Daniel’s Reviews > but always in tandem > Status Update

Somehow, this one wasn't on my radar. Are you enjoying it so far?

Given the time/character overlap with Between the Teeth, and having at least one arc complete, it seemed like a good one to pick up after that.

I'm def enjoying it, though I'm not sure I'm having the intended reaction for a couple reasons. One, I basically have spent the first chunk of it excited to get to "the incident" with David, and see that from Robbie's POV, and not remembering the timeline from the other book in enough detail to know if that was 5 or 50 or 500 pages away, so part of my brain's been a bit, oh, whatever, just get on with it at everything that wasn't that.

Two, I am finding Robbie more funny than sympathetic. Having seen these two through David's eyes in BTT, I'm like, you little dork, all you have to do is forgive him and you can have everything you ever wanted. I dunno if that's intended, or a me thing, or if she's just not really conveying a sense of hurt there in a way that connects for me. Maybe if it were presented chronologically instead of interleaving the timelines it would be different? idk.

Also, and some of this may be because I've been distracted by the David thing, and have seen some of it from another POV, but the current timeline parts seem a bit too lightly sketched? The past timeline feels more well developed.

Daniel wrote: "I'm like, you little dork, all you have to do is forgive him and you can have everything you ever wanted. I dunno if that's intended, or a me thing..."

Oh that's interesting. I feel that what happened was absolutely, totally, completely, utterly, permanently 100% unforgivable, so I was in synch with Robbie right down to my bones. Although, yes, he is a little dork. 😂

Anomaly wrote: "Somehow, this one wasn't on my radar. Are you enjoying it so far?"

Anomaly, you can't* read this until you've read all 3 books of the BTT trilogy, and the 3rd book of that isn't published yet. That's why I haven't reviewed this yet, or even marked it as read, because I didn't want to draw attention to it and accidentally encourage people to read things out of order.

*Of course you can read it, but this story interweaves with BTT, and you'll get spoiled for David & Jake's story if you read this now. And if you get spoiled for David & Jake's story, I'll cry. Do you want to make me cry? 🥺

(I realize I may be setting myself for an answer of "Hell, yeah!" 😂)

Do you want to make me cry? 🥺

Normally, I'd be tempted to err on the side of chaos here, but since I already tortured you with that one book I'm trying hard to forget... I suppose I will spare you this time! (In all seriousness, thanks for the warning! I was half-asleep and didn't register that maybe there's a reason I had no clue who the characters mentioned in the summary were and went I SHALL SNAG THIS ONE TOO. I'm over here impatiently waiting for book three's release still. I already bought the first two, but don't wanna read until the third exists.)

Teal wrote: "Oh that's interesting. I feel that what happened was absolutely, totally, completely, utterly, permanently 100% unforgivable, so I was in synch with Robbie right down to my bones."

Meh, (view spoiler)[ I'm at the point where Robbie's just got his audition invite and Georgie kissed him on the forehead, so, idk, maybe something coming up in the past timeline will revise my opinion, but a) he's clearly seen enough to know monogamy does not come natural to Georgie and they haven't even hooked up yet, b) it seems like they haven't even talked about it and maybe Georgie will do better? idk. I've always had a very muted reaction to cheating. There's some pretty big stuff I can let go of easily, and there's shit I can hold a grudge about even after I've forgotten the reason and details myself, and for whatever reason cheating's always kind of been in the former group for me. (hide spoiler)]

Re series spoilers, keeping in mind I haven't finished this yet, so maybe more spoilers for the David/Jake books will be coming, but I kind of think whichever you read first is going to have some kind of spoilers for the other, though I'm not sure the stuff that's spoiled is exactly unpredictable or going to ruin my enjoyment, idk. I've never been one to worry super much about spoilers. I do think the overlapped parts are better developed in the BTT books, so maybe yeah, read those first, I guess.

Actually, I think the stories that are most "ruined" by spoilers are ones that rely on a big twist, and those are inevitably thin to begin with and they invariably ruin them in advance by using the fact there's a twist as the main selling point in the promos.

We're definitely due for two very different reading experiences, it looks like. For me, (view spoiler)[cheating is a relationship killer, something there's no coming back from. So from my perspective, the Robbie and Georgie fling should be chalked up to a learning experience — a very painful learning experience — and they both need to move on with their lives. Sometimes you meet the right person at the wrong time, when you're too young and immature to avoid fucking it all up. It's tragic, but unsalvageable. That's how I saw their relationship. And I wallowed deliciously in the sheer angst of it all, which is so totally not-me that I felt like the author had pulled off a miracle. (hide spoiler)]

As far as spoilers go, the reason why I read (or seek out stories in any media whatsoever) is to be surprised. That's it. That's my motivation. If I'm not driven by the need to know what happens next, I'm not going to read/watch/pay attention. I'll just put it down and walk away. Some stories turn out to be so engaging and/or personally meaningful that I'll come back for rereads, even though that element of surprise is gone. But for the first time through, I need to be hooked by the unknown.

And when I talk about surprise, I don't mean plot twists. It's about the characters — not knowing what they're going to do, what choices they're going to make, how they're going to play the hand that's dealt them. That's why spoilers can destroy a story for me. What is even the point in reading it if I already know what choices are going to be made and how things are going to play out?

I went into this book kind of the same way you did, it sounds like — wanting to see David's story from a different POV. Given that, what the author managed to do here kind of blew my mind. I already knew what had happened to these guys, in a general sense — but she got me completely invested in learning HOW and WHY it had happened. It ended up being a very emotionally intense reading experience for me.

Anomaly wrote: "Normally, I'd be tempted to err on the side of chaos here, but since I already tortured you with that one book I'm trying hard to forget... I suppose I will spare you..."

Thank you for your mercy! 😂 When you're ready for this book, let me know and I can send you the compiled-from-AO3 epub.

I feel very protective of David & Jake's story because they've become my favorite couple in the YCMAL universe. I got so invested in them that I'm writing fanfic for the first time in my life. Thus my distress at the thought of anyone getting spoiled. I am in too deep to be rational here. 😜

Interesting. I can't remember specific examples, but there have been a couple of times where while reading something I somehow stumbled across some information that just killed my interest in continuing, but it's rare.

But funnily enough, I would also say the HOW and the WHY are what I read for, it's just that I don't really experience anything I'd call "surprise" at that. I've not really reflected on it or anything, but off the cuff, I'd guess maybe it's to do with mental models, or not really anticipating/having expectations at that level? There can be a kind of ongoing sense of suspense/tension, but the resolution of the questions raising that just doesn't come in the form of surprise. More satisfaction or disappointment, I'd say. Of course, I have a lot of patterns, constraints, expectations from a lifetime of reading but I think they're more abstract, like a general range of realistic behavior or possible events. Like, the WHAT is generally not usually in question in a story, the couple's going to get together, the detective's going to solve the mystery, the heroes are going to win, etc, it's all about the how & why, and I find spoilers are generally focused on the what. (Edit: I guess they can verge into the how and why also, but it's kind of a gradient and they're usually bigger picture?)

Surprise when reading is generally something I think of as mostly negative, because when I experience anything I'd call surprise at a story it's generally because the author has violated some very basic storytelling/character expectation and essentially ruined their own book. The thing I was presumably enjoying has now turned to garbage in my mouth.

It's something I've only thought about recently, when a GR friend I otherwise respect was being snotty (not to me, but in general) about people being strongly spoiler-averse. To me it made no sense — how could getting spoiled NOT be the worst thing that could happen to a reader? I had to conclude that people read for different reasons, and my prime reason is, I am seeking to be surprised. I'm relishing the not knowing followed by the finding out.

Is "surprise" the right word to use here? It's not always "Oh no I never expected that" surprise; it's usually "I didn't know what was going to happen and wow I just found out" surprise.

In my own fiction writing, I cannot plot my way out of a paper bag, so to speak. I enjoy so many other aspects of writing — characterization, setting, dialogue, even technical things like scene transitions — but I simply cannot figure out what needs to happen over the course of a story. I bring that deficit into reading, as well — I am crap at figuring out how a story is going to unfold. When I first started reading mysteries I couldn't guess the solution to any of them, but assumed I'd get better at that with time. I remember checking in with myself about 10 years later, and realizing that I had still not figured out a single one. Eventually I got there, but damn, I am just easy to fool, I guess. Easy to surprise.

Have you seen that spoiler study? It's been ages and I don't remember the details, but basically there was some study that showed despite peoples claims to contrary, when rating their enjoyment of stories after reading they enjoyed the ones that had been spoiled slightly more than the ones that hadn't. idk, ymmv I guess, but it may be one of those counter-instinctive things and probably depends on the exact nature of the story, the spoiler and the individual.

I've never been one of those mystery as a puzzle readers, I'll get ideas as I go, but I don't make the slightest conscious effort to figure out the solution, I'm just kind of passively along for the ride. I dunno, kind of the anthropologist fly on the wall, like idk wtf these humans are up to, but I'm just going to sit here and try not to attract any attention as I observe. Generally when reading I'll have a fair idea what's going to happen next, but maybe no clue how everything's going to end. (Beyond of course the good guys win, etc.)

With writing for me at least and I imagine a lot of people it's kind of conscious / subconscious knowledge thing. Recognition without recall sometimes. Like character is experiencing X, what does X feel like? idk, I can't summon up a memory of it to save my life. Or even real people, What would Y do in some situation? I haven't the foggiest idea. Would Y do Z? No way, they would never do that.

Plotting, I tend to do by instinct, then feel insecure about whether I'm missing anything that's needed, expected. Guide wise I think the best stuff I've read/seen lately are the Dwight Swain book and Glenn Gers youtube channel "Writing for Screens" he's very pragmatic and has good process questions. I'm trying to get better at working it out instead of just waiting for things to pop into my head. Jim Butcher's got a series of livejournal posts somewhere that cover the same basic ground as Swain if you want a short version of that.

FWIW I read the BTT books a couple of years back, and may revisit them after the Jake and Dave third book is published.

I'm generally not up for that level of angst though.

Daniel wrote: "Have you seen that spoiler study? It's been ages and I don't remember the details, but basically there was some study that showed despite peoples claims to contrary, when rating their enjoyment of ..."

I have not. But I am seriously spoiler-averse, to the point where I hate to read blurbs, even though I need to read blurbs in order to figure out whether I'd be interested in the book or not. It's a dilemma. A solution seems to have evolved naturally, though, because by the time I get around to reading the books I've bought, enough months/years have gone by that I've often forgotten why I wanted them in the first place. It's kind of ideal to jump into something not knowing what I'm in for, only that Past Me thought it might be good.

Thanks for the recs. I'll take a look at them. When the original Save the Cat book came out (a long time ago now!), I found it immensely helpful. It addressed the exact things I was struggling to grasp. People dismiss it for being formulaic, but duh, some of us need to have the existence of formulas pointed out to us. It all depends on where you're starting from, and I was starting from utter cluelessness. I felt like I'd been wandering in the wilderness for years asking "What is plot? No, really, how do I do it? Help meeeeee", and reading books that claimed to answer that question but instead only spouted vague, meaningless abstractions. STC helped me finally get it. So now at least I'm smarter about why I fail, which sounds like cold comfort maybe but is actually a big improvement.

Past me can't be trusted. He's bought all kinds of garbage on the flimsiest of whims. ;)

It's interesting how so much of the good writing stuff re: plotting comes out of the screenwriting community. I think fiction writers in general are terrified of mentioning anything that smells like a formula because that's been the standard insult of "literary" toward genre fiction for so long. But I don't think it's any different than a constraint like poetic meter. Like you can bake all kinds of cakes in a square pan, if someone just keeps producing the same vanilla box mix over and over, it's not the pan that's the problem.

On the other hand, a lot of the hollywood stuff gets cultish, with true believers insisting theirs is the one true way. And also a lot of these people make bank out of running screenwriting seminars, so they're not exactly unbiased.

The problem for me with stuff like Save The Cat is I find it both too specific and too vague at the same time. Some of the labels for elements/scenes make zero sense to me, I can't imagine anything that would fit such a label. And I think there's a kind of projection aspect to it, like horoscopes or numerology, if you're determined to element X in the story you can find it, the same way you can find Jesus in a potato chip, but as the writer I would never in a billion years have thought of that story element in those terms or filling that role.

I have seen some people talk about required elements / audience expectations for specific genres, which does sound useful to me, but they never seem to produce any lists of these I can find. And I think it's much easier to recognize violations of audience expectations than the actual expected elements if there are any.

One of the reasons I like Gers is that he's all, there are no rules, if formula X helps you, great use it, if it doesn't just ignore it.