So what are you really looking for in the books you buy?

[sabolich]

I just scanned the blurb and it seems ok. It's not trouser-explodingly good or dire, but I agree that it doesn't convey a great deal of depth. More important, to me, than the blurb is the fact you've got some nice ratings. I often just skip blurbs altogether and read a positive and (if there is one) negative review.

Thanks, Thaddeus. I appreciate you taking the time.

 

[Anne Lyle]

I go by the content of the blurb, not the prose - what puts me off is a mention of tired plots (young mage comes into his/her powers) and tropes that just don't press my buttons (dragons, telepathic bonded animals, telepathic bonded dragons...you can tell I overdosed on Anne McCaffrey as a teen, can't you!).

I asked my publisher nicely to change my novel's blurb when it first went up on Amazon - it wasn't bad, but it put the wrong spin on the historical backstory and I thought it was misleading. They asked me to write the replacement, and I'm pretty pleased with it

http://www.annelyle.com/nightsmasque/

 

[Brian G Turner]

Good blurb, Anne.

 

[Toby Frost]

I actually get frustrated with the fantasy genre. Too much of it is focused on escapsim; wish fulfillment as protagonists; magic that solves basic problems with deus ex machina; evil hordes that demonstrate nothing more than the writer's inability to consider moral complexities; stories that have nothing really to say.

While I agree with you, Brian, I think the pendulum has swung the other way somewhat and "gritty" is now in fashion. However, gritty is pretty easy to do by numbers (soldier pees self on battlefield; brave warrior abandons own men; princess is ugly; mob kills gay wizard etc etc) and I wonder if we won't have a run of second-rate tough fantasy in the next few years. What I'd really love to see in fantasy is a move away from the epic: just as every detective novel isn't about the murder of the Prime Minister, I don't see why every fantasy story should be about the fate of the kingdom. But that will probably never happen. And don't get me started on multi-volume stuff.

 

[Anne Lyle]

Not every fantasy story is epic. The Lies of Locke Lamora is a heist caper; Among Thieves is about an informant trying to survive the machinations of rival crime bosses. My own books walk the line - there are major political stakes underlying everything, but the real motivation of the characters is personal.

 

[sabolich]

Anne, I agree that not every story is epic. My novel Firedancer started as a stand-alone and went into the drawer for 10 years before a publisher approached me wanting to see my long fiction (she'd only seen my short stories and was impressed). She only buys series but she wanted Firedancer, a lot. Ergo, now it's a series, but I admit it's been hard to wrap my head around extending the plot of a book written and stuck in the drawer in 1999. It's all good, as there was sufficient story there, but what's wrong with stand-alones?

I think there is serious peril for a writer of series to get pigeonholed by fans into expecting them to write the same thing forever (JK Rowling, Jim Butcher). My stuff is all over the map, from alternate history to dark fantasy to soft SF to epic fantasy. I have had the freedom to write what I want because for a long time I wasn't serious about publishing it. (Now I am, because having freed myself from a day job, I don't ever want to go back!) Be that as it may, people reading my stuff never know what they're about to pick up, but my first readers are always eager to see it. Is variety in your writing bad? I don't think the writer should have to stick to one trope just because people expect more of the same.

I like continuing series as much as the next person, and heaven knows, I can't seem to write short novels, as my mind continually spins out epic yarns. However, if I like an author, I am willing to try anything they write, and even stick with them if one book disappoints. Nobody hits home runs every time.

 

[Anne Lyle]

It is a worry, certainly. I have a project on the backburner that I could make either alternate history or secondary world fantasy, and I'm leaning towards the latter purely because I don't want to get pigeon-holed early on as a writer of alternate history.

OTOH I'm happy to stick to "historically-inspired" fantasy, because that's pretty broad in scope and encompasses pretty much everything I wrote before I got published. It could lose me some readers who love my books for the historical detail - but then again it could widen my appeal to readers who are put off by historical stuff.

I read an interesting ebook that goes into quite a lot of detail on creating your author brand. The stuff about online presence is rather dated (the author is very keen on MySpace!), but the rest is still relevant.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003VD1EQC/?tag=brite-21

 

[sabolich]

I read an interesting ebook that goes into quite a lot of detail on creating your author brand. The stuff about online presence is rather dated (the author is very keen on MySpace!), but the rest is still relevant.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B003VD1EQC/?tag=brite-21

LOL. I acquired that book just last week on the strength of a Broad Universe recommendation, which totally backs up Kristine Kathryn Rusch's point about books are sold by word of mouth, not bestseller lists, reviews, or nearly any other type of promotion the newbie author agonizes over. I'm about halfway through it and yes, she has many good points to make.

 

[Lilmizflashythang]

Ah, but do you finish it? I bought a book a couple of years ago that had a terrific opening prologue, but from chapter 1 on the writing was awful and the plot was Dullsville, with characters that never hooked me. I'll try anything that looks interesting, too, but I confess to a lot of page-flipping before I spend money these days.

Only two books did I not finish, they were both by John Grishom, and I felt that they were too slow. I guess you could call it three, but I don't think running out of time on Moby Dick and having to return it to the library counts.

 

[Karn Maeshalanadae]

Only two books did I not finish, they were both by John Grishom, and I felt that they were too slow. I guess you could call it three, but I don't think running out of time on Moby Dick and having to return it to the library counts.

No, it doesn't count.

 

[BAYLOR]

A book that will hold my interest.

 

[MWagner]

A conflict that has high stakes.

A setting that is fantastic, and rich with texture.

Characters whose values and behavior are a product of their environment. Nothing turns me off more than modern sensibilities ported into a different world.

Prose that demonstrates a mastery of word-smithing. The sound and rhythm of the words should be pleasing to the mind's ear.

 

[Anne Spackman]

I look for something to incite my imagination or to make me think a lot about what is possible, what I believe, what I hope for, etc. In historical fiction, I find I just want to be "transported" to another time and to try to understand it. I like to feel strongly for the protagonist and like him or her and what he/she is doing or trying to achieve or do. I like descriptive language and intricate plots. I guess you know it when you see it...