The Second Book Syndrome
The success of 'the Sentinel' (shortlisted for the CWA Steel Dagger for best thriler of 2013, No.1 in Spain, several copies sold to members of my family...)was,as might be expected, a massive boost for my writing confidence. Short of selling 100,000 copies (and I was some way short of that:)) what more could I have asked?
Book 2 seemed to me to be already written. In fact it was, I had copious research notes, character plans, and a plot which seemed so cunning and complex it could hardly fail. Then I read the result. It failed. When it's hard for an author to recognise their own characters, you know you're in trouble. Enter long dark night of the soul, stage left. Lots of them.
And in the middle of those cold nights, I realised with horror I was making things worse. Which was good. Instead of ploughing ahead with a 200,000 word train wreck, I pulled back and got back to basics. Once I remembered what the basics are.
Firstly, the plot. Complex plots are good but not if they're complex in ways that preclude the reader from following them. If you can't summarise the plot sufficiently to tell a stranger on a train what happens, something's wrong. Being able to summarise the plot also ensures the author knows what's happening. True Detective Series 2 is an example of such a rogue plot (so far at least).
The characters in a series should be recognisable throughout. I had my main character raging throughout. He raged at waiters, passing nuns, subordinates, superiors and walk on, walk off characters whose role was not to be raged at. 'Calm down dear' as Michael Winner used to say on those TV adverts for insurance.
This isn't to say characters shouldn't change over time but if they become someone else, it doesn't make for a positive reading experience.
The protagonist needs to be the star. In rewriting, I made sure the main characters in the two time periods became the focal point of the tale. They initiated things, solved things, addressed issues and moved the plot. Others helped or hindered naturally but the two main characters now get most airtime.
The biggest change I made, and the most beneficial, was to address the setting: The wild, wide, rugged Basque Countryside. My characters had to drive everywhere. And when they did, they talked. My, how they talked. The only thing they never said was 'are we there yet?'
They should have. By slashing travelling times and cutting the travelogue descriptions, the whole thing started to move along much faster - and it made more sense.
For anyone experiencing this(very common, apparently) 'Second Album' effect, I thoroughly recommend taking the time to analyse what the story's about, the roles and importance of your characters and the arc of the story in terms of things becoming progressively more dificult until they reach a point where things go wrong, provoking a climatic event which ends well, or badly.(As a Sheffield Wednesday Fan, I'm used to that concept- a series of events usually ending in disaster and producing a targic climax at the end of the season).
Of course, this wasn't as pleasant,but now I have half the third book written,I realise just how much I've benefited from it. 'What doesn't kill us makes us stronger,' as Nietszche put it. Think how much worse it would be for a sculptor.
Book 2 seemed to me to be already written. In fact it was, I had copious research notes, character plans, and a plot which seemed so cunning and complex it could hardly fail. Then I read the result. It failed. When it's hard for an author to recognise their own characters, you know you're in trouble. Enter long dark night of the soul, stage left. Lots of them.
And in the middle of those cold nights, I realised with horror I was making things worse. Which was good. Instead of ploughing ahead with a 200,000 word train wreck, I pulled back and got back to basics. Once I remembered what the basics are.
Firstly, the plot. Complex plots are good but not if they're complex in ways that preclude the reader from following them. If you can't summarise the plot sufficiently to tell a stranger on a train what happens, something's wrong. Being able to summarise the plot also ensures the author knows what's happening. True Detective Series 2 is an example of such a rogue plot (so far at least).
The characters in a series should be recognisable throughout. I had my main character raging throughout. He raged at waiters, passing nuns, subordinates, superiors and walk on, walk off characters whose role was not to be raged at. 'Calm down dear' as Michael Winner used to say on those TV adverts for insurance.
This isn't to say characters shouldn't change over time but if they become someone else, it doesn't make for a positive reading experience.
The protagonist needs to be the star. In rewriting, I made sure the main characters in the two time periods became the focal point of the tale. They initiated things, solved things, addressed issues and moved the plot. Others helped or hindered naturally but the two main characters now get most airtime.
The biggest change I made, and the most beneficial, was to address the setting: The wild, wide, rugged Basque Countryside. My characters had to drive everywhere. And when they did, they talked. My, how they talked. The only thing they never said was 'are we there yet?'
They should have. By slashing travelling times and cutting the travelogue descriptions, the whole thing started to move along much faster - and it made more sense.
For anyone experiencing this(very common, apparently) 'Second Album' effect, I thoroughly recommend taking the time to analyse what the story's about, the roles and importance of your characters and the arc of the story in terms of things becoming progressively more dificult until they reach a point where things go wrong, provoking a climatic event which ends well, or badly.(As a Sheffield Wednesday Fan, I'm used to that concept- a series of events usually ending in disaster and producing a targic climax at the end of the season).
Of course, this wasn't as pleasant,but now I have half the third book written,I realise just how much I've benefited from it. 'What doesn't kill us makes us stronger,' as Nietszche put it. Think how much worse it would be for a sculptor.
No comments have been added yet.
