Living the Fictional Dream

I watched the premier of the new HBO series True Blood tonight. The series had an intriguing hook, and it left me wanting more, like the first chapter of a good book. Of course, the series is based on a book series — the Southern Vampire Mysteries by Charlaine Harris — so maybe that’s why.

Interesting premise… a girl with some sort of psychic powers (telepathy and possibly TK), a vampire whose mind she can’t read, a feisty best friend, a brother associated with strange circumstances, a dead “fang banger,” and a couple of crazies out to siphon vampire blood. Take all that, throw in some Louisiana accents, and you’ve got the beginning of what looks to be an interesting story. I’ll definitely be tuning in next week.

Part of me wants to read the books so I can find out what happens without waiting a week for the resolution of each episode’s cliffhanger!

Anyway, it goes to show the importance of the opening hook.

My week has been balanced out writing-wise. I got two rejections (one from the market that had passed my story to round 2 **sighs**), but then yesterday I had a story accepted by Every Day Fiction. This will be my second with them, so I’m excited! I’ll post the link here when it comes out — I don’t know the date yet.

So, to continue on my topic from yesterday, plots or types of stories that I don’t like, I thought I would put together a few thoughts about plots that I do like. Everyone probably has these… those story premises that suck you in every time. Sometimes, I think of these as guilty pleasure stories, because I usually enjoy them even if the writing isn’t top notch.

One of these for me is the story where two people pretend to be a couple for some at least slightly nefarious purpose and then actually fall in love during the con. One example of that is the movie Drive Me Crazy, and it’s a teen movie, too, so it has that Y/A factor that I love. But this concept has been done all over the place — in books, TV shows, etc. — and I always love it! The thing is, though it’s a simple concept, there are millions of ways it can be done. Just because, boiled down, the premise is the same, each story is totally different.

Vampire and werewolf fiction is another one for me. I love the urban fantasy/supernatural feel to these creatures. I love that they are human and “other” at the same time. I like them with the traditional tropes (silver bullets, wooden stakes, no reflection), and I love it when writers give them their own twist (like the werewolves in Kelley Armstrong’s Otherworld and the vampires in Stephanie Meyer’s Twilight). I used to devour these any time I found them because they were rare. With the current urban fantasy explosion, there are a lot more to pick and choose from, which is great, because I can always find something new to read.

I also love it when two characters who seem to be diametrically opposed (by a point of view, by temperment, by class, by family, whatever) form a really strong relationship. Romantic relationships of this sort abound — think Veronica/Logan on Veronica Mars, the main couple in Pretty in Pink, or even Romeo and Juliet (though, I prefer the ones that end more happily!). But the relationship doesn’t always have to be a romance. A friendship that opposes these lines can be just as fascinating. In this story, it’s all about the depth of the relationship, the connections forged, the sacrifices made, and the ways the characters’ eyes are opened.

I’m also a sucker for a story about a scoundrel/rebel. A character who lives his/her life in shades of gray is inherently more interesting than a black-and-white hero. Give me the Han Solos (Star Wars), the Mals (Firefly), the Deans (Supernatural), the Sawyers (Lost), the Faiths (Buffy the Vampire Slayer), the Jos (Little Women), and the Dr. Horribles (Dr. Horrible, of course) any day! I like to see the struggle between right and wrong, and when they choose the right thing over the selfish thing, the reward is so much sweeter. These characters might think they have it easy, but in reality they struggle more than any of the more black-and-white versions.

If I thought for a while, I’m sure I’d come up with more tropes/stories/plots that I have a weakness for, but that’s probably a long enough list for now. What about y’all? What concepts have you buying the book/turning on the TV without knowing anything else about the end product?

Yesterday, I stumbled across the 2004 remake of Dawn of the Dead on the Sci-fi channel — the movie about survivors of the zombie apocalypse hiding out in a mall. Now, I enjoy a good scary movie. Loved Scream, love Supernatural (even when those creepy ghost stories give me the willies), even have been known to enjoy a slasher flick from time to time (the Halloween and Friday the 13th variety, not the new ones, like Saw, that are all about pain and torture with no good guy to win in the end — or so I’ve heard). But after watching DotD yesterday (really only the last half… starting when the zombie baby was born), I spent half the night having insomnia and thinking about the movie and the other half of the night dreaming about my own zombie apocolpyse (the strange thing was, I dreamed the same dream twice, and the second time, I knew I’d done this before, but even still I wasn’t able to save my friends from their zombie-fied doom!).

I think it was the depressing ending that did it to me. (Spoiler alert, in case you care!) If we’d ended with our four survivors on the boat, sailing away to a deserted island and some kind of meager life, I would probably have been OK, even after my favorite guy was bitten in the last reel and had to stay behind and shoot himself. At least some of our good guys would have gotten away, won the day (sort of). But the depressing clips during the credits of the boat runing out of gas, the engine catching on fire, and them fining coming up on an island — their last chance — to then find it infested by zombies, as well. Man… suckage! So… what was even the point of the movie, you know?

The whole thing got me thinking about stories that I just don’t like. And high on that list is stories that end badly. Now, I’m not saying that I always want a happy ending or a silver lining, because that’s not true. There are stories that really need to have an unhappy ending — such an ending is true to the story. Take Memento, for example. That is a really well done movie, and one that everyone should see, but a happy ending just wasn’t in the cards from the get-go. For me, it’s the total destruction, everything’s lost including the characters you spent the last two hours growing to care about, ending that gets me. When I watch a scary movie, I want there to be a ray of hope at the end. I want the bad guy to ultimately be defeated by the last survivor or the group of survivors to get away to fight another day.

Another type of story that is hard for me is a war story — a dramatization of a real war that we fought in our histories, like Saving Private Ryan and Pearl Harbor, to name a couple of recent ones that I actually watched. The invasion of Normandy sequence at the beginning of SPR tore me up inside when I watched it, as did the battle aftermath sequence in PH. I wasn’t a fan of the silly PH love triangle and all the rest of it, but that scene where the nurse has to sort through the bodies and mark the ones who have a chance of being helped in triage vs. the ones with no chance (condemning them to death), is so painful. The semi-blurry way it portrays the scene interspersed with images of clarity… I think that’s exactly how one would remember such a thing.

After a while, I realized that the reason I don’t like these movies is because they are too realistic. As in, humans actually did these things to each other — they killed each other at Normandy and at Pearl Harbor, and so many other times. The fact that one human can do that to another, no matter what the larger stakes are, crushes my soul a little bit. But, I do see the value of war movies, too — if we are going to be that cruel to other humans, we should remember that they are human just as we are.

And another thing that, as a consumer of stories, I can’t take sometimes is stories where people are intentionally cruel to each other emotionally. Now, this one is less of an issue than the other two, because sometimes these plot elements can be done in a way that I don’t mind as much, but, to really like the story, I have to have, again, some element of hope to counterbalance or some character that I can really root for. When all the characters are cruel to each other all of the time, there’s just not much for me to sink my teeth into. For example, the constant manipulations of Cruel Intentions/Dangerous Liasons are intriguing on one level, but also excruciatingly painful, so those movies are not on the top of my list. I had to give up watching Desperate Housewives midway into the first half of the first season because the bad stuff that they did to their families (at that point in the series anyway) so outweighed the good. My last straw was when one of the housewives took her mother-in-law, a recovering gambling addict, and intentionally left her within the grasp of a casino’s temptations for her own selfish gain.

Anyway, this entry is getting to be quite a ramblefest, so I should wind things up. I guess the whole reason for writing this today was that, after my troubled sleep last night, I was thinking about the kinds of stories that I like and the kinds that I just don’t. This kind of preference definitely affects one’s writing style, I think. You’re not going to see me writing a war story any time soon, and though sometimes my stories don’t end happily, they aren’t going to end it total destruction without some note of hope — those are things you can expect from me as a writer, because they are things that I want as a reader.

What about you guys out there? Are there any kinds of stories that just don’t work for you? Stories that you avoid from either a reading/watching or writing perspective?

I finished watching The Sarah Connor Chronicles last night (the day after they came out on DVD), and man, this is a really good series! If any of y’all like sci-fi and/or the Terminator movies, you should definitely check this series out!

First of all, the series rocks at continuity. In a world with such complex plotting, it’s amazing how many details they remember. Of course, they made movie 3 obsolete, but no one saw that one anyway, right? And it supposedly sucked (though I actually never saw it, so I can’t say). But, since this is a time travel concept, even rewriting history (or, perhaps future history?) makes sense in the ‘verse.

Second, this series has great characters, and, to me, characters are the most important part of any story. I suppose, on a basic level, the SCC characters are basic sci-fi trope. We have a robot struggling with what it means to be human. There’s an angsty teen who is supposed to grow up to be the “chosen one” (though, not a mystical choosing, like with Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Harry Potter). There’s a lioness mother struggling to protect her cub, a law enforcement agent who is against us right now but might become our friend in the end, and an embittered soldier in mourning for a lost loved one.

But SCC takes these standard characters and gives them all a fresh feel. Sarah kicks butt and takes names, which is awesome, and yet, she doesn’t like to kill. Derek has a grudge against terminators and possibly a death wish, but there’s a surprising soft side. He’s had some great moments with John, and when he teared up watching Cameron dance… great acting! Cameron has more depth than either Data or the Voyager holographic doctor had at the beginning of the series. She is a strange combination of mystery (what is she doing? whose side is she on?), humanity (feeling like making conversation is the thing to do, appreciating ballet), and machine (killing or allowing humans to die). And John, while he has those whiney teenaged moments, he often surpases them, and that future greatness glimmers underneath all the while.

These characters really do make SCC a great show. Anyone can take an element and tell a story about it — the thing is to give those elements their own skins, their own personalities. It’s the trappings that make a story unique, because there are only so many plots out there in the world. It’s a testiment to the series that it’s this good and, really, it has nearly the same plot (at least at a concept level) as the second movie!

And, of course, I love a show where female characters get to be strong fighters. That always rocks! If you haven’t watched this show yet, if you can get your hands on the DVDs, you should definitely give it a try. The first season was only nine episodes thanks to the writers’ strike, so you can even watch it now and be done in time for the 9/9/08 premier of season two!

One of the things I really love about a writer is when their supporting characters have just as much spark, as much life as the main characters. Without good supporting cast to round out a story, the story can feel flat or limited.

I think really fleshing out the supporting cast is a skill that can take a while to master, too. I know when I’m writing, I get involved in the main plot and with the main characters. The other characters aren’t always a high priority.

But, let’s look at to examples that illustrate how important the supporting cast is. First, look at the Batman movies in the 80s and 90s. They were all about the comic book stereotypes and the flashy action. Big names, too. But character depth? Not so much. Especially for the supporting cast. With Keaton’s Batman, some. Jack’s Joker, too, a bit. But Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl? Why was she even there? Commissioner Gordon? I don’t even remember who played him, he was on screen so little. Harvy Dent was played by someone completely different than Two Face, and you had to really listen to even realize they were the same character.

Now, look at the new Batman movies — Batman Begins and the recently released Dark Knight. These movies know how to use all the characters to create a world that feels incredibly real. Part of it is the writing, that we get to know all of these characters. And part of it is the incredible acting that allows the characters to make the most of every small moment, every glance, every movement. Alfred, Lucius, Gordon, Dent… they were all amazing. The Joker, of course, was blow-away, but in some ways you knew he would be going in. The Joker is one of Batman’s biggest rivals, if not the biggest. He had to be great. But the awesome thing is, none of the characters in these movies are wasted.

Return to Me is a move that does the same thing (though light years away from the subject matter of Batman). Bonnie Hunt wrote an incredible love story between two unusual people, but what really makes the movies pop are the people the hero and heroine surround themselves with. The quartet of old guys playing poker in the back of the restaurant. The loyal, obnoxious, ladies’ man vet. The pseudo-sister, her husband, and their passel of kids. This movie could have been just another hum-drum romantic comedy, enjoyed and then forgotten, but the memorable cast of characters sets it apart from the pack and makes it something special.

So, that is the lesson that we must take to heart today. Don’t just use those supporting characters as plot points — give them personality, give them uniqueness, love them!

P.S. In other news, I want to give a quick shout out to Jens. Congrats on finishing that novel! Way to go!

Lately, I’ve been fighting the excuse monster — that insiduous little voice inside my head that whispers excuses for not writing. I’m too tired. I’m too busy. I have no ideas. The list goes on and on.

Now, there is a difference between a reason and an excuse. Sometimes, you really do have writer’s block or you just worked a ton of overtime and are brain-fried. But, other times, you’re just giving into the excuse monster.

I guess it’s the same for any aspect of your life. You have to put time into something to get something out of it or to get to the next level. If I don’t spend time writing stories and honing my craft, I’m won’t have stories to submit or ever improve in my craft. Both of those mean that this writing thing is never going to be any more than a hobby for me.

Writing as a hobby isn’t a bad thing. Tons of people do it. But I want something more. And if I want that something more, then I have to banish the excuse monster and his whispers about laundry, returning phone calls, and surfing the Internet, and get writing.

Of course, even still, the odds are against me. There are way more aspiring authors/novelists out there than those that get published every year. But, to quote one of my favorite movies, “Your odds go up when you file an application.”

What about you guys? Career or hobby? What do you think? And what do you think will help you achieve your goal?

In other news, I had a literary flash piece accepted today, so yay! Two acceptances in one week is a very good week.

Last weekend, I read Meg Cabot’s new book, Airhead. Let me start out by saying that I very much enjoyed the book. I’m a Meg Cabot fan, and love everything of hers that I’ve read (The Princess Diaries, Jinx, An American Girl, and even her adult novels, like the Heather Wells mysteries), and, despite the title, Airhead was no exception. Em Watts is a fabulous character with believable issues, but Meg also managed to make the celebutants/models sympathetic, as well.

But, while reading, I started to worry. My page count was rapidly dwindling, and it felt like the main plot had yet to really get going. And when I reached the end, my worries were realized. Airhead, to me, doesn’t actually feel like a complete story… it feels like the first installment of an ongoing series.

This got me thinking about the novel-writing biz. Everything I’ve read — author blogs, agent blogs, etc. — stress that in the writing game, you shouldn’t think about writing a good series. You need to think about writing a good novel. The series will never sell if the novel doesn’t stand on its own. After thinking about it, especially in relation to books I’m reading, I have to agree.

I’m not saying that every novel needs to tie up all loose ends. That would be no fun at all. But I think that a series is better served if each installment has its own specific plot that can be resolved by the end of that book, leaving just the overarching character development and possibly a larger series-long mystery to spin out between books. Some great examples of this method are the Golden series by Jennifer Lynne Barnes, the Gallagher Girls series by Ally Carter, and the Midnight Louie series by Carole Nelson Douglas. The Harry Potter series by J.K. Rowling also does it well. The more I think on it, the more great examples that come to mind.

This method works because the reader gets a sense of closure at the end of each installment of the series. The reader can feel content with the money that they paid for the book and relax while they wait for the next installment to be written (which usually takes at least a year!). And yet, there is still a sense of anticipation because there are elements that the reader wants to find out more about. It’s the best of both worlds.

After reading Airhead, I wish that I would have waited to buy it. The first novel was quite good, but it was just enough to get me really into the characters and the storyline, but by the end, nothing had been resolved. It was all setup for future stories and not a complete story in and of itself. Mysteries upon mysteries were set up, as were many, many relationships (friendship and romantic), and yet none of them got any kind of resolution. Had I known that going in, I would have known that this is a series that I should wait and buy all of in a clump (or at least three or four installments in a clump). I still would have read it eventually, but I wouldn’t have done so now. (Especially not for the price of a hardcover!)

Of course, Meg Cabot is a best seller, so she can write whatever she wants. The advice I read in agent and author blogs doesn’t apply to her, as she already has a publisher, an agent, and many more people lined up to accept anything she decides to write (what an awesome place that must be, right?). And she’s not the only writer who does this. George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series is totally like this… one novel fades right into the next, each one ending in a huge cliffhanger that leaves readers gnashing their teeth and cursing his name for two years until the next installment is published.

Perhaps the conundrum is similar to the difference between an episodic TV series with continuing elements and season long major plot arcs (like Buffy the Vampire Slayer or Supernatural) and a soap opera or a soap opera-esque series like Lost. I like both types, but I really prefer the former and tend to watch the latter in large clumps of episodes as opposed to every time it airs. I also feel like that the episodic series model works better in the Y/A genre than the soap opera model — of course, that’s just my personal opinon, and I’m sure that many people think just the oposite.

If I’m ever lucky enough to be the published author of a book series, I’ve already made my decision. I would definitely go the route of each installment being its own story with continuing elements, instead of using the other formula. I wouldn’t want someone to finish reading an installment in my series and be disapointed the way I was when I reached the end of Airhead. And, when it comes to Airhead, if you like Meg Cabot, I defintely recommend the book, but I would advise waiting to buy it at least until the sequel (Being Nikki) is released so you can read them both at the same time.

This has been a great week for me! “The Dragon Thief” was published, and I’ve had two more stories accepted — one by A Thousand Faces and one by Perpetual Magazine. I’m really excited by both of these acceptances. The story I sent to ATF was one that I came up with on the spur of the moment, and ended up working out better than I had ever hoped. The one accepted by PM is a story I wrote quite a while ago and had about dispared of ever finding a home for. And the PM editor said such nice things in the acceptance email. What a great week!

And in honor of what a good week this has been, I’m going to share more links with you. Hopefully, y’all will find something here that piques your interest!

First, if you like flash, you need to go check out “Visions of Hummus-cide” at Bewildering Tales by Stephanie, one of my writing group pals. If you weren’t a hummus-convert after Buffy the Vampire Slayer (”Attack the Mayer with hummus. … He’ll never see it coming.”), this story will bring you over to the cause.

Next up is the mid-June issue of All Things Girl. The update includes part two of their interview with Stephanie Meyer (author of the Twilight series and The Host — which, if you haven’t read them yet, you definitely need to).

And here’s a fun one for all you writers out there — The Random Title Generator. If you’re out of creative ideas, try some of these automatically generated titles on for size. Perhaps you’ll create your next great story after being inspired by titles like “Shakespeare, As Written by a Dinosaur,” “My Friends Call Me Fuzzy Banana,” and “Always Share Your Moonlight”!

Finally, if you want to find out what’s going on in the world of television, you should check out my two favorite TV columnists over at TV Guide’s website: Matt Roush and Michael Ausiello. When Matt recommends something, I always know to pay attention, and Michael always has the latest scoops and a smattering of spoilers. However, apparently Michael is actually leaving TV Guide, so you’ll have to check him out there fast!

And I’m out… for today. Happy clicking!

Last night, Stephen and I watched the last three hours of this season of Lost, and I really enjoyed it — probably more than any episodes of the show since season 1. If you gave up the show during the downturn of season 2, I would highly recommend catching up. It just gets better and better. That said, while this post is going to talk about writing, there will also be some spoilers for Lost, so read at your own peril.

Sawyer has long been one of my favorite characters on Lost. Since we first met him, I was sure the character had something more than a cocky attitude and a charismatic smile. I knew there was a hero underneath, masked by all the hurt he’d endured over the years, starting with what happened to his parents. However, my opinion was met with vociferous resistance in some quarters of my acquaintance, especially because every time he did something “good,” he would soon follow it up with something selfish or his self-serving motives would be revealed in the end.

But in the current season, Sawyer has finally been revealed as a good guy, albeit, reluctantly so. The other people on the island have become his friends (at least some of them), and he actually cares about them. He’s done many things for Kate, just because she wanted/needed him to, proving genuine feelings for her. He left the safe house to rescue Claire in the commando attack. He trailed her into the woods and took care of Aaron when she was gone (I will never forget that scene of him holding the baby in the clearing where Claire disappeared!). When Locke and Ben wanted Hurley, Sawyer wouldn’t let them take him, only backing down when Hurley told him to. Despite antagonism in the past, he refused to let Jack go to the helicopter alone. And when all he had to do was jump on the helicopter and leave, he organized the search party to find Hurley. And his bad-boy-gone-good thing was cemented when he took that flying leap from the helicopter and swam back to the island on the off chance that without his weight Kate (and the others) would be able to make it to the freighter before the helicopter ran out of fuel.

My growing enthusiasm for Sawyer’s character got me to thinking about characters in general. What is it about Sawyer that makes him such a great character (to me anyway), and how can I think about that in light of developing characters that other people would feel that way about? And while I was thinking about all that, I read this article at author Shanna Swendson’s blog. Check out number 3 on her list of why it’s important to talk about TV, which discusses characters who earn their fans love.

This is totally Sawyer — he started out a snarky conman with only a charismatic grin to cover up his selfishness, and over four seasons, he’s become a guy that you can count on in a pinch. I wouldn’t go so far as to call him a reformed bad boy, but his heart has finally been tapped, and watching him you get the feeling that once he cares for you, he’s going to be behind you all the way.

But I think there are other lessons to learn here, too. Stalwart and true heroes and heroines can be good characters, but it’s that flaw that really gives a character oomph (at least for me). The flaws humanize them, give us something to relate to, and, darn it, just make them more interesting. It is way more fascinating to watch someone struggle than someone who makes the “right” choice as a matter of course and without thought. And a story of being redeemed is so compelling.

Who is more interesting? Max or Michael on Roswell? Jack or Sawyer on Lost? Logan or Duncan on Veronica Mars? Luke or Han in Star Wars? The Phantom or the Raoul in The Phantom of the Opera? The list could go on and on. And in my experience, in the fannish communities out there, it is the scoundrel or the reformed bad boy who have the passionate fans.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I like all of those characters I listed. They all have their place — sometimes you need the stalwart hero type. And some of my closest friends eschew the scoundrels and are devoted to the heros. So, in that sense, it’s all a matter of individual taste. But, there is something to be said for writing what one enjoys. If you don’t, it’s more like work, and who would get into this fiction-writing business if they weren’t doing it for the love. No one is doing it for the money (at least, not until they actually land an agent and a six-figure book deal!).

Another thing to consider is that we need all of those types of characters in our arsenals as writers. There are some things that a stalwart hero is just not going to be able to do, and that’s precisely when the scoundrel is needed.

In any event, as a writer, I would love to create a character that makes someone else as excited about a story as Sawyer makes me about Lost — if I can do that, then it’s definitely worth it.

So, if you’re out there and still reading this, which one do you prefer? The stalwart and true hero or the reformed bad boy/scoundrel? Or someone else entirely? Who has you screaming at the TV or paging through the book faster to find the next page where s/he appears?

A cliffhanger irritates me, be it on a TV show or in a book series. The idea behind them is to leave the public wanting more, to make it so they have to come back to the next chapter, the next novel, the next episode, or the next season.

And, I will admit, they work. I can’t tell you how many times I open up a book to read a little before bed, and, before I know it, it’s approaching midnight and I have blown through several chapters at one go. I want to keep going because there is no good place to stop. Every time I get to a section break or the end of a chapter, something dramatic happens, and I have to know what happens next, just like the dramatic happenings right before a commercial break on a TV show.

The worst ones, though, are the cliffhangers between seasons or book releases. Those are the killers, and the ones that I find the most unnecessary. I do understand that the same principle still applies. The writers want to leave the public wanting more, ensuring they will tune in next season/buy the next book in the series.

But it’s so cruel… At least when it’s a TV show, you’ve only got three or four months to wait (cable shows like Farscape aside). I just finished watching this season’s Supernatural, and since the show runners knew they were going to be renewed for next year, they left us with a doozy. That final shot of Dean was haunting, and I have no idea how they’re going to get him out of this one! It’s agony waiting until next fall!

But a book series is even worse! Publishing moves slowly… like a glacier, sometimes. It depends on the author and the publisher, too. Take P.C. Cast’s House of Night series. Crazy things happened to our heroine in the last book, and drama came crashing down hard. Now everything she used to be able to depend on is ripped asunder, evil threatens, and I’m left to wonder until maybe the fall. I’m not sure.

And then there is George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire series. The thing has the worst cliffhangers I’ve ever read, and the guy takes forever to finish a book. Multiple year-type forever! If the books weren’t so amazing, I wouldn’t even bother because it’s so frustrating, both waiting for him and waiting to find out if the characters in jeopardy at the end of the last one are going to get out of it OK (and with GRRM, you seriously never know!). The cliffhangers are even worse this time. Because of the length of the last novel, he cut it in half and each half addresses some of the characters. So the characters in jeopardy at the end of A Feast for Crows won’t even be seen again until the book after A Dance with Dragons!!!

I guess that my opinion on cliffhangers is that they are a tool in a writer’s arsenal, but they should be used judiciously. You should keep your readers/viewers in mind. If you’re not going to be able to continue your series, definitely don’t leave it in a cliffhanger. Heck, if you’re not 100% sure you’ll be able to continue (i.e., you don’t have the signed contract in hand), don’t leave it in a cliffhanger. And, you know what? If you’re going to be a year or more between installments, think about giving your readers a break!

As far as the more minor cliffhangers between chapters go, I can see why they are so popular today. In this world where TV, movies, video games, etc., take more of the public’s time and attention away from reading, you have to build that excitement and make them unable to put the book down in favor of something else. If the reader puts the book down, they might never come back again. So, I do understand them for pacing, and it can make a very exciting read at a breathless pace.

Personally, I prefer a mixture of dramatic moments and restful ones, but I fear I am in the minority on that one.

We’re going into summer now… time to cool my heels until the next round of television comes back to relieve me from my post-season-finale-cliffhanger madness. Maybe a few of my favorite book series will come out with new installments to pass the time until fall? Or perhaps I’ll have to find some new ones…

I will say, though, that there are more important things than cliffhangers. They may irritate me (whether or not I understand the purpose, they still irritate me), but there are more important concerns. For me, if I love the characters, the universe, and the story, if the book or show sucks me into that vivid fictional dream and won’t let me go, then I’ll be back. Cliffhanger or no cliffhanger. And if it doesn’t, that’s when I walk away.