Clueless brilliance?

[BookStop]

How is it possible for brilliant authors to continually put out less than brilliant tales?

I just picked up the Dragon Quintet last night and've read In the Dragon's House by OSC and Judgment by Elizabeth Moon. *yawn*

I haven't read Moon before, so maybe I'm just not a fan of her style, but Orson Scott Card gets my point across perfectly. Sometimes he is a brilliant storyteller, and other times he's just bad....really bad. The dragon story wasn't the worse thing I've read by far, but it's not good either.

I tried to pick up an OSC horror novel after I had finished with Ender's Game and the Alvin Maker books; it was so bad I traded it in to a used bookstore the same day. I don't get it.

Do authors sometimes really not know why their works are good?
Do they get in such a rush to meet deadlines that they just plop out whatever nonsense comes to them quickly?
Is thier brilliance a fluke perhaps?
Am I just weird?

 

[The Procrastinator]

Er...yes.

 

[Switchback]

It's my opinion that just because someone may be an absolutely incredible writer that doesn't necessarily mean they have an incredible story to tell. Writers are as susceptible as anyone to the pressures of deadlines and if they have some kind of story to tell, they will tell it just to get it published. This means that sometimes they are forced to write something they probably aren't 100% passionate about, which will most likely lead to a weak story poorly executed. The "just gotta finish" mentality.

To be a legendary writer, you need the chops as well as the story. One without the other just doesn't cut it....

 

[Overread]

I think Switchback is right - a writer who writes what they want when they want at their own speed (as is often the case with a first book) gets all the time they need to get the book right - they also are only writing because they choose to. Once published however, the not only have to write another book, but write it within a deadline not of thier choosing and proably also within a set limit of words -- so its not surprising that they might write someting less than perfect under these conditions.
Also - sometimes I think they try new things and new writing styles that sometimes just don't gell with some of thier original fans.

 

[Erin99]

Ditto to the two posters above me.

As a series progresses, an author is under immense pressure to wrap up each plotline, keep the story hooking, keep the characters fresh and interesting, keep surprising the reader, and many other things. A brilliant first book might slip if the writer cannot cope under pressure, especially if other things get in the way of writing, such as family, illness, depression, etc.

That's why I think it will be (slightly) easier to have a series plotted carefully, knowing where every plotline fits and how they meld together throughout each book. An author who knows where he's headed will perhaps find it easier to get there.

As for single stand-alone books differing in quality, perhaps the author is struggling to cast off their previous novels and characters, and so tries a different writing approach or a different type of novel/idea. That's one of the reasons why I'm interested to see how JK Rowling progresses after her best-seller dissipates. Will she still come up with an intriguing story? How will her characterisations be? Will her writing still appeal to adults and children? Etc.