nodded, unable to deny her.
Once the doors were completely open, he was carried into a grand circular chamber. The repeated noise of hundreds of collective feet stomping on the ground caused his heartbeat to quicken. As he was carried to the center of the room he looked up to see the full moon perched on the black backdrop, shining furiously through a dome window. His eyes ran down the cylindrical room, scanning the three levels of onlookers who waved their fists in the air, and landed on Kirk whose armor had receded completely.
“Kirk,” Hershiser hacked, unable to move his jaw. He attempted to crawl toward his comrade, but a large foot stepped between them. He looked up and the towering Cyclops snarled in reply. A pink light washed over the room, encouraging the owners of the hundreds of stomping feet to lift their voices with loud cheers.
The man from the boat stood at the steps of a throne. Seated in the massive gold and stone chair was a woman: Princess Maya. Her crimson hair draped down the side of her face covering her eye and cheek on the right, and was tucked behind her left ear on the other side. Her dress, inordinately long, sprawled all the way down the five steps away from her seat. It was slit along the right leg, exposing her olive skin. Her eyes were dark, but as she looked at Hershiser he noticed the slight orange glow around the pupils.
She stood, grabbing the sides of her form-fitting dress and flapped it, creating the cracking sound of a whip. Those who cheered before fell silent. A muscular gladiator dressed only in a loincloth knelt down on the steps before her, raising his hand to help her down the stairs. She reached the cobbled floor. Her spiked black boots made a distinct clacking noise as she approached Hershiser.
“What have you done with our Lord?” Maya asked, with a firm, yet alluring voice. He wanted to respond to her question—to give her a pleasing answer, but he didn’t know what she was talking about. She knelt beside him, exposing her smooth thigh, and grabbed him by the face. “Answer me.”
“I’ll help you find him.” He tried to grab her dress and pull her close, just hoping to smell her hair, but she pushed him away. He didn’t know why she spurned him nor did he know why he cared. He just wanted her attention. The song in her voice aroused him. “Please, I’ll do anything.”
“I find your begging to be pathetic.” She walked over to Kirk. Her fingers massaged his face, making Hershiser’s blood boil.
Maya’s lips pressed against Kirk’s, and her tongue slithered down his throat. His body convulsed as his genetically altered sandy blonde hair turned into a jet-black mess. His eyes reverted to their original color, and his cheekbones and squared jaw morphed into a fat round face. She stood, pushing off of Kirk’s aching chest, and walked toward the throne. The half-naked gladiator once again bowed.
“Another impostor posing in our great Lord’s armor,” she said, sliding her long lacy gloves onto her hands. She spun around and sat on her throne. “Kill them both.”
“No. I can be of service.” Hershiser stood, using all his strength, and ran toward the steps of the throne. He flung himself to the floor, his face down, and held his hands together. As if betrayed by a friend, his heart split in half. He pleaded with her. “I will do as you say.”
“Will you?” She grinned, leaning forward and rubbing her chin. Her legs crossed and the chamber let out a collective gasp of enlightenment. Hershiser looked up, nodding. She spoke. “Bring me the impostor’s head. Prove your allegiance and I will let you be one of us.”
Hershiser nodded, limping over to the half-naked gladiator and taking a sword. He slowly meandered over toward Kirk who was awakening from the transformation back to his normal self. Kirk slowly rose and drove his elbow into Hershiser’s arm, attempting to stop him from swinging the sword. The two men locked up, but Hershiser quickly gained the upper hand. His arm wrapped around Kirk’s neck, squeezing. He flung Kirk to the ground and knelt over him, dealing fist after to fist into the face.
Maya laughed and Hershiser looked up, allowing Kirk to roll backwards and drive a heel into Hershiser’s sternum. Kirk lunged for the sword, but Hershiser kicked it out of the way. He grabbed Kirk by the ankle and twisted it quickly with a snap.
Kirk screamed, raking his fingernails across the ground. Several broke off. Hershiser dealt three quick blows to the kidney. He slammed Kirk into the base of one of the large columns that climbed through each floor of the massive chamber. He yanked Kirk by the hair and repeatedly slammed his head into the large stone beam. Once his enemy passed out, Hershiser walked over to the sword and picked it up. He plodded back toward Kirk and slammed the blade into his neck, face, chest, and finally, jaw as his errant swipes failed to sever the head.
Building up the anger to try one last time, his sixth swipe went clean through Kirk’s jaw, severing the head and lodging the blade into the stone column. Hershiser grabbed the head by the hair and lifted it, much to the applause and delight of those who looked on.
“Are you ready to share your secrets?” Maya asked, leaning forward.
Hershiser nodded, unable to deny her.
May 13, 2014
Well-written characters and great writing
In my previous blog, I focused on how we (reviewers in this instance) often approach rating a work in the wrong frame of mind. I went into detail about the difference between reviled characters and likable ones, and how they shouldn't directly correlate with being good or bad writing.
A hated character, like Eric Cartman from South Park, can be a perfectly written character, whether or not he is the main focus, or the nemesis, at any given moment.
I felt the need to make this distinction because the folks here on Goodreads seem to fall into this trap. Not everyone, and by no means the majority, but a decent enough sized chunk. I bring this up, because upon reviewing books I've read (after establishing my new profile) I came across reviews of Katniss Everdeen and Patrick Bateman. Katniss was much loved, and put on a pedestal, while Bateman was trashed, and that got me to thinking: do the people who rate Bella Swan and Patrick Bateman as poorly written characters do so correctly?
This one reviewer of American Psycho was a self-proclaimed feminist, and she said on multiple occasions during her 1-star rant that she detested the way Bateman viewed the world, how his rapes and murdering of women was glorified, and how she nearly vomited several times before not finishing the novel. Even though I COMPLETELY agree with her assessment of how Bateman was written, I have to ask: so f'ing what?
How was that BAD writing?
Quite bluntly, her comments were wrong. A hardcore, bra burning, feminist (not saying she is one, just using an example) is never going to agree with Bateman's outlook on life, or his hyper-sexualized narration of killing hookers, and she isn't meant to. That was THE POINT of Bateman's character. To illicit that response from the reader. You'd have to be disturbed not to be detested.
So that leads me into the point: what is a well-written character, and are they always likable?
To me, well-written characters are ones that illicit an emotional response from the reader and keep you turning the page. Great ones do too, but they do so while being active and with a purpose.
Bateman makes things happen, and as such he has problems he has to work through, and the drama is high as the murders pile up, and his world crashes around him. You want him to get caught, and yet you never lose sight that this is HIS story told from HIS perspective. It is going to be skewed.
On the flip side, you have Katniss Everdeen. She is a perfectly likable character, volunteers for the Hunger Games so her little sister won't die, and ends up having to do horrible things against her will just to survive. So sad, so sympathetic, so incredibly boring.
I don't like Katniss on a personal level. I think she is well-written, don't get me wrong, but I don't like her. And that, to me, says the author delivered a well-written character but not great writing. While most people think Katniss is a revered hero, I think she just spent much of the novel being a bitch and piggy-backing off of other people's efforts, or dumb mistakes. Katniss spat in the face of the Capitol, and as such she spent most of the first novel (and all of the second) being a passive participant who had largely no effect on the outcome. I've not read the third, and probably won't.
The Hunger Games were A GAME that she refused to play, and others played for her. It was Peeta who drew the sympathy from the viewers so that Katniss could receive gifts that would help her win. In Catching Fire, it is more of the same where she is reserved to dying so that Peeta can live, and yet everyone else builds a rebellion around her, help her survive, and all unbeknownst to her.
What the what-what?
Neither American Psycho nor The Hunger Games are perfectly written. I rated them 4 and 3 stars respectively. However, the difference between the two was that American Psycho delivered a believable (for that world) main character who was well-written, made things happened, and affected the plot. In the Hunger Games, we got a believable (for that world) main character who was well-written, but didn't make things happen, and didn't affect the plot.
There, people, lies the difference between characters determining good writing and bad writing...and it has nothing to do with your opinion of them, and everything to do with how they shape the story, and whether or not they keep you turning the page.
A hated character, like Eric Cartman from South Park, can be a perfectly written character, whether or not he is the main focus, or the nemesis, at any given moment.
I felt the need to make this distinction because the folks here on Goodreads seem to fall into this trap. Not everyone, and by no means the majority, but a decent enough sized chunk. I bring this up, because upon reviewing books I've read (after establishing my new profile) I came across reviews of Katniss Everdeen and Patrick Bateman. Katniss was much loved, and put on a pedestal, while Bateman was trashed, and that got me to thinking: do the people who rate Bella Swan and Patrick Bateman as poorly written characters do so correctly?
This one reviewer of American Psycho was a self-proclaimed feminist, and she said on multiple occasions during her 1-star rant that she detested the way Bateman viewed the world, how his rapes and murdering of women was glorified, and how she nearly vomited several times before not finishing the novel. Even though I COMPLETELY agree with her assessment of how Bateman was written, I have to ask: so f'ing what?
How was that BAD writing?
Quite bluntly, her comments were wrong. A hardcore, bra burning, feminist (not saying she is one, just using an example) is never going to agree with Bateman's outlook on life, or his hyper-sexualized narration of killing hookers, and she isn't meant to. That was THE POINT of Bateman's character. To illicit that response from the reader. You'd have to be disturbed not to be detested.
So that leads me into the point: what is a well-written character, and are they always likable?
To me, well-written characters are ones that illicit an emotional response from the reader and keep you turning the page. Great ones do too, but they do so while being active and with a purpose.
Bateman makes things happen, and as such he has problems he has to work through, and the drama is high as the murders pile up, and his world crashes around him. You want him to get caught, and yet you never lose sight that this is HIS story told from HIS perspective. It is going to be skewed.
On the flip side, you have Katniss Everdeen. She is a perfectly likable character, volunteers for the Hunger Games so her little sister won't die, and ends up having to do horrible things against her will just to survive. So sad, so sympathetic, so incredibly boring.
I don't like Katniss on a personal level. I think she is well-written, don't get me wrong, but I don't like her. And that, to me, says the author delivered a well-written character but not great writing. While most people think Katniss is a revered hero, I think she just spent much of the novel being a bitch and piggy-backing off of other people's efforts, or dumb mistakes. Katniss spat in the face of the Capitol, and as such she spent most of the first novel (and all of the second) being a passive participant who had largely no effect on the outcome. I've not read the third, and probably won't.
The Hunger Games were A GAME that she refused to play, and others played for her. It was Peeta who drew the sympathy from the viewers so that Katniss could receive gifts that would help her win. In Catching Fire, it is more of the same where she is reserved to dying so that Peeta can live, and yet everyone else builds a rebellion around her, help her survive, and all unbeknownst to her.
What the what-what?
Neither American Psycho nor The Hunger Games are perfectly written. I rated them 4 and 3 stars respectively. However, the difference between the two was that American Psycho delivered a believable (for that world) main character who was well-written, made things happened, and affected the plot. In the Hunger Games, we got a believable (for that world) main character who was well-written, but didn't make things happen, and didn't affect the plot.
There, people, lies the difference between characters determining good writing and bad writing...and it has nothing to do with your opinion of them, and everything to do with how they shape the story, and whether or not they keep you turning the page.
May 12, 2014
Likable characters vs Detestable characters.
I see this in reviews a lot, and it's something I am sure to receive for my novels once they start hitting the shelves. They go a little something like this...
"Ermahgerd, I totally stopped reading this book (or didn't like it) because I absolutely hated the 2nd supporting character. I hated him. He was such an ass, so it's bad writing and a stupid dumb-face novel. 2 stars."
So, I have to ask, what is wrong with a hated character? In fact, when I took creative writing classes in college (yes, you can get credit for those) one of the biggest compliments I could get for my short stories was: "I really hated that guy."
That was high praise! The fact that I could write someone so reviled in your own opinion that it made you hate me, the author, was fantastic (another blog post for another time).
When you write a Novel, Short-Story, or any other work of fiction (you can extend this into film and new media), you largely want to have characters that fall into two columns: sympathetic or reviled. The former is the most common, and leads to the most the likes, the former is much more difficult to pull off.
Sympathetic characters are ones like Batman, Luke Skywalker, Jay Gatsby...you get the point. Something happened to them, and now you feel bad and want to root for them. They're good guys with good hearts and intentions. They rarely do things that off-put the reader, but when they do it is often well deserved and certainly justifiable.
Then you have the reviled characters. The ones that you hate so much that you have to keep turning the page in order to see what happens next, or to see if they get their comeuppance. These are guys like Patrick Bateman and Tom Ripley. They're sociopaths who lie, cheat, murder, rape, and their views on the world are out of whack or slightly off-kilter. Yet, you can't wait to see what happens.
The fact that Bateman and Ripley are reviled individuals doesn't make them bad writing. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The fact the author was SO ABLE to get inside their minds and make you, the reader, detest complete fabrications is a testament to how great those stories really were.
The best example of this dichotomy of the fictitious character comes from South Park. I am sure the more pretentious of you is about to click out of this blog, but hear me out.
The best, and most liked, characters on the show are as follows: Cartman, Butters and Randy. We're going to leave Randy for another blog post, as his character type is a unique one.
It's no coincidence that many episodes which feature a Cartman heavy story arc often feature Butters in a large supporting role...and vice versa.
Cartman is a sociopathic, lying, manipulative, spoiled, racist, narcissistic, plotting, cock sucking, son-of-a-bitch (or is that hermaphrodite). You hate him, yet you can't stop laughing or watching. He is always up to something. Cartman is the ultimate villain, and we loved it when Wendy beat his ass. Yet, there is something gratifying when we watch him win. Eat up, Scott Tenorman!
Butters is sweat, innocent, unassuming, gentle, caring and supportive. He is always being shit on by the other characters, getting his heart broken, his eye gouged, or drowned by his mother. Everyone in Butters world is so messed up, and caught in the middle is this innocent boy who was probably molested by his uncle at a young age. Holy shit...
You watch the episodes, hoping one day Butters will win, and Professor Chaos will reign supreme, but it never happens. And you love the little guy for it.
Both are well-written examples of the hated character vs the sympathetic character. Just because Butters is sympathetic, doesn't make him a better character, nor the episodes which feature him more relatable. It's important, as reviewers, to understand the difference between rating a book based on what we personally thought of the characters.
It's not the job of a novel to make you like all the characters in it. It's the job of the novel to entertain you and evoke emotional responses that make sense in context, and either further your own moral beliefs, or have you ask questions.
Patrick Bateman wouldn't be Patrick Bateman if you liked him, and thus the themes and responses we get from the story would be completely different. Now, if you like Bateman on a personal level, and just not how he is written, maybe you should get some help.
Until next time, watch those stars. Evaluate what the author was going for, and if those sympathetic or hated characters did their job. Sometimes, the answers will surprise you.
"Ermahgerd, I totally stopped reading this book (or didn't like it) because I absolutely hated the 2nd supporting character. I hated him. He was such an ass, so it's bad writing and a stupid dumb-face novel. 2 stars."
So, I have to ask, what is wrong with a hated character? In fact, when I took creative writing classes in college (yes, you can get credit for those) one of the biggest compliments I could get for my short stories was: "I really hated that guy."
That was high praise! The fact that I could write someone so reviled in your own opinion that it made you hate me, the author, was fantastic (another blog post for another time).
When you write a Novel, Short-Story, or any other work of fiction (you can extend this into film and new media), you largely want to have characters that fall into two columns: sympathetic or reviled. The former is the most common, and leads to the most the likes, the former is much more difficult to pull off.
Sympathetic characters are ones like Batman, Luke Skywalker, Jay Gatsby...you get the point. Something happened to them, and now you feel bad and want to root for them. They're good guys with good hearts and intentions. They rarely do things that off-put the reader, but when they do it is often well deserved and certainly justifiable.
Then you have the reviled characters. The ones that you hate so much that you have to keep turning the page in order to see what happens next, or to see if they get their comeuppance. These are guys like Patrick Bateman and Tom Ripley. They're sociopaths who lie, cheat, murder, rape, and their views on the world are out of whack or slightly off-kilter. Yet, you can't wait to see what happens.
The fact that Bateman and Ripley are reviled individuals doesn't make them bad writing. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The fact the author was SO ABLE to get inside their minds and make you, the reader, detest complete fabrications is a testament to how great those stories really were.
The best example of this dichotomy of the fictitious character comes from South Park. I am sure the more pretentious of you is about to click out of this blog, but hear me out.
The best, and most liked, characters on the show are as follows: Cartman, Butters and Randy. We're going to leave Randy for another blog post, as his character type is a unique one.
It's no coincidence that many episodes which feature a Cartman heavy story arc often feature Butters in a large supporting role...and vice versa.
Cartman is a sociopathic, lying, manipulative, spoiled, racist, narcissistic, plotting, cock sucking, son-of-a-bitch (or is that hermaphrodite). You hate him, yet you can't stop laughing or watching. He is always up to something. Cartman is the ultimate villain, and we loved it when Wendy beat his ass. Yet, there is something gratifying when we watch him win. Eat up, Scott Tenorman!
Butters is sweat, innocent, unassuming, gentle, caring and supportive. He is always being shit on by the other characters, getting his heart broken, his eye gouged, or drowned by his mother. Everyone in Butters world is so messed up, and caught in the middle is this innocent boy who was probably molested by his uncle at a young age. Holy shit...
You watch the episodes, hoping one day Butters will win, and Professor Chaos will reign supreme, but it never happens. And you love the little guy for it.
Both are well-written examples of the hated character vs the sympathetic character. Just because Butters is sympathetic, doesn't make him a better character, nor the episodes which feature him more relatable. It's important, as reviewers, to understand the difference between rating a book based on what we personally thought of the characters.
It's not the job of a novel to make you like all the characters in it. It's the job of the novel to entertain you and evoke emotional responses that make sense in context, and either further your own moral beliefs, or have you ask questions.
Patrick Bateman wouldn't be Patrick Bateman if you liked him, and thus the themes and responses we get from the story would be completely different. Now, if you like Bateman on a personal level, and just not how he is written, maybe you should get some help.
Until next time, watch those stars. Evaluate what the author was going for, and if those sympathetic or hated characters did their job. Sometimes, the answers will surprise you.
Writers don't write?
I like to write. Some say I am even good at it. I guess that's a good thing, considering my ability to churn out numerous amounts of work. However, as I sit on the precipice of releasing my first fiction novel, I find that I have a laundry list of things to do, and none of them include writing.
I'm not talking about the general stuff that comes with making sure a piece is well formatted, edited, and ready for release. I'm talking about the endless game of merchandising, blogging, soliciting reviews, interacting with fans...and just about everything else that doesn't include cracking open MS Word and finishing the sequels and the novellas that tie into the world I am trying to create.
Lest you think I am having a pity party, remember that there is still the whole being a dad thing I've gotta juggle, making money to eat and feed people (because you can't depend on writing to be your sole income), and whatever else needs to be done. I think my lawn needs to be mowed, and my 4 year old isn't going to do it.
So, I'd like to hear from aspiring writers, full time writers, and avid readers. What is most important to you in this new world of writing where writers have to be concerned with more than just their original craft? A writer who does everything to interact with their fans, and blogs every day, or a writer who is a recluse and pumps out a lot of cool books for you to read? And be honest, do you search out newest and best material from people you've never heard about, or do you pretty much stick to the people with the loudest blow horn (Not that they can't be good too)?
Because, after all, the reason we are writers is to be read. On one hand you can churn out tons of books and never have the grassroots momentum behind your books to gain traction, or you can write a few books, and spend all your time promoting them.
Decisions...
I'm not talking about the general stuff that comes with making sure a piece is well formatted, edited, and ready for release. I'm talking about the endless game of merchandising, blogging, soliciting reviews, interacting with fans...and just about everything else that doesn't include cracking open MS Word and finishing the sequels and the novellas that tie into the world I am trying to create.
Lest you think I am having a pity party, remember that there is still the whole being a dad thing I've gotta juggle, making money to eat and feed people (because you can't depend on writing to be your sole income), and whatever else needs to be done. I think my lawn needs to be mowed, and my 4 year old isn't going to do it.
So, I'd like to hear from aspiring writers, full time writers, and avid readers. What is most important to you in this new world of writing where writers have to be concerned with more than just their original craft? A writer who does everything to interact with their fans, and blogs every day, or a writer who is a recluse and pumps out a lot of cool books for you to read? And be honest, do you search out newest and best material from people you've never heard about, or do you pretty much stick to the people with the loudest blow horn (Not that they can't be good too)?
Because, after all, the reason we are writers is to be read. On one hand you can churn out tons of books and never have the grassroots momentum behind your books to gain traction, or you can write a few books, and spend all your time promoting them.
Decisions...
